• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

student viewpoint on president hiring process

I can empathize with those who are having to deal with the uncertainty created by the lack of a leader at UM. It adds stress to everyone's life when their isn't a clear vision and message coming from leadership.

At the same time, this is a unique university president search and, when you are trying to do an expedited search and hiring process for the CEO position of a public university, it makes it harder on everyone. Even more so when the application stage was kept open during the interviewing stage. I think we can give the BoR and UM president search committee some grace.

At the same time, Clayton, the Commissioner of Higher Ed., should acknowledge and connect with peoples' worries and explain the reason for the communication strategy and acknowledge and apologize for the communication shortfalls. Based on the results of the search, I trust Clayton wanted what is best for UM. A true leader recognizes and acknowledges the issue(s) and takes accountability and commits to making it right. I trust that Clayton is that type of leader.
 
The lack of transparency certainly has been frustrating, but my only real big concern is that we've only landed on one finalist. I've said from the beginning that expediency should not trump being as thorough and selective as possible. Shinn seems like a great candidate, but despite the updates saying they've seen numerous applicants, having only one at the end in a rushed search seems like a potential mistake. Maybe he really is the best candidate, but I don't think it would have hurt to spend a little more time to see if there aren't any equally good or better candidates out there.
 
uofmman1122 said:
The lack of transparency certainly has been frustrating, but my only real big concern is that we've only landed on one finalist. I've said from the beginning that expediency should not trump being as thorough and selective as possible. Shinn seems like a great candidate, but despite the updates saying they've seen numerous applicants, having only one at the end in a rushed search seems like a potential mistake. Maybe he really is the best candidate, but I don't think it would have hurt to spend a little more time to see if there aren't any equally good or better candidates out there.
Click to expand...
Agree that would be ideal in a normal president search. However, with Wyoming, Boise State, Weber State, and North Dakota State also looking for new presidents at the same time and with Wyoming and NDSU at the later stages of their normal search process, there's a different level of urgency to get the best candidate to campus as soon as possible.
 
GriznMN said:
Agree that would be ideal in a normal president search. However, with Wyoming, Boise State, Weber State, and North Dakota State also looking for new presidents at the same time and with Wyoming and NDSU at the later stages of their normal search process, there's a different level of urgency to get the best candidate to campus as soon as possible.
Click to expand...
Wyoming announced yesterday, and NDSU 4 days ago that they hired their new presidents, so they are essentially irrelevant. Both had their candidates and interviews done around the time Bodnar left.

Weber has been searching since November and just closed to start reviewing candidates.

Boise's search is a political mess that has been paused and reopened since it first started earlier last year.

The urgency seems to be self-inflicted and not, in my opinion, necessary. We keep calling this an unusual presidential search, but we're imposing that on ourselves here.

Again, Shinn seems like a good choice, but if he turns out to be less than expected, the short search timeline is going to look really dumb in hindsight.
 
This could go in either thread but probably belongs here in the opaque thread: The wording of the latest update says "a" finalist is visiting, and it appears the general consensus seems that the visitor is "the" finalist who has the job to lose at this point. Is that a leap? I mean, nothing I've read says this visit is a formality and picking out office carpet. That's kinda what I've read here, but I didn't really get that from the update. Is it possible that we might have others visit? Nobody knows, I guess, and that's why I'm posting the question in this thread.
 
CDAGRIZ said:
Man, starting a sentence with “Everybody always” puts a LOT of pressure on the rest of the sentence! 😂
Click to expand...
Yeah, but the sentiment remains...

There sure are A LOT of entitled people who think they DESERVE to know everything right now.

There are a couple of exceptions - maybe a few...:)
 
Maybe my perspective is a bit unique on this, but there are two major points I feel are missing in this article.

1) These closed searches are confidential by necessity, and the people on the committee have to sign NDAs. This is not new. The students get representation on these search committees through their elected ASUM reps. When I was in college I was on three of them at a different school in Montana. One for an AD, or to run the tutoring program, and one other that I am blanking on the position. I believe it was for the football coach. I wasn't allowed to talk about it.

Going beyond that representation is not possible when searches like this are, by necessity, closed and confidential.

2) While I understand informing students is important, I would contend that the average student has very little understanding of what would make a strong University President. For those that feel they do, their input after meeting the candidates will absolutely be considered. But there was no role for the student body as a whole to play until candidates come to campus. I'm sorry, but there just isn't. The amount of students who could give informed opinion on a search for a University President is very small, and those students are probably already just as connected to what is going on as anyone else outside the search committee.
 
Last edited:
ElrodGrizzly said:
Maybe my perspective is a bit unique on this, but there are two major points I feel are missing in this article.
1) These closed searches are confidential by necessity, and the people on the committee have to sign NDAs. This is not new. The students get representation on these search committees through their elected ASUM reps. When I was in college I was on three of them at a different school in Montana. One for an AD, or to run the tutoring program, and one other that I am blanking on the position. I believe it was for the football coach. I wasn't allowed to talk about it.

Going beyond that representation is not possible when searches like this are, by necessity, closed and confidential.

2) While I understand informing students is important, I would contend that the average student has very little understanding of what would make a strong University President. For those that feel they do, their input after meeting the candidates will absolutely be considered. But there was no role for the student body as a whole to play until candidates come to campus. I'm sorry, but there just isn't. The amount of students who could give informed opinion on a search for a University President is very small, and those students are probably already just as connected to what is going on as anyone else outside the search committee.
Click to expand...
Exactly
 
ElrodGrizzly said:
Maybe my perspective is a bit unique on this, but there are two major points I feel are missing in this article.

1) These closed searches are confidential by necessity, and the people on the committee have to sign NDAs. This is not new. The students get representation on these search committees through their elected ASUM reps. When I was in college I was on three of them at a different school in Montana. One for an AD, or to run the tutoring program, and one other that I am blanking on the position. I believe it was for the football coach. I wasn't allowed to talk about it.

Going beyond that representation is not possible when searches like this are, by necessity, closed and confidential.

2) While I understand informing students is important, I would contend that the average student has very little understanding of what would make a strong University President. For those that feel they do, their input after meeting the candidates will absolutely be considered. But there was no role for the student body as a whole to play until candidates come to campus. I'm sorry, but there just isn't. The amount of students who could give informed opinion on a search for a University President is very small, and those students are probably already just as connected to what is going on as anyone else outside the search committee.
Click to expand...

Great info, Elrod.
 
ElrodGrizzly said:
Maybe my perspective is a bit unique on this, but there are two major points I feel are missing in this article.

1) These closed searches are confidential by necessity, and the people on the committee have to sign NDAs. This is not new. The students get representation on these search committees through their elected ASUM reps. When I was in college I was on three of them at a different school in Montana. One for an AD, or to run the tutoring program, and one other that I am blanking on the position. I believe it was for the football coach. I wasn't allowed to talk about it.

Going beyond that representation is not possible when searches like this are, by necessity, closed and confidential.

2) While I understand informing students is important, I would contend that the average student has very little understanding of what would make a strong University President. For those that feel they do, their input after meeting the candidates will absolutely be considered. But there was no role for the student body as a whole to play until candidates come to campus. I'm sorry, but there just isn't. The amount of students who could give informed opinion on a search for a University President is very small, and those students are probably already just as connected to what is going on as anyone else outside the search committee.
Click to expand...
So what you're saying is this article was wrote by some whiny entitled kids😁?
 
ElrodGrizzly said:
Maybe my perspective is a bit unique on this, but there are two major points I feel are missing in this article.

1) These closed searches are confidential by necessity, and the people on the committee have to sign NDAs. This is not new. The students get representation on these search committees through their elected ASUM reps. When I was in college I was on three of them at a different school in Montana. One for an AD, or to run the tutoring program, and one other that I am blanking on the position. I believe it was for the football coach. I wasn't allowed to talk about it.

Going beyond that representation is not possible when searches like this are, by necessity, closed and confidential.

2) While I understand informing students is important, I would contend that the average student has very little understanding of what would make a strong University President. For those that feel they do, their input after meeting the candidates will absolutely be considered. But there was no role for the student body as a whole to play until candidates come to campus. I'm sorry, but there just isn't. The amount of students who could give informed opinion on a search for a University President is very small, and those students are probably already just as connected to what is going on as anyone else outside the search committee.
Click to expand...
You mean the Kaimin conveniently left out the other piece of the puzzle?! I am SHOCKED. 🤣
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top