The first issue of Trusteeship for 2012 leads off with an important piece for any institution that will one day face a change of leadership at the top – which is to say, every institution: "How Presidential Evaluations Must Change," by Terrence MacTaggart. Moving on to the tightrope that modern board service can sometimes be, Stephen Pelletier uses Duke University as an example of "New Strategies for Managing Risks: A Balancing Act for Boards." Think your institution will be immune from public records requests because it’s an independent, not a public? Rachel Levinson-Waldman and Robert O’Neil urge you to think again, in "Growing Demands for Public Records: How Should Boards Respond?" Theodore Marchese advises boards to manage wisely the time and opportunities between a president’s resignation and the next president’s assumption of office in "Making the Most of Presidential Transitions." Once a new president is in the executive office, developing a strong working relationship with the board chair should be tops of the to-do list, according to Gettysburg College’s President, Janet Morgan Riggs, and Board Chair Robert N. Duelks, in "The Chair and the New President: Getting the First Months Right." And finally, every institution hopes it won’t face hard times, but when it does, the board and administrators would be wise to follow Lawrence White’s counsel in "Governing During an Institutional Crisis: 10 Fundamental Principles."
Read the blog post from the editor for this issue.
Most board of trustees’ evaluations of a president’s performance look backward, assuming that the challenges of the future will be pretty much the same as they’ve always been. But as every alert trustee now realizes, colleges and universities face problems more daunting than the familiar conundrums of the past.
The stately collegiate gothic buildings that define the iconic West Campus at Duke University evoke a strong sense of stability and the status quo. But like all institutions of higher learning, Duke faces many potential challenges to campus equilibrium—some of which could prove devastating to the university. At Duke, as elsewhere, risk is a fact of life.
Rachel Levinson-Waldman and Robert O'Neil
How often have you heard an exasperated
trustee ask of an 11th-hour demand for public
records, based on Freedom of Information laws:
“Do we have to back up the truck and turn over all
this stuff just because some gadfly or muckraker
asked for it?” For boards at public colleges and
universities, the short answer is, more often than
you might expect, “yes” or at least a “probably”—
and also more likely on a very short timeline.
The time between a president’s
resignation and the next president’s assumption
of office—often a 12-to-18 month period—can
be crucial for an institution. Between the winding
down of an existing presidency and the successful
launch of the next, there are all too many opportunities
for lost momentum, frayed relationships,
key departures, and financial disappointment.
Janet Morgan Riggs and Robert Duelks
Gettysburg College President Janet Morgan Riggs and Board Chair Robert N. Duelks are both members of the Gettysburg class of 1977, but did not know each other as students. As a member of the college’s board of trustees, Duelks chaired the presidential search committee that selected Riggs as Gettysburg’s 14th president in 2009. Then, one year after she took office, Duelks became chair of the board. Trusteeship asked both Duelks and Riggs about how they have worked together early on to lay the groundwork for her long-term success as president.
Finding out what happened is the board’s first and most pressing priority—and one of the most elusive parts of crisis management.
Boards should be armed with the necessary expertise to respond to assertions by the IRS and should maintain that the audit is limited to the tax years in question.
Now may be a good time to take a careful look at the whistleblower protection policy your institution has adopted— or, if it has not done so, to start that process.
The decision was made quickly, but the preparation for it took much longer. Ideally, a strategic decision is a process, not an event.
Many colleges and universities have already taken major steps to cut costs, particularly in “back-office” functions, over the last three years.
AGB recently conducted several surveys that probed board practices regarding risk and found that the majority of governing boards and their institutions don’t engage in comprehensive risk assessment.
There are similar signs of vulnerability within higher education. Many institutions are not listening to their customers or legislators, who are unhappy about rising tuition costs.
Printer-friendly version
Share via e-mail
