C.L.--College Board on 'dangerous' course - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Mar 14, 2006

C.L.--College Board on 'dangerous' course

Date: Mar 14, 2006

There is not much to add to this editorial. A candidate of character would want to meet some of the people that he/she would be interacting with if they took the job. A smart candidate would not want to come into a job under a cloud of secrecy. What am I thinking, the Board does not want a president that is smart and has character. They want a clone of SFT.

Date: Mar 14, 2006

"Any individual purportedly needing such secrecy simply lacks the self-confidence, sense of security and leadership skills called for in the job description!"

The flip-side is that the most talented candidates, who have the full confidence of their current employers, would likely not last too long in their current positions if word got out that they were talking to other universities.

Date: Mar 14, 2006

Flip-side wrote:

The flip-side is that the most talented candidates, who have the full confidence of their current employers, would likely not last too long in their current positions if word got out that they were talking to other universities.

How can that be? Is the IHL board going to hire a president without contacting references? Are they going to hire someone without finding out from those who work under them what kind of person and employer they are? Are the going to hire somebody without discussing with their superiors what kind of person and employee they were? The current employers will have to be contacted at least when the short list is made. So this is a bogas argument for secrecy. There is no reason why the short list of candidates (3-5) can't be made public and interviewed by all concerned.

Date: Mar 14, 2006

Actually, you only need to get a few car dealers together for the interviews. They can handle it all for us. Seems like a trend setting in.

Date: Mar 14, 2006

If any of you remain at USM in hopes that things will drastically improve with the new president, you are badly mistaken. Any thoughts you have about leaving should only continue, if not grow stronger.

Date: Mar 14, 2006

The College Board and Meredith appear to subscribe to the concept that less information is better than more information. That puts them in a very small minority since anyone who has done searches in academia or in the real world of business knows that the opposite is true. I cannot understand why they wish to reveal to the world that they are eaten up with the dummy a%#@. The positive side of this is that they are willing to demonstrate their incompetence to a wide audience.

Date: Mar 14, 2006

Flip-side wrote:

candidates, who have the full confidence of their current employers, would likely not last too long in their current positions if word got out that they were talking to other universities.

USM faculty who have leaked out the word that they were considering another university have sometimes been given astronomical rewards. I sometimes though it was used as a bluff.

Date: Mar 14, 2006

Cossack wrote:

The College Board and Meredith appear to subscribe to the concept that less information is better than more information. That puts them in a very small minority since anyone who has done searches in academia or in the real world of business knows that the opposite is true. I cannot understand why they wish to reveal to the world that they are eaten up with the dummy a%#@. The positive side of this is that they are willing to demonstrate their incompetence to a wide audience.

Cossack, do you think the IHL Board is afraid to have faculty input their voice in the search because of what happened with Thames? Are they afraid the faculty will turn down their choice, which would require them to again go against faculty opinion? With regard to SFT, USM faculty has made it loud and clear to the public and the IHL, "I told you so." Are they afraid of that happening again?

Date: Mar 16, 2006

Name: Clarion-Ledger reader

Date: Aug 24, 2004
Views: 2744

RE: Creme de la Creme Accolades

Kudos to Steve Shephard for this brief letter to the editor in today's Clarion-Ledger

Snap finger, save university budgets

Date: Mar 17, 2006

sage wrote:

If any of you remain at USM in hopes that things will drastically improve with the new president, you are badly mistaken. Any thoughts you have about leaving should only continue, if not grow stronger.

When the bosses of any institution are held to a LOWER standard than faculty and staff, then the faculty and staff are in deep poo. There is no easy fix; a new president cannot, and will not, solve the problem.