SHARED GOVERNANCE IN THE COB
(April 13, 2008) As the “Confidentiality” turns . . . . . According to reports received, the CoB dean search committee has
done their job and were reminded that they are sworn to secrecy about it all. Does this make any sense? Members of
this committee are on it because some of them were appointed and some were elected. In theory, the committee
represents the faculty and staff of the CoB. If that is the situation, why are the faculty and staff not allowed to know
who this committee selected as its top choice for the new dean? Since there is such a limited voice for faculty and staff
anyway, how could this information hurt anyone if it is made public? The only answer left is cover for the President if
she does not agree with the committee’s selection. She wants to operate in secret and not be held accountable for her
decisions. That is unacceptable. The minimum asked in this kind of process is for the decision makers to state his or
her decision and the reasons for it.
(May 4, 2009) And the Winner is . . . How Much Faculty Governance is Occurring in the Selection of CoB Dept Chairs?
Nail's choice of Donna Davis sounds more like the sort of fait accompli that carried the day in the EFIB throughout the
Harold Doty administration of the CoB (2003-07). Given that, one might conclude that a little bit of "faculty governance
took the day off" is just what the doctor order vis-à-vis the CoB's all-too-politicized economists. One can, and should,
still hope, however, that Nail confines any faculty governance lapses to matters concerning the CoB's economists. If
such a policy becomes widespread then CoB faculty will be left wondering just how much, and how good, the
"change" being ushered in by the Nail administration really is after all.