The University of Hawaii Board of Regents has come under scrutiny for its contract with an executive search firm, WittKieffer, which includes a “special condition” giving the firm control of candidate information. This arrangement has raised concerns about transparency, as the firm presented reports and updates orally, leaving no documentation of its work. The contract also shields candidate information from public view, raising questions about accountability and public access to information.
Despite being paid at least $148,000 under the contract, WittKieffer’s work has been called into question, as there is no documentation of the firm fulfilling specific tasks outlined in the contract. This lack of transparency has led to criticism from experts in the field, who argue that the university should have access to all information gathered during the search for a new president, including any potential red flags that may have been uncovered.
The contract also departs from previous agreements between the University of Hawaii and WittKieffer, granting the firm ownership of candidate information, a departure from past practices. This has implications for future hires made by the university and raises concerns about the ability to assess the thoroughness of the search process.
In the end, the lack of transparency and accountability in the hiring of Wendy Hensel as UH’s next president has led to calls for reform in Hawaii’s public record laws to prevent public agencies from blocking access to information by outsourcing to private contractors. The controversy surrounding Hensel’s selection highlights the need for increased oversight and accountability in the hiring process for public positions.
Source
Photo credit www.civilbeat.org