Recently, I had an opportunity to speak with the chair of the presidential search committee at a U.S. university. He is a prominent leader in the local business community and chairs a presidential search committee composed of approximately ten members from both inside and outside the university. In his view, the most important qualification for a university president is strong executive and managerial ability.

The selection process begins about a year before the appointment of the next president. The committee’s work starts by identifying more than one hundred individuals from across the United States and around the world who may be suitable candidates for the position. From this pool, the committee meets frequently to narrow down the list of prospects. Eventually, the list is reduced to about ten candidates, each of whom is interviewed individually.

Before the interviews take place, the committee conducts extensive due diligence, including reputation checks, background and credit investigations, and a thorough review of any potential academic misconduct. For the finalists, there may be several rounds of interviews, and in some cases informal meetings or dinners are also arranged. Ultimately, the university selected a female candidate from outside the institution to serve as its next president.

While the American system is not without its own shortcomings, I do not believe that the current Japanese system is capable of consistently selecting university presidents on the basis of their managerial competence. In practice, presidents are almost always selected from within the university itself. Furthermore, as is only natural in any system of internal politics, candidates who do not represent one of the university’s larger faculties often face significant disadvantages, regardless of how capable they may be as organizational leaders. The current method of presidential selection is therefore deeply flawed in several respects.

Under Japan’s National University Corporation Act, the President Selection and Supervisory Council has the authority to select the final candidate for a university president. Therefore, I do believe that the Council should be allowed to work more actively as a genuine search committee, identifying and evaluating outstanding candidates from both within and outside the university. Such a process should place far greater emphasis on managerial ability and comprehensive assessment of each candidate’s qualifications.

In my view, the time and resources required for such a search should not be regarded merely as a cost or a burden. On the contrary, they represent one of the most efficient and valuable investments a university can make in its future.