For 15 years I have been involved with the Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges (AGB) as a board governance consultant. My work has taken me to colleges and universities from Maryland to California and several states in between. Recently, my engagements have been mainly at Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), a passion of mine since my undergraduate days at Grambling College (now Grambling State University) in the 1960s.
My career began as an assistant professor of political science and spanned more than four decades. It included advancement to tenured full professor and progressively responsible positions as an academic administrator at comprehensive research and doctoral-granting universities. No matter where I worked or what I was doing I kept a steady eye on HBCUs and harbored the ambition of one day leading one.
Black colleges as an area of scholarly interest and potential leadership began while I was an undergraduate. During my junior year faculty and staff at Grambling were roiled by an article in the Harvard Educational Review (volume 37, number 1, 1967). Entitled “The American Negro College,” the authors arrived at several startling conclusions, the most offensive to me personally was an assertion that impugned all black institutions of higher education: “Like the poorer private Negro colleges, then, public Negro colleges are for the most part likely to remain fourth-rate institutions at the tail end of the academic procession” (page 59).
Although I was enrolled at a public segregated college with facilities and campus amenities that were by design less than equal to those of all-white Louisiana Tech five miles away, not once did I believe that the education I was receiving was fourth-rate. Moreover, lumping all black colleges and universities under a single umbrella was a palpable display of ignorance. Black colleges are not now and never have been monolithic, and I developed a passion to lead one and make a difference.
At every step of my career, I was intentional about preparing myself for executive leadership roles in the academy convinced that generic skills would readily transfer to HBCUs. I read leadership studies extensively in higher education but also in the corporate sector. I was always intrigued by the automobile industry and I was fascinated by Lee Iacocca’s ability to apply what he learned at Ford Motor Company toward rescuing the Chrysler Corporation at a time when its demise was imminent. Iacocca’s success caused me to think that after nearly 25 years of solid faculty and academic administrative experience at major universities in Virginia and North Carolina I was adequately prepared to lead an HBCU. Quickly, I discovered I had a lot to learn.
My friend and AGB colleague Artis Hampshire-Cowan occasionally reminds me of the singular importance of cultural competence, that is, an awareness of differences based on race, ethnicity, or gender and how they affect success and workplace relationships. When I left Virginia Commonwealth University in 1996 to start a new chapter of my career as chancellor of Winston-Salem State University, I may have been culturally competent, but I experienced something equally challenging and that was culture shock. At Winston-Salem State University I encountered an organizational culture quite different from what I had been accustomed to at majority institutions. This is not to criticize HBCUs, for their iconic role in American higher education is unassailable. Instead, I offer an honest and candid assessment of what can happen when under-resourced organizations develop unsound practices and procedures that stifle progress and which are abetted by a governing board that is either unable or unwilling to confront them.
For example, although I had acquired extensive experience in academic affairs, planning, and budgeting, student affairs, fundraising and external relations, I had never worked in a university that shifted the admissions office from one division to another because it was viewed as a drain on the budget. Having started the first enrollment management office at the University of North Carolina Greensboro more than a decade earlier, I found this unbelievable.
Working with my board was also revelatory. In prior roles, I had staffed board committees but that was the extent of my direct involvement. It did not help that I inherited a board that was basically dysfunctional, that did not understand its role and further, wasn’t interested in learning. In four years, I had four board chairs each of whom it seemed was determined to beat me into submission rather than figure out a way for us to work together in the best interest of the university.
When I interviewed for the job I acknowledged the university’s enormous potential. I presented myself as a change agent. I wrongly believed that the search committee and the board supported confronting difficult challenges. In retrospect, it is clear that I did not know what I was getting myself into: I under-estimated the complexity and magnitude of the academic, administrative, and financial problems as well as the political challenges on the campus, within the board and in the local community. Being a change agent is fine—if the organization is supportive—but that was not my good fortune.
Prior to my arrival, the board had a history of inserting itself into the daily operations of the institution, a major violation of best practice in board governance. It wasn’t just that the board regularly meddled in the affairs of the university, the chairman of the university’s foundation viewed his role as superior to that of the chair of that board of trustees and did not hide his desire to be the power behind the throne. There was no way I could succeed under these circumstances.
During my first year, I learned about an AGB board chair-president workshop in Asheville, North Carolina. I asked my second board chair to attend with me. It took some convincing that this would be beneficial to both us and the board so finally, he agreed. On the night before the start of the workshop, the board chair called to say he would not attend; he did not offer an explanation for his decision. This did not bode well.
Since I had paid the registration fee, I decided to attend the workshop alone and I am glad that I did. The AGB workshop leaders were as accommodating as possible given the circumstances and although I was the “odd man out,” I actually learned a lot.
The difficulties I experienced with my first board and what I learned from attending the board chair-president workshop largely explain my long involvement with AGB. My consulting continues to be among the most highly rewarding experiences of my entire professional career. This is particularly true of my work with HBCUs. In far too many instances an underperforming board jeopardizes an institution whose existence may also be threatened by an outdated business model, enrollment and funding problems, fierce competition for students, faculty and staff, and inadequate facilities.
Any meaningful steps to address the challenges confronting HBCUs must begin with an appreciation of effective board governance and its role in fulfilling the mission of the institution. Without it, no school can achieve its potential. Because their margin for error is near zero, effective board governance is more critical to the sustainability of HBCUs today than any time in their history. Let me explain why.
Black colleges were established in a period of harsh segregation. Racial antipathy and overt threats to their existence were common. Before college, first, blacks needed elementary and secondary schools. In many southern states support for public schools for blacks was slim to none. Were it not for the generosity of organizations like the Rosenwald Fund, the General Education Board, several church-related philanthropies and others, schools for black children would not have existed. In light of prevailing attitudes and conditions at the time it is understandable that securing financial support for any type of higher education for blacks was extremely difficult. As Anderson and Moss describe in “Dangerous Donations,” southerners were violently opposed to any kind of education or training that might lead to “social equality with whites.” Consequently, the leaders of black educational institutions were expected to maintain strict discipline and order. In this milieu, black college presidents acquired a near god-like status on their campus and in their community. They did not brook opposition and recalcitrance of any type was not tolerated. Arguably, the archetype of this leadership model was Booker T. Washington, who emerged as the most powerful black man of his time. According to Anderson and Moss, “No black educator could…exercise the influence—the independent power, one is tempted to say—that Booker T. Washington wielded….”
The leadership model characterized by Booker T. Washington and his contemporaries did not allow for a strong governing board or shared governance. Board governance, to the extent it existed at all was often the province of white benefactors. During the civil rights movement several black college presidents found themselves in hot water because of their inability to control students and the handful of faculty willing to risk their career. In SNCC: The New Abolitionists, Howard Zinn, formerly on the faculty of Spelman College, chronicles the extraordinary leadership that the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee provided to the civil rights movement despite what he describes as “a fascinating paradox”:
On the one hand, it (black colleges) has produced many of the new leaders of the civil rights crusade; on the other hand, it has done so unwittingly, and with varying degrees of resistance. The militant students coming out of the Negro colleges have had to vault over the century-long traditions of conservatism and obsequiousness which pervade many of these campuses (page 235).
It would be wrong to generalize on this issue because many black colleges presidents were progressive risk-takers in spite of a pervasively negative racial climate. Without support from black college leaders the SNCC would not have been created. Its founders and members were young women and men who were enrolled at public and private schools like Fisk, Shaw, Spelman, South Carolina State, North Carolina A&T, and Tougaloo. Nonetheless, there is no doubt that different standards, expectations, and treatment based on race adversely affected HBCU board governance in the early stages of their development. Consequently, black college presidents in some cases amassed enormous power curtailing to varying degrees board influence as well as the notion of shared governance. Vestiges of this history persist at several institutions today.
History notwithstanding, HBCUs must change course if they are serious about the future. It is not enough to cite their iconic status and role in producing outstanding professionals in every field of human endeavor. Board governance matters. A college or university can never be better than its board. This may be the single biggest challenge confronting black colleges and universities.
Achieving effective board governance starts with establishing a strong board chair-president relationship. The board chair and the president have the greatest influence on board effectiveness. Together, they are thought leaders and thought partners committed to building a strong board with attention to the types of skills and expertise to fulfill its fiduciary responsibilities. Boards do not get involved in the institution’s daily operations. Rather, they focus on policy and strategy, oversight of mission, and educational quality. As difficult as it may be given the realities of routine, persistent problems that demand immediate attention, boards must take the long view. The unique character of higher education board governance requires dedicated individuals with knowledge of the academy, information technology, higher education finance, marketing and branding, fundraising, and risk management, to name but a few. This is a longterm process, but it begins with commitment and intentionality.
American higher education continues to be buffeted by the winds of change. Presidents cannot shoulder the responsibilities of leadership alone, if ever they could. Boards must step up to the increasing demands of governance.
If they wish to enjoy a continuing, impactful role in higher education HBCU boards must adopt these and other best practices. The closing of St. Paul’s College in 2013 and the very serious problems that threaten Bennett College and Bethune-Cookman University are directly related to a lack of board engagement. Several other schools are experiencing similar problems although they have not received the same public attention, yet they are struggling and on the brink of failure.
Board governance matters and in the words of former AGB President Richard Legon, we must “get governance right.” The unraveling of Bethune-Cookman University is Exhibit A for the urgent need for radical reform of board governance at far too many black colleges and universities. Bethune-Cookman, like many independent, church-related HBCUs was established under austere circumstances. Its founder, Mary McLeod Bethune started the school with the tidy sum of $1.50. Mrs. Bethune would later become one of the most influential black leaders of the 20th century. An ally of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt and a personal friend of First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt, she devoted her life to the school that bears her name.
Regrettably, her legacy appears to have been squandered. It is questionable whether the university can recover from crushing debt of over $300 million dollars. Obscured by these numbers are the thousands of students whose dreams and aspirations will evaporate with the school’s potential closing.
For black colleges and universities genuinely interested in carving a sustainable path, help is available. Next year AGB celebrates its centennial, a veritable milestone that attests to its enduring ability to foster effective board governance as higher education continues to adapt to society’s expectations. AGB has long been committed to helping HBCUs achieve their potential through effective board governance—and it will continue.
Over the years, many have lamented the loss of black banks, hospitals, and a variety of black businesses. Black colleges and universities are in some respects remnants of a bygone era yet they remain an essential part of American higher education. Every effort must be made to support those schools that wish to strengthen their extraordinary legacy. Presidents come and go, but as AGB’s recent report, An Anatomy of Good Board Governance in Higher Education, points out, boards must have the right focus, the right composition and the right relationships. The fiasco that has engulfed Bethune-Cookman University in a quagmire that threatens its existence was avoidable. An effective governing board could have made a crucial difference. For HBCUs that wish to escape a similar fate: the time to act is now.
Alvin J. Schexnider, PhD, is a former chancellor of Winston-Salem State University, an AGB senior fellow, and the author of Saving Black Colleges.
AGB Governance Resources
An Anatomy of Good Board Governance in Higher Education
The Governance Committee (Public Institutions)
TAKEAWAYS
- An underperforming board puts an institution in danger whose existence is also threatened by an outdated business model, enrollment and funding problems, fierce competition for students, faculty and staff, and inadequate facilities.
- Effective board governance is critical to helping HBCUs confront their challenges since their margin for error is near zero. With effective board governance, HBCUs can fulfill their mission and achieve their potential.
- Historically, the leadership model at HBCUs did not allow for a strong governing board or shared governance due to the pressure for leaders of black educational institutions to maintain strict discipline and order. Different standards, expectations, and treatment based on race affected HBCU’s board governance development.
- To start achieving effective board governance, HBCUs must start with establishing a strong board chair-president relationship. This relationship has the greatest influence on board effectiveness.
Share on LinkedIn
