A new typology for faculty is proposed, based on their expressed priorities toward activities in which research universities engage. Responses of 617 faculty to a survey of 66 statements about university activities were factor analyzed, and scores on eight factors obtained were used in a cluster analysis that produced three clusters of faculty. When coded into disciplinary groupings, the faculty clustered along lines defined by their political description and gender. Items included in the following eight factors and their loadings are identified: (1) concerns about minorities and women; (2) liberal arts, liberal education; (3) nontraditional education; (4) intercollegiate athletics; (5) concerns about quality and research; (6) health care and training; (7) professional education; and (8) concerns about student health. The primary strength of this approach involves the effort to relate faculty groupings to institutional priorities as well as the assumption of heterogeneity rather than homogeneity among faculty members belonging to a specific department. The results are compared to Biglan's (1973) typology; some correspondence is found with his "hard-soft" axis, or applied-pure and life-non-life dimensions, which were used to classify departments. (Author/SW)