Lil Thames - USM Forum -- Message Board

Emma · Status: Offline

Lil Thames

Lily · Status: Offline

Probably not until there's a new dean. Too bad.

Cossack · Status: Offline

When does she get booted? She's incompetent?

I am afraid that Lily is right in her observation that there will be a new dean after we get a new real provost. This outcome is why I posted early on that if President Saunders did not take time to meet with faculty in groups of say 30 or so, most faculty will find that they will have SFT toadies as their chair and dean. That is why I think we will have one more year of what went on under SFT. If you report to a bad chair and/or a bad dean, then next term and maybe Spring term will be the same as you had before. In my college and department, it will be more of the same administered by the same people and the college will continue to roll down hill and we will continue to lose our competent faculty. We may not get reaccredited given the loss of faculty and the lack of research output in one department. In addition, it becomes more and more difficult to recruit unless one resorts to lying and obfuscation. I choose not to do that and I doubt my cohorts will either.

stephen judd · Status: Offline

I've been watching our new President in action at a number of meetings. I'm not sure I agree with you Cossack -- she's already started to put people on notice about favoritism . . . and she has made it pretty clear that beginning now, she expects leaders to justify their decisons with better information than has been true in the past. I'm not saying people might not try to get away with something -- but I think they know there may be a price if they get caught now. She was not happy about the remands at all and indicated that she felt many of our standards are too arbitrary and can be abused.

I think her meeting with folks is a good idea -- I don't think she can do it right now however when there is so much going on. For what its worth -- my feeling is give her a chance to take care of business at the top level. There are a lot of things left undone that need to be finished or cleaned up. The second thing is that we at departmental and college level need to take some responsibility and start learning to work together until she can get around to those levels. For the record, she indicated in the senate meeting that she will be happy to visit departments -- just send her an invite.

Cossack · Status: Offline

I assume that the "give her a chance" recommendation was also for the posters who preceded me since we agreed on the problem and were pondering the time frame. We have no choice but to give her a chance. From what I see, I think she has good intentions. She has two things working against her given the situation at USM. One, she has minimum experience as a President and two, she came alone. What she lacks is information, time, and people she can trust. She cannot micromanage based on every complaint by a faculty member regardless how meritorious the matter. The original poster asked the question as to when an incompetent and intensely disliked chair will be replaced. The response was that the poster would have to wait until higher level administrators were hired. I agreed and added that people who were put in by SFT will continue to act badly. You think they have been warned to straighten up. Over the 30+ years I have been in academia, I have never seen bad administrators change their behavior regardless of the threats. We have one who was bounced from the job once before for what they are doing now. Nothing was learned. They believe that what they do is what should be done because that is what they are about.

If she really wants to make a point, she needs to make some examples of two or three grievous violators in a public way. Allowing a bad and devious administrator to save face by resigning does not send much of a message. Where is Donald Trump when you need him?

stephen judd · Status: Offline

I believe that she is making changes Cossack -- and some of them are very public. The fact that they do not come with denunciations or poor and uncivil behavior is a mark of how much of a humanitarian this president is. "Making examples" is what Shelby would have done. I don't know that we need to see people humiliated to get the message. But, that is me.

Beginning on July 31 we will have a new Provost and, I hope, we will be searching for the heads of two areas in which morale has been a problem. The other dean searches will start shortly thereafter. She overturned a majority of the remands issued by the Provost. I would call this a pretty strong start for her first 30 days.

The very points that you make -- that she does not know exactly whom to trust, argues against her making drastic changes until she understands the context in which those changes will be occuring.

I understand you have concerns about your college and the leadership there. I can't answer for your experience because it is your own. My own 30+ years has been mixed -- but certainly doesn't lead me to conclude that leadership can't change -- at least partly because I believe that many mid-level leaders function in the context of who leads at the top. We had a repressive regime for five years and it encouraged divisiveness, favoritism, hidden agendas, and cruelty -- at the very least some otherwise decent people had to find a way to survive in a difficult environment while still trying to maintain their units. If I were President, I'd be desperately trying to sort out those people who are otherwise compentent and may continue to be needed in the short run, from those who really did support to methods and motives of the previous administration.

She has got a complicated job-- not the least is to avoid doing what the previous administration did -- a complete repudiation of the past. In my little engagement with her, I believe she is looking for are ways to bridge the gap between the more humane and functional past of the Lucas years while not completely rejecting the last five years under President Thames. She needs to do this politically and she needs to do it in order to unite a divided university. Finding the middle ground isn't easy and it risks alienating those who want clear, decisive action. For my part, I've had enough of leaders who shoot from the hip -- its time for some patient thinking.

I don't want to put myself in the place of being an apologist for a President whom I will likely have to work with from different sides of an issue in which she and the Senate may have different perspectives. But I believe she is someone who is not afraid to ask questions, listen to other opinions, and then make the decisions that she believes are best for the university with those things as a part of her consideration. I don't believe we can ask more of a leader and I am prepared to support a president who functions on that basis.

I also believe we can't ask for the entire world to change overnight, I believe that we need to take her at her word that she senses the need for change and is looking to make chnage in constructive ways; and that she needs our active help at this stage of the game. Part of the active help can very well be to reflect some confidence in what we can do together, rather than assuming it is the same ol' same ol'.

Cossack · Status: Offline

I do not now nor did not before, disagree with what Professor Judd says. We differ in emphasis. It is a fact that President Saunders does not have a lot of experience as president. It is a fact that she did not negotiate to bring with her a person she can trust to be a second set of ears and eyes. She either did not think she needed such a person or does not know an outside person who could be her temporary second in command. It may be the case that she will hire one as soon as she assesses the situation. My point is a simple one that does not differ from yours except in expectations of the behavior of the current "team" members during the time before she replaces them. The idea that the current team will change behavior is not realistic. They have built their power base by rewarding sycophants rather than productive faculty. If they change behavior, they lose their power base. Most of them are smart enough to talk the talk, but will not walk the walk. The only way the President will know what is going on is to communicate with the faculty.
You make the point that you have interacted with the President, albeit briefly. How many faculty members do you think have had that opportunity and how many will have that opportunity even after a year? I anticipate that you will continue to see an exodus of mobile talented faculty who do not wish to go another year with the same abusive administrators that they cannot trust, and quite soon those abusive administrators be seen as working for the new President. Note that I do not think that this is what she wants, nor is it what many faculty including me want. It is what will happen with the passage of time and it will not take long. The initial poster is already chapped that a bad administrator they have to deal with is still there after a month, a feeling I can relate to.

BAD · Status: Offline

It's my understanding that President Saunders will be available to meet with faculty...I think there is free ice cream involved too.

Cossack · Status: Offline

Some time ago Emma asked about a chair person who is SFTs daughter, "When does she get booted? She's incompetent." It would seem that no one has an answer to Emma's question except to suggest it would be sometime in the future after a new dean is hired. Of course, the new dean will need to get acclimated and take some time evaluating the administrative team she/he inherited. It would appear that it will be 2008, maybe 2009 before anyone will come to Emma's rescue. Many of us face a similar situation. We will just have to wait patiently and silently with a happy face or we will be scolded and called an ingrate.

Lily · Status: Offline

Do you want this president to jump the chain of command of dean and provost in order to fire a chair because most of us dislike her (and she is incompetent.) Or do you want the president to take the proper steps, even if it takes longer? Do you want the old way or the right way?

And why do you think the people on this board would have the answer to Emma's question?

Cossack · Status: Offline

Do you want this president to jump the chain of command of dean and provost in order to fire a chair because most of us dislike her (and she is incompetent.) Or do you want the president to take the proper steps, even if it takes longer? Do you want the old way or the right way?

The right way is to take control. If she does not take some bold steps, she will rapidly begin to lose support. I do not want another failure as President. Good faculty have endured this crap for five years. The proper steps are for her to find out from faculty what there problems are and eliminate quickly the most egregious violators of the handbook and proper procedures. If she does not remove some of these people soon, they become her people and then she becomes the target.

Curmudgeon · Status: Offline

There's a rumor that the faculty member in question is looking for work elsewhere.

Incredulous · Status: Offline

The clock is ticking.