Chronicle on Internal Search v. Succession Planning in Higher Ed

The Chronicle of Higher Education has two interesting posts in its On Hiring blog (here and here) on internal v. external searches in higher ed.  The posts do a good job of surfacing many of the pros and cons of each side -- the national search versus internal succession planning.  I agree with the author and the comments that an institution should avoid a national search that is, practically speaking, just a formal exercise that precedes appointment of the anointed internal candidate.  Indeed, I have heard some potential dean candidates say that they will not enter a search where there is an internal candidate for that very reason.  Also, having served as an associate dean, I also agree with the observation that internal candidates can come with accumulated baggage that may hurt their effectiveness.  That said, as the article notes, there is support in corporate circles and some research for internal succession planning.  What do most law schools do when selecting senior leadership?  Do you discourage internal candidates when doing a national search?

Comments

[Senior prof]

Great question. My impression from possibly idiosyncratic personal experience is that searches begin in a burst of great optimism, and the optimistic view is that the ideal dean candidate is somewhere out there -- certainly not in here. The search thus proceeds, at the outset, with a predisposition to give serious consideration only to external candidates. I believe, although I do not know for sure, that senior internal candidates are generally counseled by their peers as the search begins to stay out of it. However, I have also seen two failed external searches, in each case followed by an internal search resulting in an internal appointment. So there is hope for an heir apparent, but he or she will usually be seen as a slightly deflating next-best choice.

[Paul McGreal]

Great observations. I have been both an external candidate and a "informally discouraged from applying" potential internal candidate. Also, I have been at a law school where a number of ill-fated internal candidates applied. It would have been helpful, I think, if each of those institutions overtly considered the internal v. external question. In addition, the larger university might consider whether it would like its departments to grow internal talent through associate and assistant deanships as part of a formal succession planning approach. In Built to Last, Jerry Porras and Jim Collins argue that so-called home grown leadership is better correlated with corporate success than hiring leaders from outside. http://www.squeezedbooks.com/articles/built-to-last-successful-habits-of-visionary-companies.html. Then again, one might question whether this corporate model applies well to the institutional structures in higher ed.

[Mid-career Faculty]

I think that law schools are too quick to jump to national searches. In my time as a faculty member at multiple institutions, I have witnessed 5 national searches, 2 of which failed to land a Dean and three of which succeeded in hiring mediocre to disastrous outside candidates. It is simply impossible to know enough about external candidates to make a fully informed hire. If you have no plausible internal candidates, need a culture change, or have reason to believe you will attract particularly strong external candidates, rolling the dice is fine. In a lot of cases, however, the potential reward does not outweigh the huge risks.