Concept and Practice - University President Selection

Author: Huang Junjie
Publisher:
Publish Date: 2006-07-01
Features:
(III) Compared to European countries, one prominent characteristic of American higher education in terms of organization is that the highest power structure is led by individuals who are outsiders in both academia and education. The governance of American universities is corporatized, with the highest authority held by the board of directors. This is true not only for private universities but also for state universities, which all have a board of directors. The difference lies in the fact that directors of state universities are elected, while those of private universities are appointed by the existing board. These board members are primarily composed of professionals such as business managers, lawyers, and accountants. These individuals are outsiders in both academic and educational matters. American higher education is essentially run by outsiders leading the experts. Surprisingly, this outsider-led system has produced the world's most advanced higher education. This miracle can only be understood through the unique socio-cultural background of the United States.
A unique phenomenon in American culture is that successful citizens often take on board positions in public organizations, such as museums, symphony orchestras, art academies, and universities. Moreover, their roles as board members are not merely ceremonial; they are fully committed. Additionally, the traditional American business model emphasizes that the primary role of a board of directors is to select key executives, such as CEOs or university presidents. Once the executive is appointed, the day-to-day leadership and operational responsibilities are fully entrusted to them. This division of power ensures that the board does not excessively interfere with the's daily leadership or long-term strategic planning. This may be the main reason why an outsider-led system can succeed.
This organizational structure of American universities aligns with the country's corporate culture and political system. American businesses emphasize a vertical hierarchical system, with a strong top leader as the soul of the organization. Politically, the U.S. presidential system also prioritizes a single top leader, differing significantly from the parliamentary systems of European countries. This leadership model can yield results relatively quickly but is also more susceptible to influence from society or the market, often prioritizing short-term gains over long-term planning. Furthermore, the lack of term limits is consistent with corporate practices, which is beneficial for the long-term mission of education. During periods of major reform in higher education, this organizational system has indeed played a significant role. Several major reforms in American higher education have occurred under this system. In contrast, Germany's 19th-century university reforms were driven by the government, not this model.
However, this model is not without flaws. There is a certain tension between academic and educational institutions and corporate groups. An excessive focus on corporate management efficiency can compromise academic standards and educational quality. Market pressures may also push universities toward elitism, making them complicit in reinforcing an undemocratic class-based society and undermining the principle of equal opportunity. This can hinder social mobility and become a pillar of social conservatism.
Regarding the specific selection process, the selection of a university president is undoubtedly the most critical task of the board. The board typically forms a search committee, which is not composed entirely of board members. It usually includes representatives from faculty, alumni, and other community members. However, board members typically constitute more than half of the committee. Many universities also establish a faculty advisory committee and a student advisory committee to provide recommendations to the search committee. These advisory committees do not participate in decision-making or the final recommendation. Additionally, the search committee often hires professional consultants. Some studies have highlighted the importance of this step, as search committees are often temporary and may have never selected a university president before. Hiring a professional consultant to guide the committee through the selection process and potential challenges is both necessary and practical.
The selection of university presidents in the U.S. places great emphasis on confidentiality, primarily to protect the privacy of candidates. Without this, many outstanding candidates may hesitate to apply. Identifying and encouraging qualified candidates to apply is a key aspect of the selection process. Outstanding individuals may not always volunteer to apply, and the committee can easily become overwhelmed by a large number of mediocre applicants. The formal selection process typically takes a year or longer. Therefore, a president must notify the board at least 18 months before their term ends.