BlogU

  • Ask the Administrator: Chairperson Interview Questions

    By Dean Dad April 15, 2009 11:17 pm

    A new correspondent writes:

    I was wondering if you could share some questions you might ask a chairperson candidate. Thank you.

    Context is huge here. At some cc's, department chairs are elected by the departments, so interviews are either pro forma or nonexistent. At others they're appointed by deans, but wise deans usually take the pulse of the department first. I've also heard of colleges where department chair positions are externally posted, and people are hired into chair positions. I've never been anywhere that has done that, other than one-person departments, but I'm told they're out there.

    Chair duties also vary by college and department. I've seen systems in which chairs formally evaluate faculty, and in some they're even responsible for allocating merit raises. In others, faculty evaluation is left to deans, and the chairs primarily tend to class scheduling, adjunct hiring, and administrivia. At some colleges, chairs effectively serve for life; at others, there's an expectation (sometimes formalized) of a fixed and finite term. Sometimes the positions are hotly contested, and sometimes actively avoided. (In the latter case, interviewing is more about recruiting than about screening.)

    Those distinctions matter a great deal in determining interview questions. Rather than phrasing questions, I'll address qualities.

    To the extent that I have a say in choosing candidates for administrative positions, I tend to focus mostly on motivation and temperament. Intelligence is great, but most college professors have more than enough of that. Great professors become lousy chairs (or deans) where the motivation and/or temperament isn't right. Red flags include:

    • --The resigned “I could really use the course releases.” Run away, run away. If the candidate sees the chair position as a chance to relax, you don't want him. I've actually seen this.
    • --Any sign that the candidate is power-hungry. I've mentioned before using the waiter test, or the secretary test. If the candidate is obsequious during the interview, but cold or cruel to the waiter or secretary, run away. The “kiss up, kick down” personality is toxic to the entire organization. (To my mind, the difference between this and a more constructive ambition is in the focus. Is the drive to be the center of attention, or is it to get things done?)
    • --Thinness of skin. It's possible – difficult, but possible – to have a thin skin and still succeed in the classroom, since there's an element of control there. But in any administrative position, you will be attacked vigorously and repeatedly, often in breathtakingly unfair and/or personal ways. Academia seems to encourage this, for reasons I still only vaguely understand. To be effective over the long haul without resorting to a reign of terror (or giving away the store), you need to be able to maintain relative equanimity while being put on the spot. You have to be capable of refusing the bait. This is related to, but somewhat different from, 'conflict resolution' as it's usually presented. The relevant skill is resolving a conflict to which you've been made a party.
    • --Too much idealism. See 'administrivia,' above. Yes, good chairs bring out the best in everybody. Yes, they provide academic vision and a key leadership role in the trenches. But they also have to get classes staffed, assessment outcomes reports done, budgets balanced, labs or studios maintained, and the like. Nobody enjoys all of those, so I look for people who are capable of, for lack of a better term, sucking it up when necessary. I've seen a few wonderful, successful, well-meaning, widely-respected professors wash out as chairs because they just couldn't be bothered with the little things. I could sympathize, but dealing with those little things is an essential part of the job. This is sometimes disparaged as the 'management' part, as distinct from the 'leadership' part, but it's important. In my first quasi-administrative role at Proprietary U, I quickly drew positive notice by dint of being the first person from the academic side of the house to actually get people information when they wanted it. You'd think this would be basic, but for some reason, it isn't.

    Those should be fairly portable across most contexts, I imagine.

    Speaking of contexts, I'd like to hear from my wise and worldly readers on this one. Wise and worldly readers – what have you seen in successful (or, perhaps more importantly, unsuccessful) chairs?

    Have a question? Ask the Administrator at deandad (at) gmail (dot) com.

Go to comments (3) »
Advertisement
On the Job Market Together?

Comments on Ask the Administrator: Chairperson Interview Questions

  • Chair Person Interviw Questions
  • Posted by Dean Mom on April 16, 2009 at 10:00am EDT

  • I agree with all that was posted by Dean Dad regarding the Chair role. At our college the chairs are pseudoadministrators; they are faculty from the departments that have the first line supervisory role of full and part-time faculty while in a temporary position. They are responsible for all of the administrivia and the personnel as well. A dean with multiple departments and 30+ full-time faculty cannot possibly supervise that many direct reports effectively. I have to rely on the chairs to be honest about what is happening with their colleagues while in the role. That translates to chairs being responsible for first cut on the annual evaluations for full-time faculty and then sitting in on the evaluation meetings with the dean each full-time faculty on our campus. The chairs on another campus within our college are the only ones to meet with the faculty and conduct the evaluations. They consult with the dean on the final ratings, but faculty tend to only meet with the dean if there are issues to be addressed.

    The responsibility is embraced by some chairs and done quite professionally while other chairs are very reluctant to assume that role. As a former chair for 5 years I found the balance of the pressure by the dean to be a supervisor for my peers and the fact that they would be my peers once I stepped down from the role as a point of tension for me as a leader. Add in a faculty member with serious issues and it became a serious challenge for a temporary chair. There is constant pressure to have fewer administrators and more full-time faculty at a college so the structure is there out of necessity, but not a good solution by anyone's measure.

    So the question of what traits I look for in a chair? They must be honest, willing to take on responsibilty for personnel issues, organized, people savvy (ignore a small problem and it becomes a large departmental problem), well respected w/in the faculty ranks and above all else patient.

  • Successful chairs
  • Posted by Jeffrey on April 16, 2009 at 11:00am EDT

  • The best chairs and best administrators are invisible--they get things done and the faculty doesn't even know it's happening. The worst are the drama kings/queens--they like the interpersonal emotional energy more than "administrivia."

  • Chair as King
  • Posted by CC Prof , Division Chair on April 16, 2009 at 8:30pm EDT

  • Nice that this article has come up. I am just finishing my first year as a Division Chair at a large CC after 9 years of a very good and popular Chair (we have term limits or he probably would have been Chair For Life). At my college we have a long and strong tradition of each academic division being its own little kingdom. We actually speak about differing cultures between divisions. Each Chair evaluates the faculty members in the division and most of the time the Deans to not change the evals. The Chairs are selected by the members of the division who technically just give their recommendation to the President. Officially it is the President who chooses the Chair but I do not know of one instance when a faculty recommendation was rejected so the process is really an interview by the faculty. I must admit that most of the time it is a recruiting effort, but occasionally we get a horse race.

    With regards to good Chair qualities I will list some that my previous Chair possessed and those that people have said I possess when being complemented. I agree with all that has been written so I will not repear. I think one of the most important things a Chair can do is influence the culture of their division. This was the strongest part of the previous Chair who wanted above all else a group of faculty who worked together well and harmoniously. My division is often recognized as such. A Chair also needs very good communication skills - communicate just enough but not too much info to the division members. Performance reviews and the ability to give constructive feedback are also a very important especially to those in a promotion window. My previous Chair, despite all his good qualities, was not very good at this. As a result in my first year I have already had to deal with two instances of faculty not fulfilling their duties and who cannot understand why they are being criticised when there did not seem to be a problem these past few years.

Print
© Copyright 2010 Inside Higher Ed