The Effective Presidents Emeriti

I’ve seen presidents emeriti deeply resent not being asked for more advice or resentful of the changes their successor made. I’ve also seen a few retired presidents undermine their successors with excess presence on or engagement with campus in a way that made it more difficult for their successors to shine. Worse yet, I’ve witnessed how a shrug from president emeritus (e.g. “I don’t know about the new president’s views because she/he seldom contacts me” or “they didn’t talk to me before they did that”) can erode confidence in a new president.

My advice to presidents emeriti unhappy with their relationship with their successor is to grow up and act your age. It is not about you—it is about the mission of the institution you loved and tended.

Most people would say that the role of presidents emeriti is whatever their successors define it to be. That recommendation is too simplistic. Out of respect, new presidents usually hesitate to define a role for their predecessor and even ask that person to define their own role. But is it common for new presidents, within their first year, to be concerned about the long shadow of the former president. The most important role of a departing president is to set their successors up for success. Once they gain emeritus status, it is to support their successor even as the successor defines a new path for the institution.

When I announced my retirement as president of Augustana College, the chair of the board gave me some challenging advice: a big part of my legacy would be judged by whether my successor was successful. Though I took that challenge to heart, I could find little good counsel on what makes an effective departing president and president emeritus. Most recently retired presidents I talked to have struggled to define their role.

A soon-to-retire president can help set a new president up for success from the beginning by helping the board leadership establish an effective search process. Presidential search processes are often controversial in our process-driven institutions, particularly around who has what say and how open the search is. It is important that the president endorse the search process as a reasonable one, even if it is not entirely public to protect the confidentiality of the candidates.

That process, of course, should respect shared governance, something that many boards struggle to understand. Though an increasing number of presidential searches, particularly at private institutions, are not open searches—the finalists are not publicly announced—faculty members should have some voice in the process, including membership on the search committee and the ability of elected faculty leaders to interview finalists after signing nondisclosure agreements

At the same time, the departing president should recognize that their role in a presidential search process is limited and largely behind the scenes. In my case, I participated in a panel at a board retreat with the board chair and a board member who had experience in presidential transition and shared what had worked best for me when I became the new president. I also had breakfast with each of the finalists to promote the college and answer any questions they had about the presidency. Afterward, the board chair asked if there were any red flags about the finalists. There were not.

I was a controversial choice when I was appointed in 2003, because I was a lawyer and not a member of the sponsoring denomination. The full-throated support of my predecessor, both of the process and my credentials, was the most valuable gift of many that my predecessor, Tom Tredway, gave me.

Exiting presidents should also remind the board of the need to support a new president, not overmanage them and allow the new president to get to know the community before announcing new initiatives. I reminded my board that it took me a number of years to ramp up to the skills and relationships that I enjoyed by the time I retired. I reminded the trustees that I made mistakes and it was through board support that I was successful. And I reminded them that I had implemented all my good ideas, which was why we now needed a new president with fresh ones.

It is important to develop a plan for a handover. I’ve known outgoing presidents who have had a one-hour handoff meeting with a new president and others who have become a full-time, on-campus adviser for a year. I believe the best approach is somewhere in between but much closer to a relatively short handoff—and that if a strong senior team is in place, it should manage the bulk of the transition. The focus of the president’s handoff should be what they alone know about: relations with the board, the senior team and the faculty. It is also helpful for outgoing presidents to candidly assess their own shortcomings and those of particular programs at the institution, so that new presidents can present themselves as thoughtful counterweights.

As a general rule, the outgoing president’s engagement with the campus should be in deference to the wishes of the new president. A president emeritus should carefully determine what the new president’s true wishes are—beyond their assurance that, as a former president, they are “always welcome on the campus.” A rule of thumb is that the less time that former presidents spend at the institution conversing with members of the community during the first months the better. Other than attending the new president’s inauguration and teaching my J-term class, I stayed off the Augustana campus for a year after I retired. I minimized any contact with trustees and my senior team, so as to avoid inevitable conversations about the new president.

Final Gifts

All this said, I have found it somewhat challenging to be a president emeritus. Going from a center of attention to sitting on the sidelines was more of an adjustment than I expected. I retired at age 67 and still felt I had a lot to give higher education. I re-engaged with Capital University as a board member (where I had served as law school dean for nine years) as well as with the University of Montana, in Missoula, where I’ve retired. I also do some consulting on governance issues with other small colleges. Doing so has allowed me to use my skills without being underfoot at Augustana.

One president emeritus joked with me that the major role of emeriti is to go to funerals and write letters of recommendation for former colleagues. But it should be more, for the well-being of their institutions and themselves. Particularly after the first year away, the former president, in consultation with the new president, should define an ongoing role they can play. In my case, that role is part-time teaching (staying out of faculty governance and gossip) and occasionally attending events where I continue to be the best advocate for the institution that I can be. My endorsement of the mission of the institution, the need for the institution’s continual improvement, the difficulty of the job of the president and the good work of my successor are the final gifts I will give to Augustana.

Most of all, it is important for a retired president to adopt the mindset of a selfless president emeritus/a. That includes humility, a willingness to support change, an understanding that you left the president with a strong team that has primary responsibility for the transition and the grace to accept a smaller but important role from the sidelines.

On the first anniversary of the appointment of my successor, Andrea Talentino, I sent her a message congratulating her for a good first year, observing that in these challenging times her work is more difficult than mine. She promptly replied, thanking me for the strong institution and administrative team I left her with, as well as welcoming me back to campus to attend an event here and there. The exchange of emails evidenced our mutual respect: her respect of my legacy and my respect for her efforts to build an even better legacy of her own. What more could a president emeritus want?