1. It’s 2020.  What does higher education look like at the end of this decade?

That will be about three years after the giant crash of education loans and the inability of the typical student to justify a full-fare education. It will also be a few years after most courses are available digitally–maybe not from your school, but calculus is calculus. At that point, schools will either be labels, brand names that connote something to a hiring manager, or they will be tribal organizers, institutions that create teams, connections and guilds. Just as being part of the Harvard Crimson or Lampoon is a connection you will carry around for life, some schools will deliver this on a larger scale.

I guess it’s fair to say that the business of higher education is going to change as much in the next decade as newspapers did in the prior one. And one more thing before I really get ranting: Higher education is vitally important to our future. It’s one of the best reasons to be a citizen, to be a person in our society. It has the potential to change lives and open doors. But we need to push in the right direction.

2. What are the interesting problems that higher education needs to solve?

The biggest one is: What’s it for?

Is higher education the thing you do before you become a college professor? Because that pyramid scheme is coming to an end… we don’t need any more Ph.D.s, do we?

Or is higher education the place rich kids go to become erudite? Not so many rich kids as there used to be.

Or is it a finishing school/trade school? Professors bridle at that.

One thing I hope we can agree on is that college should not continue to be advanced high school but with more binge drinking.

3. You’ve said most colleges and universities are “mass marketers.”  What’s holding institutions back?  Do they lack meaningful, compelling uniqueness; can they not tell their stories; or both?

I wouldn’t say “holding them back” because colleges have CHOSEN to be mass marketers, have chosen to sell above average education to above average masses of students. That’s what thousands of colleges have chosen to do, all at the same time. I get the brochures at my house daily. Switch the logos and there’s not a lot of difference.

If you reward the University president for fundraising, don’t be surprised that she’s in favor of a big football team and a plan to move up the US News rankings. 

There are definitely unique schools out there, niche schools, schools that know who they want and what they want to deliver. But most institutions are institutions first, and lack the guts to say no, so they become mediocre.

4. What advice would you give to higher ed marketers, especially those looking to do things differently and create change within their institutions?

Marketing is first and foremost about what you sell, not how you sell it. So an institution that wants a different marketing footprint needs to have a different agenda, a different curriculum and needs to be less beholden to the accreditation folks. If there’s a crisis around the corner (and there is, draw any lines on any graph you choose), then doing what you’ve been doing is surely going to get you what you’ve been getting, no?

5. In terms of university advancement, how can we rethink traditional approaches and truly create “tribes” among our universities’ alumni and donors?

The question is: does the relationship start or end at graduation? Not just the relationship with the institution (give us money!) but with the other students? What does an alumni network that works actually look like?

My good friend went to Harvard Business School while I went to Stanford. I was struck by one huge difference: the first day of the first class, he and his classmates elected their alumni rep and organizer–two years before graduation. I don’t think we ever did.

Bonus Question: Do you see evidence of university Admissions teams and Advancement teams effectively “flipping the funnel?”

I think we see this a lot with the fundraisers at the big football schools, certainly. For admissions, I’m not seeing it. The alumni network is a huge source for the right sort of student selection and conversion, but generally, alumni are put to work as fake interviewers, contributing notes that aren’t actually read by the admission office…

Bonus Question: What should be on the reading list of higher ed leaders for 2012?

John Taylor Gatto, for sure. Loren Pope. My book Linchpin if I can be bold. Richard Feynman and Tim Wu’s The Master Switch too.

Meetings do matter though.  They are a must for effective coordination and important interaction with your staff to support their work.  But most days include five or six – if not more – meetings, and it’s a constant challenge to find the time needed to do real work.  Therefore, I made a New Year’s resolution to have fewer meetings (and fewer bad meetings).

Looking for inspiration, I read Read This Before Our Next Meeting by Al Pittampalli, a manifesto challenging our traditional meeting culture.  Mediocre meetings cripple our organization, the author laments, creating a culture of compromise (where game-changing ideas die) and killing our sense of urgency.  We’ve all seen it happen…in the face of a pressing, difficult decision, someone calls a meeting instead of taking action.

Pittampalli dreams of a world of fewer meetings, where we would have more time for real work – the work that propels our organization forward.  “Work that involves action, struggle, and effort.  It’s that output that puts us closer to winning.  If the mission could speak, it would constantly tell us, ‘get back to work.’”

His solution is the “modern meeting.”  We have to change our mindset about meetings.  They are not just another form of communication, but a “special instrument” or “sacred tool.”  The modern meeting exists for one reason: to support decisions.  That way “bold decisions happen often and quickly” and are converted into forward momentum.

The author outlines seven principals of modern meetings, and there is great content within each.  The modern meeting:

1. Supports a decision that has already been made.
2. Starts on time, moves fast, and ends on schedule.
3. Limits the number of attendees.
4. Rejects the unprepared.
5. Produces committed action plans.
6. Refuses to be informational. Reading memos is mandatory.
7. Works only alongside a culture of brainstorming.

Here are some of my takeaways to implement for the new year:

• Keep meetings as brief as possible.  I have several regular meetings on the calendar for one hour; I’ve changed them to a half-hour.  Get in, get out, get to work.
• Be more willing to decline a meeting if necessary.  Request a meeting agenda in advance if it is not provided, and upon review, determine if I will really add value to the meeting.  Let’s face it…we invite too many people to our meetings, particularly in academia.
• For my own meetings, recommit to ensuring that everyone goes in with a clear purpose and comes out with a clear action plan.  What actions are we committing to, who is responsible for each action, and when will those actions be completed?

Regarding a clear purpose, Pittampalli says that modern meetings should center around two things: conflict and coordination.

Conflict: The relevant stakeholders can debate the decision, propose alternatives, suggest modifications, or have concerns addressed.  The decision is ultimately resolved.

Coordination: If a decision demands complex collaboration from different people, teams or departments, stakeholders can convene to coordinate an action plan.

Once again, the modern meeting convenes to support the decision, not to make the decision.  “After all, decisions are the job of the individual.”  This avoids the trap of “over-planning” and “never-ending due diligence.”  If you need input pre-decision, you should get it via one-on-one conversations.

Can you lead the emergence of a new meeting culture at your institution?  By the time Katherine turns nine, perhaps “He just goes to meetings all day” will be transformed into “He creates change, and when he goes to meetings, they’re awesome!”

During the summer, our entire External Affairs staff reads a book, and that becomes the focal point of our annual all-staff retreat.

Here’s what we’ve read so far:

Directors

• The Power of Less by Leo Babauta
• Tribes: We Need You to Lead Us by Seth Godin
• The Story Factor by Annette Simmons
• Enchantment by Guy Kawasaki

All Staff

• StrengthFinders 2.0 by Tom Rath
• Orbiting the Giant Hairball by Gordon MacKenzie

Additionally, we have established a tradition at our annual scholarship luncheon where the keynote speaker selects a book that has had an impact on him or her.  We then provide complimentary copies to student scholarship recipients, donors, and all guests in attendance.  Here are the books our speakers have recommended over the past few years:

• Outliers: The Story of Success (selected by Matt Ferguson, CEO of CareerBuilder)
• The Bill Cook Story: Ready, Fire, Aim! (selected by Gerry Dick, President of Grow Indiana Media Ventures, LLC)
• The She Spot: Why Women Are the Market for Changing the World – And How to Reach Them (selected by Laurie McRobbie, First Lady of Indiana University)

What’s on your 2012 reading list?

1. Every time we say “brand,” people think we are talking about our logo.  (Rather, it’s the sum total of all associations with the brand – good, bad, and ugly.)
2. Everyone wants their own logo and tagline.  (This chips away at the strength of the brand.)
3. Brands are built by what you do, not what you say.
4. We are afraid or unwilling to differentiate.  (Many faculty and staff think that “excellence” is their brand.  Everyone claims excellence, but how are you excellent in your own way?  What is “your way?”  Developing a strong brand is as much about what you’re not as what you are.)
5. We don’t have the right data.  (When conducting research, do not ask superficial marketing questions.)
6. We have to integrate within a decentralized environment.  (Follow these two principles: differentiate and integrate.)
7. Most people on our campus think the marketing department is an internal Kinko’s.  (Not that print is dead, but a silver bullet simply doesn’t exist.  We need lots of different ways to communicate with our target audiences.  Determine this not by asking them, but by monitoring their behavior.)
8. Our campus thinks a brochure is the problem to every marketing problem.  (This limits our ability to strategically market.  We need to position ourselves as a “strategic marketing innovation center.”  If you’re in the following predicament – “we don’t have any time to plan because we haven’t done any planning” – commit to breaking this vicious cycle and give yourself time to plan.)
9. We are only investing five dollars in marketing.  (We must make a case – by creating urgency – for investing in brand management.)
10. Deep down, faculty wished that we didn’t have to market our institutions at all.

Despite her presentation title, Scarborough concluded that colleges can indeed brand.  She praised American University and Gustavus Adolphus College as examples of distinctively articulated brands.

The waning public perception of higher education makes branding even more important, Scarborough said.  We must all communicate the value of our institutions.

Mark your calendar for the CASE Indiana spring conference – Friday, April 13, 2012, at Ivy Tech Community College-Central Indiana.  Neal Raisman, author of The Power of Retention and Embrace the Oxymoron: Customer Service in Higher Education, will keynote.

Lyons said that authentic branding is about telling the truth and becoming the truth.  He encouraged the 900-plus attendees to be explicit about what your institution’s culture stands for, be profoundly intentional about everything related to that culture, and put words to your culture and differentiate it (don’t use the same words everyone else is using).  He described the four principles that define the Haas School’s distinctive culture — question the status quo; confidence without attitude; students always; and beyond yourself.

Singer gave a thorough analysis of what a brand is (a relationship that is formed and nurtured through delivering mutual value) and is not (trademark/name/logo, tagline/messages, and something you unilaterally control).  He explained that the “value” is both conscious (15%) and unconscious (85%).  A strong brand is authentic, inspirational, and aspirational.  We must say why we’re different and why it matters; Signer said that we’re better at the former than the latter.

He encouraged the audience to look at our brands “outside in” by understanding our constituents and rank-ordering them by importance.   The challenge, according to Singer, is that higher ed brands are extraordinarily fragmented – by constituent (prospective/current/former students, faculty, donors, etc.) and by school/discipline/center, for example.

Another highlight of #amahighered was the opportunity to give a paper presentation.  Colleague John Dalton and I presented “From Admissions to Advancement: Transforming a Campus through Lifecycle Marketing.”  There is an article in the November/December issue of CASE Currents magazine titled “United by Goals: There is no integrated advancement without communications and marketing.”  Yes!  In the article, I said that the bottom line is advancement teams are charged with advancing the mission of their institution by enhancing the university’s reputation, its relationships, and ultimately its resources…and that these efforts cannot be maximized without communications and marketing playing a leadership role.

However, our school’s integrated advancement model goes beyond that.  John and I demonstrated how the unconventional inclusion of campus life/student activities enables advancement to directly impact the entire lifecycle – prospective students, current students, alumni, and donors – in a seamless fashion.  Through lifecycle marketing, our institution accelerated a mission and image transformation, resulting in 65 percent enrollment growth over the past four years.

We had great questions from the audience.  Someone asked for tips on how to begin breaking down silos, when offices aren’t organizationally aligned or even in close physical proximity.  Proactively force the issue.

Do whatever it takes it takes to get people around the same table talking about bigger-picture organizational goals that your offices both impact – and could impact more through alignment.  Invite them to your staff meetings; offer to attend theirs.  It could be enlightening to learn about all the other office does and about its challenges and opportunities.  And consider what you could do to make your colleagues in that office look good.  If you’re trying to build bridges with Admissions, it could be as simple as you and your staff offering to volunteer at an Admissions event.

The payoff for integration can be immense; proactively force the issue.

1. Tell us about your CASE Indiana keynote presentation: “Why Colleges Can’t Brand.”  Why can’t they brand?

Colleges can’t brand because branding requires integration. Integrating any organization’s marketing requires breaking down silos. In higher education, our silos have been in place for decades or even centuries. So, to brand, we have to work across the entire organization to share marketing messages and strategies. This requires vision, leadership, and a great deal of institutional will.

2. You recently noted the rising number of vice president-level marketing positions at colleges and universities.  Is the once-held impression that marketing “cheapens the academy” finally a thing of the past?

That sentiment is dying to be sure…..but it’s not dead yet. Faculty members still say to me that higher education should be “above” marketing. Frankly, I agree. It should be. But, the “if you build it, they will come” approach only works in the movies. The reality is that colleges and universities have to convince students and parents their institutions are worthy of one of the biggest purchases in their lives. And, they seek to steward their alumni to bequeath their millions to their alma maters. This requires marketing. Not marketing that cheapens, but marketing that shines a light on the authentic distinctions of the institution.

3. How can advancement professionals be more strategic when answering the common question from the president or chancellor about ROI for their institution’s marketing efforts?

Advancement professionals need to help leadership understand the right ways to measure ROI. I’ve had a president ask me, “How many students did we get because of that billboard we put on I-95?” This question, of course, is unanswerable. But, many other mROI questions are answerable. We need to explain ways to effectively measure mROI and deliver mROI data and information to leadership at regular intervals, whether they ask for it or not.

4. Any advice for marketing officers who are trying to effectively pull together the myriad of marketing activities occurring throughout their school and strategically align them within the institution’s overall brand?

Keep on truckin! You are doing the right thing. Listen carefully and educate as you work to integrate. Tangible results may take years.  Consider it a marathon as opposed to a sprint.

5. As the pressures continue to mount for colleges and universities, what are the biggest challenges that higher ed chief marketing officers are going to face in the coming years?

Long term, I believe that managing the public’s perception regarding the rising costs of education is going to be a real challenge.

Bonus Question: You have your first book, to be published by CASE, in the works.  What is the book about?  What other books would you recommend to higher ed marketing colleagues?

The book is about marketing success stories in higher education. My co-author, Dr. Tom Hayes, is also my business partner and Vice President of SimpsonScarborough. Our book will profile over 25 institutions of all types, highlighting how they achieved a myriad of marketing objectives. Together, their stories paint a picture of the key ingredients to success in the marketing of higher education.

In most standard business books you can find something that applies to higher education. Anything and everything by Schultz, Aaker, Ries, and Trout are good choices.  Also:

• Atkins, Douglas – The Culting of Brands: When Customers Become True Believers
• Crawford, Fred & Mathews, Ryan – The Myth of Excellence: Why Great Companies Never Try to be the Best at Everything
• Davis, John – Measuring Marketing: 103 Key Metrics Every Marketer Needs

Long an advocate for change in higher education, he has called on colleges and universities to reinvent themselves and better collaborate, acknowledging their role and responsibility as economic engines.  Part of that change at Ohio State includes the transition to an integrated advancement model.

President Gee was generous with his time to offer thoughtful insight on university advancement, leadership, and more as part of my “Five Questions” series.

1. It’s 2020.  What does higher education look like at the end of this decade?

One word:  expansive.  Not in terms of bricks and mortar, but in the realm of imagination.  We will be creative without boundaries.   Higher education will play an increasingly vital role in forging economic success, in a world where ideas are the catalysts of virtually all future economic progress.  Our classrooms will expand in multiple ways, bringing in the world.  Partnerships will expand, linking colleges and universities in many countries through study abroad programs, research collaboration, and problem-solving.  College students will have the benefits of a global curriculum, global experiences, and global thinking.  The next generation will be fully prepared for the global tasks they confront.

2.  In the often risk-averse environment of higher education, what role can Advancement play in driving the change that so many institutions need?

In my view, advancement plays a crucial role.  At Ohio State, we are in the midst of developing and implementing our own advancement model.  Recently, we had an opportunity to experience the benefits of our advancement progress, as we hosted the 75^th anniversary celebration of alumnus Jesse Owens’ historic Olympic achievements.  It was clear that our newly-coordinated efforts in areas that had previously operated separately — development, alumni, University communications, to name a few — were extraordinarily effective as one entity, moving the University forward.

3.  You are known for your fundraising prowess.  Approximately what percentage of your time do you spend on development, and what makes a president not just an effective fundraiser-in-chief but an exceptional one?

Nearly everything I do as University president can be categorized as either friend-raising or fund-raising.  Our students, faculty, and staff are our best ambassadors, and so I think it is important to nurture those relationships.  With our students, for example, we begin making connections before they arrive on campus, and continue beyond graduation day.  Of course, our goal to move from excellence to eminence as one of the nation’s great land-grant universities depends on our ability to convey investment opportunities to alumni and friends.  The Jesse Owens celebration and subsequent funding of the Jesse Owens Scholars Program, for instance, was made possible only through the generous gifts of families and individuals who share our vision.  To answer the last part of your question, I think an effective fundraiser-in-chief embraces this element as essential to the mission.  It helps if you like being with people, and I certainly do.

4.  Over the course of your career, who are some of the leaders — both inside and outside of academia — you have admired and why?

I have had the wonderfully good fortune of personally knowing some great leaders.  The one who first comes to mind is Andy Sorensen, who passed away just recently, and who leaves an impressive legacy as both a human being and university leader.  He and I were good friends with similar world views, and I was so grateful when he accepted the task of leading our fundraising efforts as senior vice president for development at Ohio State, having previously served with great success as president of the University of Alabama and the University of South Carolina.  In the too-short time that Andy was with us, he accomplished remarkable goals.

Other academic leaders whom I have been privileged to know and admire include Gene Budig, a guiding light who served as president and chancellor of several institutions including West Virginia and Kansas, and Peter Magrath, a true statesman of higher education.  Both men have been my mentors, and I am grateful for their insight and wisdom.

Of course, new generations of leaders are on the horizon, and I am excited to see what lies ahead for them and for our world.  Standing tall among these young leaders in my view is Wendy Kopp, chief executive officer and founder of Teach for America, the national corps of outstanding college graduates who commit to teach for two years in some of the nation’s highest-need schools.  The fact that she envisioned the organization while still an undergraduate at Princeton University, then made it happen, is inspiring.

Outside of academia, I admire those leaders who think big.  Two of them are surely Bill and Melinda Gates, whose Foundation has recently committed a large sum to improve education at all levels.

5.  You have over 21,000 followers on Twitter.  How has this platform fit into your overall communications toolkit, and — more broadly — how can colleges and universities better leverage the power of the social web?

Twitter allows me to speak directly, and instantly, to a broad audience that is interested in Ohio State.  I love the immediacy of the medium, not to mention the challenge of distilling my thoughts into 140 characters or less!  I have always been a strong proponent of thoughtful internal and external communication, and  tweeting is one of today’s most powerful — and fun — tools.  Colleges and universities simply must leverage the power of the social web, as it is the primary way to reach future students, alumni, and friends.

A recent survey placed Ohio State in the top three universities for number of “friends” online, and I recognize the significance of being so popular!  I think we have accomplished this and other social web-related achievements by understanding our constituents’ needs and then putting attention and talent to the development and delivery of our message.

1. One of the core elements of donor-centered fundraising is your concept that “communication is the ask.”  Please describe what you mean by this.

Donors say that, apart from their first contribution to a not-for-profit, it is not the solicitation that convinces them to renew but, rather, what goes on in between the asks. As early as receipt of the thank you letter, donors begin forming impressions of the organization that they are now supporting. Those impressions can make them feel even more positive about having given and more likely to give again, or they can cause donors to wonder whether they made the right choice. By the time they are asked for another gift, the decision has already been made; the solicitation merely provides the opportunity to convey that decision.

Whether it be a thank you note for a gift just received, a report on progress of the program or research project that the donor is funding, or an impromptu phone call, communication is what connects institutions with their donors. The quality and timeliness of communication is so influential with donors that it solidifies their future giving decisions. Therefore, communication, not solicitation, is really the ask.

2. Are social web platforms a genuine fundraising asset or strictly another communications tool?

Since communication and fundraising success are intrinsically linked (see #1 above), social media should not be underestimated even if it plays more of an indirect than a direct role in raising money. Currently, though, about 18% of donors say they can be influenced to give for the first time or give again by social media. However, unlike one-to-one fundraising programs such as direct mail, a social media group usually includes a small percentage of “mass influencers” — people who blog, re-tweet, endorse, and actively promote your organization and your messages to their own network. They independently expand your reach and can be very important in your donor acquisition, event participation and other fundraising strategies.

3. Where do young donors fit into the equation for development programs?

Among respondents under the age of 35 in the 2011 Cygnus Donor Survey, 39% plan to increase the total value of their donations this year, compared with only 20% of older donors. This and other data comparing respondents by age suggest that Fundraisers should not measure the importance of their younger donors by current gift value alone. Half the respondents between 25 and 34 years of age enjoy household incomes over $70,000, and no matter what questions we asked of them, younger donors scored not just slightly higher, but significantly higher on willingness to engage, to give more, and give in ways that are more cost-effective for fundraising.

4. Your forthcoming book, Donor-Centered Leadership, addresses the high turnover rate of fundraisers.  Please provide some background on this issue.

Extending a valued fundraiser’s term for even one more year has huge implications on revenue, fundraising cost and donor confidence.  So, it’s not surprising that 87% of top Development execs agree that the rate of staff turnover in fundraising is a problem.  It’s not that fundraising is an unappealing career choice, though (thank goodness.)  In fact, 75% of people who enter the field, regardless of their original motivation, plan to stay in fundraising indefinitely or evolve into positions in which fundraising experience is a decided advantage (like becoming a not-for-profit CEO, for example.)  Where the problem lies is in job-to-job tenure.  For example, fundraisers in front-line, non-management positions say that it takes them ten to twelve months to get fully up to speed in a new position.  However, with the average tenure in these positions well under two years, not-for-profits are justified in questioning whether they are getting good value for money.

While tenure lengthens as seniority rises, the supply/demand ratio in our business is a nightmare for employers…but a boon for search firms and job banks, it seems.  Senior Development professionals say they are approached for another position, on average, in about ninety days after starting a new job.

5. In addition to your own, are there other fundraising books that you would recommend to colleagues?

Anything by Ken Burnett.

While Catholic education has existed in our community since 1851, the high school is relatively new, graduating its first class in 2006.  The schools are riding a wave of momentum right now – implementing a new one-to-one technology initiative at the junior/senior high, achieving the highest ISTEP test scores of any school in the area, and winning a sectional championship in baseball this past spring, Seton’s first in any sport.

With enrollment increasing and additional enrollment growth as a major goal, strong brand marketing is a must, and we are becoming much more intentional and strategic in this area.  I have the privilege of chairing the board’s new marketing-for-image committee, and over the past several months we have been working on a new visual identity for Seton Catholic Schools.

I had a blast leading this process, and it brought back fond memories of our mascot change at Indiana University East, when – along with changing our mission to a bachelor’s and master’s institution and launching intercollegiate athletics – the campus transitioned from Pioneers to Red Wolves.

At Seton Catholic, our goal was to create a new visual identity that is consistent, unifying, and distinctive.  The schools – which until one year ago had separate boards for the elementary school and high school – had been using a variety of logos and graphics.  Our new visual identity, in contrast, will be consistent and unifying across the entire school system, enabling us to build and enhance positive awareness and recognition for Seton Catholic.  Check out the new school logo:

Institutional logo

Another driving factor was to be distinctive.  With a common mascot name (Cardinals) and symbol, we didn’t want to be confused visually with the Louisville Cardinals or any other college or pro Cardinal brand.  We wanted something unique, something that people immediately recognize as Seton Catholic.  Here’s the new Seton Catholic Cardinals athletics/spirit logo:

Old logo

New logo

We officially unveiled the new school logo and the new athletics/spirit logo at a standing-room-only launch party a few weeks ago.  Although our work is just beginning, initial feedback has been overwhelmingly positive, and I am hopeful that the new visual identity will help bring Seton Catholic into further prominence in our community.

Next on the list…a new and improved website!

President Bennett and his wife were great advocates for our town – Richmond, Indiana.  They leave an indelible mark on the community through friendships and outstanding service to a variety of nonprofit boards and organizations.  But Bennett made it clear that he would not stick around, and I admire that very much.

In a newspaper interview with the Palladium-Item, he said, “It was pretty clear to us when we came that leaving Richmond would be part of the plan.  That didn’t have anything to do with what we thought we’d find about Richmond. What we found was that we loved Richmond, but it’s a good idea for ministers and college presidents to move away and let their successors have a degree of freedom to steer things without somebody watching over their shoulders.”

Jerold Panas discusses this topic in The First 120 Days: What a New College President Must Do To Succeed, and I don’t think he could have said it any better than Bennett did.  Panas writes that many presidents seem unaware of the dangers of staying on too long and they find leaving extremely difficult.

How does a new college president handle the potentially delicate and difficult issue of dealing with his or her predecessor?  Panas has the answers (and humorously titles this section “Send them on a cruise”).  First and foremost, honor the past and respect your predecessor – no matter how you feel.  Remember, one day you will have a successor.  “Think of your predecessor (whether great, good, or otherwise) as a member of the same hallowed club.”  Never be negative about the past, but turn the focus of the trustees and others to the future.

All the presidents that Panas spoke with agree that having a predecessor serve on the board is a serious mistake.  Sometimes the person will be named chancellor as recognition for a long and successful tenure.  The chancellor (the former president) should then have just one responsibility: fundraising for the college – that and “being a roaring advocate for the president.”  However, keep in mind that if the person was not a successful fundraiser as president the same will hold true as chancellor.  Most importantly, Panas is adamant that the former president should not report to the board.  He/she should be a direct report to the president.

If there is not a clear understanding, the new president can easily be characterized as the bad guy.  Therefore, it’s imperative for the board to consult with the new president on these issues and address them in advance.

Panas suggests a quick transition – not several months – in terms of bridging the old and the new.  The two only need to spend a full day or two together, at most, for the successor to absorb everything that is necessary.  Moving forward, the new president will gain the information he or she needs by “talking to others, probing, and listening.”

Even if the predecessor remains in the community, there should be some distance initially. Bruce Heilman, former president and current chancellor at the University of Richmond, told the author, “It’s a good idea for the predecessor to be away from the campus for six months or so.  Perhaps take a trip.  The new president has all he can handle just to put his own imprint on the presidency.  You don’t want the former president getting in the way.  Even if he works hard to dissolve into the background and not interfere, he is a presence.”

Fortunately for the incoming president of Earlham College, Doug Bennett – in the best interests of the college – has made this easy.  Congratulations to President Bennett on his successful tenure at Earlham and the very best wishes to him and his family!