Andrews University Presidential Search Committee Looking at 14 Possible Candidates
November 6, 2015: After a process of establishing standards and reviewing suggestions, the search committee has voted 14 names for study. The 14 potential candidates include two African American males, three African American females, five white males, one white female and three Hispanic males, stated Dr. Benjamin Schoun, chair of the committee looking for a replacement for Dr. Niels-Erik Andreasen, the Old Testament scholar who has led the university for some time and earlier this year announced his upcoming retirement.
Before considering names, the committee at an October 22 meeting reviewed all of the lists of characteristics that had come in from the board, faculty and Adventist denominational leaders. These were collated, and eight were ranked as essential: strategic vision, academic experience and standing, personal courage and character, spiritual maturity and Adventist integrity, embracing multicultural diversity, ambassador and statesman internally and externally, team builder and possessed of good judgment.
In addition the committee agreed that there are three characteristics that reflect the current situation with Andrews University, the leading institution of higher education affiliated with the Adventist denomination. “First, multicultural and international sensitivities; second, a bridge builder who can negotiate difficult divides in the context of Adventist vision; third, building undergraduate programs and a presence on campus that connects with undergraduate students.”
A total of 83 names had been suggested by board members, university administrators and faculty, General Conference and division leaders, the Lake Union Conference, students and alumni, Schoun stated in a memo to the campus family. At the October 22 meeting, the search committee reviewed each name one by one, and the 14 were selected for further study.
Those potential candidates will be contacted and asked if they are willing to be considered and will supply a curriculum vitae. Some may eventually be invited to interviews with the committee.
Schoun has served as chairman of the board for the university and is retiring from a vice president role at the denomination’s General Conference. He continues to lead the search committee. The selection is a vital decision for the future not only of the university but also Adventist higher education around the world.
I cannot think of a better person to lead this search than Ben Schoun. Let us pray that God will guide the search team to the right person.
There is a saying that university politics are so vicious because the stakes are so small. But for many of us as individuals and for the SDA church the stakes are NOT small. Andrews University is a microcosm of the many forces and stake-holders that tug institutional Adventism in different directions. And all of these forces intersect in the President’s office. (To mix metaphors, this is a hot seat inside a fishbowl 😎
Nobody agrees with everything that Dr Andreasen has done, but it is hard to argue with the huge influence he has had during his tenure. His will be a tough act to follow and I would be surprised if his successor has such long and fruitful tenure.
I think Dr. Andreasen and AU should have replaced Meier Hall with a newer building. It’s really sexist. Meier Hall the x-shaped insecure pre-fair housing men’s dormitory built in the 60s without a mail room and 4 ugly concrete stairwells and Norad style blast doors. The administration and Dr. Andreasen should have done more or been more proactive in selling Monterey Institute to someone besides Middlebury like Ohio State or Clemson or maybe Harvard or University of South Carolina.
I asked El Bischoff (Dayton Daily News) about Gordon Gee’s “Significant other in California” *ahem* Monterey *ahem* Monterey California *ahem* Monterey Institute of International Studies / Middlebury Institute of International Studies Errrrr MIIS@Monterey and all the lights in the restaurant went out.
There is no “search committee.”
Unless one believes “one” is a “search committee”.
Whomever Wilson wants will be appointed.
Save all the time and expense and just ask Ted and be done with it.
McMurphy: That is absolutely preposterous and totally ignorant. One stint on one of these committees would be enough to show you the true character of those who lead in such matters. But why would the likes of you ever be chosen?!
Progressive SDA will be satisfied with a Black lesbian for AU president.
Mr. Hansen, the candidates mentioned, although ethnically diverse, all equally share in merit.
It’d be foolish to choose candidates based on ethnicity alone. Many often cry fowl in situations like this one. They cannot get past racial diversity and forget that it’d be a gross irresponsibility for any committe to choose candidates without merit.
Being that, according to a recent Pew survey, almost half of the NAD is made up of minorities (thus confirming one of Mr. Foster’s posits on his last opinion piece), then; wouldn’t it make sense for Andrews to consider an ethnically diverse but equally deserving panel of candidates? If a black woman happens to be voted into the position (based on her qualifications/merit), what’s the harm in that?
I don’t perceive this issue to be a progressive VS. (fill in the blank) stand off. The list of candidates simply reflect the times we’re living in, as well as the non-effective evangelistic efforts of the NAD (they are not retaining members, therefore minorities come in and fill the empty spots).
*foul*. Not fowl ?
Hansen, for the love of Christ, and if you love His Church, why offer a stumbling block to your Church family, and attempt to rile up those who agree with your thinking, of which has no value, but is a slap in the face to our GOD?????
I agree. These are not just laughing matters. The world is falling apart and so is the Church. The devil is actively getting involved in trying to do his very best to bring about chaos as he knows his time is VERY LIMITED. Let us do diligence before we do anything.
Earl, China’s current president stated in a recent interview ~”Many people enter or see in politics, the glory, the prestige, the power.” I, however, see the interrogations, the confinements, the accusations. We have different points of view.” Like Mr. Xi I’ve seen too much of the “equality” “empowerment” “inclusiveness” downside in the toils of daily life. Political correctness too often translates into incompetence, stupidity, corruption.
Years ago, amidst concerns about the lack of female firefighters in the L.A. fire department, the chief released training video of female candidates unable to hoist themselves over a barrier, which he attributed to lack of upper body strength. He was forced out of his job…for telling the truth. He wanted firefighters who could do the job. not fill quotas. Activist elements wanted his head. Coroner Thomas Noguchi accurately said that William Holden died in a drunken stupor. He also lost his job.
A former SDA champion colporteur attained his position by exploiting a loophole in the accounting method tracking sales, defrauding the denomination out of money and benefits; the books he “sold” piled high in his garage
Ask people at JPL, for example, how many incompetent, divisive, personality disordered individuals they have on the engineering teams doing rocket science. I did. After an incredulous look, I got the answer “Not one.” Any organization that strives for excellence need give the same reply. That’s my…
I was a grad student at the time of Andreasens’ appointment. I’ve worked with him as a fellow head of an institution. I’ve mixed with him socially, had supper at his home, etc. A true gentleman and a leader par excellence. Our prayers go out to the committee as it tackles the unenviable task of finding a replacement. ‘
Right. Except Dr. Andreasen didn’t resolve the issues with Meier Hall which reduces the marketability of AU to recruit male students. They spent 6 million on Demazo the Women’s dormitory and totally neglected Meier Hall the Men’s dormitory under Andreasen. Meier Hall doesn’t have an elevator and is x-shaped with 4 ugly ratty concrete stairwells and a small cubby hole desk for the entrance lobby and clunky metal blast doors. The entrances in Meier are terrible and I would hate to hall a sofa or HDTV up those stairwells or a U-Haul load up them.
http://miamioh.edu/hdrbs/home/living-at-miami/residence-halls/academic-quad/index.html
Andreasen could have sold Monterey Institute to someone besides Midlebury like Ohio State or Harvard. Administration support if there was a sale for Monterey Institute in California was really really poor almost like they favored Middlebury. Harvard could have offered 5+ million for the opportunity to buy MIIS. Wexner could have bought the entire University for Ohio State or Harvard and he gave 100 million to Ohio State. AIG needed a hundred billion dollar bailout… It’s just off the record for MIIS and under the table without a contract and possible collusion or bribery. It’s Monterey Institute and all AU offers for mediation is an e-mail? There is also the issue of the Ohio State Social Work dean getting fired over a T-Shirt?
Kind of disappointing that gender and ethnicity are the characteristics they released. How about the academic backgrounds (4 educators, 3 church administrators, 2 corporate CEOs, 1 athlete, etc.)? Or, some other characteristics that relate to how well they could do the job? If the board is emphasizing getting a “diversity” candidate rather than choosing based on merit, it will not bode well for Andrews.
What does Wilson have to do with the search committee? For every extreme liberal SDA who is fine with a lesbian AU president there is an extreme SDA conservative who would have a problem is one. We need a middle ground.
I agree, while the ethnic composition of the interest pool is nice to know and admirable, I’d like to know their fields of expertise (college administrators? church administrators? business execs?). Also I find it interesting that the top criteria the search committee is using, makes no reference to management and administrative ability. A lot of emphasis seems to be on cultural sensitivity and bridge building, albeit important, but first and foremost a university president must be the business and spiritual CEO of the institution.
I am reminded of US President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s allusion to leadership, stating that sometimes leaders (he used the word “Kings”)just need “to be there”. Eisenhower, though a military man, was not a top-down leader in the classic sense and in his own career as a 4/5 star general, was not known as a browbeating dictator. He was seen as a man who governed thoughtfully and by example, in a cooperative style of leadership. He went about things quietly; his staff supported his leadership, and the United States people elected him to two four-year terms. He is now regarded as one of the most effective US presidents of the 20th century, and a war hero too. I get a sense that Dr. Andreasen may have led Andrews in a manner consistent with the integrative ways of the quiet Dwight.
It’s instructive, as well, that Eisenhower had no civilian elected experience; his resumé primarily centers on his military achievements and the presidency of a top American university.
While possessing certain classic resumé items may be seen as absolutely essential in a candidate, there are indeed cases where a hero of a different kind trumps (no pun intended) the conventionally prepared candidates. It will be interesting, in these interesting times, to see whom the committee recommends as a follow-up to Dr. Andreasen’s lengthy terms of service in academia.