Yes indeed, this whole thing is finally coming to a close.
After a yearlong search, the UM System will name its 23rd president tomorrow and we still have no idea who it is.
The last presidential search was spoiled before an announcement was made when two potential candidates (U.S. Rep Kenny Hulshov, and then New Jersey businessman Terry Sutter) were publicly considered, but board Chairman Warren Erdman has made damn sure that won’t happen again this time.
Last Friday, Janese Silvey of the Columbia Daily Tribune checked into a blog reporting that University of Florida president Bernie Machen was the board’s finalist, but Silvey was able to shoot that down with a call with new curator Craig Van Matre.
Since then, there haven’t really been any good, constructive rumors (that I’ve heard). So it seems we won’t know the president until the board announces one, just the way Erdman designed it.
As always (of course I wouldn’t miss the big finale!) I’ll be at the announcement live tweeting from @zach_murdock and @CoMissourian. For the most comprehensive coverage of the new president, check out columbiamisourian.com for articles and check back here for more behind-the-scenes and analysis.
*This is an update on the post titled “A quick, semi-speculative presidential search analysis” that I published Monday night about this week’s developments in the UM System presidential search.*
I’ll be straightforward — I was wrong. My initial hunch that the UM System Board of Curators would announce a new president this week turns out to be incorrect.
I talked about this gut feeling with UM System spokeswoman Jennifer Hollingshead after Tuesday’s search advisory committee meeting and I believe that may have prompted the phone call I received while I worked on my story.
Hollingshead called to explain that after talking with board Chairman Warren Erdman that she didn’t want to string people along and leave folks confident that the meeting with a single candidate today would mean that we should expect a presidential selection Friday morning.
I think my openness with her — and my not-so-subtle assertion to her that I really did believe we’d have a new president this week — put her in a position where she saw what direction my writing would take. On the phone we even spoke about how the nature of Tuesday’s meeting certainly made it seem to the all of the media present that the search was all but officially over.
But, she assured me that the search is very much alive and kicking. Which means I need a new hunch…
Now I think I may understand the procedure the rest of this search could take. Perhaps (and of course, I’m still stuck speculating here) the search advisory committee will reconvene again — and even once (twice?) more — and interview this list of the curator’s decided finalists one by one.
That would mean that over winter break this advisory committee could continue to interview candidates individually and get a sense for which finalist they think is the best fit for the system. And that means we’ve still got some time on our hands.
This revelation changes things for me, and shakes up any idea of a timeline that I thought I had. Frankly, I think we may just have to wait and see how this week plays out before I can predict how things may continue.
I’ll be in St. Louis for the board’s regularly scheduled December meetings this Thursday and Friday. As always, I’ll be tweeting from @zach_murdock, blogging right here and publishing on columbiamissourian.com — follow along at all three for the latest (and I’d say most comprehensive) coverage/analysis of the #prezsearch.
I’ve had a few gut feelings about the presidential search in the last week or so. As a matter of logistics and being prepared to break the story, I’m stuck speculating (we have been all semester, I’m looking at you SEC…) about will happen next. Just what will those darn curators do now?
For months the search has been veiled in this secretive, elaborate web of public notices and closed meetings. We know virtually nothing about any candidates or their qualifications — not even very good rumors — and up until now we’ve never had any idea when a new president might be announced.
But suddenly, I can see the light.
The Board of Curators has passed a list of an undisclosed (surprise) number of finalists to an advisory committee made up of representatives from all walks of academic life at all four UM System campuses.
That’s all fine and dandy, but what that means for us [reporters, the media, et al] is that now that the list of finalists is out and about, there is in fact a timeline for an announcement.
It may be subtle and certainly unintentional, but there are 20 members on the advisory committee. That means there’s upwards of 30+ people (including the curators and involved UM System admins) who know the remaining candidates — and likely know who the front-runner is — spread across the state.
Of course they’re all bound to secrecy, but the curators must understand that the longer they wait with this many people in the know, the higher the risk that one person drops one clue that just happens to make sense to the one reporter who hears it who is able to connect it and figure out the candidate. No matter how far-fetched, it could happen. And the curators have taken such care to be so secret, it would seem there’s no way they’d allow that much risk this late in the game.
I’ve been embedded in this story since the beginning of this semester. So when board Chairman Warren Erdman tells me that the curators will receive the advisory committee’s report Thursday afternoon, I understand that the curators will have two executive sessions (those are the closed-door, private meetings) to discuss the matters at their regularly scheduled meetings this week — all before the normally scheduled press conference Friday morning.
Read for yourself part of the email exchange I had with UM Spokeswoman Jennifer Hollingshead this afternoon. Sometimes the raw answers and context can be more telling than just the parts that make it into my story.
I don’t know about the other news outlets, but I’m letting my colleagues at the Missourian know they’re all on call Friday morning — because I think we’re going to have a new UM System president before this week is out.
I’ll be keeping things updated on my Twitter, @zach_murdock, following Tuesday’s advisory committee meeting and all day Thursday and Friday when the board meets in full at UMSL. Stay tuned to Twitter and columbiamissourian.com for the latest in UM System president news.
It seems that nearly everything I’m working on is a developing story this week.
Not in any kind of conclusive way either — it looks like nearly all of the subjects I’ve been covering are going to keep on rolling right through November.
Here’s a basic breakdown of the issues I’m following (including links to my most recent work on each):
- The UM System presidential search: curators have met in closed session twice in the past two weeks, once in Kansas City and again St. Louis. Both meetings were held behind closed doors, and the curators will meet in executive session again Thursday night via teleconference. UM spokeswoman Jennifer Hollingshead confirmed curators met with candidates in St. Louis and that the search committee hopes to have a small group of finalists in the next few weeks.
- Performance funding: MU Faculty Council will again discuss performance funding models and their implications for MU at Thursday’s meeting. Council members have been critical of a proposed performance-based funding model and it seems Nikki Krawitz hopes to quell their fears and talk about the specifics of the plan before making her presentation of the model at the fall semester general faculty meeting Nov. 16.
- Retirement plan and academic freedom: these two get lumped together because they’re two developing issues that have had some serious chatter. The Board of Curators recently approved a new retirement plan, but there’s still lots of work to be done and I hope to stay on top of it as I become an advanced reporter this spring. The proposed academic freedom policy is a hotly debated issue and MU’s Faculty Council butted heads on whether it goes too far or not far enough — and the debate is far from over.
- SEC and academics: this is a good story I have up my sleeve, but is still in its infancy. I won’t talk about the details here, but with the help of Jacqui Banaszynski, I think I’ve got a strong footing to get this story rolling to quickly follow up on the *almost-certainly* pending MU/SEC announcement.
As things continue to develop I’ll try to keep things updated on the blog. As I receive information, I do my best to make it available on my personal Twitter, @zach_murdock, (and it will often make the @CoMissourian Twitter feed too) so follow along on Twitter for the latest news and highlights.