The Search for the Next UNC System President Is Well Underway

2015 has been a turbulent year for the University of North Carolina system’s Board of Governors (BOG).

Its decision in February to discontinue three campus centers and institutes (one of which was the John Edwards-founded Center on Poverty, Work and Opportunity at UNC-Chapel Hill) and closely monitor thirteen others, some of which are known for championing left-wing initiatives, sparked national outrage. The move caused a few commentators to allege that the BOG was infringing upon academic freedom.

And in January, the UNC system announced that president Thomas Ross will (involuntarily) step down in early 2016. Liberal pundits across the state blasted BOG chairman John Fennebresque and other Republican board members, accusing them of engaging in partisan politics and ousting Ross, a Democrat, without valid justification.

Now, as Ross prepares to exit the system’s top office, the BOG is preparing to choose his replacement. Last week, the university system hosted three public forums, or “regional input sessions,” in Asheville, Greenville, and Durham. University affiliates – mostly professors, students, and alumni – were in attendance to tell board members what characteristics they’d like to see in the next president.

(I went to the Durham forum with my Pope Center colleague Jay Schalin, who wrote about the event here. The fourth and final forum will take place tonight at 7:00PM at UNC-Charlotte’s Harris Alumni Center. Video recordings of each input session are available here.)

Also last week, the BOG approved the hiring of Isaacson, Miller, a national executive search firm that has helped schools such as Duke University, Dartmouth College, Harvard Law School, Vanderbilt University, and New York University find presidents, provosts, and chancellors.

Last Friday, at a special meeting of the BOG’s presidential search committee, Joan MacNeill, committee chair, said that the original applicant pool had 18 search firms, but that only four were selected for interviews. She said that, ultimately, Isaacson, Miller was approved by the twelve committee members because of its “thoughtfulness, abilities, and background.”

Isaacson, Miller’s website states that racial and gender “diversity” is a major part of the firm’s mission:

“[A] distinguishing feature of our firm is our longstanding commitment to bringing women and people of color to senior management positions. For over 30 years we have established networks that support us in our efforts to build and present diverse pools of candidates. Over the life of the firm, 43% of our placements have been women and 23% have been people of color.”

MacNeill said that Isaacson, Miller has conducted more executive searches than any other firm in the country. The price tag for the presidential search will be roughly $300,000.

This month, the BOG’s Leadership Statement Committee will approve a “leadership profile” based on feedback from various campus constituencies, the regional input sessions, and a public survey. Once approved, the profile will be presented to the full board and, presumably, Isaacson, Miller. A final date for the selection of the next president has not been set.