THE ISSUE: The chancellor selection committee met Monday to begin the search for Chancellor Holden Thorp’s successor. One contentious factor the committee must consider is whether the new chancellor should come from outside the UNC-system or from within. Two editorial members present opposing views. Read Sanem Kabaca’s counter-viewpoint.
In seeking a new chancellor, the selection committee should give preference to a candidate who is already within the UNC system.
By picking someone familiar with the system, the committee would ensure the new chancellor can understand and navigate the intricacies of the position from day one. With the number of problems UNC is facing — from NCAA sanctions to budget cuts — this is clearly a benefit.
But what about a president from a different University? Surely he or she has experience running a college? True, but someone from the inside knows the particularities of this University much better and therefore could manage and advocate more effectively. The learning curve would be less steep.
But a chancellor is more than an advocate for the University.
A chancellor is both a representative and a driver of the culture and values of UNC. Who better to reflect UNC’s atmosphere and its students’ desires than someone with firsthand familiarity?
Some might say that the academic-athletic scandals that have plagued UNC for the last two years have been so disastrous to this University that a fresh, outside face is needed. This would show that the issue has been put to rest and that UNC is ready to start anew.
But this is unfair. Keeping someone from the office of chancellor just because he or she was at the University when the misdeeds occurred is unfair to the candidate because it implies guilt by association.
Furthermore, we can’t dismiss so much potential talent out-of-hand based on such a simplistic understanding of the situation.
Clearly, there are qualified individuals outside of UNC; no one can dispute that. But an inside pick means experience, familiarity and effectiveness.
