Times are changing. In fact, “change” was a central theme in President Obama’s successful bid for the White House. Changes have been taking place for years throughout our society, and everyday activities, changes in personal behavior, how we dress, values, what’s important and isn’t important in the eyes of different people, the role of government and on and on.
Some of the changes may be for the better, while others are for the worse.
One of the big changes is in America’s work force, which has shifted from the traditional model of a husband being the breadwinner and the wife taking care of the home and raising the children. Starting around the time of World War II, women became an increasing and important part of this country’s work force, and today, it may be that there are as many, maybe more, households with both husbands and wives working than the old model.
The old saying, “behind every successful man is a woman,” probably is out of date and not favored by women, although just the reverse could be true in many situations. Nevertheless, this writer believes the role of a spouse, male or female, or even a partner, is extremely important and often plays a major role in the level of success of a high percentage of men and women.
This is particularly true in those situations where men and women are in executive or leadership positions where they mingle with other executives or leaders and are expected to meet and communicate with others in professional and social gatherings, where spouses can and do play an important role.
A personable, intelligent, knowledgeable spouse or partner often plays a significant role in a person’s level of success. Maybe some will say this is wrong or politically incorrect, but it’s a fact.
Those charged with conducting searches for individuals to fill important leadership positions should not only consider the qualifications of individuals being considered for an opening but also should visit with the job seekers’ spouses. One of the major changes these days is that there are fewer traditional spouses staying home. Now, they often have full-time jobs.
Kansas University officials currently are in the process of identifying and interviewing individuals from across the country to fill four extremely important positions at the university: provost (the most important academic post at KU) and deans for the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences and the schools of law and music. This writer does not know the marital status of any of the candidates or what their spouses may do, if they have spouses.
Each of the positions calls for the officeholder to work closely with all those within that specific school. The provost deals with the entire academic community of the university. These officials will have many interactions with other deans and administrators and probably will participate in various meetings or gatherings with alumni. The deans and provost certainly will play important roles in any upcoming universitywide capital campaign, explaining the fiscal needs of their schools and the university and asking potential donors to make sizable gifts. There will be any number of occasions in which the deans and provost will be engaged in off-campus activities that include their spouses.
Right or wrong, spouses can help or hinder. It works both ways.
This being the case, and considering the importance of the four open positions at KU, it is hoped those on the search committees met and visited with the spouses of married candidates seeking the various deanships and the provost’s job.
There is tremendous competition among universities, and the quality and excellence of those in senior academic and leadership positions play a critical role in the success of these institutions. The environment the deans create within their schools and their ability, often with the help of a spouse, to enthuse alumni and friends of the school to become more active and generous all combine to improve the odds of success and excellence.
Granted, the excellence, track record, level of enthusiasm, vision, degree of entrepreneurism, personal manner, charisma, leadership skills and many other factors will determine the success of a dean or provost, but a helpful spouse is a great asset.
The right spouse can, and does, play a significant role. They can be tremendously effective sales people for the schools and the entire university.
For this reason, it is important those on the various selection committees not only sought out highly qualified individuals for the KU positions but also gave sufficient attention to the spouses.
It’s too important for the school not to take every opportunity to end up with winners, in every respect, for the current Mount Oread openings. You seldom get a second chance to correct a mistake, at least anytime soon, and in the meantime, the various schools and the entire university are handicapped in their competition with other universities.
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
nobody1793 (anonymous) says…
So now you're discriminating against single people too?
Dymaio (anonymous) says…
I wonder if Mr. Simons is aware that it is illegal for an employer to ask about the marital status of a job applicant or employee?
yourworstnightmare (anonymous) says…
This meandering and seemingly inoffensive column by Mr. Simons has a hidden agenda, methinks.
The question arises: what does the spouse of the highest KU office, the chancellor, currently do?
To my knowledge, Mr. Little does not have an official position with the university in any capacity. What does he do?
equalaccessprivacy (anonymous) says…
This is a far less than than insightful column --I'd pretty much call it clueless. A formal policy of interviewing people's spouses would conflict with employment law in several ways. Please inform yourself, Mr. Editor.
equalaccessprivacy (anonymous) says…
This is a far less than than insightful column --I'd pretty much call it clueless. A formal policy of interviewing people's spouses would conflict with employment law in several ways. Please inform yourself, Mr. Editor.
equalaccessprivacy (anonymous) says…
This is a far less than than insightful column --I'd pretty much call it clueless. A formal policy of interviewing people's spouses would conflict with employment law in several ways. Please inform yourself, Mr. Editor.
oneeye_wilbur (anonymous) says…
What Mr. Simons is getting at, is the fact that the choice of personnel depends highly on the spouse in the normal sense, and/or the partner.
Nowdays, the partner/spous is also empoyed and given that, there must be a job within the community for that person. Not unlike the CEO at LMH who has a spouse that works not in Lawrence but elsewhere, so the head of LHM lives elsewhere than Lawrence.
KU may be heading toward the day when even the Chancellor lives not in Lawrence but Cedar Creek or Mission Hills or Topeka, if the spouse has an even "bigger titled" job.
Spouses/partners play a role in their spouse or partner taking a job someplace. First of all, is Lawrence where they both want to live and secondly, is there employment in the community for both. It is sad that one cannot live on one income.
Lawrence is no longer the home of the Beaver Cleaver Family, nor is KU, and for that KU is not really that special.
Look at Hemenway, his wife worked at KU, look at many in the school district, Nepotism at work, the same with the city and county. In fact, many working at City Hall do not live in Lawrence, same with USD 497 and districts outside Lawrence.
I expect the day to come soon when a top job at KU will be taken and that person will not live in Lawrence.
Phillbert (anonymous) says…
Dolph: Spouses are critical! ... "This writer does not know the marital status of any of the candidates or what their spouses may do, if they have spouses."
How to write a Saturday Column: Spend hundreds of words going on and on about the importance of a topic, while just mentioning halfway through that you have no actual facts to offer about said topic.
beatrice (anonymous) says…
Brilliant! Newspaper editor/owner recommends illegal hiring practices. Oh my.
If anyone feels they have been illegally denied employment or fired from a top-level position with the LJWorld, this column might prove useful in proving a court case. I just wonder how Mr. Simons can possibly be so completely clueless about employment and interview laws?
Regarding the state of Kansas:
"An interviewer isn't allowed to ask questions relating to these characteristics. Interview questions that aren't allowed include:
•Are you married? Are you planning to get married?
•Do you have children? Are you planning to have children?
•Where were you born?
•What's your sexual orientation?
•Have you ever been arrested?" http://research.lawyers.com/Kansas/Em...
sad_lawrencian (anonymous) says…
I personally find this column to be offensive. I am a single male, in my mid thirties, have never been married, no children, and I work in a position of "leadership" in Lawrence. I am successful in my job. How dare Mr. Simons suggest that married people are more successful than single people because they're married!
wingspouse (anonymous) says…
Dolph is right in recognizing the role an active spouse (wingspouse) plays. The fact that an employer cannot ask about marital status is unimportant. A wingspouse goes out of her way to offer up such information and to showcase the strength of the two of them as a couple. Employers would be wise to recognize this benefit and invite potential candidates to bring their family to a second/third interview to "see the town."
Made_in_China (Paul R. Getto) says…
"I wonder if Mr. Simons is aware that it is illegal for an employer to ask about the marital status of a job applicant or employee?" === Beat me to it; there are many other illegal questions: How old are you? When were you born? What is your date of birth? You seem awfully young to have had so much experience in the field of education, how old are you anyway? What church do you go to? Do you attend religious services regularly? Do you ever have to miss work because of your religion? Do you consider yourself a religious person? Does your religion prevent you from working on weekends (or eating certain foods or drinking with associates...etc.)? I see you are wearing a cross (or mezuzah); are you Catholic or Jewish? What country are you from? You have an interesting accent. Where are your people from? I have a friend with a name like yours and he’s (Armenian, or Polish, or Italian). Is that what you are? What kind of work does your spouse do? Does your spouse work? How much money does your spouse make? Does your spouse contribute to the family income? How is your family life? Are you married (or divorced, separated, living with anyone, engaged, etc.)? How are you and your spouse getting along? Are you planning to get married (or divorced, or separated, etc.) in the near future? Have you ever been arrested? Have you ever had any trouble with the law? Has a bonding company ever refused to bond you? How’s your health? Have you ever collected “workers compensation” for a job-related injury? Do you have high blood pressure? Are you overweight? Do you have a handicap that would prevent you from meeting the demands of this job? Are you on any type of medication? What is the lowest salary you will accept? What is your minimum salary requirement? How much money do you need to take this job? How’s your credit rating? How much in debt are you? How much money do you owe? Do you own your own home (or car or other real estate)? How many children do you have? Do you have any children? Why don’t you have any children? What are your plans for raising a family?
Made_in_China (Paul R. Getto) says…
" I just wonder how Mr. Simons can possibly be so completely clueless about employment and interview laws? " === No need to learn them? I doubt all of the current LJWorld employees were subjected to an extensive, legal interview before they assumed their position in the company. It's good to know the king.
alm77 (anonymous) says…
I'm going to have to go with wingspouse on this one, what you are asked directly and what you choose to reveal are completely two different things. Bringing up the fact that you have an enthusiastic and supportive spouse during the interview could make all the difference. Going out of your way to mention how excited you are to relocate and that your spouse is also interviewing in town could also tip the hiring party in your favor. Neither of those things would be illegal. A smart applicant would offer up as much insight as they could.
I'm not saying single people are at a disadvantage. Very often single people are chosen over married people because they are presumed to have more time, more availability and less complicated life schedules.
It just depends on how you spin it in the interview.