Finalists for campus presidencies answer a lot of questions in the interview process. But a new guide for job candidates suggests they ask some tough questions themselves before taking office.
Too many presidents start work unaware of some of the difficult problems facing the institutions they've been hired to lead, according to a report released this month by the American Council on Education, called "The Well-Informed Candidate: A Brief Guide for Candidates for College and University Presidencies."
"'I wish I had been told,' or 'They did not tell me the whole story,' are refrains often heard from newly seated college and university presidents," the guide says. "These plaintive comments often refer to the financial condition of the institution but they also can address warfare among governing board members, unacknowledged and pending lawsuits, deferred maintenance, and other possibilities."
The 18-page guide, written with the input of 20 search consultants and 1,000 college presidents, offers a list of basic questions about an institution's mission, culture and climate, financial health, enrollment, governance, and athletic program, among other areas.
Candidates are often "so eager to get the job that they don't ask the questions they should," says Robert H. Atwell, one of the guide's three authors and a former president of ACE. And if candidates do ask the right questions, search committees may hedge in giving complete answers. "Search committees want candidates to be impressed with the place. They're cheerleaders, which is understandable, but that can be detrimental to finding out the real skinny going on."
Mr. Atwell, Madeleine F. Green, and Marlene Ross wrote the guide after the ACE's latest survey of college presidents, released in the fall of 2000, found that many of them had not known about important issues affecting their institutions before starting the top job. (Ms. Green is a vice president of ACE, and Ms. Ross directs the ACE Fellows Program, a year-long effort that grooms men and women for presidencies and other senior leadership positions in colleges and universities.)
There are a number of reasons why presidential finalists might not get the full story, the guide says: "This withholding of information occurs either because the committee or board members themselves may not know the facts, or because they are so eager to recruit their No. 1 choice that they gloss over the truth or put a favorable spin on some unhappy circumstances."
The guide is intended not just for candidates, but for governing boards, search committees, and search consultants. It includes a list of documents that search committees should provide to semifinalists, including accreditation reports, collective-bargaining agreements, and five-year histories of the institutions' financial aid and state-financing sources.
At what point should candidates start digging for dirt? "If you have merely reached the airport-interview stage," the guide says, "you will hardly need all this information, nor will you have time to delve into complex issues. However as the selection committee narrows the pool of candidates and you move from semifinalist to president-elect, you will need to be a quick learner."
Sally Clausen is president of the University of Louisiana System and chairwoman of the committee searching for a new president for the Monroe campus. The campus suffers from financial problems and low faculty morale, and it recently received an unfavorable audit and sanctions from an accreditor. She says her committee has provided its search consultant with a great deal of campus information to make sure that "he can be very upfront with [candidates] about the institution, so if they should apply they know the risks they're taking and the challenges before them ... to bring this university to its full potential."
But not all of the candidates were given the full scoop on Monroe, Ms. Clausen says. "I invite them to visit a Web site, to call me personally, and to dig a little about the campus," she says. "As we narrow down the search, it will be interesting to me and the search committee to see how many of them have done some homework, the depth of their questions, their concerns, if they want more newspaper articles and can't get them."
It would be a mistake, however, to rely solely on the search committee for information. Candidates should also call faculty members at the institution, do a little research, and even visit the campus incognito, says Mr. Atwell, adding: "We recommend they do their homework." It's not an issue of trusting the search committees, he says, because they provide candidates with background material and presumably expect them to look for information beyond that.
While you're poking around for information, be diplomatic, the guide says: "You will be asking for much of this information indirectly, being careful not to embarrass the search committee or board members who are not as well-informed as you might wish."
"It's impossible for every candidate to get all this information," Mr. Atwell says. "We recognize that." And that's why the authors have placed an asterisk next to the questions that they have deemed most critical. Here are some of them:
-
What major successes and crises arose during the past five years?
-
Are there any major lawsuits pending?
-
Is enrollment stable, declining, or increasing?
-
What other regulatory reviews by federal or state agencies are pending?
-
What is the word on campus about the climate for women? Minority students? Gays and lesbians? Other groups?
-
What is the proportion of tenured faculty, and what are the implications of these figures?
-
Is there an information technology plan? What was the process used to design it?
-
How well-informed is the governing board about the institution?
-
Have there been NCAA investigations or sanctions?
"In an ideal world, this is what you should know before you accept an offer," Mr. Atwell says. "If you don't get it before you take the offer, for heaven's sake, get it shortly thereafter."
The $15 guide can be ordered through the council's Web site.
