COMMENTARY
Clashes between president, regents mask change under way at university

By Deane Neubauer

Recent stories and articles in The Honolulu Advertiser have focused on tensions between University of Hawai'i president Evan Dobelle, and the university's Board of Regents.

University of Hawai'i President Evan Dobelle confers with Patricia Lee, chairwoman of the UH Board of Regents. Tensions between Dobelle and the Board of Regents have grown more pronounced. Advertiser library photo

I would guess that both the board and President Dobelle endorse this sound advice.

The amount of heat being generated at the moment obscures a fuller appreciation of some broader university dynamics. Based on the experience of my 34 years at UH — the past two and half in interim administrative positions as the Manoa chancellor and system-wide vice president for academic affairs — I believe that we all need to step back from the heat of these disagreements to gain some historical perspective on the UH presidency and the nature of a public board of regents, in order to assess the actual progress this president has or has not made in his two and a half years at the university.

Useful perspectives on UH require some base-line information on which most observers might agree.

As the Advertiser suggested, tensions between the Board of Regents and the university president have long been a part of the institution's history. Over the past 40 years we have witnessed a robust litany of disagreements, public and private, between the president and the board, and on various occasions between the president and the Legislature, the governor, the faculty, community groups, single-issue focused groups, students, the university's unions and others.

Former UH president Albert Simone, under whom I served as a dean, used to remark that the university presidency was the most difficult job imaginable because of the range of constituencies to be consulted and somehow "satisfied," recognizing that the things they wanted from the university were often mutually exclusive.

Patterns drawn from the past five permanent UH presidents are worth noting.

Budget cuts sour good will

When state revenues are growing and budgets are generous, everyone is relatively happy. When revenues are down, everyone is relatively unhappy. Presidents Harlan Cleveland, Fujio Matsuda, and Kenneth Mortimer were each greeted with budget crises shortly after taking office.

Cecil Mackey, selected by the Board of Regents to succeed Matsuda, never even took office as UH president, the appointment coming apart over money issues related to his contract.

Perhaps it is significant that Dobelle's presidency began just 74 days before the tragedy of Sept. 11, 2001, an event followed by a gubernatorial budget cut. A further cut followed the inauguration of Gov. Linda Lingle in December 2002.

New presidents, especially those hired as change agents, do create strong expectations. When external budgetary events overtake them, the climate sours.

Change can provoke pain

This aerial view of the University of Hawai'i's main campus at Manoa offers only a hint of the range of activities that occur in the entire system. Advertiser library photo

Harland Cleveland was forced to reorganize and eliminate programs to accommodate budget cuts. On a rising tide of resources, Simone was able to inaugurate organizational changes that eliminated the Manoa chancellor's office. He left just as the decline in post-bubble Japan and Gulf War revenues created a far more severe budget climate for the incoming Ken Mortimer who had to accommodate a major change in the UH financing structure in which the university lost significant state revenues.

Dobelle was instructed by the board that hired him to restore the Manoa chancellor, and create an administration for the UH system. The reorganization provides each of the 10 campuses their own chancellor, and the opportunities and responsibilities that go with that, such as developing each campus in greater alignment with the distinctive needs of the community it serves.

Part of the Dobelle brief was transferring activities located at Manoa that combined campus and system functions to the system level.

These changes have been well received by some, and not by others. Coupled with the challenges of managing restricted resources, the discomforts of change and reorganization contribute to varieties of unhappiness.

Differing viewpoints emerge

The presidential role in the university and that of the board are complementary, but necessarily different. This can and frequently does produce tension.

For six years I served as a member of the WASC Senior Accrediting Commission, one of the two regional accrediting bodies for UH. In that capacity, and as a team chair for an additional 10 years, I reviewed literally scores of team reports covering most of the colleges and universities in the Western region (California, Hawai'i and Guam). One sees over again in these situations conflicts and tensions between chief executive officers and governing boards. CEOs are charged with establishing a vision for their institutions and working to achieve it; public boards are charged with oversight of the institution in the name of the public authority they represent. When tensions exist, boards often express the belief that they don't understand and approve of the way the institution is being run. CEOs and those they represent (which in complex ways includes faculty, staff and students) often believe that boards have gone beyond their policy authorization and oversight roles to engage in micro-management.

It follows that what frames the issues of any historical moment in the complex life of a university reflects the broader context of the economy and society within which the university exists, as well as the structural tensions inherent in its governance activities.

Typically, public trustees of state universities are appointed by governors with the advice and consent of upper house legislatures. Disagreements and tensions are bound to arise in this process as a result of changes in the holders of political office and their understandable desire to oversee the institution through individuals in whom they have confidence. Like all boards, public trustee boards experience discontinuities as older, experienced members are replaced by newer members who must learn quickly both their roles and the myriad activities of a complex institution. Public boards are staffed by volunteers. The amount they must learn about their institutions in short periods of time requires extraordinary dedication and work to succeed. The learning curve is often one reason why conflict in this phase is so apparent.

Additionally, public higher education in the United States is changing radically and rapidly in response to the larger social, economic and political forces that are shaping and reshaping our world. Typically, when faced with challenges of great complexity, we as problem-solving humans make them manageable by personalizing them.

Understandable as this is, to focus on personality and personnel issues at the expense of broader macro forces and their impact on our institutions is, I think, a mistake.

UH is large, multifocused

Running public institutions of higher learning is hard work. American universities are meant to be multicentered and run with a relatively loose hand. From this, it is argued, comes the intellectual and scholarly creativity so admired by the rest of the world.

Universities are also built around consultative relations involving students, faculty, unions, staff, boards, administrative subunits and external constituencies that make them quite different in important ways from other large organizations such as businesses.

UH has grown to be a very large institution with more than 50,000 credit and 80,000 noncredit students working at 10 campuses and through three university centers. Research and service activities go on at dozens of sites external from these campuses. Measured by all its accounts, UH is just shy of being a billion-dollar operation.

Only a portion of this money comes from the state general fund, and while this percentage has grown continually smaller, it remains a critical component of the university budget and is the focus of most public attention.

Throughout the United States money set aside for higher education as a percentage of state budgets is in decline, pressured not only by declining state revenues in the recent recession but also by the rising shares deemed necessary for healthcare (primarily Medicaid), K-12 education, and public safety.

The University of Hawai'i community has accepted the challenge of raising money from other sources, while protecting access through modest tuition and fee increases. The record over the past 30 months is impressive.

Money for research and training, for example, is on pace to increase 221 percent between July 2001 and July 2004. Factoring in the multiplier effect of these mostly out-of-state dollars, makes the UH a powerful contributor to the economy, responsible for adding thousands of jobs. Private money-raising through the UH Foundation is at a higher continuous level than before (despite the disastrous economy of the time), and it continues to grow.

The great danger I see in the recent disputes and media coverage they attract is that important messages about the university are lost. UH is an institution that has made powerful strides over the past two and a half years, in response largely to the Dobelle agenda and vision, which has been contributed to and endorsed by the broadest consultative process in UH history.

What we require to sustain this fine university during difficult times are measured views, assessments of what has been accomplished and not accomplished across the broad range of activities that characterize the institution.

Is style really an issue?

The Advertiser editorial addresses Dobelle's style, indicating that his "eastern" brashness and actions may clash with the more "laid back" inclinations of the local scene.

Yes and no, I think. We can all name examples of successful Hawai'i leaders in business and politics with "strong" personal styles. The critical issue for UH, and this community, is assessing substance, not being distracted by style. Hawai'i has a very fine university of which it should be proud. The accomplishments of the past 30 months represent the work and creativity of thousands who make up this complex and sometimes confusing institution. The key to the work of this period has been the vision and leadership of its president, senior staff, chancellors, college and departmental personnel, the staff that support them, and students, most of whom have been endorsed by Board of Regent actions.

UH has devoted enormous energy over these months in finding ways to work together in its quest for demonstrable progress. Given a restoration of the appropriate climate, I have confidence that we can do precisely that.

Deane Neubauer is former vice president for academic affairs at the University of Hawai'i.

Correction: Harlan Cleveland's name was misspelled in a previous version of this commentary.