xt78sf2m6m1k https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt78sf2m6m1k/data/mets.xml Lexington, Kentucky University of Kentucky 2010 minutes  English University of Kentucky Contact the Special Collections Research Center for information regarding rights and use of this collection. Minutes of the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees Minutes of the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees, 2010-11-14 text Minutes of the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees, 2010-11-14 2010 2012 true xt78sf2m6m1k section xt78sf2m6m1k Minutes of the retreat of the Board of Trustees of the University of Kentucky, Sunday,
November 14, 2010.

The Board of Trustees of the University of Kentucky began its retreat at 9:00 am.
(Lexington time) on Sunday, November 14, 2010 at Spindletop Hall, 3414 Iron Works Pike,
Lexington, Kentucky.

A. Members Present

Dr. Brockman welcomed the Board members and thanked them for attending the retreat.
He also thanked Spindletop Hall for the use of their fine facility and encouraged members of the
Board to use the facility. He asked Secretary of the Board Pamela T. May to call the roll.

The following members of the Board of Trustees were present: E. Britt Brockman,
(Chair), Sheila Brothers, Jo Hem Curris, William S. Farish, Jr., Oliver Keith Gannon, Pamela T.
May, Everett McCorvey, Billy Joe Miles, Terry Mobley, Sandy Bugie Patterson, Joe Peek,
Charles R. Sachatello, and Ryan Smith. Penelope Brown arrived at 9: 10 am. after the vote on
CR 1. Dermontti Dawson, Carol Martin “Bill” Gatton, Erwin Roberts, Frank Shoop, James W.
Stuckert, and Barbara Young were absent from the meeting. Ms. May said that a quorum was

The University administration was represented by General Counsel Barbara Jones, Vice
President for University Relations Tom Harris, and Executive Director for Public Relations and
Marketing Jay Blanton. Presidential Search Committee member Hollie Swanson, representatives
from Greenwood/Asher & Associates, Inc. Drs. Jan Greenwood and Betty Turner Asher, and
members of the media were also present.

B. Chairman’s Opening Remarks

Dr. Brockman reminded the Board that he announced at the October 12, 2010 Board
meeting that he planned to attend the Presidential Search Committee meetings and that he would
serve as an ex officio member of the Committee. In the interest of transparency, he thought it
would be best to present CR 1 to the Board for approval.

CR 1 is the recommendation that the Board approve the appointment of the Chair of the
Board of Trustees to serve as a nonvoting ex officio member of the Presidential Search
Committee. Mr. Mobley moved approval of CR 1. Ms. Brothers seconded the motion, and it
carried without dissent. (See CR 1 at the end of the Minutes.)

C. Presidential Search Firm Introduction

Dr. Brockman informed the Board that the Presidential Search Committee met on Friday,

November 12, 2010 and approved Greenwood/Asher & Associates, Inc. to be the search
consultants to work with the search committee in seeking the best candidate for the President of
the University of Kentucky. He introduced Drs. Jan Greenwood and Betty Turner Asher. He
reviewed their biographical information and noted that their firm recently assisted in searches

for the President of Kentucky’s Council on Postsecondary Education and the Commissioner of
the Kentucky School System.

Dr. Greenwood, president and partner, explained their role in the presidential search
process. She distributed a folder which contained informational materials that would be helpful
to the Board in understanding the process. She summarized searches from the late 1950s to the
mid 1970s, noting that there is good news and bad news. She said that there is a huge talent
pool looking for positions, and there are also others looking for opportunities.

She discussed confidentiality and the Code of Ethics adopted by the Association of
Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges and the American Code of Ethics. She told the
Board that candidates risk losing their jobs if information leaks out and gave examples of
candidates who had lost their positions because of leaks. She said that the process will drive the
pool, and publicity will affect the number of candidates. She noted that if the search
requirement if for more than one to be public, fewer women and people of color are reluctant to
be in the mix. If there is more than one candidate in the final pool, many will not participate.
She said that it is important to seek nominations. She asked the Board to send them names so
they can follow up with the individuals. The common goal of the Board and the consultant is
for the University of Kentucky to get the very best president. She then explained some of the
things that they would do, which included advertisement, recruiting, evaluation, interviewing,
criminal and civil checks, selection, and assistance with contract. It was noted that video
interviews are not satisfactory.

Dr. Asher, vice president and partner, said that the Board had already done a lot of work,
and they wanted to continue meeting with deans, stakeholders, etc. They would like to have
places to visit to have conversations with individuals around the state. They will meet with
Kentucky legislators or anyone the Board and Search Committee wishes.

She told the Board that they would be mindful of the work that Dr. Shelton has been
doing with them. They will announce to the world that the opportunity is open, and they will
have conversations with individuals at every land-grant university. They will talk to people
they know in their network to match what the University of Kentucky is looking for in a
candidate. They will try to do 360 degree reference checks on the candidates and will be
working with the search committee along the way.

Dr. Greenwood said the least reliable indicator for success is the interview, and the most
important is matching the candidate with the needs of the university. Many universities are
hesitant to hire someone who has not been a university president. The Board must decide their
appetite for risk. This is the way the market is working right now. Prominence with a public
research university is moving throughout higher education and becoming more intense now.

Dr. Greenwood mentioned compensation and said that the University’s compensation is
out of line with other large, public research institutions. She suggested that the Board contact
Ray Cotton, a compensation expert, and ask him to do a market salary study for the Board.


Dr. Greenwood reiterated that they would help the university’s attorney with the terms
and conditions of the contract. It is critically important for them to find the best candidate in the
world at this time for the University. She talked about the importance of the transition period
and interaction with faculty, staff, and students and said that on-boarding cannot be

There was a discussion regarding the final number of candidates to be brought to campus.
Dr. Greenwood said that in some instances, it is necessary to keep the candidate pool
confidential until one finalist is announced. The traditional model, however, has been to
publicly announce three to five finalists and bring them to campus for daylong visits with
campus constituencies. There is a possibility that some candidates may drop out if three to five
finalists are selected. The process chosen will impact the candidate pool, and this could lead to
a younger, less experienced pool of candidates.

Dr. Greenwood told the Board that their firm never goes away. They stay in touch over
the years. She said she looked forward to working with the Board.

Dr. Brockman thanked Drs. Greenwood and Asher for meeting with the Board and giving
their overview of the search process.

D. Presidential Transition Workshop

Dr. Brockman expressed pleasure in having Dr. Bill Shelton continue the Presidential
Transition Workshop. He informed the Board that Dr. Shelton is completing the workshop pro
bono and out of goodwill. The Board should reach decisions about the following items at the
end of the workshop:

Key challenges for the next president

What skills the next president needs

What kind of personality will succeed at UK

Dr. Shelton reviewed the tasks that the Board had already completed: appointed a search

committee, presented the charge to the committee, and had confidentiality statements signed by
the members of the Board. He reminded the Board that they basically finished the three search
phases, which are search, screen, and select, in the previous session. The purpose of this work
session is for the Board to focus on the differentials and what unique skills are needed for the
University of Kentucky. He had the Board work in groups to complete an exercise that consisted
of five questions:

1. Are you personally satisfied with the current position of the University within the

context of its mission and available resources?

2. Of the benchmark institutions identified in your Top 20 Business Plan, what do they

have (either perception or reality) that would move the University forward?

3. Dr. Lee Todd has been a very successful leader of the University. His credentials

were clearly aligned with UK’s needs during his tenure. Now the University enters a
new phase 7 what leadership skills will best match current needs and aspirations?

4. What are the differentials that you believe that do (or should) distinguish the
University from other universities?
5. If you named the top 5 most influential leaders in Kentucky, would the president be
included? If not, where should he/she rank?
Dr. Shelton then had the Board participate in small groups in another exercise to name
the most important attributes of the next president. The results of this exercise are as follows:
Politically Astute
Proven Fund-Raiser
Strategic Visionary
Student Focused
Proven Management Skills
Strong Communicator
Public Higher Education Experience
Creative/Innovative Leader
The Board discussed the results that came out of the groups, offering opinions, ideas, and
suggestions throughout the discussions.
Dr. Shelton led a discussion regarding differentials and the following items were listed:
Entrepreneurial/visionary (economy).
Medical complex and various colleges
Ability to lead complex institution
Top 20 Mandate
Extension Offices
The Board had a lengthy discussion about the differentials. Dr. Shelton said that the Top
20 mandate must be explained to the candidates. The candidates also need to know the long-
term goal at the Coldstream Research Campus. Athletics will be a big issue, and the medical
side is also a huge factor.
The Board continued with another exercise and identified attributes that were most
important to them. Below are the results of that exercise:
Politically Astute
Strong Communicator
Proven Management Skills
Strategic Visionary
Creative/Innovative Leader
Dr. Shelton said that the exercises will help the consulting firm know what is special
about the University and also know what the firm needs to incorporate in the search. The

exercises will also help the firm distinguish what sets the University apart from others in terms of
issues. A goal should be to identify the differences in candidates.

Dr. Shelton concluded the workshop by asking the Board members to reply to five
questions. Below are the questions and answers from the Board:

1. Does the Board want to go outside the University?

Answer: The Board wants to consider candidates inside and outside the University.

2. Does the Board want the candidate to have a terminal degree?

Answer: A terminal degree is preferred but not required.
3. Does the Board want a sitting president of a university?
Answer: The search should not be limited to sitting presidents.

4. Does the candidate have to have national prominence?

Answer: The candidate does not have to have name recognition.

5. Does the candidate have to have a Kentucky connection?

Answer: A Kentucky connection is irrelevant but knowledge about Kentucky is

Dr. Brockman expressed appreciation and thanks to Dr. Shelton for his excellent work.
Dr. Shelton was given a round of applause.

E. General Counsel Remarks

Ms. Jones talked about different phases of closed sessions and stated that all interviews
are closed. She reiterated her remarks that Dr. Brockman read at the October 24 workshop and
emphasize that their notes should be professional. If there should be litigation, everything is
subject to discovery. Board members must not disclose what happens in closed meetings.
Confidentiality is most important throughout the entire process.

F. Other Business

Dr. Brockman called attention to a Communication Plan that had been prepared by Mr.
Harris and Mr. Blanton.

Dr. Shelton advised the Board that only the chair of the Board and the chair of the
Presidential Search Committee should make comments from now until the end of the process.
The Public Relations staff should provide updates on the website and keep everyone informed
about the process. The Board must take the position of letting the Presidential Search Committee
do its work. It is critical to coordinate and keep the Public Relations staff informed.


Some concerns were expressed about the plan, and Dr. Brockman asked Mr. Harris to
work on the document. Ms. May asked that the website be current and keep the information

Ms. May noted that the expectations regarding the number of candidates brought to
campus needed to be managed. Dr. Brockman said that the charge to the Presidential Search
Committee is to bring three to five candidates unranked to the Board for their for their

G. Closing Remarks

Dr. Brockman thanked everyone for attending the retreat, and the retreat ended at 12:35

Respectfully submitted,

Pamela T. May

Secretary, Board of Trustees
(CR 1 which follows is an official part of the Minutes of the Board retreat.)

 Office of the President
November 14, 2010
Members, Board of Trustees:

Recommendation: that the Board of Trustees approve the appointment of the Chair of the Board
of Trustees to serve as a nonvoting ex officio member of the Presidential Search Committee.
Background: Governing Regulation (GR) VIII-l states that the Presidential Search Committee
shall consists of 13 members appointed by the Chair of the Board of Trustees, representing the
Board of Trustees, faculty, staff, students, and alumni. While GR VIII-I does not specify an ex
officio member of the Committee, it is the advice of the General Counsel of the University that
the Chair of the Board of Trustees may serve on all committees of the University as an ex-officio
member. By virtue of the office, it is the obligation of the Chair to attend meetings, be informed,
and understand all activities of the University and Board.
Action taken: Approved CI Disapproved CI Other