Rawpixel.com / Shutterstock
As interim leaders become more numerous and influential on campuses, we are now regularly asked how to assess their effectiveness. In our experience, there are multiple indicators to use, and in the following, we provide four reliable ways to determine whether an interim is serving effectively:
1. Readiness: Effective interims possess the prior related experience to succeed in new situations, and thus do not need special orientations or training aside from basic informational items and an introduction to the community. This contrasts with promoting an internal dean or vice president who has never served as an interim before. John Fraire has served as an interim at two institutions and is currently appointed as an interim vice president of student affairs. In his view, the prior relevant experience and readiness of an interim administrator is potentially the most important element in their eventual success. As he explains, “When an institution secures an outside interim, there is an expectation to get things done immediately. Often, the conditions of the interim assignment mean that there is little time, if any, for traditional onboarding. Thus, a successful interim must have prior experience to know what is expected of a leader in that position and an ability to hit the ground running. That is, a successful interim will not be blindsided by ‘new’ surprises. The institution expects that the outside interim will arrive with the confidence to say, ‘We can do this, no problem.'”
2. Accountability: Leadership teams expect that interims will immediately begin implementing the institution’s basic job description for their position, but effective interim leadership encompasses something beyond the position description and merely “keeping the trains running.” Rather, effective interim leadership includes expanded accountability for multiple work objectives. An experienced interim administrator can accomplish tasks that move the college or university forward in strategic ways beyond and outside the job description. George Sims, recently served in his first interim placement as the provost of a medium-sized, midwestern university, and he offers this view of what the university immediately expected of him: “One of my assignments was to update the institution’s strategic plan into a ‘more relevant, actionable plan.’ Within a few weeks, I recognized that although the institution’s strategic plan reflected the aspirations of the campus community, it was not aligned with the institution’s actual strategic priorities. When I asked, most of the institution’s leaders acknowledged this was true. Having seen similar patterns in my previous service, I was able to name the disconnect that was undermining the strategic plan in a way that the campus community would accept and begin conversations that led to more fruitful strategic planning.”
3. Consulting Value: Successful interims also serve increasingly as consultants during their time on campuses. In fact, many presidents and trustees now call for this form of engagement at their institutions. The scope of activities can include participating in, even chairing, the search for the permanent successor, completing summaries of strengths and weaknesses for key operational areas, or coordinating feasibility studies and accreditation reports for new degree programs. In her current interim assignment, Lynne Rosansky is focusing on several projects more as an institutional consultant than an interim administrator. As she describes it, “With every interim assignment, I consider myself to be an institutional consultant. The role of consultant is to see processes and procedures from 50,000 feet in an objective and comparative way. This means envisioning change and improvements without the myopia of internal politics or organizational history.”
4. Seasoned Perspective: Experienced interims bring a depth of understanding and candor to their campuses. Realizing that their leadership is time-limited and will not segue into the permanent position, experienced interims remain responsible to complete their primary assignments while preparing each operational area for a smooth transition. To achieve this, the interim is typically responsible for developing a capstone report that assesses their own work and outlines the opening steps necessary for the successor to consider. Reflecting on his recent assignment, Interim Vice President for Student Affairs and Enrollment Management, Kurt Keppler observed that “As someone with over 20 years’ experience across three institutions, this placement was a unique opportunity as I knew I would not be pursuing the position permanently, and therefore could focus my efforts on institutional strategic goals with an emphasis on setting a framework for future directions for the successful candidate.”
Whether interim leaders are effective in their assignments depends on myriad factors, including the expectations of the supervisor, the institutional context of the interim’s service, and the nature of the position. In this article, we provide a generalizable, qualitative set of rubrics that institutions might utilize to measure the effectiveness of an interim leader and reliably assess whether that individual “met the moment.” Yet, even these rubrics may not always reveal the full extent of an interim’s success, nor should presidents and trustees expect that the assessments of different institutional stakeholders will always converge.
