The search for the University's next president presses forward. To date, the Special Committee on the Nomination of a President has held six open forums for public comment - five on Grounds and one at the University's College at Wise. The Committee will next meet this coming week.
Selecting a new president is the University's foremost opportunity to stake out its future. The Committee has a demanding task to perform, and it must make sure not to unnecessarily restrict the scope of its search. The University has something of a track record in taking a safe, tempered route when filling administrative positions. The individuals chosen are always competent and do their jobs ably, but do not often break the mold or challenge business as usual.
The Committee should not be fearful of choosing an atypical candidate for the job, one who stands out and does not necessarily fit the traditional image of a college president. No individual should be selected simply because he is the most experienced or conventionally qualified nominee. He also need not be previously affiliated with the University. Going this route is naturally a bit riskier, but it could pay dividends if done thoughtfully.
The University is at an important juncture; its long-term trajectory will soon be determined. Over the years, steady progress has been made on numerous fronts: academics, fundraising, diversity and so forth. But to break from the status quo and arrive at the next level, dynamic and innovative leadership is essential. Even a little quirkiness is not such a bad thing.
None of this has to come at the expense of more tangible skills, like adept financial management. Rather, a creative, independent thinker could be a strong asset when it comes to business matters. Of course, any future president would have to be familiar with the fiscal world and know his way around a balance sheet. Given the General Assembly's poor track record in funding public colleges, the financial side of the administrative puzzle will not become less of a priority anytime soon. Still, that does not mean the next president has to act like a prototypical Wharton MBA graduate. After all, fundraising is not a mechanical process. There is plenty of room for novelty.
An original, energetic leader also need not be seen as a threat to the University's unique tradition and heritage. Instead of undermining these customs, such a leader might in fact serve as the perfect complement to the University's historical appeal. He could offer the kind of foil that catches people's attention and draws them in. Furthermore, if the University shows itself capable and willing to break from convention occasionally, those remaining traditions will take on a whole new significance. A rich culture and history is intriguing - strict homogeneity is not.
This reasoning does not mean the Committee should ignore those fundamental traits like wisdom, experience and prudence. Those things are unquestionably important, but there is little doubt that the Committee will adequately address them in its search. The case for an avant-garde president, on the other hand, is a slightly tougher sell. The possibility should not be ruled out, nor should the selection process be deliberately narrow. For all the lip service given to thinking outside the box, here is a real chance to put boldness into practice.