November 18, 2008

Privacy Worries Cancel New Mexico State U.'s Presidential Search

With no finalists left in the hopper, New Mexico State University’s governing board voted on Monday to terminate the search for a new president, the Associated Press reports.

A search committee had settled on five finalists. But state law requires that their identities be made public 21 days before a hiring decision. Four of the candidates pulled out because they did not want their names disclosed. The fifth was hired elsewhere.

The university had paid a search firm $90,000 to find a replacement for Michael V. Martin, who in May was named chancellor of Louisiana State University at Baton Rouge. The search yielded a list of 43 candidates, which was trimmed to five by the committee.

The disclosure requirement was adopted after a 1998 presidential search at the University of New Mexico resulted in a lawsuit and a canceled search, according to the AP. University officials said Waded Cruzado would continue in her role of interim president until a new search could begin. —Paul Fain

Comments

1. Why didn’t the search firm clear the public notice requirement with each of the candidates before submitting their names to the university search committee? What a ridiculous waste of everyone’s time and money…

   — A Speck    Nov 18, 03:49 PM    #

2. Gee, I’ll take the job and even let the public know who I am 22 days in advance of a hiring decision.

   — tere    Nov 18, 03:54 PM    #

3. Candidates were told about the disclosure requirement at the beginning of the search, according to the board’s chairman.

   — Paul Fain    Nov 18, 04:08 PM    #

4. Tere: The search firm would never consider you because your willingness and eagerness to take the job undermine their professional livelihood.

   — Alabama    Nov 18, 04:27 PM    #

5. Why do you assume the fault lies with the search firm? In my three decades of experience with presidential searches, on both sides of the table, I have observed that such problems are the result either of inane state laws and university or system regulations, or aggressive but inexperienced search committees who ignore too much of the advice given them by the seardh firm.

   — case hardened    Nov 18, 04:43 PM    #

6. The search committee that hired Martin operated under the same rules and, evidently, had no trouble finding five finalists. Moreover, the search committee that hired the current UNM president operated under the same rules and had no trouble finding finalists. This is certainly very fishy and surely not the whole story.

   — Fidel    Nov 18, 04:49 PM    #

7. As with most chief executives, you do not want your name released unless you are pretty sure that you may be hired. It is their right to pull out at any time. Especially if they work at an institution where their current position will be put into jeapordy…

   — commonsense    Nov 18, 05:04 PM    #

8. What is inane about state sunshine laws? To be president of a state university is comparable to being an unelected governor —- moreso than it is being a private business CEO. If candidates for public office do not wish to be identified, then do not enter the competition.

   — John Thelin    Nov 18, 05:08 PM    #

9. The NMSU Board of Regents cancelled the president’s search because the names of the candidates would be come public? What a bunch of baloney. Did the candidates expect to arrive on campus in secret, dressed in camo with bags on their heads and have their voices electronically altered? Did they assume only a “sworn to secrecy” search committee would address them each by a fictitious name and that no member of the media would be allowed to interview them? Come on folks, this is unabashed nonsense and the NMSU Board of Regents needs to have a long talk with the Ethics folks.

   — Taos    Nov 18, 05:42 PM    #

10. The results speak for themselves. Until modification of the state’s “sunshine law” occurs…then be happy with an interim CEO and the challenges that such a temporary condition presents for an institution.

    — D. New    Nov 18, 06:48 PM    #

11. How does a public institution modify a state’s sunshine law? Perhaps they should become a private institution or better yet, maybe they want to insure they keep an internal interim. So much for national searches. One would guess another “appointment” will be the norm.

    — Sunshine    Nov 18, 07:36 PM    #

12. Call me naive, but is it possible that economic developments of the past few months have affected the willingness of the candidates to be named, yet not get the job? When they initially applied, the economic horizon was different. I think we’re all somewhat more grateful for whatever security we have these days….

    — Just wondering    Nov 18, 07:47 PM    #

13. I know very few seating presidents who would put their academic community at unrest by having their names made public for another position. This is simple, even if their Board is understanding (and believe me very few are), the University community will not invest in the seating President anymore because they will assume (even if this was an one and only application)that he is a lame duck. People who think a seating President is being selfish by not allowing his name to be made public just doesn’t understand the culture of the academy.

    — SMA    Nov 18, 10:56 PM    #

14. Maybe not the first seating presidents, but how about the second seating?

    — NWS    Nov 19, 12:31 AM    #

15. I seem to remember back when a sitting president at Brown, he had been there 18 months, emerged as a candidate at Vanderbilt and got fired while a finalist. According to media reports he thought it would be confidential and told his board that he was not a candidate after one year on the job but then the Tennessean published a list with his name on it. So the Brown board immediately fired him.
    Then he lucked out for the Vanderbilt board felt sorry for him and gave the job to him.
    They also gave his wife a tenured position even though she was tentured at Brown.
    Then, the Tennessean did it again when they reported that the wife, a tenured professor, was using pot in the presidential mansion in Nashville. They separated but she refused to move so another well know university stepped in and gave him another who. Whew! He moved and the Vandy board moved her out.
    So this confidentiality thing is not to be an academic matter for a lot is at stake.

    — Doug1978    Nov 19, 07:32 AM    #

16. Okay, a little reality. First of all, it is expected that your name will become public at some point in the search if you make it to the final list of candidates. These were people who were going to come to campus. Everyone in academic administration knows that if they are being brought to campus that their name will be released publicly. If these 4 candidates did not know this, then they are idiots. Therefore, there is no reason to repeal sunshine laws.

    Second, in modern academia, we expect administrators to only stay in a position for 5 years. That is about the average. We expect them to move on to better positions if they become available. Oh, sure, there are some positions like president at Harvard that might last longer than 5 years, as this is viewed as the top of the peak. But other than a handful of these, we expect them to move on. Word of you going on such an interview does not make you a lame duck. What it does do is get you a counter offer if your people really want to retain you.

    Third, it is not likely that the candidates applying for this job were presidents at comparable schools. They are probably vice presidents at comparable schools or deans at bigger schools. The only presidents will be people from small schools.

    Lastly, this is just more evidence that NMSU is totally broken. I have a feeling that the candidates removed their names after finding out more about NMSU. Until the state steps in and gets rid of the entire nest of corruption there, it will continue. Leaving Cruzado in as interim is just making the situation worse. She is a big part of the problem, as she perpetuates the cronyism that has led to NMSU becoming known as a place to avoid.

    — Bob    Nov 19, 07:35 AM    #

17. As a faculty member searching for a new position, I decided the correct thing to do was notify my chain of reporting when I accepted an interview. Up until that point, talk of changing jobs is just that, talk. When you go for the interview you potentially have let the cat out of the bag. It is easy for talk of your interview to get back to the current institution. These presidential candidates are using the “stability” of their current institution as a crutch to allow this selfish behavior. Be honest, that is the culture of academy that needs to be promulgated, not selfishness and secrecy.

    — Looking for a new job myself    Nov 19, 07:41 AM    #

18. It’s the 21st century. An African-American is President of the United States. The boundaries between the “free market” and (gasp!) “socialism” are blurring in the banking industry and maybe the auto industry. The next Administration looks like it’ll be a lot more transparent (witness the way Hillary Clinton is being considered for Secretary of State). It’s a new day, people.

    The delicate flowers who are final candidates for university presidences are just going to have to learn to live in the sunshine, and their current institutions are just going to have to learn to live with the fact that if they fire those candidates, the finalists for replacements will be in the sunshine, too.

    Sometimes improved ethics—such as letting the taxpayers know how their money is being spent—can be a little tough at first on the likes of academic administrators seeking better jobs. But the poor dears will get used to it eventually.

    — Just Passing Through    Nov 19, 07:57 AM    #

19. As messy as the process often is when public institutions hire a new president, isn’t the open nature of it preferable to what might happen when it is all done in private and behind closed doors? This issue has caused some colleagues of mine to avoid public presidencies in favor of ones at private colleges. Which hiring policy results in the best president being hired, or in the college’s best interests? This question continues to perplex some of the best minds in higher education.

    — Carl    Nov 19, 09:43 AM    #

20. True, candidates know that the names will be released sometime, usually at thetime of final campus interviews when various stakeholder groups are involved. The problem in this case is the requirement of public exposure for 21 days prior to selection. Usually the decision is made very shortly after the final interviews. Even then, the appropriate courtesy is to arrange for sitting presidents who are finalists to withdraw if they are not chosen so they can at least give the impression they prefer to stay where they are. Otherwise, their exposure certainly will undermine the position at home at the same time as they are rejected at another place. This does not matter so much with those candidates who are in positions below the presidency; it is expected they will wish to move up. The process is very delicate and dangerous for sitting presidents, however, and they deserve whatever courtesies the search committee and board of the searching institution can extend.

    — case hardened    Nov 19, 10:19 AM    #

21. Considering how nasty campus politics have become over the last decade or so, applicants for positions at a different school are wise to keep their relocation interests private until the last possible moment. It has become very common to find in cover letters a request to keep the applicant’s interest confidential.

    — James D. Williams    Nov 19, 12:32 PM    #

22. Great Presidents write memoirs early and have funny names: Tojo, Adolph, Benito, Karl, etc

    — Doug1978    Nov 19, 03:07 PM    #

23. reply to James D. Williams: How does one know that campus politics have become more nasty over the past decade than the decade before — or in 1988, 1978, or 1808? Just because a candidate “requests confidentiality” hardly makes such a request legitimate or one to be honored. I, as a state citizen, voter, taxpayer, and faculty member, request that candidate letters, as with most public records, be, well, “public” — and not confidential. Why all this deference to presidential candidates and presidents? At most state universities each semester the university publishes by name and course student evaluations of that course and instructor.

    — John Thelin    Nov 19, 05:19 PM    #

24. Number 16 is right on the nose. Quit speculating and reread that message.

    — tex    Nov 19, 08:12 PM    #

25. “Case hardened” is right on with regard to a very delicate hiring process and any search committee that fails to acknowledge the sensitivity of this process will find themselves in exactly the same position as NMSU. That is why a # of states are reexamining their “sunshine laws” and making appropriate adjustments.

    — D.New    Nov 19, 10:17 PM    #

26. Dear all: to the best of my knowledge, I am the only Chicano full
    professor in the College of Arts and Sciences (if there is another one,
    please email me, I’d like to meet you). This, in the most Hispanic of
    states, in a Hispanic majority community. This lack of Chicano faculty
    representation is not an anomaly or a fluke. Change sometimes must be
    imposed; white Southerners did not eagerly embrace desegregation, it was
    forced on them.

    Waded is my president.

    Viva la raza!

    Daniel Villa Professor of Spanish Languages and Linguistic

    — Daniel Villa    Nov 20, 08:34 AM    #

27. As a former employee at NMSU, I have seen how this university is dysfunctional. One of the major problems has been the overwhelming push by the Hispanic community for a President from their ranks. This is clearly stated in Dr. Villa’s remarks. They wanted Bill Flores and they got Michael Martin, who by the way did not do that great a job. The Board evidently does not want a permanent Hispanic President. The comments made by Bob in #16 are quite accurate. NMSU is becoming a pariah in academia.

    On a positive note, maybe Waded Cruzado can find a job at the State of New Mexico’s Higher Education Department and follow in Bill Flores’s footsteps.

    — John    Nov 21, 11:13 AM    #

Previous: Johns Hopkins U. Unveils Gunshot-Detection System
Next: Jury Convicts Former N.J. State Senator of Corruption Tied to Medical University