Political Influence in Running head: ADMINISTRATION CASE STUDY THREE

Political Influence in Higher Education Leadership Craig W. Beebe Colorado State University

1

Political Influence in

2

Political Influence in Higher Education Leadership Higher education is a system that struggles with keeping up in an increasingly political time. But it is also a system that is itself a political structure. Politics, while confusing and challenging at times, need not be at odds with the purpose and direction of U.S. higher education institutions. In the immediate case, we are faced with the challenge what seems to be differing agendas in regards to the selection and appointment of a new institutional President; the governor demanding one particular individual whom, it would seem, will help advance certain political motives, and the governing board seeking to pursue a more open process that will find a more “suited” candidate. The board need not fret, for what we have here is simpler than it may at first seem. By acting as a cohesive unit and clarifying its values, the board may find that the process is more amenable to accomplishing what is best for the institution after all. Communication on a couple of levels are key in this situation. First, the board must communicate effectively with its constituents: the faculty, administration, and students of Mountain State University. By examining the needs, attitudes, and values of the existing campus community, the board will find direction in pursuing an appropriate course of action. One of the most critical voices that seems to be missing from the case study altogether is that of the campus community. In a search for a person of such importance as a President, it is critical to hear the voices of the people to be served, for ultimately they are the institution. Second, the board must communicate with the governor. It may seem obvious at first why the governor has nominated a particular candidate, but it is short-sighted to discount the important qualities that the candidate may have simply because of political relationships. Third, the board must communicate effectively within itself. In this case it seems that, despite political differences, the board is united in at least one motivation: To find the best President to fill the soon-to-be-vacant position.

Political Influence in

3

Without internal communication, they will fall easily to the authority of the governor and a candidate who seems, on its face, to be an inappropriate consideration. Communication is necessary to effective functioning for any governing body. Unfortunately, it will take much more than communication to do what is right for the future of the university. To make a statement to the governor, the board must effectively put forth the mission and values of the institution as its driving forces. The central statements of purpose that an institution operates under can be the most convincing arguments for selecting a leader to take the institution toward its future under those guiding values. Gubernatorial influence is strong, and especially so in a state where she/he has the support of the congress, but perceived power cannot in itself speak to the ways in which a particular candidate will carry forth the mission of the institution. Essentially, it is critical to hear the candidate speak, and to gain an understanding of how they will continue the recent success of the institution under a flourishing mission and administrative structure. Perhaps the most critical aspect to overcoming the political infringement being played out by the governor is to use what the institution know to back up what it does and why it does it. Data is increasingly critical to higher education in this information age. It is not enough to say that “we”, as an institution, behave a certain way, simply because it our prerogative to do so. In a time of tightening budgets, and especially so in a state where the people are unlikely to support tax increases to support higher education, the board must make a point as to how it is helping to meet the governor’s own goals and initiatives on a daily basis. The governor needs to know why it critical to support the mission of the institution based on the fact that it is producing graduates who ultimately support the tax base of the state and who promote technological advances that improve the quality of life for all of the state’s residents.

Political Influence in

4

The governor has challenged certain programs, claiming that the funds used could be reallocated to support other state initiatives. The institution must demonstrate how these programs are ultimately an investment in precisely the programs that the governor wishes to support. This situation resembles what has taken place on the campus of Colorado State University over the last couple of years since the appointment of current President Larry E. Penley. When Penley took over in his current role, he immediately began evaluating programs across campus in an effort to streamline institutional efforts toward specified goals and to free up lines of funding that could be allocated to more productive programs. Many programs across campus hurriedly began compiling data and examining goals to make sure that they were helping the larger institution to meet its goals. One individual responsible for building such a case was Dr. Paul Thayer, who early on realized the need to substantiate programs such one that he was in charge that grants financial aid to first generation students and students from underrepresented populations in the pursuit of recruiting and retaining them at the institution (personal communication, September 27, 2006). Thayer’s program was dedicating substantial funds toward its goal of making higher education available to a larger population of students than has traditionally been the case. It came under immediate scrutiny, but Thayer was able to substantiate the program and expand it by demonstrating that his program was directly impacting the goals that had been laid out for the institution in terms of diversity and retention (Dr. Paul Thayer, personal communication). This same attitude would be valuable in demonstrating how an institution is helping to further the goals set forth by the governor. If the institution is already meeting the larger political agendas of the governor, why the need to force a candidate for President into office?

Political Influence in

5

The question arises as to whether a candidate not supported by the governor can be successful. This question must be addressed in relation to institutional goals. The candidate should be able to communicate both the goals of the institution and the relationship of those goals to the future of the larger political structure. The two cannot exist separately, and it is not the job of an institutional President to pursue one to the exclusion of the other. Likewise, it is critical that both the board and the Presidential candidate understand that the institution’s mission must necessarily exist within the context of the larger political culture of the state and local governments. At the center of the issue is the idea that all parties involved must be able to look past simple political affiliations in order to progress toward the greater good of the university and that of the larger institution of higher education. Inasmuch as higher education institutions exist within a larger political climate, it is a necessity that boards consider the role of their institutions’ leaders as being both academic and political in nature. As leaders of a higher education institution, the governing board must exercise an unwavering commitment to the values of the institution in pursuing the appointment of its new President. The board must work to demonstrate its commitment to achieving the goals of the governor, and must demonstrate, through the use of finely-tuned data, how their institution has been aiding in the accomplishment of those goals under the existing mission and administrative structure. These arguments may help in convincing the governor to relax her or his demand as the appointment of a particular political candidate by demonstrating a willingness to collaborate across party lines and to keep the campus relatively “neutral” in a state where political motives seem to drive much of the decision-making, both on a state level and on the level of the citizenry. Though highly cliché, communication and collaboration would seem to be the only ways to

Political Influence in approach a somewhat volatile situation. These values are critical, however, in order to maintain the integrity of the institution as a leader in the higher education world.

6