Lately it seems like I’ve been surrounded by complaints about how Presidents are hired in organizations. In my own organization some individuals are unhappy about how the selection occurred, how the interview process occurred, who’s sitting in on the interviews, etc. While I’ve been observing this at work I’ve also observed similar complaints on a larger scale with the local community college.
Monroe Community College recently set out to search for a new president. Two separate search committees decided on two candidates with prior experience in the field. Then the board went ahead against the suggestion of the search committees and added a former county legislator and a local lawyer – both with absolutely no experience in the field. As you can imagine the faculty and many community members threw a fit. One of the qualified candidates left the race. The other was not considered for the position. When it came down to final board vote between the two unqualified candidates they became deadlocked in a tie. Meaning that the process has now been reopened again.
The problem with hiring a president is that the board controls the process. Yet, the board does not work with the president everyday or nor feel the effects of the decisions the president makes. Far too often the people who face real change with a new president are on the outskirts of the decision making. And in many cases, such as with MCC, the reasons behind selection of candidates is not explained.
While hiring for such positions can be difficult, especially when there’s a high level of confidentiality involved. But, everyone’s (down to the lowest person in the organization) input should be sought. They should be asked ahead of time what is important to them about a president and what their concerns are about a new president. If possible, some should be involved in the interview process. They still won’t be able to make the decision but their input should be heard and considered.
Buy-in from the bottom is essential to hiring a new President yet it is often overlooked due to the fact that the board remains on the peripheral of many organizations. How sad it is that they have the most power but are the least impacted.
