NEWS
February 14, 2014
Presidential search continues, candidate hiring process may remain confidential
BY ABE KENMORE
StAPI^ WRiTiR
On Feb. 5, faculty and community
members crowded into the Moon Room to
hear from the faculty representatives of the
presidential search committee: Professor of
Geology Dave Dobson, Associate Professor
of Music Kami Rowan and Assistant
Professor of Justice and Policy Studies
Barbara Lawrence.
The representatives were there to explain
why, on a campus that prides itself on
transparency, the next president might be
hired before the community even knows his
or her name.
According to Carole Bruce, trustee and
head of the presidential search committee,
there are good reasons to allow applicants
to keep their information co^dential
throughout the entire search process.
"We have been advised by our search
consultant ... that some very well-qualified
candidates may not be in a position to
participate in open campus interviews due
to their current roles as sitting presidents,"
Bruce said in an email interview.
This option to remain anonymous is a
growing trend in presidential searches.
Roughly 25-30 percent now use this model.
according to information presented at the
faculty meeting.
"I don't think anyone wants the final
interview process to be secret," said Dobson
to The Guilfordian. "But we acknowledge
the possibility that someone might be in
a particular situation ... (where) if they
didn't get our job, it might cause irreparable
damage to their own job."
The only thing known about the
applicants currently is that both solicited and
unsolicited candidates have applied, and,
according to Dobson, there are many tens of
people in each pool.
The presidential search committee will
receive all applications later this month.
After that, the committee will recommend
several finalists to the board of trustees.
If one finalist requests that his or her
application be confidential., the trustees will
likely keep all the finalists anonymous until
one is selected.
"That isn't firmly decided yet ... (but) it
might be hard to have an equd process ... if
some people are giving public presentations
and tdking to the community and others
were only talking to the trustees," said
Dobson.
The committee also suggested that some
faculty and students join die trustees for the
will take the
anonymity."
final interviews if public presentations are (won't),
not possible.
Several community members questioned
whether the confidential interviews would
do more harm than good.
"My concern is that a presidential
candidate who doesn't talk with a wide
swath of the community (before being hired)
might have a hard time as president," said
Max Carter, director of the Friends Center.
"Open forums are absolutely essential for
them to get a feel for Guilford."
The committee freely acknowledges that
the situation is not ideal. It feels, however, that
the benefits of allowing confidential
applications outweigh the
potential disadvantages.
"I, as much as many ~
community members, am a
little bit perturbed because
Guilford has a culture of
openness," said senior
Lyes Benarbane, student
representative of the search
committee. "But, in the
same regard, if anonymity
is the difference between
a candidate who will re
vitalize this school and this
community, and one who
SALARIES
In 2002 the Vice President
of Advancement made
$156,289. In 2011 the Vice
President of Advancement
was paid $215,244.
Salary Change: +37.7%
Salary studies shed
light on disparities
In 2002 the President
made $138,549. In 2011
the President was paid
$269,850.
&lary Change: +94.8%
Peer School Olympics:
Source for administrator ranking:
IRS 990 forms from Guilford and peer
instituitions.
1stoutof9
2nd out of 14 .
Continued from page I
"worst-case," the coUege's top
administrators said.
Ben Marlin, assistant professor
and chair of mathematics, finds
the rate of prof^sor pay troubling,
especially for bringing the best
educators to Guilford.
"If we can't offer a competitive
salary, and an applicant has
two offers, only those who are
somehow determined to come to
Guilford regardless will chcxise
our lower offer," said Marlin. "That
means it's likely that we'll only be
able to afford to hire those who
aren't getting offers from other
schools."
Meanwhile, top Guilford
administrators received notable
salary increases over the same 10-
year peiicxi.
In 2002, the president made
$138,549, vice president of
advancement $156,289, vice
president for finance $109,109,
dean of CCE $71,500, vice president
& academic dean $64,422, dean of
student affairs $65,005 and vice
president of enrollment $80,667.
Nine years later, the president
now makes $269,850, vice president
of advancement $215,244, vice
president for finance $165,960,
dean of CCE $97,000, vice president
& academic dean $149,820 and vice
president of admissions $128,000.
Administrators at the college
also receive what is called deferred
compensation, which they receive
as pay later on. In some cases
administrators make an extra
$10,000 a year, in other cases over
$40,000.
Public institutions must
provide a full accounting of their
administrative salaries, unlike
private institutions such as
Guilford. Except for the highest-
paid administrators, other
administrative salaries remain
confidential.
Faculty who have been with
the College for 20 years or more
have remained the lowest paid
among their ^feers while senior
administrators have hovered
towards the middle of the peer
list, except for the vice president
for advancement, who is ranked
number one among the peers.
Associate Professor of Sociology
Julie Winterich, who came to the
College in 2008, said Guilford could
be a leader in creating a just salary
policy for all employees regardless
of raj^ especially considering the
equality prong of the College's core
values and mission.
"The question for any institution
of higher learning to consider is:
how are resources distributed
in light of the core mission of
education?" said VYinterich.
"Regarding faculty salaries, why
do our peers, who have similar
budgets, revenues, expenses and
endowments pay their faculty
better than does Guilford?"