Saunders Informants - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Apr 7, 2007

Saunders Informants

Date: Apr 7, 2007

Corrected the title. Carry on.

Date: Apr 7, 2007

One possibility would be to print out all the articles by Robert Campbell and send them to her. It's too bad the articles ceased before the need for them stopped. They were invaluable.

Date: Apr 7, 2007

USM Sympathizer wrote:

One possibility would be to print out all the articles by Robert Campbell and send them to her. It's too bad the articles ceased before the need for them stopped. They were invaluable.
PPresident Sanders indicated that she has been reading the board, although I don't know for how long. She also indicated she has been getting regular reports and clippings from family and friends. She cannot possibly be innocent of the isses here -- she spoke with remarkable effectiveness about what she would do to counter act the effects of the last five years . . . as clearly as diplomacy permits. She has to be able to work effectively with everyone in the community -- including those who support the current administration. And . . . may I add . . . so do we. If it is possible to convince those people that whatever their belief about Dr. Thames they were wrong about the faculty, that is important. If it is possible for us to find ways in which they and we can find areas of unity where we do agree about the future of the university, we need to find them. We have entered a different period in our university's history. The struggle, up to this point, has been an insurgency to preserve the values we believed were threatened under the previous administration. That required us to be skeptical, to raise questions, to protest. It required us to suspect every move by the administration -- even though even I don;t believe every single thing the administration did was intentionally destructive or even destructive at all.

We have a President's whose announced values and (apparently) actions are pretty consistent with those we have advocated. We need to shift gears and be prepared to show her that we can be a positive force for change as well as one that resists.

President Sanders indicated that her "informants" were "triangulating" in a way that gave her a consistent picture of what the campus needs. Since her three goals pretty clearly align with what most of us would agree are critical issues for the university, I'd say that she is already well aware of the advice she is likely to get from various quarters and has probably been getting her information from sources that are well aware of our difficulties.

While I think it is good to think about how we can help, I don'think she is about to get fooled . . . . and I think we need to be very careful not to patronize her. I'm pretty satisfied from her comments that she sees the situation pretty well. I think we can rely on her observation that she knows she needs to make some changes very quickly.

Date: Apr 7, 2007

Stephen Judd said:
"She has to be able to work effectively with everyone in the community -- including those who support the current administration. And . . . may I add . . . so do we. If it is possible to convince those people that whatever their belief about Dr. Thames they were wrong about the faculty, that is important."

I agree that this is extremely important. We're entering a "post-war" era of building and re-building.

Date: Apr 8, 2007

LVN wrote:

The question was asked on the "board structure" thread, how can we help Dr. Saunders get the information she needs via informants without keeping the old power structures in place? Is that about right? I'm moving the topic over here to avoid getting the other thread too off-topic.

-- Edited by Web Master at 21:14, 2007-04-07

LVN...thanks for starting this thread.
Dr. Saunders is the one that said she would have informants....not snitches. She needs to be informed. Just be reminded that Bud Ginn was very close to AKL, Horace Fleming, and Shelby Thames. He is still closely connected to those inside the university and the politicos and community folks outside the university. These people will try to use Bud to carry their water.....something he has done for many years. He relishes that role.

I think that Dr. Saunders is aware of many things that have happened behind the scenes at USM. I hope she understands that those that have been in power are not going to roll over....they are going to try to continue to exert influence. Isn't it refreshing to know that USM has a chance for rebuilding?

Date: Apr 8, 2007

The idea that the Shelby's leaving will allow USM to all pull together is attractive, but my experience is that the pent up resentments will remain for a long time. President Saunders is faced with tasks that few new Presidents ever face. She does have some inside knowledge and ties to some in the university so that she can short cut some of the necessary information gathering. To accomplish what faculty expect will require the replacement of many administrators very quickly. If she leaves many of the bad and incompetent people in place, they become her people and the fallout splashes back on her.

I do not know if President Saunders can find enough talented people quickly to ease her burden and increase her chances of success. My preference would be that she hires some quality people on a short term basis by paying extra dollars to get experienced quality administrators who would do the job temporarily until national searches can be completed.

I do not think that the majority of the committed faculty will be satisfied to work another year with the same management team that now exists. While it has its own costs, a purge of a goodly number of existing administrators would do much to raise morale and energize faculty

Date: Apr 8, 2007

Cossack wrote:

I do not think that the majority of the committed faculty will be satisfied to work another year with the same management team that now exists. While it has its own costs, a purge of a goodly number of existing administrators would do much to raise morale and energize faculty

My experience elsewhere has been that, when new management comes aboard, inherited appointees tender their resignation and return to the ranks. The choice is then up to new management. That makes things far less clumsy.

Date: Apr 8, 2007

Cossack wrote:I do not think that the majority of the committed faculty will be satisfied to work another year with the same management team that now exists. While it has its own costs, a purge of a goodly number of existing administrators would do much to raise morale and energize faculty

Cossack is 100% right. We need a thorough house cleaning, from
department chairs to the provost.

Date: Apr 8, 2007

"My experience elsewhere has been that, when new management comes aboard, inherited appointees tender their resignation and return to the ranks. The choice is then up to new management. That makes things far less clumsy."

I expect the chances of this happening are slim to none, especially with some of the old timers.

Date: Apr 8, 2007

Interested onlooker wrote:

I expect the chances of this happening are slim to none, especially with some of the old timers.

Then God bless you each and every one.

Date: Apr 8, 2007

Cossack wrote:

The idea that the Shelby's leaving will allow USM to all pull together is attractive, but my experience is that the pent up resentments will remain for a long time. . . . To accomplish what faculty expect will require the replacement of many administrators very quickly. If she leaves many of the bad and incompetent people in place, they become her people and the fallout splashes back on her. My preference would be that she hires some quality people on a short term basis by paying extra dollars to get experienced quality administrators who would do the job temporarily until national searches can be completed.I do not think that the majority of the committed faculty will be satisfied to work another year with the same management team that now exists. While it has its own costs, a purge of a goodly number of existing administrators would do much to raise morale and energize faculty

Excellent points, Cossack. And good to see you posting again.
Why don't some of you mention anyone you think should stay in their present position, or another position in administration. (That might be more productive than focusing on who should leave.)

BTW, I was told that it is normal practice for administrators at least down to the Dean level to tender their resignations when a new administration comes in. Is this not standard practice?

Date: Apr 8, 2007

I think the practice of offering resignations is one associated with business -- it has happened in academia but I certainly would not call it anything other than an occasional convention.

Paul Bremer -- I disagree with you about chairs. Our own table of management puts the chairs on the faculty side rather than the administrative side. Most chairs (obviously not all) really do see themselves as the point person for the faculty rather than as a subalturn of an administration. I think of the chairs as the sergeants and chiefs -- the lead enlisted ranks rather than the bottom of the officer corps. Most chairs have either served with distinction or have tried to do the least harm possible at a time when a great deal of pressure was being brought on Deans and Chairs. The chairs keep things running -- and since many departments have few faculty members who are breaking down the doors to become chairs, I think they can be allowed to continue with little fear.

The new President is most likely to act quickly on those around her whom directly report to her. It is apparently (I'm going from what i have been told by a number of administrators) very unlikely that she will reach down below this group right away in order to minimize disruption at the day to day level of activity in the academic units.

At the moment only three of our deans are not interim appointments. We should hope that the new administration begins an immediate national search for the two inteirm positions while evaluating the three deans who remain. I am sure that once she gets her leadership team in place, she will reach out to learn more about her deans.

Date: Apr 8, 2007

stephen--don't you think it wise to get a new provost and the like before searches occur for interim deans? do we want to saddle a new provost with deans that they had no input in hiring?

Date: Apr 8, 2007

SCM -- yes. I think that she will look to her leadership team first and she has indicated that she wil move very quickly when she arrives on campus.

I leaped to the next logical step and saying she should do a national search for the interims -- after all, the interims can serve at least a year but it would be good to have permanents in place by the summer/fall of 2008. You really don't need to hire a new provost to know that national searches there is a no brainer . . .

I might also note that she indicated she will do national searches for leadership positions . . . her attitude was of the "well . . . . what else do you expect?" variety -- very refreshing . . .

Date: Apr 8, 2007

stephen--my only issue is timing. if you don't have a new provost on board while doing deans searches, my feeling is that the provost may have limited input into the deans. when a new provost (not interim) can be on board is debatable.

Date: Apr 8, 2007

stinky cheese man wrote:

stephen--my only issue is timing. if you don't have a new provost on board while doing deans searches, my feeling is that the provost may have limited input into the deans. when a new provost (not interim) can be on board is debatable.

SCM-

In normal circumstances this would be desirable. In COEP, the interim dean and associate dean came into office under very suspect circumstances, and both have made it clear that they are moving ahead great guns with some major changes that the current administration has charged them with. Both are relatively new associate professors, and one has only been tenure track since 2002. Their performance to date has had troubling aspects. Something needs to be done, and it can't wait two years...

Date: Apr 8, 2007

If she intends to do a national search -- then I don't see how we can't have an interim for at least close to a year. Obviously she could also bring someone on board permanently w/o going through the search process . . . but that doesn't seem her style. I think most people agree we need a change -- right away -- at the top levels. If that is true I don't see how we can avoid an interim.

It is possible to hang on to the interim deans for two years . . . but that is pretty rough on a college. Especially CoAL and EdPsych, which have had lots of changes in five years. As important as anything is establishing some kind of stability and a college narrative that seems to have some continuity. I actually believe that Denise VH is capable of this in CoAL . . . she is already actively trying to build some lines of continuity that are very sensible, in my own estimation. I can't answer for Wanda, although if the pattern of recent events in ed-psych continues it looks to me as though it is possible that her term might look a lot like Shelby's in terms of a complete break with the past -- the good as well as the bad.

Date: Apr 8, 2007

Stephen & GL--I don't know we disagree much except with when you find a new provost and then when the provost conducts the search for deans. i believe the provost is the most appropriate person to conduct searches for those who are direct reports to him/her. if the prez acts as quickly as she says, you could have a new provost within a few months (I guess) and then this person could spend some time sizing things up--listening is as important for the provost as the prez. if deans begin to start implementing own agendas (particularly interim ones--and i hear DvH has her own agenda as wellas WM) the provost, or even the prez, can say--hold up!

Date: Apr 8, 2007

The concept of keeping chairs seems good on the surface, but what USM needs is a thorough housecleaning. All administrators need to be put on notice. They may reapply for their current jobs, but nobody should be guaranteed. Chairs may be "mostly faculty" in some colleges, but they are "mostly administrators" in others.

Date: Apr 9, 2007

Dr VanNostren wrote:

Chairs may be "mostly faculty" in some colleges, but they are "mostly administrators" in others.

My perception is that at USM capable chairs seem themselves as "mostly faculty." Weak insecure chairs seem themselves as "mostly administrators."

Date: Apr 9, 2007

Been there, Done that wrote:

My perception is that at USM capable chairs seem themselves as "mostly faculty." Weak insecure chairs seem themselves as "mostly administrators."

Addendum: My perception is that at USM capable deans see their chairs as
"motly faculty." Weak insecure deans see their chairs as "mostly administrators."

Date: Apr 9, 2007

DVH was put in place with some (minimal I was told) consult with the chairs. WM was not. DVM was a necessary appointment (Elliott's death). There was absolutely no honest or compelling reason for the WM appointment, and that appointment has not been well received in COEP (an understatement) except by the very small minority who engineered the coup. I think Dr. Saunders is savvy enough to know that we don't have a one size fits all situatiom.

Date: Apr 9, 2007

Dr. Saunders needs to clean up the dome before coming down the food chain. Although if you think about it, there are only four individuals in the dome placed there by SFT: Jay Grimes, Cynthia Easterling Moore, Joan Exline, and Joe Morgan. The other vice presidents have been in place for a number of years. Joe Morgan is in an interim capacity until the CFO position can be advertised. As for Grimes, Moore, and Exline - they should be put on notice NOW.

As far as the deans go, we currently have two interim deans and three deans. We all remember when SFT assumed the presidental position, he cleaned the deans' houses in one sweep! The really sad part of that whole situation was that outsiders knew what was happening before campus did. He called an early morning meeting for the deans, basically fired them, told them they could apply for the positions with no guarantees, and did not even feed them sausage and biscuits!

I believe that the majority of the department chairs/directors should be left in place. However, there are some that need to be bumped down.

Dr. Saunders seems very capable of handling herself and will find the best way to handle the situation.

Date: Apr 9, 2007

Been there, Done that wrote:

Been there, Done that wrote: My perception is that at USM capable chairs seem themselves as "mostly faculty." Weak insecure chairs seem themselves as "mostly administrators." Addendum: My perception is that at USM capable deans see their chairs as
"motly faculty." Weak insecure deans see their chairs as "mostly administrators."

i suspect that you will have several chairs resign shortly(some from chair only, others will leave the university)

i think you will see replacement chairs before replacement deans, etc
which will probably be a good indicator of the future

Date: Apr 9, 2007

Would CEMoore even care to work for Saunders? Is she able to retire or go back to her dept?

Date: Apr 9, 2007

Wonder if someone like Don Cotten would be willing to come back for a transition year. Anyone still in contact with him?
I'm aware of the huge economic shift that went along with the 2003 reorganization, but I sure would like to see some conversation about re-establishing the College of Fine Arts--that was one of our flagship areas.

Date: Apr 9, 2007

don didn't apply for the presidency, so I doubt he'd want to take on an interim provost position.

Date: Apr 11, 2007

Interested onlooker wrote:

Wonder if someone like Don Cotten would be willing to come back for a transition year. Anyone still in contact with him?
I'm aware of the huge economic shift that went along with the 2003 reorganization, but I sure would like to see some conversation about re-establishing the College of Fine Arts--that was one of our flagship areas.

Why would DC want to take a pay cut to come back to USM?

Date: Apr 11, 2007

This is wishful thinking. A house cleaning will not occur, so do not be unreasonable in your expectations. Enjoyed seeing Bob Mixon at the press conference on athletics. Some things don't change.