In early February, Dean Suzette Grillot penned an open letter to the University of Oklahoma Board of Regents, respectfully requesting they release names of the finalists for the University of Oklahoma president and provide an opportunity for university stakeholders to engage with those under consideration to lead the state’s flagship university.
“We have looked forward to public conversations about how our future leader will build on President Boren’s many accomplishments, as well as how the next OU president will address the challenges we face as an institute of higher education,” Grillot wrote.
More than 330 faculty members added their signatures to the open letter. About a month later, the board of regents held back-to-back special meetings in closed-door executive sessions and interviewed seven finalists. Two weeks later, the board of regents posted a special meeting agenda for March 26. The agenda listed one item: the appointment of a president.
On March 26, thirty minutes after the board of regents entered executive session and remained in session, a text message alert notified the university community that James “Jim” Gallogly was named the 14th president of the University of Oklahoma.
Two hours later, the university community had its first chance to hear from Gallogly, a longtime energy company executive and major donor. At an introduction ceremony on the Norman campus, University of Oklahoma Board of Regents Chairman Clay Bennett praised the 65-year-old OU College of Law alumnus for his business expertise and love of the university.
“I came with a vision,” Gallogly told the crowd. “I came to help continue that work that David Boren started, that great foundation, to take the University of Oklahoma from a great institution to absolutely the pinnacle of academic success.”
Closed search
With the exception of the board of regents, it was the first time the university community had heard the next OU president share their vision for the future. The board of regents conducted a closed president search, meaning only members of the board, search committee members and select university administration discussed the task of selecting the next president in closed-door meetings. The secrecy has left students, staff and faculty members with many questions.
Once again, Grillot, with input from other faculty, penned an open letter. This time, it was sent to Gallogly, asking how his experience as an oil executive would influence his decisions as president; how he would handle decreased appropriations from the state, among other questions.
“We knew we needed to respond in a way that was welcoming to the new president,” Grillot told Oklahoma Gazette. “We wanted him to know that we had made the request for transparency and it had been ignored. We wanted to take the opportunity to ask the questions of him that we all would have asked if we had had the opportunity to meet him prior to his selection.”
Trends in higher education highlight that not many students and faculty get the opportunity to interact with finalists prior to a governing board announcing their pick for president, said Frank LoMonte, director of Brechner Center, a Florida freedom of information think tank, and nine-year executive director of the nonprofit Student Press Law Center.
“If you go back 20 or 30 years ago, it was unthinkable that you would hire a president without, at the bare minimum, bringing several finalists to campus,” LoMonte said.
Governing boards of public universities argue that their closed searches attract the best candidates because it offers privacy. Boren, OU’s 13th president, shared this view in a February statement to The Oklahoma Daily, known as OU Daily, the student newspaper.
“Confidentiality is needed to attract highly qualified prospects,” Boren wrote. “Several may hold important posts which they don’t want to risk, and they will not agree to be considered unless the process assures that their names will not be revealed.”
Employing search firms
Boren contended that through the search committee, which was comprised of students, faculty, staff, alumni and community members, the university community had a voice in the process.The search committee worked closely with the regents’ hired search firm, Storbeck/Pimentel & Associates. Contracted search firms operate out of the public view, providing candidates guaranteed secrecy. Committee members sign strict confidentiality agreements.
Researcher Judith Wilde at George Mason University’s Schar School of Policy and Government found that about 92 percent of public university presidential searches are now conducted using search firms. In the same study, researchers found during the 1975-1976 academic year, only 2 percent of universities employed search firms.
Governing boards, which are often comprised of business people, tend to employee corporate-style headhunters, which are widely used in the business world, said Wilde.
The selection and evaluation of a university president is the most important job by a governing board, Wilde contended.
“Think about it this way: This is a public office,” Wilde said.
Informing campus
Since Boren announced his retirement, OU Daily reporters have followed closely the process of picking a president, producing dozens of articles alluding to its secrecy and reporting the university community’s response. Three months ago, Nick Hazelrigg, news editor and reporter, learned through an interview with a search committee member that the search would be “confidential.”
“When that article went out, the response to it — I don’t want to say surprising — we saw how many students and faculty alike did care,” Hazelrigg said.
On March 10, when the board of regents entered into executive session to interview candidates, university police asked OU Daily reporter Anna Bauman to leave a hallway at the OUHSC library. Hazelrigg explained that by standing in the hallway, Bauman could potentially see candidates enter and leave meetings with the governing board. University police asked media to wait in the lobby, where there was no chance to see a candidate.
Business-minded presidents
The OU campus was abuzz following the announcement of its next president. Some students took to social media to share their concerns about a nonacademic leading the state’s flagship university. Other students saw the appointment of an outsider as positive for the university, which welcomed a nonacademic when Boren, a former U.S. Senator and governor, was named president in 1994. (However, Boren did teach class at Oklahoma Baptist University while serving in the state Legislature.)Gallogly, who notably gave a sizable donation to OU’s college of engineering, is the former chairman and chief executive officer of LyondellBasell, a company he guided out of bankruptcy. He also served nearly 30 years in executive roles with energy companies.
In Oklahoma, Gallogly joins Burns Hargis, a well-known name in legal and business circles who became Oklahoma State University president in 2008 and also entered the president’s office new to academia. Oklahoma City University Board of Trustees recently named Martha Burger, an energy executive, as its president.
These days, while a majority of university presidents come from academia, 15 percent come from backgrounds outside of higher education, according to a 2016 American Council on Education report.
Regardless of the new president’s background, a closed presidential search could be the reason a new president struggles, explained LoMonte.
For example, in February, Sam Olens, a former Georgia attorney general, stepped down as Kennesaw State University president after a year. Olens entered the office amid complaints by some that he got the job through political connections rather than qualifications. He was highly criticized for his response to a cheerleader protest scandal last fall.
Learning time
On July 1, Gallogly assumes the role as OU president. He views his early days in office as a chance to be a student again, learning from faculty and students.Many on the OU campus don’t want to wait until July. Grillot, the dean leading efforts around a public forum with the new president, is hopeful that the university community can learn from Gallogly before his first day. “We are looking forward to working with him and we ask these questions out of the spirit of loving the university,” Grillot said. “We all want the same thing: a wonderful place to work, a wonderful place to educate and grow. We hope that we can work collaboratively, productively and positively to accomplish great things at OU.”
This article appears in Joy of Dining.