tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5776587.post6138360995556026473..comments2023-11-03T04:00:24.785-04:00Comments on Kentucky School News and Commentary: An Open ProcessRichard Dayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14586435007687942849noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5776587.post-36577813613293152232012-10-25T10:56:04.219-04:002012-10-25T10:56:04.219-04:00Good points…all.
I think search firms are helpful...Good points…all.<br /><br />I think search firms are helpful and at their best, probably worth the money. Having established systems in place to handle the screening of a large number of applicants, mailings, setting up meetings….there’s a lot of busy work.<br /><br />I just think they should not be blindly trusted to always act in the best interest of the client. That, in my mind, is not due diligence.<br /><br />I doubt there can really be full transparency with the applicant pool, but neither is that necessary. We really don’t need to know who the bottom candidates were who didn’t progress through the process. But I do think it is very important for finalists (plural) to be announced. Otherwise, it becomes this ruse, where the committee trots a single finalist around campus selling them, rather than gathering input that might affect the outcome. <br /><br />I sense a growing unrest among the faculty but it’s hard to tell if it will turn into anything. Most folks complain but stop short of doing anything else. But I believe most faculty members would feel better if they felt that they had a few folks they trust who monitor the process form the inside.<br /><br />The Regents vision is, of course, key to all of this. <br /><br />To be honest, I don’t have a particular type of finalist in mind. I don’t have an opinion on the rumored insiders…and like them both personally. I am more interested in ferreting out unsuitable candidates who may have significant faults. If the Regents know all of the pros and cons and they decide on someone with a blemish or two, then they have made an informed decision. What I object to, and have reason to fear, is that the Regents themselves (as highfalutin’ board members, none of whom have ever done this sort of thing before…so far as I know) will not do the hard work required to vet candidates, and that the search firm won’t do extensive research either, and we end up getting sold someone who may not be as advertised. That would be a shame.<br /><br />Thanks for the comment.Richard Dayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14586435007687942849noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5776587.post-40646486069198412902012-10-24T15:07:37.610-04:002012-10-24T15:07:37.610-04:00I would be inclined to go even further if your exa...I would be inclined to go even further if your examples are indicative of the lack of candidate research offered by these headhunters. I am betting that $100,000 could be better spend at home with a group of our own folks recruiting and researching. <br /><br />As much as these positions are publically trumpeted as being transparent, in reality they never are. In the end, this decision will be made by two or three powerbrokers at the highest decision making level. <br /><br />I too am interested in the vision which the Regents hopefully share about EKU's future identity/role. Seems like we went from one environment of international asperations with heavy handed, topdown control to one of stability based in past identities and values without much understanding of what future post secondary education is becoming. <br /><br />I wish we would bring on a young, dynamic leader who could lead the charge in transforming this univeristy into something which is ahead of the curve instead of either being behind the curve or insulated in a historical identity which is no longer sustainable.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com