Moving Up

Warning Signs on the Search Circuit

Article tools

Printer friendly	E-mail article	Subscribe	Order reprints
	Discuss any Chronicle article in our forums
Latest Headlines First Person It's Not a Zero-Sum Game Are a moderately heavy teaching load and an active research program mutually exclusive? First Person Pothead Ph.D. This is most definitely not a cautionary tale. First Person Subject Experts Need Not Apply Recent job postings and hires suggest that many academic libraries are losing interest in hiring humanities Ph.D.'s. Career News When Laptops Disappear Stolen computers containing sensitive data are a growing and costly problem for colleges. Resource Salaries: Faculty | Administrative Presidential pay: Private | Public Financial resources: Salary and cost-of-living calculators Career resources: Academic | Nonacademic Library: Previous articles by topic | by date | by column Career Talk, Ms. Mentor, and more... Landing your first job On the tenure track Mid-career and on Administrative careers Nonacademic careers for Ph.D.'s Talk about your career Blogs

By Milton Greenberg

Congratulations, you've just received an invitation to be interviewed for an administrative position. This is heady stuff. It marks you as a leader with a record of accomplishment and the promise of future growth. The interviews before search committees and with campus leaders and potential colleagues are challenging, flattering, and usually enjoyable.

Your natural tendency is to look for the positive aspects of the experience and to want to be offered the position. But don't be so taken with the glow of it all that you ignore some obvious negative signs that should make you wary about accepting the post, signs that I have come to know well both as a candidate and in my 21 years as a chief academic officer.

Here are some of the questions you should be asking yourself and, in some cases, others about the nature of the search being conducted:

What does the makeup of the search committee reveal? Only in academe do the workers and customers have so much to say about the selection of management. Too often a search is dominated by considerations of campus politics rather than the job to be filled. Are the faculty members on the committee the campus scholars and teachers or the professional academic politicians? How were they selected? Are the student members on an ego trip or do they seem to know what the search is about?

Ted Marchese and Jane Lawrence, in The Search Committee Handbook (American Association for Higher Education), recommend that committee members be appointed rather than elected, with the admonition to "avoid at all costs the appointment of known paranoids, gossips and egotists." As a candidate, you can't control the selection process but you should weigh committee membership in your evaluation of the institution.

Do the committee's questions demonstrate knowledge about the nature of the administrative life or do they reflect self-indulgent games? I was once asked my opinion of the Vietnam War so that, according to the questioner, "we can determine the kind of person you are."

Few faculty members, students, or staff members have any idea about how university administrators spend their days. The result is a series of questions designed to ascertain personality rather than the abilities and leadership talents required for success in the specific post. The search committee will play a large role in the final decision (if not, you really face trouble) and should represent the best of the campus. If it obviously does not, beware.

Does the search committee appear to be looking for a "leader of the opposition?" Watch for critical remarks (humorous, sarcastic or otherwise) about other campus leaders. Frequent references to "the administration" (even by upper-level administrators as well as faculty members) may cloak a we-they syndrome.

Questions about how you would handle disputes with other leaders may cloak a desire for a fighter to fend off this or that vice-president or dean, or often, the president. Hypothetical scenarios are apt to be true. Explicit criticism of the person you might be replacing is not uncommon -- this is often an attempt to see how you differ in approach or personality. Avoid any campus that appears to see administration as guerrilla warfare and that has search-committee members who see you as a potential ally or enemy in a war you know nothing about.

Is the search being used to air campus grievances? I have been amazed at how much dirt is revealed over a day or two on campus. People can't seem to resist telling a total stranger who is interested in the possibility of holding a leadership position on that campus of every scandal, suspicion, rumor and alleged misdeed of the central administration.

When conducting interviews of prospective administrators on my own campus, I have been surprised by the number of unpleasant rumors that I have been asked to comment upon. It took me a while to realize that those ingenuous or devious enough to pass on scandalous rumors actually are, in their mind, currying favor with a potential new power holder. I came away from several interviews (both as a candidate and as an appointing offer) believing that the search process was so political as to be destructive of campus morale.

Is the campus, in the words of Timothy Healy, "looking for God on a good day?" Searches often start out with enormous hope of finding a savior who will help the campus to be born again. Soon the flow of applicants leads to despair as the realization sets in that Nobel laureates are not applying. The arrival of one or two outstanding résumés leads to speculation about why anyone that good is interested.

You can sense your status as a favorite or an also-ran during the interview. Most of the time will be spent either selling you on the virtues of the campus and the great opportunities for leadership or on challenging you to analyze campus problems and to establish an agenda for the future should you be chosen. What is at play here is a campus without a mission, unclear about its future, truly looking for God to point the way.

As attractive as this may sound to an aspiring ambitious administrator, success is unlikely. This campus is likely to have frequent turnover. I once turned down an invitation for an interview upon learning that I was on a "short list" of 12 scheduled to be interviewed. The "long short list" is a clear sign that the committee has not done its homework because it has no idea of what it is looking for other than "God on a good day."

Is there an inside candidate? A serious inside candidate can be a warning sign of a phony search to satisfy affirmative-action policies or a playful exercise to "see what is out there." Do not hesitate to ask if there is an inside candidate and try to size up the situation.

I lost out as a finalist to insiders on two occasions. In one case the search committee informed me that there was an inside contender but several people "confidentially" assured me that he was a "courtesy" rather than serious candidate. These assurances were repeated when I returned for a second interview. In another instance I was assured on both visits that there was no inside candidate. Had I missed something?

Usually, inside candidates have a tough time because people tend to undervalue those they know. Also search consultants want to use their Rolodex to earn their fee and to satisfy their clients. But appointing officers are often more comfortable with long-time associates. Even if you win the post, you may have an established source of internecine warfare from the unhappy insider and from his or her supporters.

Do the other administrators impress you? Listen to your potential superiors and colleagues for the same indicators as recommended above. Remember that they, too, are products of that campus's search practices. Are they people of quality? Do they appear to be looking to you for things other than strong professional performance? Do you see yourself as part of the assembled team, or do you come away feeling that you understand, more than ever, the high turnover rate in higher-education administration?

The participatory nature of the academic search process is often criticized because it puts a very complex undertaking in the hands of no one in particular. From the standpoint of the job seeker, however, it affords a special opportunity to survey the neighborhood. When you buy into a campus, you are buying into the whole campus culture.