University of Virginia Library

The Best Man

We are somewhat distressed to discover
that the student and faculty committees
assigned the task of recommending a
replacement for retiring President Edgar F.
Shannon Jr. seem to have been placed under
a nearly impossible deadline in which to
complete their work. A number of
committee members have indicated to us
that a certain pressure exists such that they
must review some 75-150 resumes and
present their lists of recommended and
unsatisfactory candidates to the Board of
Visitors within the ridiculously short
time period of two weeks. They have been
informed that whoever the eventual nominee
might be, he must have ample time to
disassociate himself from his present
occupation, and thus will most likely be
chosen sometime this summer . . . some
12-15 months before Mr. Shannon has
indicated he will be ready to step down.

This frightens us. First of all, we were
under the impression that the student and
faculty committees were to be given an
"adequate" amount of time to deliberate on
the criteria for selection and on the
qualifications of the list of candidates to be
considered for this office – an "adequate"
amount of time presumably meant, we
thought, some time into the next school
year. That would still give the person
selected over six months to prepare himself
for the job.

This impending "rush job" of course
leads us to wonder, just as one member of
the student committee speculated, if perhaps
the Board has not already made a decision
and is now merely "biding time" in
anticipation of what the committees choices
might ultimately be. We certainly hope not,
since as we emphasized in last Friday's
editorial, the choice of Mr. Shannon's
successor must be one in which we can all
concur that we had some serious input, if
not one that we all agreed upon together.

It is the students and faculty with whom
the new president must deal mostly and
most often. Thus, it is imperative that he be
at the top of their lists of prospective
nominees. If not, he will undoubtedly be
faced with an uphill battle from the very
start in having to prove himself to a very
wary and distraught group of people.
Moreover, the disgust, frustration and
possible fury of these two groups towards
the Board's blatant disregard of that input
might very well be unconsciously and
unintentionally turned upon the new
president himself.

Such a result, of course, would be
unfortunate. Nevertheless, it can be avoided
if proper care is taken to insure against the
"mistake" which such haste might very well
bring about. The presidency of a university,
and this University in particular, is a position
which in many ways is central to the future
and even survival of many ideals, traditions
and goals of this institution. Certainly, this
post is not one which can be handled by just
anyone.

Rather, the president of the University,
in having to deal fairly and impartially with
– as well as be a spokesman for – all
elements of the University community, must
be a person of the utmost understanding,
character and respect.

Furthermore, he must be chosen on the
basis of one over-riding criteria – that is his
stature as a leader, not as someone who has
proven himself solely through his success on
a cliquish cocktail circuit, who parts his hair
in the right place or has a distinctive
southern drawl. Rather he must have a real
affinity for students – all students, not just
a select few – for all faculty members, not
just the cocktail bunch, and as equally for
the employees of this University as for its
patrons.

When you start taking all these things
into consideration the list of possibilities
gets shorter and shorter, and the most
distinctive names and instinctive choices
might very well be those that have filtered to
the bottom of the list. Moreover, the
person ultimately selected may also very
well be the one and only one who fits this
total billing.

Hence, the responsibility for finding the
right person to fit these criteria is by no
means an easy task and should not be
regarded lightly. Once again we reiterate that
to hastily reward someone for years of
quietly dedicated service, or to recognize
that person who has lobbied the most for
the job, to sense a compulsion to select the
most highly visible candidate or, on the
other hand, to discount someone because of
ideological, institutional or doctrinal
affiliation would be foolish.

The fate of this University in the coming
years will be to a very great extent in the
hands of one man. We can hardly stress
enough the absolute necessity that the
Board's choice be unequivocally the best
man for the job.