Though yesterday's announcement of University Provost Teresa Sullivan's successor came sooner than many on campus expected, the choice of Philip Hanlon as the next provost was something few found surprising.

For many on campus, the choice of Hanlon, who currently serves as vice provost of academic and budgetary affairs and is a professor of mathematics, seemed a logical one. What surprised some was that the announcement came a mere two weeks after Sullivan announced she would be leaving the University to become president of the University of Virginia.

University administrators said in a series of interviews yesterday that Hanlon’s selection as Sullivan’s eventual successor was in the works before anyone knew whether Sullivan would be chosen for the presidency at the University of Virginia.

In an interview with The Michigan Daily yesterday, University President Mary Sue Coleman said she had known Sullivan would be leaving for “quite a long time” before it became public and she began the process of looking for Sullivan’s successor as quickly as possible.

“I had started considering this actually about a month ago and had started just as soon as I could — I certainly couldn’t reveal anything about Terry — but getting input from people,” Coleman said.

To complicate the situation further, the University was in the midst of a retention battle with the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill over Hanlon. According to UNC’s website, Hanlon was one of four finalists for the executive vice chancellor and provost position at its institution before he withdrew his name and was named the next University of Michigan provost.

“Dr. Hanlon has withdrawn consideration to accept another position,” a statement on UNC-Chapel Hill’s website stated.

Coleman said the very real possibility of losing Hanlon was a major factor in why she acted so quickly to name Sullivan’s replacement.

“His candidacy at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill put things in a very tight timeframe,” she said.

Hanlon’s institutional knowledge made him essential to retain in the Office of Provost, Coleman said.

“That was one of the key factors in the decision, because I think inevitably if you do a national search it takes a year, and I was very concerned about losing the whole brain trust of the budget construction, which is in Phil Hanlon’s bailiwick along with Terry Sullivan,” Coleman said.

In fact, Coleman said the reason she consulted privately with leaders on campus — as opposed to forming a search committee — was, at least in part, because she feared losing Hanlon to UNC.

“All my time, basically over the last two weeks, has been devoted to this,” Coleman said. “I didn’t have a search committee. I was trying to get as much input as I could because I knew I didn’t have the luxury of time.”

“If it hadn’t been for his candidacy elsewhere and the risk of losing him,” Coleman said before stopping mid-sentence and pondering whether under different circumstances she would have considered a national search. “Whether I would have done an internal search or a national search, that was a question I actually thought about but didn’t end up confronting because of the timeline I had with (Hanlon).”

In the end, Coleman said she was very happy that Hanlon agreed to stay at the University and accept the position as provost and executive vice president for academic affairs.

“I wanted us to have a lot of experience in that office, and so I was thrilled that he agreed to accept the position,” she said. “I think it will be a very smooth transition in a time when we all know the state is going to be facing some real budget challenges, and we’ve got to keep the University strong.”

In an interview with the Daily yesterday, Hanlon said he feels honored to have the opportunity to serve as the next University provost.

“I’m excited to the join the team in this new role,” Hanlon said.