Library Faculty Assembly Meeting

with the Search and Screen Committee for

Executive Director of Libraries

Friday, June 10, 2005

 

 

Assembly:                     Mary Gay Anderson, Adis Beesting, Valerie Boulos*, Sherry Carrillo*, Gail Clement, Cindy Dottin, Antonie Downs*, Jennifer Fu, Andy Grof, Dan Hardin, Mirtha Hernandez, Nancy Hershoff*, Bob Mead-Donaldson, Steve Morris, Sherry Mosley, Mayra Nemeth, George Pearson, Patricia Pereira-Pujol, John Radencich, Emily Ray, Tony Schwartz*, Vicki Silvera, Steve Switzer, Sue Wartzok

 

                                    * -- also members of Search Committee

 

Search Committee:       Martha Castiello, Peter Craumer, Lori Driver, George Fray

 

 

Special meeting called to address the resolution passed at the Emergency Meeting of the Faculty Assembly on June 7, which reads:

 

"Be it resolved that the Library Faculty Assembly expresses a serious lack of confidence in the search and screen process for the Executive Director of Libraries and urges an immediate meeting with the Search and Screen Committee to address concerns about the process before a recommendation is made."

 

 

Issues addressed at the meeting:

 

• Speed of the search – librarians expressed concern over the “hurry up and wait” method by which the search was conducted, particularly the rush to receive applications with a short deadline and the speed with which the interviews were scheduled. 
  • Search Committee response: Sherry explained that these concerns had also been expressed within the search committee, but the schedules of all participants in the process needed to be taken into consideration when scheduling meetings and interviews with candidates.  Since many participants will not be available in July, there was a need to bring candidates to FIU in June.

 

• Recruiting – Ad in College and Research Library News came out after the review date for applications. Recruitment could have been done at ALA rather than having interviews just prior to ALA.  Has a “head hunter” been considered?
  • Search Committee response: Although the print version of the ad was delayed by publication schedules, the online versions were available much earlier.  Additionally, the search was posted as “open until filled”, with a date for initial review of applications.  ALA was not considered as a place potential Directors would be seeking positions.  A head hunter may be an option, but it is very expensive and it is a little premature to say we need such a service at this time.

 

• Contacting References – Why did it take so long to contact the candidate’s references?  How was it decided who would contact references?  How come no librarians were present during the calls to references?
  • Search Committee response: At the time, there was a different Chair in place.  Current Chair cannot address this issue.

 

• Interview Process – Due to use of HR system, applications were unavailable to librarians as a body because of the password protection in place. Candidates’ schedule was posted late. 
  • Search Committee response: Applications for the finalists are currently available.  The schedule required coordination of many participants before going public.  Faculty will be invited to sections of the interview.  There will be a presentation, which will be repeated several times so people can see it.  Additionally, any finalists would likely be invited back to campus for at least one more visit before being selected for the position.

 

• Interim Director –August is approaching quickly and no interim director has been named.
  • Search Committee response: This is not under the purview of the committee.  A recommendation to this effect should be made directly to Dr. Rosenberg or Dr. McGowan.

 

• Role of the Committee, Provost, and CIO – What are the roles of each of these bodies?
  • Search Committee response: The Search Committee was charged by the Provost and reports its recommendations to the Provost.  It is the Provost’s prerogative to make the final selection for the position, but he would be unlikely to dismiss the recommendations of the committee without cause.  Dr. McGowan will also meet with each of the candidates.  Any vagueness in the reporting structure or the roles of each of these bodies in the hiring process would need to be addressed at the level of the Provost or CIO rather than by the Committee.