Many college administrators hope that one day they will be college presidents. Although I can't predict their futures, there are some career paths that are more likely, and some that are less likely, to take you to a presidency. My comments here are based on the impressions I formed while serving as a consultant for approximately 20 presidential searches in the last several years.
One of the best ways to be selected in a presidential search is to be a college president already. Search committees are often very attracted by candidates who have already been presidents, especially if they have been successful presidents at "aspiration institutions" -- that is, institutions that their own institution would like to resemble in terms of enrollment, resources, prestige, etc.
Candidates trying to become first-time presidents may have to compete with those who are already doing the job; to be successful, they will have to work even harder to demonstrate to the search committee that they are ready to step into the job without a lot of on-the-job training and without a lot of risk to the institution.
But even for "repeat" presidents, there was a first time. The classic path to the presidency of a four-year college is a fundamentally academic path; the majority of the successful candidates in my searches have taken this path. It is the norm against which candidates are often judged and so it is useful to think about how your own path has varied from this.
The path begins with a doctoral degree and a full-time faculty position in an academic department, including a successful review for tenure. The next step is usually to serve as a department chair, dean, and/or chief academic officer (vice president for academic affairs or provost). The step after that is the presidency.
If your career has varied from this pattern, you can develop a strategy that deals with the gaps that may be perceived to exist between your experience and the norm that I've described. Some differences are more troublesome than others.
Not having a doctoral degree is normally a serious limitation. Candidates who come from the nonacademic world may be understood to bring "nontraditional" credentials as well as nontraditional experiences, but candidates who have been in the academic world will be expected to have a Ph.D. In some institutions, J.D.'s or Ed.D.'s or Doctor of Arts degrees are acceptable, but in others, the Ph.D. is all that will be considered adequate.
In terms of faculty positions, most search committees like to see that the president has experienced the world of the full-time faculty member, including being reviewed successfully for tenure and promotion. These experiences are thought to provide the president with a better understanding of the core activity of the institution -- teaching students -- and of the most critical experiences in the life of a faculty member.
Perhaps faculty members hope that, having been through these things himself or herself, the president will be more sympathetic to faculty issues. If you have not been a full-time faculty member, you should certainly try to demonstrate your solid understanding of that experience, and should strive to show your commitment to students and to teaching in other ways. For example, you might take on some academic advising responsibilities, serve as a guest lecturer or teach a course occasionally, lead one of the sections of a "University 101" course, publish articles, or give papers on professional issues.
There is another dimension to holding a faculty position that can be extremely important in some presidential searches, and that is a record of scholarly productivity. Institutions differ greatly in the importance they place upon this element of a president's credentials. Many outstanding candidates are disqualified on the grounds of scholarship; their earlier decision to follow an administrative career path may have built their administrative experience but limited the time or energy they devoted to publications or grants. In the end, they may be hampered by having turned away from scholarship too soon.
The critical element of the next set of steps -- department chair, dean, chief academic officer -- is having experience dealing with faculty personnel issues (i.e., hiring, reviewing faculty for tenure and promotion, solving personnel problems, firing), and dealing with budgets. If you haven't been a "line officer," as this kind of position is known, you haven't had these significant and difficult responsibilities.
Is there a substitute? If you have been a line officer in another segment of the institution (e.g., director of development, dean of students, vice president for finance), you have probably had personnel and budget responsibilities, but it is unlikely that you have hired and fired faculty members. Since faculty members are usually the most powerful (although not the largest) group within the institution's employees, this is an important experience.
Perhaps you can demonstrate your readiness to take on these responsibilities by noting that you contributed to faculty personnel decisions from your particular vantage point, or that the most difficult personnel decisions took place before the dean's council or the president's staff, of which you were part. You may have served on institutional committees that reviewed policies about academic personnel matters (e.g., early retirement or professional-development programs). You should be sure to provide the names of respected faculty leaders who can serve as references and attest to the fact that your deviation from the classic career path doesn't mean you don't grasp the issues that other candidates may have experienced more directly.
Presidencies today also require a substantial amount of work outside the institution. Work with donors, board members, and legislators is a major responsibility of virtually all presidents in both public and private institutions. If you want to be a president, you should strive to acquire these experiences either within your institution or, if necessary, in some other way.
Finally, as I think about the searches I've worked on that have chosen nontraditional presidents, many were institutions with special needs, and they sought out candidates who were especially well-qualified to deal with those needs.
One institution that was focused on fund raising selected a president who had never been a full-time faculty member but had been an extremely effective full-time fund raiser. Another institution that had serious conflict in legislative arenas selected a president who had worked for a state higher-education agency. A public institution that sought to raise its prestige selected a candidate from a very prestigious private institution, even though he didn't have traditional faculty credentials.
The lesson here is that, if your path has been nontraditional, you should seek institutions that will especially value the particular path you have followed. Figuring out which institution this might be will take serious research, strategic thinking about how you can be helpful to that institution, and careful crafting of your cover letter to show the connection between what you have done and what the institution needs. In fact, the basic premise is the same here as in almost all aspects of the search process: What counts most is the needs of the institution.
ALSO SEE:
A list of current vacancies and recent presidential appointments
