Does an open hiring process hamper many searches at Kansas University?

Kansas University officials currently are in the process of reviewing candidates to fill the vacancy created when former KU Athletic Director Al Bohl was fired by Chancellor Robert Hemenway.

Hemenway and Acting AD Drue Jennings have said they would conduct the search process to make the final decision about who would move into the AD’s office, hopefully by the first of July.

It is interesting to note that the chancellor has said the names of those being considered for the post would remain secret.

In a recent Journal-World story, he said, “The best people from other universities won’t want to be considered here if they think it will damage their position at home.”

Jennings added, “A lot of people won’t touch the job with a 10-foot pole if they think there will be a premature release of their identities.”

Although this is sound reasoning, it doesn’t seem consistent with the university’s general hiring policy. It is unfortunate KU officials do not keep names secret when seeking, reviewing and interviewing candidates for other major positions at KU.

When filling vacancies for deans, provosts, admissions directors or one of the ever-increasing fraternity of vice chancellors, the names of candidates are made public, and the job-seekers are paraded around the campus to meet various student and faculty groups. In past searches, the practice of identifying candidates has caused qualified individuals to drop out of contention.

Why is the reasoning any different when filling an athletic director’s position than in filling a deanship if Hemenway acknowledges that, “the best people from other universities won’t want to be considered if they think it will damage their position at home”?

Some may say the athletic department plays by a different set of rules because a much smaller percentage of its budget comes from state money than is the case with the university’s academic and administrative budget. The state provides only 30 to 40 percent of the operating budget for the university and far less to the athletic department, which gets state funds for some coaching salaries. Is there some magic percentage university officials use to gauge whether a search process must be public or conducted in private?

There’s the old saying, “There’s no such thing as being a little bit pregnant.” This would seem to apply to the question of the use of state funds. An academic department, school or athletic department that receives state funds, no matter how small, still gets state funding and has to conduct itself accordingly.

As the chancellor noted, the really good candidates for open positions at KU are not going to put their names in play if they know it will “damage their position at home.”

Does this mean KU is willing to attract less than the best candidates for academic and administrative positions just so they can conduct the selection and interview process in public? If so, maybe it’s time to change the policy.

Why settle for less than the best in deanships and other positions when KU seeks the very best to staff its athletic department?