The Committee's Three Finalists

The Committee’s Three Finalists

Eli Jones III

Eli Jones III, one of three final candidates for permanent executive vice president and provost of Texas A&M. (Photo by Texas A&M )

Editor's note: The following information is copied exactly how it appears in the committee's recommendation report.

Strengths

Dr. Jones is a dynamic and experienced leader with a passion for Texas A&M. He embodies the culture of A&M and has a breadth of leadership experience. He is trusted among fellow colleagues and students. His knowledge and background as Dean at other universities provide him with a wealth of varied experience that will be beneficial for the provost position. In addition, his experience with fundraising and cultivating relationships will allow him to be a bridge between internal and external stakeholders. He understands the political landscape at Texas A&M University and will be able to navigate it skillfully.

Vision
Dr. Jones seeks to work collaboratively with leadership to be a champion of change management and increase support for all of the reorganization changes moving forward. He is devoted to creating transformational leaders and passionate about student success and providing support and resources to all students facing challenges. He would work to create a culture of inclusion throughout the TAMU community and among all its stakeholders.

Weaknesses
Dr. Jones was not specific in his answers to follow-up questions from his presentation. He envisions his service in the provost capacity as a calling, as opposed to a destination.

Overall
Dr. Eli Jones not only lives out the Aggie Core Values but embodies the culture of Texas A&M every day. He is an effective communicator and dynamic leader that can expertly navigate the recent institutional changes as well as the political landscape of an institution of this size. His focus on working collaboratively with faculty, staff and students is inspiring.

Andreas Polycarpou

Andreas Polycarpou, one of three final candidates for permanent executive vice president and provost of Texas A&M. (Photo by Texas A&M)

Editor's note: The following information is copied exactly how it appears in the committee's recommendation report.

Strengths
Dr. Polycarpou showed substantial interest in improving the student experience and experiential education for all students. He is not afraid to take on tough assignments and does so in an engaging and caring manner. Polycarpou shows a genuine concern for all stakeholders, faculty, staff and students and places a high value on shared governance. He is committed to getting the right people at the table to figure out where the issue lies. His understanding of the nuances of satellite campuses was unique among the candidates and led stakeholders to believe that he would be effective in bringing the academic units across all campuses together. Additionally, he is an excellent fundraiser and is competent in cultivating relationships with various stakeholders.

Vision
Dr. Polycarpou brings a holistic vision for student success and academics across campus that is rooted in his understanding of new pedagogical advances. Polycarpou is a transparent leader that values shared governance and collaborative problem solving as it pertains to furthering student success and experiential education.

Weaknesses
Dr. Polycarpou’s engineering background is a concern as it may draw backlash from stakeholders. The survey revealed mixed feedback from those he’s led in the past.

Overall
Dr. Andreas Polycarpou is a surprisingly successful candidate and his vision and excitement for the role is evident. The committee appreciates his vision of a holistic approach to student success and academics. He engendered excitement by not only recognizing but also discussing the role of distributed campuses and how through collaborative problem solving we can create a more synergistic environment with the flagship campus. His commitment to shared governance will be beneficial in helping navigate the institutional changes.

Alan Sams

Provost Alan Sams answers a question asked during a Faculty Senate meeting in Rudder Tower on Monday, Oct. 14, 2024. (Jenna Isbell/The Battalion) (Photo by Jenna Isbell)

Editor's note: The following information is copied exactly how it appears in the committee's recommendation report.

Strengths
Dr. Sams has an understanding of the new provost position and how his role as the Chief Academic Officer integrates with the new organizational structure. He is a proponent of professional development and has a breadth of experience as Dean at other universities.

Vision
Dr. Sams has a vision for integrating transformational education across all academic units at Texas A&M University. He also has a solid vision for addressing student debt and mental health for students.

Weaknesses
Dr. Sams does not portray himself as a dynamic leader nor does he portray significant enthusiasm for the job. His communication skills are viewed as marginal, which has resulted in a sense of distrust with stakeholders. Stakeholders noted that Dr. Sams seems more suited for special projects than Provost.

Overall
Dr. Sams will bring a solid understanding of the changes already made institutionally and has the dedication to try and make those changes work. His communication skills and perceived lack of enthusiasm for the job may hinder his ability to be successful in the role.

Final Recommendation

Editor's note: The following information is copied exactly how it appears in the committee's recommendation report.

By majority vote of the search committee, all three candidates were deemed acceptable for the position of Provost, Vice President for Academic Affairs and Chief Academic Officer of Texas A&M University. Two of them – Dr. Polycarpou and Dr. Jones – are being forwarded as leading candidates.

The committee members considered their discussions with the candidates, the general forums, and the specific meetings with stakeholder groups, along with the feedback sought through a university wide survey of students, staff, faculty and administrators, in their final decision.