|

|
 |
Feature
Seven Fresh Ideas to Help Searches for Academic Leaders Succeed
William T. Mallon, Ed.D.
wmallon@aamc.org
What fresh ideas has your institution used to improve the
search process?
Share your innovative approaches by e-mailing them to wmallon@aamc.org.
We will include these ideas in an upcoming issue of Faculty
Vitae.
|
Why are academic recruitment searches such a source of complaint
and consternation? This isn't a new question. Recent articles in
Academic Medicine have asserted that "the current system is
in major disarray(1); that search committees don't really search(2);
and in the new business environment of academic medical centers,
"most search committees are ill equipped or unwilling to undertake
the labor intensive process required to truly search" for new
leaders(3).
The Problems
So what's not working? Based on my recent research with executive
search consultants and medical school deans and administrators,
the criticism of the process can be distilled in several overarching
themes.
-
Pre-Work
The traditional academic search process does not sufficiently
address in advance of the search getting underway what
characteristics, skill sets, and competencies the new leader
is expected to have. Often, institutions don't think in outcome
terms: in one or two years, what evidence would demonstrate
whether you've hired the right person? What would be different?
Then, what competencies or expertise are you looking for to
achieve those outcomes?
-
Committees
A committee approach to the search process honors academic traditions
but can also impede outcomes. Some schools are saddled with
arcane requirements about who has to be on the committee—polices
that may not reflect the complex health care enterprise in which
academic medical centers operate. In other cases, committees
simply can be too large or not populated with people committed
to the search process.
-
The Dean's Charge
The dean's charge to the committee—that is, the specific
skills and requirements for the position—can be a source
of friction. The committee hears the charge but might not listen
to it, thinking of itself as a selection committee,
not just a search committee.
-
Casting the Net
Committees can be under the delusion of "advertise it and
they will come." Several ads in prominent journals or newsletters
plus a handful of letters to peers around the country might
only work in the most prestigious of positions, and maybe not
even then. Far too often, the search process is passive.
-
Scheduling
Scheduling committee meetings and candidate interviews can take
forever. Instead of maintaining momentum, an extended search
can get bogged down and candidates can lose interest.
-
Confidentiality
In some searches, confidentiality is not respected. Committee
members might conduct a parallel search process—contacting
colleagues at a candidate's current institution and gathering
information (or worse, gossip) on the side. Such behavior is
damaging to everyone—candidates, search committee, and
institution.
-
Professionalism
Overall, the search process isn't conducted with the same high
degree of professionalism that is routinely afforded to and
expected from other arenas in the academic medical center.
These missteps affect the outcomes of the search process in all
cases, but can be detrimental especially when the institution wishes
to increase the diversity of its leadership team by recruiting a
women or minority member: for example, the position isn't evaluated
with an eye toward attracting diverse candidates; the committee
doesn't include diverse perspectives; there is a disconnect between
the charge and the eventual outcome; or the casting-of-the-net doesn't
identify a sufficient pool of women and minority candidates.
Fresh Ideas
While each of these criticisms may be valid for the academic search
process when we think about it overall, medical schools around the
country are attempting to break the mold, using innovative approaches
to search for new leaders. Those institutions that are pushing the
envelop in developing search innovations implicitly or explicitly
embrace the view that process is everything—that you
need to pay attention to the details of how you search in order
to improve the outcomes for the institution.
Here are seven fresh ideas that are in place and working at a medical
school near you:
-
Lots of prep work
Some schools spend a significant amount of time defining the
position in outcome terms and the characteristics a candidate
needs to achieve those outcomes. For your most recent search,
did you answer the question, "What problem is this person
being hired to solve, and how will we know when they've solved
it?"
-
Search "ambassadors"
Several schools have identified one point person to coordinate
all senior-level searches, with the goal of making the process
more systematic, professional, coordinated, and strategic. At
some schools, this role is filled by an administrative assistant
who aids every search committee chair to bring consistency to
the administration of the search. As important as that role
can be, a more strategic approach is a senior level associate
dean who advises every committee on cutting-edge practices,
including how to search for diverse candidates.
-
Inclusive search committees
A number of medical schools have taken a broad view about who
to include on search committees. Community representatives,
members from local minority medical societies, faculty from
other schools and colleges in the university, and even faculty
from other universities deepens and widens the perspectives
of the committee, and enables committees to be more diverse
in terms of backgrounds, perspectives, and assumptions.
-
Actively engaged deans
In a few cases, deans have taken a very active role in tapping
networks to find candidates: attending specialty meetings, making
calls, and actively inviting people in. Some candidates may
be reluctant to put their name in the hat unless they know the
search is credible and legitimately open, and a personal call
from the dean can indicate just that.
-
Reverse site visits are not a new idea, but
many institutions do not use them. Visiting finalists on their
home turf, and speaking with people below, beside, and above
the candidate can crystallize whether the individual would be
a good fit for the institution and its culture.
-
Streamlining
This idea compresses what otherwise can be a drawn-out process.
One simple solution is when the search ambassador (see #2 above)
at the beginning of the process reserves time on committee members'
calendars for candidate interviews, so scheduling doesn't cause
delays months later. In another example, the search committee
replaces the traditional two rounds of candidate visits (semi-finalist
and finalist) with just one. The goal is to get just enough
information for the committee to make its recommendations to
the dean.
-
"High touch" service
Many institutions strive to provide concierge-level service
to all candidates—those who become finalists, to be sure,
but also to those who don't. The goal is to treat everyone who
is considered for the position with dignity and respect. This
includes escorting candidates to interviews, considering the
needs of spouses and significant others, and calling candidates
who don't make the cut. One dean personally called every woman
applicant, even those not on the short list, and thanked them
for their interest. Small acts go a long way in creating goodwill,
which only improves the institution's reputation as a great
place to work.
Recommended Steps Following the Announcement of the Departure
of a Department Chair
An important part of conducting a professional-quality search
is paying attention to details. Module I of The Successful
Medical School Department Chair (4) includes a list
of recommended steps (PDF, 1 page) for good searches.
|
New Directions
Despite some fresh ideas and innovations in the search process
around the country, a few discrete changes may not be enough. Medical
schools and teaching hospitals should be aware of three trends in
the leadership search process gaining traction in the industry.
-
Talent Management
First, the discrete "search process" is evolving into
a strategic system of "talent management." The idea
is that the search process shouldn't start just when there's
an opening, but rather that searching is a continual process
of identifying potential leaders wherever they may be—at
your institution and others. Think of this as a process of continual
networking, where the job of the dean or CEO is akin to a sports
recruiter—knowing where the talent is and cultivating
those relationships.
-
Centralization of Search
The second trend is the centralization of the search process
at an institution-wide level—including the use of a search
coordinator, standardized search protocols, and visit guidelines.
Some schools use these tools now; many don't. A centralized
search strategy is the only way to integrate the leadership
selection process with institutional culture.
-
Succession Management
Finally, there is the trend toward succession management. I
intentionally use this term rather than "succession planning,"
because succession planning conjures up the image of a CEO hand-picking
a successor, a modern-day version of primogeniture. That model
isn't easily grafted onto the culture of academic medicine.
Rather, succession management is an organization-wide process
to identify and develop future leaders, using strategies such
as pipelines for developing junior leaders, on-the-job experiences
like "stretch" assignments, participation in cross-organizational
initiatives, and the use of coaches. Succession management also
is a key strategy in monitoring the composition of potential
leaders from a diversity perspective.
References
- Creasman, WT. Is this any way to choose a chair? Academic
Medicine 2001; 76:1032-1034.
- Hoffmeir, PA. Are
search committees really searching? Academic Medicine
2003; 78: 125-128.
- Grigsby RK, Hefner DS, Souba WW, Kirch DG. The
future-oriented department chair. Academic Medicine
2004; 79: 571-577.
- Biebuyck JF, Mallon WT. The
Successful Medical School Department Chair. Module I: Search,
Selection, Appointment, Transition. Washington, DC:
AAMC, 2003.
|
|