Monday, March 26, 2012

The Final Candidates


We are just completing our search for the founding dean of our School of Engineering and Applied Science.  The finalists are all impressive but the search process itself has also been impressive.  In doing a search, the process and transparency matter as much as the results.  This was made clear in a recent conversation with a friend who is visiting another school for a semester.  This school doesn’t have a tradition of shared governance, doesn’t provide for a strong faculty voice even on faculty issues, doesn’t have open searches for key positions, and doesn’t provide for transparency.  Consequently, the faculty who should take key leadership roles and who would make a clear and positive difference, just sit on the sidelines as much as they can or else they look to leave.

Our process started with the election of the 6 faculty representatives on the search committee, which in this case came from the two departments involved in the new school, engineering and computer science.  Given the respective sizes of the department, four engineering faculty (including the department chair) were elected and two computer faculty (also including the department chair).  In addition to the faculty there are three senior administrators (including me) and three trustees .  The faculty, administrators and our search firm consultant next determined a preliminary search timetable and also determined where ads and announcement should go in addition to the search/recruitment activities that all of us, especially the search firm, would be involved in.

All of us looked at every resume that came in. There was no preliminary screening undertaken, but there was a firm commitment on the part of every person on the committee that we would preserve all candidates’ confidentiality up to the point that they had been selected to be, and agreed to be finalists. Once a person became a finalist, the identities of the finalists would be made known to all the faculty and we would then undertake comprehensive due diligence.

Coming up with a list of individuals to interview was not easy.  First, we had many highly qualified candidates and second we were sometimes far apart initially on some of the preliminary ranking.  We kept at it and ultimately came up with a list of 10 candidates to interview.  Not every committee member voted in favor of all ten.  Most did however, and those who didn’t at least knew that their voices had been heard and considered.

As a committee, we interviewed every candidate for an hour.  We did 4 interviews on the first day; 6 on the second; and the final two shortly thereafter.  Though in previous high level academic searches, we have interviewed up to 8 candidates on a single day, I am more and more certain that up to four in a single day is the right number and that 6 or 8 is simply too many given the attention that needs to be paid to each.

Once the interviews were complete, we also completed our list of finalists.  Just as we were doing so, one superior candidate withdrew from the search for personal reasons but the pool was robust enough that we could just move on.  Once again we did not all agree on every finalist.  But there was a high level of agreement as we fully discussed every candidate and provided all the time necessary to make all views known and bring all pertinent facts to the attention of the committee. 

And here we are, the finalists are selected, and checking of references is underway.  But we do more than just check with the names on the list that the candidate has provided us with.  We insist on checking off the list as well, and many of us on the committee are making use of the contacts we have at the schools the candidates work at.

We have also scheduled an entire day of follow up meetings with each of the finalists, including a key meeting with the President of the University as well as important meetings with the faculty, other academic deans,  students, the Provost’s office, and, if time permits, some community leaders in related areas.  Those follow up meetings have started to take place. I can’t predict the person to be chosen as yet, but I know already that this process works very well.  And now stay tuned; I think the best is yet to come. 

Monday, March 19, 2012

Civic Engagement


We have a very active and respected Center for Civic Engagement on our campus.  The Center has undertaken many worthwhile initiatives including the development of “a brief workshop for students who will be working with off campus communities.”  This workshop, which is slightly over an hour in length, examines how students feel about working with off-campus communities and how these communities feel about working with students.  The attitudes stressed to the students include “being open minded,” “being respectful and appreciative,” “being humble,” “being responsible –sticking to commitments.”  Civic Engagement is fostering civility as a prime objective, and values articulated in the workshop are values we should be able to agree on. 

More and more, however, these values have under assault.  For example the recent comments by Rush Limbaugh are totally reprehensible and an apology alone is hardly sufficient to right the wrong involved.  Referring to a student as a slut and a prostitute because of her support for contraceptives being covered by employee health plans crosses any reasonable line of civility.  The student involved attends Georgetown University and the President of Georgetown, as reported in Inside Higher Education, issued a statement that stands up for values we should all endorse.  President DeGioia noted that the student “was respectful, sincere …spoke with conviction… and was a model of civil discourse” while some who opposed her position, including Rush Limbaugh, “responded with behavior that can only be described as misogynistic, vitriolic, and a misrepresentation of the position of our student.” President DeGioia did not endorse the student’s point of view, only her right to free expression (and civil discourse) and he did so in a very elegant and persuasive manner. He quoted from Saint Augustine: “Let us, on both sides, lay aside all arrogance.  Let us not, on either side, claim that we have already discovered the truth.  Let us seek it together as something that is known to neither of us.  For then only may we seek it, lovingly and tranquilly, if there is no bold assumption that it is entirely discovered and possessed.”

I often blame politicians for what seems to be an ever more pervasive assault on civil discourse.  However, the comments last week from a faculty member at Rochester in regard to the Rush Limbaugh remarks, reminded me that higher education is also not immune from those who undercut civility.  And even more unfortunate (given my academic discipline), is that the faculty member in question is an economist and I always expect more and better from economists.  The faculty member at Rochester stated that the Georgetown student’s position “deserves only to be ridiculed, mocked and jeered.”  He goes on to note that “To treat it with respect would be a travesty.”  Joel Seligman, the President of Rochester responded well by stating “I am outraged that any professor would demean a student in this fashion” and he also noted that “To openly ridicule, mock, or jeer a student in this way is about the most offensive thing a professor can do…we are here to educate, to nuture, to inspire, not to engage in character assassination.”

We are running out of time to prevent more strident views from dominating more and more of the public discourse.  We all need to stand up whenever and wherever the need arises for civility and civil discourse.

Monday, March 12, 2012

Customer Service Continued - The Mouse Wins

I am just back from a family vacation in Hawaii. And it really is a family vacation when we go to Hawaii. Not only is it a great venue for a vacation with always spectacular weather, but since we also have family living there, we also get a chance for some valuable family time. This time we split our visit to Hawaii between two vacation clubs. Both were beautiful facilities, both were comfortable and both had excellent amenities. We will go back to both in the years ahead but one stands out, and the difference is clearly customer service. In the first vacation club we stayed in, my kids who were sharing a bedroom, found a cigarette lighter in the queen size bed. That’s correct—they found a cigarette lighter in the freshly made bed. They didn’t even know what it was when they brought it out of their bedroom and showed it to my spouse. An easy recipe for kids to get hurt and a serious oversight on the part of the hotel. I called housekeeping to report the cigarette lighter. The only response was the person who answered indicated he would report this finding. And that was it. No follow-up call, no one came to see the lighter or to explain how something like this could happen. Very indifferent customer service for something that was clearly the hotel’s fault. In the next vacation club, there actually was a mix-up with the reservation which was almost seamlessly resolved. But straightening out a mix-up that shouldn’t have happened in the first place doesn’t warrant customer service recognition. Instead, it was the reaction from the staff when a drinking glass broke on the ground adjacent to the water facilities. Four staff members immediately appeared and started removing the broken glass. They worked on removing all traces of the broken glass for what was at least ten minutes. They even shined a spot light on the area even though they were already in bright Hawaiian sunshine on a crystal clear day. After all their efforts and after the detailed attention placed on removing every trace of glass, I would gladly have walked the area barefoot. I had confidence that everything that could and should be done, had been done. What also differentiated this vacation club was the friendliness of the staff (which was known as the “cast”). Almost to a person, and the staff was more than abundant, everyone said hello, everyone was professional, and in addition everyone was friendly. The staff training was visible and it was clearly an asset. The mouse makes a difference. Two great places to stay at. Two great locations and physical settings. Two great ambassadors for vacationing in Hawaii. And yet during this trip, there is no doubt that one stood out. And as a result, I have a new first choice of where to stay in Hawaii and the reason is directly attributable to customer service. Our students, our future alums, also care about service, and it matters greatly to the students and to their families. I’m never a fan of compromising standards but I’m also not a fan of compromising on service. It matters both in the short and long run, and it should.

Monday, March 5, 2012

Customer Service

I was reminded a few weeks ago, in response to a situation I will outline in the next paragraph, of how important customer service is throughout education and especially at the very competitive higher education level. And by customer service, I am not suggesting a weakening of standards; rather, I am just suggesting that we, especially in private higher education, do all that is necessary to minimize administrative hassles and in that way help our students succeed. A colleague at another very good private institution was telling me about a student, who was completing his third degree at this institution. He needed just one more course to earn his second graduate degree and had a potential excellent job opportunity (in an area where there is a tough job market) that was contingent on competing the degree before the end of January. The school involved didn’t have this course scheduled in the winter session, didn’t offer this course in January, and the administrators contacted were not responsive to the student even given the compelling nature of the student’s request—not to do any less work, but rather just complete the degree within this session so as to take advantage of an important opportunity. The administrators contacted felt that because this course had never before been offered during a winter session, it should not be offered now and besides, since this was an intensive course, there was no way the student could do the work involved. The story has a happy ending. More senior level administrators, responding to an appeal from the student, intervened and asked that the course be given as a tutorial (or independent study) type course. The student was assigned everything that a student taking the course in a regular semester was expected to do, and he did it all well and in the shortened time frame available. The faculty member upheld standards and worked with a highly motivated student and the rest was history. The administrator telling me this story concluded by stating how much he hoped the possible job opportunity would work out for the student (now a three-time alum). I do too, but even if it doesn’t, I expect that this alum will be a very loyal and supportive graduate of an institution that helped when help was needed at a key time in his life/career. The person who preceded me as Provost often said when looking for a model of good customer service, we should emulate a Bloomingdale’s rather than a Korvette’s or an Alexander’s. Don’t know or remember those two chains which were very prominent in this area a number of years ago? Not surprising since both are now out of business. No doubt in my mind that customer service helped determine their fate.