The University of Virginia’s Special Committee on the Nomination of a President has provided an update on the committee’s work, as well as a detailed report from Isaacson, Miller, the executive search firm assisting the University with the process.
The update was provided to the UVA Faculty Senate on Friday following the conclusion of the first round of interviews with candidates to be the University’s 10th president. Those interviews, held this week, were conducted in private to protect the confidentiality of the individuals who have stepped forward for the position, many of whom are currently serving in leadership roles at other institutions.
While the first round of interviews is complete, the committee has additional steps to take before narrowing the candidate pool and selecting finalists to present to the Board of Visitors.
According to the briefing from Isaacson, Miller, the search process is following a classic timeline similar to many other presidential searches, including the last two conducted at UVA. Both the committee statement and the Isaacson, Miller report remark on the significant interest and impressive caliber of candidates for the position. Isaacson, Miller has also observed how competitive the environment is for high-quality candidates. Isaacson, Miller attributed the high level of interest to the University’s strong reputation, high academic standards and position of national leadership at a unique moment.
The full statement from the special committee and the report from Isaacson, Miller, are included below.
A statement from the Special Committee on the Nomination of a President
We serve as the special committee responsible for the University’s presidential search, and we want to speak directly to the community at this pivotal moment. We have just completed the first round of interviews with an extraordinarily impressive group. Their experience, vision, and commitment to higher education give us tremendous optimism. However, we are not yet at the point of selecting finalists. To responsibly narrow this exceptional pool, we must conduct additional due diligence, hold further interviews, and continue our internal deliberations.
We know there is concern across Grounds about trust and transparency in the process. While we understand these concerns, a successful presidential search must uphold strict confidentiality. The strongest candidates – almost all of whom currently hold prominent leadership roles at major universities or institutions – will only participate if their privacy is fully protected. Without that confidentiality, the University would lose access to the caliber of candidates our community deserves.
As a committee, we want to state unequivocally: This search has been conducted with rigor, fairness, and integrity thus far. We would not lend our names or our service to a process that failed to meet those standards. Our consultant, John Isaacson – who also led the search that brought President Ryan to UVA – has repeatedly affirmed that both our process and our timeline are entirely typical for a presidential search of this scale and caliber.
We genuinely wish we could share the candidate pool with the community. If we could, we are confident you would share our excitement about the individuals we have met and the possibilities they represent for UVA’s future. We care deeply about the University of Virginia, and we remain unwavering in our belief that its next chapter can be one of strength, purpose, and renewed trust.
A report to the Faculty Senate from Isaacson, Miller
Isaacson, Miller is honored to support the Special Committee in UVA’s presidential search.
The Special Committee, by design, includes students, faculty, staff, alumni, current trustees and former trustees from prior administrations. It is considerably larger, also by design, than most presidential search committees. Over the last few decades, we have only seen one or two that are larger.
When committees launch presidential searches, they almost always reach out broadly to their university constituencies. At UVA, in this demanding time, the Special Committee created over 40 different listening sessions, engaging every constituency in the UVA community. That is consistent with classical search practice, though rarely at this scale. The number of listening sessions exceeded most presidential selection processes. As part of our collective learning, we, at the firm, with the Committee’s guidance, created a survey sent broadly to UVA faculty, staff, students, and alumni, seeking advice and nominations. We received just over 1,300 responses, which produced clear themes to guide the Special Committee and a helpful list of nominations. The Special Committee’s collective effort to listen and learn led directly to the position profile, which is a careful statement of UVA’s virtues and of the hard work a new president should undertake on behalf of the University.
As is the norm for a presidential search for a major research university, we, at the firm, did foundational research to create a prospective candidate list of talented leaders, particularly those in higher education, focusing on those with the administrative experiences to lead an institution of UVA’s scale and prestige. This included leading presidents, provosts, and deans with special attention to identifying those with a connection, in their service or their education, to UVA wherever possible. The Special Committee was keen to identify candidates who demonstrate a deep appreciation for the University’s founding mission, longstanding values, and continued excellence. It has been a meticulous effort that sought out talent broadly across the country. This is a critical moment in higher education. At the start of the search, we were unsure how candidates would respond to the opportunity. We were pleased to learn that the University’s sterling reputation, outstanding quality of education and research activities, and national leadership position at an important time in higher education made the position very appealing in spite of challenges facing the sector at large. Candidate outreach yielded an extremely strong pool of highly qualified candidates.
UVA has done exceptionally well. It has been well led. It has created an extraordinary student experience, which is widely recognized. It attracts top students across its outstanding undergraduate, graduate, and professional programs. It has increasingly invested in its research and scholarly mission and attracted eminent scholars at the forefronts of their fields. The institution’s finances have been carefully managed, placing UVA in a stronger position than most to invest in its future. The medical center is also thriving and excellently positioned for additional opportunities in research, education, and clinical care delivery. The candidates have responded to the existing strengths and aspirations for UVA’s future – to cement its place as one of the absolute best universities in the world. Candidates have recognized this potential, and we have received a much stronger response than we might have anticipated.
The Special Committee has done its work on a classic search timeline, in line with most university presidential searches, including the prior two UVA presidential searches. The members of the Special Committee have many different perspectives, but they have listened carefully to the community, have acquired a unified vision of the work ahead, and have engaged seriously and diligently with evaluating potential candidate profiles and, then, with the candidates themselves. Over the last three months, the Committee has engaged in a meticulous and comprehensive effort to recruit, screen, and vet hundreds of potential candidates. The evaluation has been rigorous and thorough, in accordance with best search practices and guided by the priorities expressed by their colleagues in the UVA community. The seriousness of purpose and investment of time and energy have been intense. We are grateful to serve them. They have embraced their duties and have worked hard, collectively, to weigh the experience and talent of a group of impressive academic leaders.
The work continues. The Special Committee, with our help, has been careful to take the appropriate time necessary to evaluate and vet an exceptional group of candidates who could advance the best interests of the University of Virginia. Selection of the right leader is a crucial decision, and the Committee is prudently continuing its due diligence.
We offer our thanks to the Committee for the privilege of joining them in this search. The University of Virginia is an inspiration.
