An ad soliciting applicants for the open EMU presidency is posted to the online CHRONICLE OF HIGHER EDUCATION today. Copied below:
PRESIDENT
Eastern Michigan University
The Board of Regents and the Presidential Search Advisory Committee announce a search to recruit the next President of Eastern Michigan University.Founded in 1849, Eastern Michigan University is a public institution grounded on a proud tradition of public education encompassing five Colleges including the Colleges of Arts and Sciences, Business, Education, Health and Human Services and Technology. Eastern Michigan University emphasizes a student-focused learning environment positively affecting the lives of students and the community, as well as the strong commitment beyond campus boundaries to the broader community through service initiatives and partnerships. Eastern Michigan University is committed to excellence in teaching, the extension of knowledge through basic and applied research, and creative and artistic expression. Eastern Michigan University maximizes educational opportunities for professional and personal growth for students from diverse backgrounds.Eastern Michigan University is a fully accredited educational institution by the Higher Learning Commission of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools. The Princeton Review named EMU a “Best Midwestern College” for the fourth straight year and also selected the College of Business as one of the “Best 282 Business Schools” in the nation. Eastern Michigan University is a member of the Mid-American Conference (MAC).Eastern Michigan University, located in Ypsilanti, MI, is conveniently situated between Detroit and Lansing, and its 450+ acre campus is graced by 18 miles of walkways and jogging trails and more than 200 acres of scenic lawn and wooded areas. Eastern Michigan serves 23,000 students annually.Visit Eastern Michigan University at www.emich.edu.Interested candidates must possess a graduate degree. An earned terminal degree is desirable. Please forward your resume and cover letter by February 1, 2008 to the following address:Paul Czamanske, President & CEO Michelle Olmsted, ConsultantCompass Group Ltd.401 S. Old Woodward, Suite 460 Birmingham, Michigan 48009 molmsted@compassgroup.comT: (248) 540-9110; F: (248) 647-8288www.compassgroup.com Member of Association of Executive Search Consultants since 1988.Eastern Michigan University is an equal opportunity employer.
 |
Other ads from this institution
I know (well, heard through the rumor mill) that one of the issues that delayed this ad was what sort of qualifications do candidates have to have as a minimum– thus the phrase “Interested candidates must possess a graduate degree. An earned terminal degree is desirable.” What concerns me about this is it more or less confirms some of the fears of folks expressed by others here, that the BoR is stacking the deck in an effort to hire a non-academic-type.
I guess I’m for “thinking differently” in terms of the next presidential hire. Lord knows we have not had a good president here since I got here almost 10 years ago. But the last thing EMU needs is someone else who is going to come in and advocate running the institution even more “like a business.”
Here come the judge!
Yeah, it’s odd that the EMU presidential job ad has only ONE requirement specified — a graduate degree – while the normal for all other EMU jobs that merit national advertisements, and for comparable jobs in higher ed, specify lots of requirements.
And 200 acres of “scenic lawns and wooded areas”? Really, there’s no need to exaggerate the natural beauty of the EMU campus — which is not natural area. Where are our “scenic lawns”? Where is our woods? Such claims are irrelevant to recruiting good candidates.
And who would describe Ypsilanti as located between Detroit and Lansing, and NOT mention Ann Arbor? Of those 3 fine cities, Ann Arbor is by far the biggest draw in higher education.
It’s a very odd job ad – it says nothing about what the president will do, and it doesn’t mention that EMU has graduate programs, but it is filled with the kind of vague boilerplate rhetoric that is both commonplace and essentially without content as far as letting the reader know what EMU is all about.
Given the success (or lack thereof) of the last two traditional president searches, I think now is as good a time as any to think differently and seriously consider a nontraditional candidate. I personally think the most important trait in a candidate should be a passion for the university and not merely someone who is looking to pad their vita/resume for the next position down the road. And, the success of any president, as it would be for the CEO of any large organization, is largely dependent on the people he/she selects to help him manage the organization.
Frankly, every day that goes by without firm leadership in the public’s eye is another student or two that is forever lost to other universities in this state. How much longer can EMU wait?
Mark wrote,
“It’s a very odd job ad – it says nothing about what the president will do, and it doesn’t mention that EMU has graduate programs, but it is filled with the kind of vague boilerplate rhetoric that is both commonplace…”
I think I shall forward along my resume today!
Contrast EMU’s with Wayne State’s announcement, published on 11/20/07:
http://chronicle.com/jobs/id.php?id=0000536136-01
“As a national research university with urban teaching and service missions, Wayne State University seeks a president with a broad vision of the nature and responsibilities of an urban, public research university, and the ability to articulate a personal vision of excellence within the university and beyond. This individual will have the ability to formulate policies and programs to implement that vision, and the administrative skill to achieve them. Wayne State’s next president will be creative and confident, committed to diversity and capable of inspiring faculty, staff and students to excel in the university’s primary missions of research, education and service to society….”
The position description includes: “The preferred candidate will have a strong academic background or have occupied a senior executive position at a large, complex organization; have a strong fundraising track record, and have exceptional interpersonal capabilities.” http://bog.wayne.edu/presidentialsearch/position.php
Interestingly, nothing about a terminal degree other than “strong academic background”.
Well, you all may know that Roy Wilbanks wanted to be Prez once, but could never have the job because he lacked a Ph.D. Now that he’s in charge (the real President) he’s been able to affect the process by writing the job description. What did you all expect from this political hack. We may get another President like Shelton who spent all his time on the golf course or some banker or hedge fund/virtual money manager. But you can bet that the new guy or gal will be a sports backer! You can bet on that! Wilbanks, Stapleton and Hawks will see to that! Bye the way did you see that the number one group that donating money to EMU was the EMU Grid Iron Club – THis group of ex-football players donated over $350,000. +- to the EMU football program in 2006-07. The source you ask: EMU Foundation Report for 2006-07. Just came in the mail today. Keep an eye on “Wilbanks.” Hope you all have the guts to raise hell when he and Stapleton stick it to you- but then —- Roy’s M.O. is that you don’t know you’ve been stuck! The ad is written for a generalist – or anybody that Roy and Company want to hire. It will be interesting to hear from the other committee participants when the whole thing is over. I’ll bet they feel that the process was like a rigged election process. Roy and Company will find a way to discredit or reject all candidates that won’t further their agenda.
(1) At least the ad is posted! It has only been 5 months after all. (sarcasm there)
(2) I agree that it looks like the powers-that-be were trying to manage the search so that a local player, or someone with local connections would be the inevitable pres.
However, I think even the most myopic will soon realize how PATHETIC it would make EMU look to appoint a president without stature. What prospective student will take seriously a university whose president has an MS in whatever and no stunning record of accomplishment? (Aside: I remember well the heated discussion when UM was considering hiring an assistant dean of engineering who had only a bachelor’s degree. Only a bachelor’s degree, but a GLOBAL reputation in a field that REVOLUTIONIZED IC architecture. The lack of credential was balanced by an international and stunning record of achievement.)
But if EMU appoints an average joe, well, it’ll would be a public relations DISASTER. Try selling the university to the state legislators, or to parents, students or prospective faculty or prospective administrators with an underwhelming president. NIGHTMARE PR. I think the Regents are intelligent enough to realize that EMU cannot have any more NIGHTMARE PR.
Interesting Ad. But don’t worry everyone. Everything will be just fine and EMU will be back on top soon. Don Lappnow (Ph.D in Higher Education Administration) will absolutely be president….and ‘good old’ Bob Neely will be appointed the provost. Just chill….everything will be just grand in a little while.
Alum Wrote,
“…We may get another President like Shelton who spent all his time on the golf course… ”
Hey! The EMU Student Senate, Bobby Murkowski and Daniel Cicchini and the whole gang were tottaly into President Shelton!
And we all know the judgement of the EMU Student Senate in their support of President Samuel Kirkpatrick’s Presidential Palace, and the Huron issue, and so on is impeccable!
Whoever and whatever the EMU Student Government Senate supports (and currently at least one individual in the Student Senate fully supports Raising Tuition Rates even higher than they are now), is what we all should support! The EMU Student Senators are never wrong and they working Diligently with Interim President Sidlik to make sure our Tuition Rates are kept at an unreasonable level!
/Sarc (Sarcastic Tagline for geeks)
BrianAlum, in his comment of a couple days ago, referred to the failure of the last two EMU presidential searches, and
called them “traditional searches.” But there was NOTHING traditional about EMU’s recent presidential searches, if by traditional we mean what is the proven tradition of presidential searches for American universities: A search committee in which regents and faculty share the search responsibilities, in which faculty define as much as any other group (or more) what qualities are needed in the next president, and have major input – but not final say – on the decision as to whom the job is offered. EMU most certainly did not have anything at all like that when Sam Kirkpatrick or Fallon were hired, and there’s little hope that the current search will be at all like that. Instead, EMU is repeating the process of doing a search that is controlled by a few insiders on the BOR and a few insiders in the Welch Hall gang.
And thus, by repeating past failures, EMU runs a higher than necessary risk of making another bad selection for president.
Why can’t EMU do presidential searches the way other Universities do? Not only is it a proven method, it’s also a method that ensures that the new president will arrive with some real insight into what the faculty (whose daily labors, combined with those of the students, comprise the bulk of what a university is all about) thinks are the crucial issues and priorities. None of our recent presidents have had a clue as to what the faculty thinks EMU’s strengths and weaknesses are, and thus, no surprise, our recent presidents failed spectacularly.
Perhaps what the faculty think may be incorrect; it’s certainly not the final word on anything. But by using a search process that isolates candidates and new presidents from learning what the faculty think is a recipe for failure.
Why go that route for the third time in 7 years?
Hi Mark,
“Why can’t EMU do presidential searches the way other Universities do?” Well….why is transparency at EMU still nonexistent?
IMHO…the plain truth is that people at EMU just don’t want to change. You Mark…(like me when I was employed at EMU)…and others….are clearly in the minority. There are forces at play here. Some at EMU frankly just don’t care….the faculty know this yet maybe don’t want to openly admit it. In addition, there are others that have a vested interest in keeping the status-quo. I spent years at EMU trying to get administrative people to look me in the eye and tell the truth…..just be honest and tell me what the deal is….what are you willing to do and what are you not willing to do. Unfortunately there were only a few people that I felt were up-front and honest.
“Why go that route for the third time in 7 years?” Your right…..7-10 years is about 1/3 of a academic career to put up with this type of stuff. That is why faculty will leave EMU….its happening.
Well….I am sorry to say its just not going to happen to EMU until the powers that be have a shake-up. I just don’t think that is going to happen….hence it will be the same old version….replayed. I will bet you anything that Lappnow and Neely will ultimately be in charge….same ole….same ole…..
Mark, I really don’t know what you mean by”proven tradition of presidential searches.” You define this as “A search committee in which regents and faculty share the search responsibilities, in which faculty define as much as any other group (or more) what qualities are needed in the next president, and have major input – but not final say – on the decision as to whom the job is offered.” It seems to me that is what we have on this committee with 25% of the committee being represented by faculty and emeriti, 25% of the committee being community people, 16% representing the Board of Regents, 8% representing students, 8% representing the alumni, 8% representing the EMU Foundation, 8% representing univ. admin. It seems to me that the condition that faculty and regents share the search responsibility is being met.
At this point, I feel that there is an effort made to be transparent. I am not saying that it will not change, but everything the committee has done to date has been reported publicly. Moreover, the co-chairs have indicated they feel the committee has an obligation to report the results of the meetings back to their constitutiencies and bring back suggestions from those constitutiencies. I’m not certain what more is required at this point.
Additionally, the chairs have indicated the need to spend some time discussing how to involve the faculty and the rest of the campus in the rest of the search process. I, for one, thought that was again an effort for transparency.
How this will all play out will be interesting to watch. However, to this point, I do not see what there is to criticize.
Ultimately, doesn’t the responsibility fall on the board of regents to make the hiring decision they feel is best for a university, after taking into consideration the input and suggestions of the search committee? After all, it is the board of regents where blame is placed (appropriately) when things don’t go right with their selection (as in the last two presidents).
I appreciate Mark’s discussion of my previous comment. I should have worded it differently, as I was referring to the last two “presidents” as being traditional candidates more than I was referring to the search process. It is the nontraditional “candidate” that I think a search committee should at least be open to considering this time around. The last two presidents probably had aspirations well beyond EMU even before they started.
My other point is that we need someone who primarily wants to be at EMU and is focused on making a difference “here,” without maintaining visions of grandeur or losing sight of what is happening on the home front.
I would largely agree with your newest comment, BrianAlum; but how would we measure whether a potential president wants to be at EMU long term or has ‘visions of grandeur’? All candidates will profess to have no desire other than to devote their full energies and entire career to the well being of EMU; whether they are sincere is another thing entirely.
And for the record, John A. Fallon III was not at all a typical candidate for president: he’d been president before, but he’d never been a regular university faculty member; he had no record as a scholar or as a classroom instructor. That may not have seemed essential to the then members of the Board of Regents, but a better informed board would have seen that lack of experience as highly problematic, if not outright disqualifying. And if they’d checked out his record better, they’d have discovered deep problems with his rule as president at SUNY Potsdam. Nearly all American university presidents are people who started out their careers as university scholars-teachers, and that’s appropriate, as research and teaching are the bulk of what a university is all about. Academics is not the end-all, be-all of a university, but it is the bulk, the core; yet EMU has a habit of picking presidents with little knowledge or respect for teaching and research, so EMU suffers. (Sam Kirkpatrick had been a scholar and teacher, but his egotism and tendency toward cronyism and other forms of material corruption made him quite willing to gut academics at EMU in favor of indulging the Welch hall gang’s peculiar goals.)
Hopefully this search will turn out better. I do appreciate the good of efforts of Prof. Bert Green, emeritus, and the many other good folks on the search committee to make it a successful search. I know they are are all sincere and devoted to this goal. And thanks, Bert, for your optimism and your comment above. I’d be happy as can be if the search turns out great, and if so my worries now will be irrelevant. But the past is not irrelevant to choices being made in the present, hence my current worries about this search.
Allow me to add a little data to Mark’s remarks as further food for thought. The Chronicle of Higher Education haf a series of articles in 2005 regarding characteristics of presidents of 4-year colleges. Apparently online access is limited to subscribers, but here is some of the more significant info:
What was your position immediately before assuming your current post?
* President at another institution 21.5%
* Provost or chief academic officer 32.1%
* Nonacademic university vice president or similar post 22.0%
* Other academic 7.2%
* Dean of a graduate or professional school 6.7%
* Corporate executive 2.6%
* Governmental official 2.2%
* Lawyer 0.8%
* Other 3.8%
* Not reported 1.2%
Perhaps of some significance to the debate over whether we should have a “non-traditional” president is the following article in the series:
PRESIDENTS FAVOR SCRAPPING TENURE
But leaders who have been scholars are more apt to favor job security for faculty members
If the majority of college presidents had their way, tenure would become as obsolete as the slide rule. According to the findings of The Chronicle’s survey of four-year-college presidents, 53 percent of them said they agreed that tenure for faculty members should be replaced by a system of long-term contracts. Thirty-nine percent disagreed.
But presidents’ backgrounds led to wide differences in how they viewed tenure. Those with no teaching experience, the survey found, were much more likely to oppose tenure than those who had spent years standing in front of classrooms. Seventy percent of presidents who had never taught before favored the contract system, compared with only 38 percent of those who had taught for more than 20 years.
In general, a president’s immersion in the academic side of university life seemed to be an indicator of whether or not a president valued tenure, the system by which faculty members evaluate their peers on teaching, research, and service in return for what is essentially lifetime job security…
http://chronicle.com/weekly/v52/i11/11a03101.htm#scrap
A sidebar to that piece says:
DO AWAY WITH TENURE
Presidents more likely to want to scrap tenure:
* do not have tenure themselves.
* have been president for at least a decade.
* have never taught.
* previously held a position outside academe.
* are from private religious institutions.
* are Republicans.
SOURCE: The Chronicle’s Survey of College Presidents
While I don’t have access to the Chronicle articles, it appears that you have posted the most salient portions of this article. There are some interesting points here, but I can’t agree that merely considering or hiring a nontraditional candidate for president at EMU would likely lead to the loss of tenure for EMU faculty. That concept would be a stretch at best and could lead to sensationalism.
The reason I say this is that any new president that has even the remotest idea of the historical faculty-administration labor relations issues at EMU would know that the mere hinting at doing away with tenure would lead to utter chaos. And I doubt the board, even a relatively new board as EMU’s, would venture down that path towards destruction. EMU already has enough challenges.
I can see where the statistics would hold that a Republican or a business-oriented president, such as one who was the CEO of a large corporation, might be more inclined to consider this. However, isn’t it the case that EMU only has one Republican remaining on the board? I would think that a purely business-oriented candidate would be the last person considered given the current board composition.
I am “merely” a small business owner in the community and a graduate of EMU, so I don’t have the same perspective that a faculty or staff member would have. But I simply can’t see any president making it through the gate who didn’t understand the challenges that EMU has with its faculty, its infrastructure, its enrollment, and its public perception. These are issues that significantly impact the community just as they do those to work and learn at EMU. The point in my original post was that I think now, given the results of the last two presidents, is the best time for a board to “think outside the box” and search for someone who can look for solutions differently and without preconceptions.