Evaluation of professors: publications vs. teaching quality From my experience (in Europe), I have often seen that professors give their research highest priority and see teaching only as a necessity that gets a low priority. I feel that this is due to the fact that having many strong publications has a direct benefit for the professor:


increased chance of getting called to a better university
better access to research grants and corporate funding
increased public visibility


Teaching, on the other hand, does not seem to have such direct benefit for the professor.

I am wondering if this is just a subjective feeling or if there exists any research that can support this?

Question: Are there any scientific publications that support my analysis? Does the current academic system favor research over teaching quality?

Update: Based on the comments and answers I see that my statement might not necessary hold in the general case. My experience is largely based on European universities where a professor is usually employed for life. Maybe there exists research specifically for European universities?
I used to work in a university, one of the largest and most research intensive, where they recognised that academics had different drivers. They created three designations:


teaching-focused academics had targets based on teaching outputs
research-focused academics had targets based on research outputs
balanced academics had targets that were a mixture of both


Performance reviews and tenure decisions were tied to these targets.