The Presidential Search Advisory Committee reviewed the criteria and procedure for reference checking presidential applicants at their meeting Tuesday, then held an executive session to review applications.

Jim Appleberry of Academic Search, the firm hired to aid the search process, presented a list of topics the committee earlier defined as important, like mission and leadership style, and possible questions for references. Appleberry emphasized that the questions listed are just suggestions and following the list exactly isn’t as important as getting the answers.

“You’ll find that some of the responses you get will cover more than one area,” he said, explaining that if a later question gets answered, it’s not necessary to ask it again.

The list also included questions not to ask, like those that relate to race, origin, sexual preference, religion, disability, age or marital status.

Search committee members will call the candidates to ask permission to check references, the first actual contact between the candidate and the committee. Appleberry said because of that, it is important to pay attention to how the candidate interacts with the committee and to answer any questions they have about Eastern.

“As you’re checking them out, they’re checking you out…remember what we’re looking for at this point is a match,” he said.

When calling the candidate or their references, the committee members must be careful to protect the candidates’ confidentiality, Appleberry said. If word gets out to the applicant’s current employer that he or she is seeking a job at Eastern, it could create problems for the candidate or cause him or her to withdraw from the search.

Talking to a variety of people when reference checking also helps, Appleberry said. He instructed the committee to find references who had been people the candidate reported to, some who reported to the candidate and some colleagues.

Each reference-checking team will probably conference call between three and five references, but Appleberry said to keep making calls until the team feels they know the candidate.

“You need to be confident that you know that candidate,” he said. “If there’s a follow-up question, be sure you answer it.”

The committee meets again Feb. 11 to narrow the list down to eight or 10 finalists who will be interviewed at the off-campus site in Indianapolis, Ind.

Then the committee will narrow the candidates down to three or five for on-campus interviews, and then the strengths and weaknesses of each of those will be forwarded to the Board of Trustees, which has the final decision.

The committee plans to hold on-campus interviews the week of March 18 and forward its recommendations by April 4.