PC & Economic Development - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Sep 6, 2004

RE: PC & Economic Development

Date: Sep 6, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"external reviews of new doctoral programs are almost never done, if ever done. at USM, if you can convince the "powers that be" you've got yourself a new doctoral program. this was true well before Thames."

stinky cheese man, you have clearly identified the crux of USM's problems. For many years there have been no "checks and balances." The institution seems to fear outside opinions, including but not limited to external reviews of doctoral programs as well as the external ratings such as the ones conducted by US News and NRC. Even the external reviews for tenure/promotion are governed by uneven and often meaningless procedures. When there is an reasonably objective criticism, it is "explained away" at one level of another. It is as if external assessments are feared because they might say something USM doesn't want to hear. As such, external opinions from appropriate authorities would restrict what the institution wants to do and is going to do regardless of what the review says. The IHL is not blameless, but USM also shares the blame. This problem has existed for quite a while, not just for two years. It is as if USM erroneously thinks the term "checks and balances" refers only to "checks" which clear through banks and "balances" which appear on an accounting ledger.

Date: Sep 6, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Cynical 2
"Economic Development is not THE problem although it certainly has problems."

I have to disagree. It is the problem, and the solution. Shelboo has made ED the CENTRAL MISSION of USM...go look at that new mission statement (written by whom? LSM? Never vetted through FS or other proper channels, I'm sure. Just appeared on the website one day). Then read the post above about Shelboo's ideas on what a university is REALLY for (a money machine...his own personal ATM?). It's all there in black and white, folks. This is the THE issue to hit him on, and I hope the PUC-ers hit him hard at the next meeting. Ask Ken Malone why he heads a dept when he has no professional experience or credentials in that field (other than having had a job in a chemical company...hey, I have a job, can I be an adjunct in USM's ED dept.???). If ED is so whirled-class, then why is the dept. chair uncredentialed in that field??

Please, PUC-ers, if you are reading, ask Shelboo about the new mission statement: who wrote it? when was it changed? who decided that "economic development" would appear in it twenty gazillion times? Make him say that it was all his idea, and that he consulted no one (other than Angie D. and LSM) in the construction of it. This points out the problem that is at the root of SFT's rotting administration...no shared governance, no buy-in.

Date: Sep 6, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: truth4usm/AH
" I have to disagree. It is the problem, and the solution. Shelboo has made ED the CENTRAL MISSION of USM...go look at that new mission statement...no shared governance, no buy-in."

This is all true and it points once again to Shelby's abysmal leadership style.

The power players that put him in the president's office don't care about this, however. They put him in the presidency over the objection of the faculty in the first place; they supported him through the reorganization; they supported him through all of last year's debacles. They support the economic development mission as it was "sold" to them. They may finally stop supporting him only when they realize that they purchased "damaged goods".

So, the question now is are the power players complicit in the duplicity about economic development or were they victims of the world class spin?

Date: Sep 6, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: G-force
" So, the question now is are the power players complicit in the duplicity about economic development or were they victims of the world class spin? "

The choices you give us in your question, G-force, are too limited: (a) "duplicity", (b) "victims." There is yet a third possibility: (c) "beneficiaries."

Date: Sep 6, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Multiple Choice
"The choices you give us in your question, G-force, are too limited: (a) "duplicity", (b) "victims." There is yet a third possibility: (c) "beneficiaries.""

You imply being duplicitious in order to become a beneficiary.

Date: Sep 6, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: G-force
" You imply being duplicitious in order to become a beneficiary. "

Maybe my vocabulary skills are lacking. Can't one be a beneficary without engaging in deliberate deception? It seems to me there are still three choices: a, b, and c.

Date: Sep 6, 2004

quote:

Originally posted by: Multiple Choice
"Maybe my vocabulary skills are lacking. Can't one be a beneficary without engaging in deliberate deception? It seems to me there are still three choices: a, b, and c."

Okay, and I'm not trying to play word games with you. There are certainly beneficiaries on and off campus.

Would this imply that the end justifies the means? If economic development in general and the Trent Lott Center in particular are good for USM and for the area (and, all things being equal, they probably are or at least could be) then what happens if the twist on this becomes "We said what we had to say to raise the money and the only way we could raise the money was to artificially raise the prestige and position of the program"? I don't buy it. I'm all for product positioning and PR but these things are not mutually exclusive of the truth. Sounds alot like "my resume was targeted to a different audience".

Why not say "here are some examples of other universities that have successfully integrated an economic development program and here is how it has helped them (fill in the blank - raise money? recruit top-notch students and faculty? raise the quality of life in the region? attract industry? get grant money?) I don't know what the benefits are or why this strategy was pursued but I do believe that the hype and the blatant fabrication of USM's "leadership" position in the field will destroy any promised value to the beneficiaries.

Date: Sep 6, 2004

Please don't use the phrase "leadership style" to describe SFT's behavior...you'll set leadership research back 20 years.

How about.....hmmmm.....dictatorial behavior?

quote:

Originally posted by: G-force
" This is all true and it points once again to Shelby's abysmal leadership style. The power players that put him in the president's office don't care about this, however. They put him in the presidency over the objection of the faculty in the first place; they supported him through the reorganization; they supported him through all of last year's debacles. They support the economic development mission as it was "sold" to them. They may finally stop supporting him only when they realize that they purchased "damaged goods". So, the question now is are the power players complicit in the duplicity about economic development or were they victims of the world class spin? "

Date: Sep 6, 2004

From Lead, Follow, or Get out of the way: " Please don't use the phrase "leadership style" to describe SFT's behavior...you'll set leadership research back 20 years."

Right! As a wise observer on the FS Board once said, a leader without followers is just a guy taking a walk.

Date: Sep 6, 2004

quote:

Originally posted by: G-force
" Okay, and I'm not trying to play word games with you. There are certainly beneficiaries on and off campus. Would this imply that the end justifies the means?

You clearly do not seem to understand, G-force. You are the one that took issue with my adding a third choice, "beneficiary," to the two choices you gave us. Of course the end does not justify the means. I never said or implied that. And the word "beneficiaries" does not imply anything positive. A beneficiary might be a faculty member who kisses a** to get a salary increase, a department chair who does not speak up forcefully when an attempt is made to inappropriately terminate one of their faculty members, a person who puts a "spin" on a press release, to name just three examples of possible "beneficiaries." There are very likely beneficiaries right before your very eyes. Beneficiaries are not necessarily savory people.

Date: Sep 6, 2004

quote:

Originally posted by: G-force
"If economic development in general and the Trent Lott Center in particular are good for USM and for the area (and, all things being equal, they probably are or at least could be) . . "

USM can not support its current programs. It is spread too thin already. It has already dipped down into 4th tier, and 17th from the very bottom of that tier at that. I fail to see how any new program could be good for the institution. It would spread the the resouces even further. USM needs to support the programs it has. The well is already dry.

Date: Sep 6, 2004

Multiple Choice and Dry Well - I think we're on the same side here but for some reason just not able to communicate today. I have no interest in bickering with either one of you. I'm going to make one final statement about my position and I'll make it as succinctly as possible. Regardless of the merits of economic development as a discipline, I am insulted that the public has been so deceived by this administration about the premier status of the USM program.

Date: Sep 6, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: G-Force
"Multiple Choice and Dry Well - I think we're on the same side here but for some reason just not able to communicate today. I have no interest in bickering with either one of you. I'm going to make one final statement about my position and I'll make it as succinctly as possible. Regardless of the merits of economic development as a discipline, I am insulted that the public has been so deceived by this administration about the premier status of the USM program."

We are clearly on the same side, G-Force.

Date: Sep 6, 2004

GForce, I'm agreeing with you. Let's not ever think divide and conquer will help our mutual concerns. We become one adhesive bandage and let the community know that we . . . well . . . we adhere. It's great to actually be speaking to people who have opinions, and we don't have to always agree; however, isn't it refreshing to have this conversation where we are all tied into the idea of making USM a better place (without the Gnome and his gang of misgnomers)? This website has made my life so much better, if only because it makes me realize that I am more sane than others. (I've wondered at times)

Date: Sep 6, 2004

quote:

Originally posted by: G-Force

I am insulted that the public has been so deceived by this administration about the premier status of the USM program.

I second that statement for sure.

Date: Sep 6, 2004

Thanks - now that we're back on track, I'll say good night. Time to rest up for another week of fighting the good fight. Maybe one of these weeks it will matter. Night all.

Date: Sep 6, 2004

quote:

Originally posted by: G-Force
"economic development . . . the premier status of the USM program."

Surely no school could claim to have a premier program with only two or three faculty members teaching mostly online. A claim like that would might have the entire academic community nationwide laughing. Let's hope such a claim does not appear on the USM website or in the student recruitment materials. It would be best if it remained a well kept secret while being quietly laid to rest.

Date: Sep 7, 2004

I heard a rumor today that a stated goal of the PhD progam in the Economic Development department was to have 200 doctoral students enrolled. Is this degree really any better than a mail order degree? Have our standards really slipped so low? No wonder our reputation is at the bottom of tier 4!

Date: Sep 7, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Doctorate for sale?
"I heard a rumor today that a stated goal of the PhD progam in the Economic Development department was to have 200 doctoral students enrolled. Is this degree really any better than a mail order degree? Have our standards really slipped so low? No wonder our reputation is at the bottom of tier 4!"

Look at what most "economic development directors" do in these parts. The usual qualifications for the job include "politically connected" right at the top of the list. A warehouse degree program would be right in keeping with the profession, which is largely bogus.

By one name or another, "economic development" has been around since Gov. Hugh White's "Balance Agriculture With Industry" (BAWI) initiative that began in the '30s.

Cynically,
Invictus

Date: Sep 7, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Invictus
"By one name or another, "economic development" has been around since Gov. Hugh White's "Balance Agriculture With Industry" (BAWI) initiative that began in the '30s.

True, Invictus. Even a young whippersnapper like myself recalls when the term "Cotton to the Carolinas" was replaced by the term "Mills to Mississippi."

Date: Sep 8, 2004

Check out the School of Public Policy at Georgia Tech. It offers bachelor's, master's, and PhD degrees specifically in economic development (in other words, not even ED by any other name) Georgia Tech, by the way, is ranked #41 in the current issue of US News & World Reports. Tier one.

Date: Sep 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Cynical 2
"Check out the School of Public Policy at Georgia Tech. It offers bachelor's, master's, and PhD degrees specifically in economic development (in other words, not even ED by any other name) Georgia Tech

And I thought we were the only one

Date: Sep 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Even more cynical than you
"And I thought we were the only one"

!!!

The Center for Economic Development Research and Service, a US Economic Development Administration Center, was established at the University of Texas at Arlington in 1994.

Date: Sep 8, 2004

The Elliot School of International Affairs at George Washington University claims a lecturer with a PhD in economic development from the University of Wisconsin awarded in 1974. If USM pioneered economic development PhD programs, how could this possibly be true?

Date: Sep 8, 2004

The Center for Economic Development at the Heinz School at Carnegie Mellon was established in 1987.

Date: Sep 8, 2004

Wouldn't it be funny if USM got a "cease and desist" letter from one of these schools saying that they will sue if USM doesn't stop claiming to be the only "comprehensive economic development department" in the world (much like the U of Iowa logo debacle)???

That's when we'll know that USM has really arrived!

Date: Sep 8, 2004

quote:

Originally posted by: Baghdad Bob

" Released August 29, 2003 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROFESSIONALS CONVERGE ON SOUTHERN MISS FOR STRATEGIC PLANNING SESSION HATTIESBURG -

"The economic developers of Mississippi gave their strong support to the growth plans of the department of economic development," said Dr. Ken Malone, the department's chair. One specific plan that came from the meeting is the idea of "branding" the Southern Miss Department of Economic Development as the economic development department of the United States. This is fitting, as Southern Miss is the only university in the nation to offer a master's and doctorate in economic development. "

"We have a president (Dr. Shelby Thames) who has made economic development a mission of the university, and the only vice president of research and economic development (Dr. Angeline Dvorak) of any university in the country," Malone said. "

Should we send letters to the Vice Presidents of Research and Economic Development at the following institutions indicating that their titles must be in error per the above?

Only a sampling:

University of Montana, Old Dominion, West Virginia University, New Mexico State University, University of Maryland, Arizona State University, Texas Tech University...

Date: Sep 8, 2004

About a hundred years ago, when I first graduated with a degree in marketing, I developed promotional materials for a Fortune 50 company. I thought I did a great job until all my creative work came back from the legal department marked up with red ink. I stomped, I stormed, I ranted and raved. I finally blurted: "All you're going to let me say is we try to offer the best service we're capable of and we hope you'll like it." Legal responded: "Yes."

I've never forgotten that lesson.

Date: Sep 8, 2004

USM Office of Marketing and Public Relations

For Immediate Release:

Dr. Ken Malone, Chairman of the University of Southern Mississippi's world renowned Department of Economic Development, has announced the hiring of Dr. Jack Hanbury as Distinguished University Professor of Risk Management. Hanbury, a noted legal scholar and writer, received his Doctor of Jurisprudence degree from the University of Kentucky College of Law, and has been admitted to the bar in Ohio, Kentucky, and Mississippi. Hanbury is a trained mediator, and in addition to his experience in private practice, was formerly Risk Manager and Special Counsel to the President at USM. Malone commented that with the addition of Dr. Hanbury, the size of the ED faculty would increase by 50%, ennabling the nascent USM doctoral program in Economic Development to admit approximately 100 additional students for the 2004-05 academic year.