Recently, I got home from a run on a gloriously crisp, bright winter day and went to the backyard to get some firewood to take into the house. When I say backyard, I should say the lakeside of the property where my grandfather built a cottage on Anchor Bay/ Lake St. Clair in Chesterfield Township and where I have been spending time when I’m not at my mom’s house in Warren.
As I walked out to the woodpile, I saw two people, perhaps a dad and his son, on the ice with hockey sticks, skating by with the family dog. I grabbed my phone to take a movie of it; while it’s common to see fishing shanties, this was the first time I’ve ever seen people actually skate on the lake. As I raised my phone to record the scene, the boy and his dog shot out together in a race to see which one of them could go the fastest. It reminded me of all that was good about my childhood (I played a lot of youth sports, including ice hockey in high school) and how good it feels to give all you have to accomplish something, especially when you’re doing something you love.
Having said all that, you might ask what this has to do with selecting Peter Cunningham as the sixth executive director of the State Bar of Michigan.
First, I am completely confident that Peter Cunningham will put his head down and work hard with integrity, loyalty, and dedication to the State Bar of Michigan and its members. He will serve the legal profession with the same love and determination as that boy and his dog setting off on their race. Cunningham begins his new role starting March 1, so I will wait to share more about him.
The second connection, and what I really want to share with you now, is just how much commitment, energy, and thoughtfulness the Executive Director Search Committee gave in executing the search process that culminated with the recommendation to hire Peter Cunningham. Committee members knew that taking on the challenge of selecting our next executive director to step in after Janet Welch’s retirement was not going to be easy. The committee began its work in April and put forth the time and effort necessary to take methodical strides forward and do our best to fairly evaluate each candidate. The committee maintained a disciplined commitment to the hiring process that was established and kept its unwavering focus on the finish line—identifying the candidate best suited to be our next executive director.
The Executive Director Search Committee was composed of past SBM presidents Robert Buchanan, Jennifer Greico, Lori Buiteweg, Julie Fershtman, and Ronald Keefe, along with past Representative Assembly Chair Chelsea Rebeck, current Young Lawyers Section Chair Kristina Bilowus, and current Board of Commissioners members including myself, President-Elect James Heath, and commissioner Erika Bryant.
We determined in the initial stages of the search that, in addition to having the support of SBM executive coordinator Margaret Bossenbery, it would be beneficial to have some consulting assistance. Our chosen consultant, Elizabeth Derrico, came to us with significant expertise in her field — she began her career in bar association work, serving with the New York State Bar as communications director for 10 years and associate executive director for another three years. Derrico expanded the scope of her work on a national scale as an associate director with the American Bar Association Division of Bar Services for nearly two decades. Since 2018, she has focused her energy on providing private consulting services for bar associations.
With Derrico’s help, the search committee understood that the first step of the process was creating a job description. The committee wanted very much to incorporate into the description those attributes and skills our stakeholders thought would be essential and important for our new executive director to have. To find this out, we polled members of the Representative Assembly, the Board of Commissioners, our section and committee chairs, past presidents, and SBM staff to gather the requisite feedback.
Once this stakeholder feedback was available, the search committee reviewed the information, discussed and approved the job description, and set out to recruit a pool of diverse, high-quality candidates. The job description was posted on the SBM website and with the Michigan Society of Association Executives, the ABA Division for Bar Services Job Announcement Board, Indeed, LinkedIn, and the National Black MBA Association. Committee members also used their personal networks to encourage interested and qualified candidates to apply.
The application period closed, and more than 50 candidates expressed interest in becoming our next executive director. The committee carefully reviewed the information and narrowed the number of candidates down to approximately 15 for first-round interviews. Our committee, with Derrico’s assistance, created a series of questions designed to better understand each candidate’s talents, motivations, interests, experiences, and knowledge of and commitment to our strategic plan. The committee conducted 30-minute interviews with each candidate, then identified four finalists whom we thought would be suitable for the position.
The search committee, once again with Derrico’s help, staged the final round of interviews using a compiled set of questions designed to address each candidate’s management style, leadership, depth of relationships within legal community, governance, and skill sets. Furthermore, the search committee required each of the final candidates to make a presentation about a predetermined scenario as if that person were the executive director appearing before the Board of Commissioners. Each finalist was asked the same questions and graded using agreed-upon metrics developed with the stakeholder’s guidance and feedback in mind.
The last piece of the process was soliciting input from the SBM staff. The search committee and Derrico created a process to give the staff the opportunity to ask questions similar to those used by the committee and allow them to evaluate the four finalists. Staff members selected to participate in interviewing the final candidates were chosen carefully — because some of the finalists were internal, none of the participants could report to any of the final candidates. The staff used the committee’s agreed-upon metrics to objectively assess each finalist.
Derrico pulled all the data together into a report and the search committee met to review and debate it all to make its final recommendation. Upon careful review and consideration and based on the metrics and feedback, it was clear that it was in the Bar’s best interests to recommend Peter Cunningham as our next executive director. The Board of Commissioners, also after careful review and consideration, unanimously ratified the recommendation.
I am so very grateful for the guidance and support provided by our consultant, Elizabeth Derrico, and I am extremely proud of the work that the search committee did. We brought out the best in each other and we very much reached the finish line having achieved the goal of finding the most appropriate candidate to lead the State Bar in the years to come.
To the members of the search committee, please know that your service throughout the strenuous process speaks volumes about your love for and commitment to the Bar; each of you deserves much recognition. I extend my sincere and deep gratitude to all members of our search committee for their excellent service. I also thank Elizabeth Derrico and Margaret Bossenbery for the excellent support they provided to the search group.
Now at the finish line, we can look back at the work we did and enjoy that feeling of knowing we have given all we have to accomplish our goal while doing something we love.
The views expressed in From the President, as well as other expressions of opinions published in the Bar Journal from time to time, do not necessarily state or reflect the official position of the State Bar of Michigan, nor does their publication constitute an endorsement of the views expressed. They are the opinions of the authors and are intended not to end discussion, but to stimulate thought about significant issues affecting the legal profession, the making of laws, and the adjudication of disputes.