We're in the midst of a candidate search, which is my first time having any real say in the process from this end. I served on committees as a grad representative and helped in the hiring for a couple of visiting positions, but this feels markedly different. Sitting here in the midst of it, I'm realizing there are a few things that I look for in the job search and some things I'm looking for in candidates.
On the job search side, the big thing I'm realizing is that I want what I perceive to be fairness to candidates. I want them to go through roughly the same experiences in roughly the same order. For example. I
mentioned in a previous post that I had some problems with the search committee's view of a teaching demonstration (which, by implication, means I also had some problems with the teaching demonstration). And to their credit, the candidate did exactly what I'd wanted - in the interview, which came after the teaching demonstration, the first thing they mentioned was the lecture and what their intention was. They also copped to what got away from them, and how they'd change things. It didn't completely dispel my doubts, but it certainly lessened them (and I realize some people think this is probably a no-no, but I, at least, would like to see it). But at least one of our later candidates won't get that chance as the teaching demonstration is the last thing they're doing.
With teaching schedules being what they are, and the strange nature of arranging candidate visits being what they are, getting that level of order can be a problem. But I would prefer it because I'll admit that I've got a series of questions that I want answered from every candidate. Obviously, I want to know how they're going to address some things that I know matter to me, but it is also because I want as much of a chance to see how they compare to each other.
I'd also like to see a bit more formality on the side of the interviewer. I'm realizing how little I recall about my own interview here as we go through this process. But I'm finding myself frustrated with the department as there is a hesitancy about planning little details. For example, there seems to be a steadfast refusal to reserve a room for the candidate interviews, which leaves us wandering, looking for an available room (and often that room winds up being a disheveled class room). I've mentioned to the search chair that I think leaving this to chance makes us look disorganized (which, evidently, we are). I've done job interviews before where the committee didn't even get me an itinerary until I was checking into a hotel, and that level of disorganization (and I'll also say lack of consideration) made me immediately lose a lot of interest in the position.
One other way this has expressed itself in our search is where the candidates are doing their presentations. Now it seems to me that we've written a very well-defined job description, and so we'd not only want to see a teaching demonstration that addresses those things, but that we'd make sure that such a lecture was being put into classes where they'd make the most sense. Instead, we've got candidates teaching to a wide variety of classes that may or may not relate to the area for this hire at all. Again I tried to express this to the search chair - and in this case, I was met with some interesting considerations that (while I don't agree with) I can at least see the point of. But I do wonder how it is being perceived by the job candidates.
Where I'm surprised though is in the margins of what I'm looking for in a candidate. Part of what I try to do with questioning candidates is to see how much of themselves they let come out. I don't trust perfect fits to everything, so anytime I see someone who loves everything we're doing, who'd suggest nothing different, who finds the university perfect, loves the area, wants the courses, etc. I'm immediately suspicious. I want a colleague who will push me (and some of those other things) a bit.
All the usual things apply, in addition. I want a candidate with ideas, who can convey them to a variety of people, and who relates well with us. Too much reserve on the part of a candidate seems dangerous to me because I, like probably every person out there, thinks I'm easy to get along with. And as a department goes, I can guarantee we're laid back. That part probably isn't surprising. But I'm also realizing that I'm looking for youth with this position, which I hadn't recognized previously.
Maybe that isn't so surprising either, but I think the reasons are worth noting. I'm currently the youngest person (by quite a margin) in the department. I'm also the newest hire. One of the things I've noticed - subtly and unintentionally - with my colleagues so far in this process is that when the candidate is their age, I'm still the kid of the department even though I advise more students, teach a wider range of classes, etc. than the rest. Even the potential hire gets into the act. I don't mean to imply that I want someone to have to pay their dues and do lots of work and toady to me. I just mean that I don't intend to pay extra dues. There is, to me at least, a palpable sense of a not-quite-Old Boys network here, and I don't feel any need to add to that with our hire. Nor do I want one more "elder to respect" in this process.
