WSU, UW presidential searches enter final stages without identifying candidates; bipartisan coalition seeks transparency

The Washington State University Board of Regents selected its finalist to be the university’s 12th president Friday, a sign the search to replace outgoing President Kirk Schulz is coming to a close.
Secrecy continues to overshadow the process, however, just as it has for Washington’s public institutions conducting similar searches in years past.
While the board authorized Chair Lisa Keohokalole Schauer to move forward with contract negotiations with a candidate, the board did not identify the finalist, their experience or stated interest in pursuing the top role at the nearly 135-year-old state institution.
The decision follows the board’s refusal to identify the top five candidates it announced in December, as well as the discussions and deliberations that led to the selection of those five. The board also did not provide public input opportunities past the initial stages of the search.
The board faced similar critiques during the search that led to Schulz’s hiring in 2016.
In a written statement, Washington State University spokesman Phil Weiler said the regents’ selection to be the university’s 12th president could be finalized within a few weeks.
He added that the board understands the desire for public input, and provided opportunities to students, faculty and the general public to share what they envision in the next president when compiling a “leadership profile” early in the process.
“The board conducted two dozen community listening sessions at all six of our campuses across the state as they were developing the leadership profile for the opening,” Weiler said. “Ultimately, 1,000 students, faculty, staff, and members of the public provided feedback on the desired characteristics for WSU’s next president.”
Weiler said the board has kept the process confidential to attract as many qualified candidates as possible, as some may not have applied had they known their name would be publicly released for their current employer to see.
George Erb, secretary of the Washington Coalition for Open Government, told The Spokesman-Review last year that concerns over the lack of transparency in selecting a public university or college’s top brass stretch back decades.
“The main issue is that public universities who adopt these confidential searches are basically overlooking one of their core constituency groups,” Erb said. “And that’s the public.”
Erb said the sitting president of the University of Washington, Ana Mari Cauce, was hired in much the same way.
In the ongoing search to replace Cauce, the university’s governing board has also refused to publicly identify finalists – even as contract negotiations with two of the individuals are already underway, as reported by the Seattle Times.
Erb countered the argument that confidentiality allows for a wider pool of well-qualified applicants by noting that public oversight could be a valuable part of the process.
“The confidential hiring also makes it harder for others to come forward with information about those candidates, even information that may be disqualifying,” Erb said.
University presidents are among Washington’s highest-paid employees and can have significant influence over a university system, and therefore state and local economies, international research, and revenue opportunities such as athletic programs.
That’s why a group of bipartisan legislators have introduced a bill that would require more transparency in the hiring process for a public school’s top brass, said bill sponsor state Rep. Gerry Pollet, a Democrat representing portions of Seattle.
“It’s the person who determines the entire culture of the university,” Pollet said. “The nature of people who are hired into key positions is the choice of the president; just about every aspect of the university is influenced by the choice of president, and that’s who you hold accountable.”
Pollet, a faculty member at the University of Washington, said he’s heard from a number of his peers at both of the state’s largest institutions, as well as students, concerned about the lack of public input and transparency in the hunts to replace Schulz and Cauce.
House Bill 1337 would require the governing boards of Washington’s higher education institutions to publicly identify “up to four” finalists for a presidential position at least a month before a scheduled vote to hire a candidate. Resumes, reference letters, school transcripts and the application for employment would be released as part of the public notice, according to the bill’s text.
The bill would also require institutions to hold a public forum on campus to allow the public to meet and ask questions of the proposed candidates.
Pollet noted that the bill language would not require schools to release information and host forums for each applicant, but for each finalist.
“You can even narrow that to just, ‘We believe that we have a choice, we want to make sure that we haven’t made a gross error by having that person come to campus and participate in the forum and have their application materials open,’ ” Pollet said. “Which could prevent highly embarrassing decisions being made.”
Weiler said the university has “serious concerns” about the bill, due largely to the belief that naming finalists could lead to less qualified applicant pools.
“There is a very real concern for some candidates that they would lose their effectiveness at their home institutions if it became public that they were exploring employment opportunities elsewhere,” Weiler said.
While not addressed in the proposed legislation, Pollet said he also has concerns about the lack of involvement from faculty and student representatives on the governing boards during the universities’ ongoing searches.
At the University of Washington, faculty and student regents have been excluded from voting on measures related to hiring the next president, as reported by the Seattle Times. A university spokesman told the publication that state law prohibits student and faculty board members from participating in votes regarding the hiring, firing or disciplining of faculty members.
The Washington State University student and faculty regents are also excluded, Weiler said, citing the same state law.
As the primary sponsor of the bill that introduced faculty regents to the state’s higher education system, Pollet took umbrage with how the universities interpret the law.
“One of their most important roles would be in a presidential search,” Pollet said. “The notion that they are being required to recuse themselves and not vote is an affront to democracy and shared governance.”
Pollet said he understands that the state’s top research institutions may have “different considerations for confidentiality” than their community and technical college peers. Still, he doesn’t expect his legislation to greatly affect their ability to recruit leadership, if it passes.
“Most of our other public higher ed institutions follow some form of a process similar to this, and there are other major research universities around the nation that follow a more open process,” Pollet said. “I don’t think people would argue that they’ve been unable to attract top-caliber candidates.”