Definition of a committee - “Doing the unnecessary by the unwilling for the unfit.” .... John Gagliardi
About this time of year, you might be in a position where you are considering interviewing for a coaching position. I would encourage you to
find out who is involved in the hiring process.
From my previous experience, the makeup of the committee is hard to understand. I have scratched my head at times trying to figure out why
some people are positioned on a committee to hire a head basketball coach.
In some hiring situations an administrator, such as the Principal, may be
part of the committee. I don't mean to be overly critical, but I have seen
instances in which the administrator on the hiring committee has no coaching experience and has demonstrated no interest in basketball. Can't help but ask why are they part of the process?
Another common member of a hiring committee is the inclusion of a school board member. A logical question to ask is the board member qualified to determine who the best candidate will be? Do they have the background
to help determine who the best candidate is? Do they have a hidden agenda?
What role will the Athletic Director play in the process? Is their ANY reason
he should recuse himself from the hiring process? Hopefully he/she has
the degree of character to admit they may not be able to be totally impartial and will recuse themself if necessary. In my opinion, most often
the most qualified member of the hiring committee is the Athletic Director.
If he is not qualified to be a part of the hiring process, the district has the
wrong person in a critical position.
You NEED to know what the make up of the hiring committee will be. Then you need to know what the process will be? Often some type of rubric style process will be a part of the process since all candidates must be asked
the same questions. What aspects of the process are most important?
If the interview process is considered to be the most significant aspect of the hiring process? I have issues with that. Some people can sell ice cubes to Eskimos in 20-30 minutes but it does NOT mean they can coach.
How much importance is placed on the following by the interview committee?
A) Ability to teach .... more than just x's & o's
B) Demonstrated organizational ability .... practice plans, etc.
C) Emotional stability .... balance
D) Prior experience .... references
E) Ethical behavior .... character
F) Program plan .... a plan to have a program not just a team
As you can guess by now, I am not a big fan of committees. I was involved in a number of hiring committees and I found them to be rather superficial and these were committees looking to hire administrators and teachers. I
found, in my opinion, far too much emphasis on the interview process and not enough on demonstrated job performance.
In terms of hiring coaches, my experience has been that most hiring committees consist of several people who know basically nothing about
coaching. They do not know what the position entails in terms of time, effort, and dedication.
At the beginning of this blog, I stated a definition of a committee that came from the winningest college football coach of all time. I tend to agree with
his definition.
Now it is very easy to be critical of the process without stating any suggestions about how the process could be improved. It is very difficult
to remove those on the committee who may be biased or prejudicial. If
you believe all members of a committee are unbiased, I think you are not
being honest with yourself. You would hope that members of a committee
who are biased would recuse themselves, but let's face it, that does not
often happen.
My suggestion about improving the process involves more time and effort
but IF this hire is important then you should be willing to do so. Interview
several people who have worked with each candidate. Interview the top
2 or 3 candidates at least twice. Make sure you have a committee that
is small enough in size to be efficient. The Athletic Director should be allowed to make the final decision based on input from other members
of the committee. If anyone should be capable of understanding the qualities necessary to be a coach, it should be the A.D. If he is not capable,
then why is he allowed to evaluate coaches already under his direction?
If you don't consider coaching to be an important part of a student's educational experience, then I guess it doesn't matter who is hired. If the
primary motivation of the district is to fill a position, then the method used
isn't critical. But if you believe a coach can make a difference in the lives
of the people under their direction, don't you want the best you can find?
Comments