Subscribe now

It has never been harder to be a college president. Between the fallout of the pandemic, declining consumer confidence, partisan polarization, the impending demographic cliff, and technological challenges from distance learning and AI, it’s no wonder that the average tenure of a college president has fallen by 30% since 2006 to just under six years. This combination of increased scrutiny and uncertainty in the marketplace has made it harder for boards to fill vacancies, as savvy candidates are now more likely to demand transparency about an institution’s finances before signing on. In addition, more presidential searches now end in outright failure. These trends are unlikely to change, as the coming years will see institutions forced to compete over an ever-dwindling supply of traditional college-age students.

Furman University has had the good fortune to weather the past decade under a single leader, an accomplishment that has become rare indeed. As the board begins the process of finding its next president, one thing is certain: Preparation is key. As lay volunteers, members of college and university governing boards rarely have direct experience leading an institution. Instead, they tend to be community members, alumni, philanthropists, or business leaders. Though it may seem odd to have laymen serve as a college’s ultimate governing authority, this is a feature, not a bug. A board serves the institution’s mission by representing the college as a whole rather than any individual constituency. As they receive no pay or services from the institution, trustees alone can act as impartial fiduciaries, and by originating from outside the college, they can act as mediators between the needs of the institution and those it was formed to serve.

It was with this in mind that my organization, the American Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA), partnered with Robert C. Dickeson to produce a guide on presidential searches to assist trustees with what is likely to be the most consequential decision they make during their tenure. Drawing heavily on the indispensable framework laid out by Dr. Dickeson, here are a few things Furman’s board should keep in mind as they identify and secure their next executive.

Leave a comment

The Board Cannot Delegate Its Choice

The most critical principle of any presidential search is that the board of trustees—and the board alone—has the authority and responsibility to select the next president. This reality confronts two prevailing truths: Trustees tend to have careers outside managing their institution, which place great demands on their time, and there are many qualified, well-meaning administrators who would be happy to do the board’s job for them. It is easy to see why boards may be tempted to defer to their skilled colleagues during this process. To illustrate this tendency, consider the rise of the executive search firm. In 1975, only 2%–3% of presidential vacancies were filled with the help of search firms, compared to nearly 100% today. Though these organizations can be invaluable parts of the search process, and have certainly helped to professionalize how candidates are selected, they often narrow the scope of potential candidates to those with a traditional background in academia. External firms can assist the board with logistics, but it remains the board’s responsibility to clearly define its priorities and push back when consultants deviate. Boards are central to defining their institution’s core values, which the future president will be expected to uphold and promote, whether they include a commitment to open inquiry and the free exchange of ideas, a tradition of liberal arts general education, or other fundamental principles. While there are many reasons for presidential turnover outside the board’s control, a rushed process that ends with a candidate who does not fit trustees’ expectations is a recipe for a short and contentious presidency.

Subscribe now

Balance Confidentiality with Transparency

There is perhaps no better way to handicap an incoming president than by conducting a closed-door process that leaves the campus community blindsided by the board’s selection. At the same time, many of the best candidates for this role are sitting presidents or senior executives at other institutions whose participation requires strict confidentiality to protect their current livelihoods. The task of balancing responsiveness to the community with competitiveness in the marketplace is a frequent stumbling block for boards, but one that can be overcome through deliberative action. Trustees should aim to establish a transparent process by publicly communicating their timeline, criteria, and the composition of the search committee. Moreover, strict adherence to institutional bylaws, state sunshine laws, and internal norms is nonnegotiable. Deviating from established protocols invites scandal or litigation, either of which can be a black mark on any leadership transition. As the search progresses, boards should plan to make public the names of the final three to five candidates. These finalists should be expected to make on-campus visits that include public forums for students, administrations, alumni, and faculty to provide feedback on their plans for the institution.

Share

Boards Must Lead, but Shouldn’t Go It Alone

A successful college presidency begins with securing institutional buy-in. If a board’s selection has to deal with a vote of no confidence from the faculty and a series of scathing op-eds in the student newspaper during their first week, they’ll rarely be able to hunker down and focus on strategic planning. Thus, boards should aim to foster constructive engagement from campus constituents early on. An example is how they form the search committee. The board should appoint a trustee to chair this body and then select representatives of the major groups that the institution serves, including faculty, staff, students, and alumni. Colleges should also consider inviting community and business leaders relevant to their mission. Each of these groups can provide a vital perspective that the board may not encounter on a day-to-day basis. Faculty can help steer the committee toward candidates capable of fostering genuine intellectual growth. Students can provide an unfiltered view of the services the institution provides.

Too often, colleges view their alumni purely as philanthropic resources to be engaged only when capital campaigns are launched, rather than as stakeholders with a vested, lifelong interest in the reputation, financial health, and success of their alma maters. Alumni who have achieved success in sectors relevant to the institution’s mission can assess a candidate’s skills and mission alignment in a way that external consultants may miss. Furthermore, engaged alumni can leverage their professional networks to help the institution look beyond traditional academic or administrative backgrounds, potentially identifying dynamic leaders who possess the unique skills necessary to run a modern college or university.

Subscribe now

Conclusion

It bears repeating that the task of selecting a college president is often the defining decision of a board of trustees. The costs of a failed tenure are measured not just in wasted capital from severance packages and search firm fees, but in lost momentum and eroded public trust. By taking a leading role, committing to a transparent process, and purposefully engaging the diverse strengths of the campus community, boards can dramatically improve their odds of success. The past decade has been challenging for higher education, and colleges should not assume this to be an aberration. Modern higher education governance requires the partnership of an informed, engaged board and a dynamic president. This collaboration begins by setting the tone during the search process.

The Furman Free Speech Alliance hopes all of you celebrated America’s 250th anniversary with as much fervor and excitement as we did! We live in a truly amazing country and we are particularly blessed by the First Amendment and the freedom of speech it protects.

Subscribe now

Upcoming Webinar

Mark your calendars for the next FFSA webinar!

On Thursday, July 16, at 4:00pm EST, our very own Alex Hibbs will be interviewing Robert Shibley, a special counsel and former executive director of FIRE, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression.

The webinar will be hosted on our Substack platform, and subscribers will have the chance to ask questions and contribute to the discussion.

Leave a comment

Welcoming Ellison White to the FFSA Team!

In the coming weeks, we will continue to cover the ongoing saga of the search for Furman’s next president. As part of that work, one of our goals is to help alumni and friends of Furman to understand what campus life is like today and what issues are animating students

With that goal in mind, we are pleased to announce that Ellison White has joined our team as an intern. Ellison is a junior Business & Politics and International Affairs major from Durham, North Carolina. On campus she is an intern for the Tocqueville Center for the Study of Democracy and Society, a member of Kappa Delta Sorority, and a Student Equipment Manager for the Furman Football team. We are grateful to have her on board and excited that she will be contributing to our website.

Below, you’ll find her first piece, in which she offers some reflections on how many Furman students feel about President Davis, her departure, and her legacy. If you enjoy it and want to read more from Ellison, subscribe today and share this piece with your friends and family!

Share

President Davis Led from a Distance

After more than a decade as president, Elizabeth Davis has announced that she will be leaving Furman at the end of the upcoming academic year. While grateful for her hard work and dedication, many students feel somewhat indifferent to her departure, reflecting that few ever got to know President Davis or form a strong impression of her.

While many students saw President Davis at sporting events and campus-wide functions, few opportunities existed to know her beyond appearances. For most students, the clearest impression of Davis came through her campus-wide emails. Davis’s communication style reflected her broader approach to leadership: consistently polished and professional but so carefully calibrated that it rarely conveyed a distinctive personal voice. At a university that prides itself on close relationships, many students struggled to feel a genuine connection with the person leading the campus.

To a certain extent, this is understandable. Davis had to navigate the university through difficult periods, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, and deal with the mounting political polarization of the past decade. In such circumstances, being cautious makes sense. However, it also comes with the downside of seeming impersonal and disconnected from campus.

The same can be said of the hallmark program of her tenure: The Furman Advantage. It was meant to help give Furman a distinct offering in an increasingly crowded higher education market, which is a genuinely difficult problem. But in practice, it never resonated with many students.

According to the university’s website, the Furman Advantage “lies in our engaged learning, reflection, belonging and mentoring.” However, many students use the phrase ironically, a campus-wide inside joke, to describe everything from DH cookies to parking tickets. In fact, the term has become so hollow that the Admissions Office now asks its tour guides to limit usage of the phrase when interacting with prospective students.

This is just one example, but it gets at a disconnect between the administration’s efforts and the reality on the ground at Furman that ran throughout the Davis era. Her administration consistently struggled to connect with students or to successfully market what makes Furman special to so many people.

As the daughter of two Furman alumni, I arrived my freshman year with an inherited understanding of what makes the university special. It is not a buzzword like “engaged learning, reflection, belonging and mentoring.” It’s professors pouring time and effort into their students’ lives, the Mall packed on the Friday before homecoming, and the friendships and close-knit culture that only form on a small residential campus.

As Furman moves into its third century, the committee should look for a different kind of leader. Ideally, the next president should be someone more dynamic, more personable, and who understands the uniqueness of Furman’s character. In addition to being an effective administrator, Furman needs someone who is eager to build relationships with students, communicate clearly, and be an active part of campus life. Furman’s greatest advantage has never been buzzwords or branding; it has always been its people. Furman’s next president should reflect that.

Now, the university’s future depends on selecting the right person to replace President Davis and confront the many challenges that bedevil the school. This is an opportunity to set a successful course for Furman for the next 10-plus years. This decision must be made wisely, and it is crystal clear who has the most responsibility for that decision.

Subscribe now

According to the Association of Governing Boards, “[t]he most important job of a board of trustees is selecting a president”, a view echoed by the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, which also add this: “when a presidential vacancy occurs, boards are rarely prepared to undertake a search.” Furman’s future then depends on its Board of Trustees getting this right.

The Furman Free Speech Alliance will cover all aspects of selection process: the procedures adopted by the trustees to recruit and vet President Davis’s successor, the selection criteria for a new president, the search committee composition and processes, the timeline for selection and much more.

We will keep our readers informed of official announcements from the university so they will not need to rely solely on the administration for news.

Subscribe now

But we will do more than that. Relying on subject matter experts and those familiar with Furman’s particular circumstances, the FFSA will offer insights, investigations and, where appropriate, criticisms of the process as it moves forward to selection. When announced officially, we will examine the search committee as a whole and its processes from the perspective of best practices. Moreover, we will highlight the challenges, financial, cultural and academic a new president will confront.

You can also expect to see webinars, interviews, and analysis concerning the selection process.

This is coverage that no one else will provide. If you have not done so already, we encourage you to subscribe today. Please also invite your friends and family who love Furman and care about its future to subscribe as well!