When Drake University officials launched a national search last year for its next president, they assembled two committees, as called for under the school charter. One group consisted of faculty, staff, alumni and students; the other had governing board trustees.
“Both committees were supposed to work parallel to each other,” recalled David Miles, a Drake trustee and chairman of the second committee. “But early on, there was jealousy and protectiveness over precisely what the two groups’ roles were, to make sure those were guarded and did not overlap. But not even midway through the process, everyone was working together, and a lot of the reticence and concern broke down.”
The trustees hired Gonzaga University’s executive vice president, Earl Martin, who becomes Drake’s president this summer.
Miles said that the faculty, who grew increasingly comfortable working with trustees as the presidential search evolved, have since talked enthusiastically about the process’s shared leadership.
The webinar consisted of a panel discussion among educators about seven recommendations in an AGB-commissioned report titled “Consequential Boards: Adding Value Where it Matters Most.” Issued by an AGB task force, the recommendations focus on how U.S. higher education governing boards can improve their effectiveness and how a university’s stakeholders can better initiate and strengthen their relationships with board members. During the webinar, Miles’ anecdote about the Drake presidential search was one of his examples of strategic engagement between faculty and a governing board.
Among its recommendations, the “Consequential Boards” report stated that boards should try to ensure the long-term sustainability of their institutions by addressing changed public finances and delivering education at lower costs. A second recommendation calls for boards to focus more on their role as institutional fiduciaries.
