Dear Colleagues,
I am writing to share with you the results of the search for an Executive Director for SRI that we launched this summer. Immediately following the opening of a search for an Executive Director for SRI, the SRI Selection Committee including Sue Horan (co-chair), Ileana Liberatore (board representative and co-chair), Tina Muncy, Gillian Smith (board representative), Michael Soguero, and Tim Martindell went to work. They gathered, reviewed, and assessed applications from more than 30 candidates. Heidi Vosekas, SRI’s national office coordinator supported the work of the Committee and coordinated interview arrangements. In keeping with our timeline, the Committee presented to the board in September, three finalists for the position.
Following a review of the three finalists, the board selected two candidates to participate in a face-to-face interview with the board on October 9 and 10 in New York City.
Interview Process. The majority of the SRI board was able to participate in both interviews either in person or via Skype. The interviews were taped so board members who were unable to participate were able to view the interviews. The interviews consisted of three parts that included a presentation by each candidate, responses to a set of questions posed by various board members, and time for the candidates to ask questions of board members. Immediately following each interview board members met to share their initial reflections.
In addition to the group interview, Ileana, as co-chair of the Selection Committee, and Heidi, in her role as national office coordinator, met with each candidate immediately before the interview to answer questions about the process and share additional information related to SRI. I met with each candidate following their interviews to respond to any additional questions and to discuss the position in more detail. There was also an opportunity for less formal interactions between the board and the candidates when we all dined together following the interviews.
Decision. Following the interviews, the board made use of multiple reflection and assessment tools to consider each of the candidates. On October 26, during a called board meeting, the board decided unanimously not to offer the position to either candidate. The board then charged Ileana and me to develop a proposal for re-opening the search.
While we were hoping that we would find the right candidate, we made the difficult decision not to pick one of the good candidates who applied but to take the courageous step to re-open the search and seek the exactly right candidate.
Next Steps. Our decision does not reflect any shortcoming in the incredible work of the Selection Committee or on the qualifications of the candidates. Rather our decision was based more on the lack of close alignment between the needs of the organization and the candidates.
Oftentimes, luck and timing play significant roles in the outcome of a search such as this one. However, we also know that there are actions we can take to ensure a positive outcome of the reopened search. Since we now have the processes, announcements, interview questions, scoring guides, and decision making processes in place, along with many of the logistical supports, we can focus our attention on refining the position description, identifying how to better focus advertisement of the position so that we can get the word out to a broader audience, and tightening our time-frame.
This next phase of the search will build on the solid foundational work that the Selection Committee and subsequently, the board did on behalf of SRI. We are still in the process of finalizing the specific details for the re-opened search. As soon as those plans are finalized we will share them with you.
With deep appreciation,
Frances Hensley
Transitional Director
President of the Board
