Comments on A Committee's Bad Choice

• Let it go!
• Posted by Professor XYZ on February 5, 2010 at 6:45am EST

• It's too late to stop this one. The committee has spoken. While it was shady, the policies and procedures were likely followed. If you try to stop it or veto it, you will look like a baby and will risk ruining your relationships with the committee members (and the award winner) for many years to come. I've been in this situation before. Just let this one go through. Then, do what you can to prevent it from happening in the future. Examine the policies, procedures and composition of the committee. See what can be altered to prevent such injustices in the future, but never forget that higher education is very political. If you try to stop this committee's decision, you will be falling on a large broad sword, which may nearly kill you or mean the death of you at this institution. In this world, there is the ideal and there is the reality. Let it go my friend. Let it go. You should probably even try to focus on the positive traits of the award winner and play them up when people question the award. The more legitimate you make this award appear (even when you don't believe it) the better off you and your office will be. It sucks, but you have to swallow this one.

• tough decision
• Posted by Roger Geyer , IT at AUIS on February 5, 2010 at 7:30am EST

• Dear Administrator,

  Have a backbone and block the nomination!

• Tacit assumption of committees
• Posted by Sherman Dorn , Professor at University of South Florida on February 5, 2010 at 8:30am EST

• There's one item that hasn't been mentioned: was there an unspoken assumption that the committee had to choose someone? I've occasionally served on committees where there was no good choice, and if we had been told, "It's okay to recommend no one," we would have happily taken that option.

  Sometimes you need to state that no choice is better than a poor choice. If administrators don't make a "no choice is fine" statement, sometimes committees will recommend poor choices because there are no alternatives. The letter-writer should console herself or himself with the knowledge that this was just about an award, not a hiring search.

• trust and shared governance is an important point
• Posted by Prof , business at public teaching university on February 5, 2010 at 9:45am EST

• I agree with Survival Guide's suggestions. Take a long-term and wider view, attend to flaws in the process, and keep the trust of those on the committee.

  Over the course of a 30-year career and several institutions, I've served on a number committees (curriculum, assessment, hiring, faculty development, strategic planning, etc.). I've often observed a dean or department head disregard or bypass the consideration process of the committee. In other cases, the administrator obviously had a predetermined agenda and called endless, frequent meetings until the committee produced the desired result.

  The effect on my colleagues and myself was demoralizing, leaving us with the strong temptation to withdraw our experience and intellectual skills and hand the administrators what they wanted; just go through the motions, teach class, and go home.

  Also, in many of these situations, the long-term outcome was not positive. Problems and complexities occurred that the committee members would have foreseen and dealt with ahead of time. The department was saddled with a less-than-desirable and unproductive faculty member.

  I know the administrator's position is not easy (I've done that role, too). I know managing faculty and committees is like herding cats or butterflies and that designing anything by committee is tough. But most folks in the academy are intelligent, experienced people who bring a lot of value to the discussions and the work.

  If administrators short-circuit the process, what they will end up with is what they will see as a lot of dead wood. But this dead wood will really be burned and burnt-out faculty who no longer see any value in engaging in the process.

  In the long run, trust is vital to the success of shared governance, and shared governance is vital to the continued success and relevance of the academy.

• Let it go...*really*
• Posted by William Cunion , Associate Professor and Chair/Political Science at Mount Union College on February 5, 2010 at 10:00am EST

• Professor XYZ nails it. As frustrating as it is to approve of this, I am sure, the alternatives are MUCH worse. In the end, you can live with giving an award that isn't deserved, but you may not be able to live with colleagues who no longer trust you.

  But what I really liked about XYZ's comment was the suggestion to focus on the positive traits of the candidate. Surely, he or she has some redeeming traits, right? Recognizing those might help you accept the decision.

  Moreover, don't lose sight of the bigger picture. This person isn't being awarded a competitive multi-million dollar grant to study a cure for cancer; with due respect, it is one award at a single institution. We've elected presidents who probably didn't deserve it, so we will surely survive with an undeserved award winner at your school. I don't mean to dismiss it, but perspective can be healthy.

  That said, work to reform the process, too. That will be even more healthy!

• FIGHT
• Posted by Mike on February 5, 2010 at 10:30am EST

• Fight them. Never let a faculty committee push you around.

• do you HAVE to give the award every year?
• Posted by chuck cushman , associate dean, college of professional studies at GWU on February 5, 2010 at 11:00am EST

• if it does not feel like a worthy year, is there any requirement to give the award? If there was only one nominee I would declare the field too small and just leave it off this year, and jump back into it next year.

• Be effusive
• Posted by Dean John on February 5, 2010 at 11:45am EST

• In announcing the winner of the award, I would be sure to name each and every member of the committee, and then stress how much time they spent working through this difficult process...not so much that anyone would question your motives, but enough to tell the campus who made the choice. You'll be surprised how many will know what happened.

• Dean John nails it
• Posted by VPI on February 5, 2010 at 12:30pm EST

• I was reading through the comments and was preparing to write almost exactly what Dean John did. Chances are almost everyone in the room will know that this was a bad choice. If you have to go through with it, just make sure everyone knows who picked the recipient. On the other hand, a recommendation or a nomination is not the same thing as an appointment. That said, if it has always been treated as such, now is probably not the time to change things. And this has nothing to do with whether or not you have a backbone. Blocking the nomination will take the focus off the people who made the horrible nomination and end up making you the bad guy. Don't fall for that. Some of them may even be hoping that you'll take the bait.

• Posted by 09bardie , underemployed BA on February 5, 2010 at 1:30pm EST

• Is there any way to communicate your objections to the committee, or to some subset of it, in order to soften the blow? If it's going to be apparent to a large segment of your public that the person in question is unworthy of the award, they may even be grateful to you. Of course, this is all dependent on the personalities of the people on the committee and your existing relationship with them.

  I think the issue of how you know what you know potentially limits your options a lot.

• Dean's dilemma
• Posted by CB , VP for Academic Affairs at Whittier College on February 5, 2010 at 1:45pm EST

• What concerns me about what was presented is that there doesn't seem to be much communication between the Administrator and the committee. I might suggest the Administrator sit down with the commitee and discuss his/her concerns--this would have to be done with the Administrator denoting both a spirit of collegiality and confidentiality. If the committee would not move off of their decision/recommendation, then prior recommendations for improving the process next time are good ones.

• Implications of rejection
• Posted by Faculty person on February 6, 2010 at 7:45am EST

• I would be concerned that if you reject the nomination people will accuse you of prejudice against the nominee.

  One change you might make is to have the committee come up with a short list of nominees for you to pick from.

• whose award is it?
• Posted by jack on February 6, 2010 at 4:00pm EST

• If the award is going to have your name on it, why are you abdicating all responsibility for it to a committee?

• Communicate!
• Posted by Bintheredoneit on February 7, 2010 at 11:15am EST

• Where is the communication between the administrator and the committee? To me it would be unthinkable to either reject the committee’s recommendation or go forward with it while holding serious reservations without first sitting with them and discussion my concerns. I would do the following:
  1) Have a confidential meeting with the committee members and express my concerns about the recommendation. (The committee as a whole may not be aware of your information and concerns and how going forward with their recommendation for the award might reflect badly on them and the institution.)
  2) If the committee still insists to go forward with their nominee, accept their recommendation according to protocol of the past. At least you have let them know your concerns, but you have still respected protocol.
  3) Make the announcement with the identity of the committee members clearly attached (as recommended earlier in this blog)
  4) Work to change the rules and process for the better in the coming year.