For several years now I've had the good fortune to be a vice president at Berea College, where I've had direct and regular dealings with our trustees. That experience has led me to reflect on my relationship with the board and how it is similar to, and yet different from, the president's interactions with the trustees.
The board's most important responsibility is to hire a competent president, so it is no surprise that much of the advice offered to trustees focuses on their relationship with the chief executive. But vice presidents are the ones who carry out the president's policies, serve on the board committees, and advise trustees on all sorts of issues.
Intrigued by the skills required of vice presidents to manage the flow of information to the board, I wanted to offer some advice on the subject but I didn't want to do it alone. So I talked to nearly 20 of my fellow administrators around the country about what advice they would give to trustees about managing a good relationship with vice presidents. I wrote to current vice presidents and deans, to retired ones, and to presidents who had at one time been vice presidents.
Among other things, I asked them how much interaction they preferred to have with trustees, and I received responses along a continuum from "leave me alone" to "let's work closely and collaboratively." But five important themes emerged, each of which I discuss below.
When Trustee Interest Becomes Interference
Time and again, administrators identified trustee intervention in management decisions as a potential source of tension. They offered examples of trustees who wanted to make decisions about the make of college cars and whether they should have CD players, or board members who "suggested" that people of a different political persuasion (often interpreted to mean "conservative") be invited to speak on the campus. One vice president reported being called to a meeting room by a trustee who wanted a new department to be created to serve only students who would work in the company owned by that trustee.
Richard T. Ingram, in his book Effective Trusteeship, writes that the "relationship of the governing board to educational programs" and "the involvement of trustees in setting institutional priorities" are "ambiguous and frustrating concerns for trustees and academic leaders alike."
The problem is that some trustees go beyond setting policy and want to be involved in its implementation. As one vice president in my informal survey said, "Though policy making is a trustee's role, and you [the trustee] might enjoy also recommending procedures, please do not be offended if they are not followed exactly, because several experienced colleagues at the university will also provide advice and the president will have to make a choice between several available alternatives."
Recognizing the Role of the Vice President
Vice presidents say they are often caught in the middle between two powerful people -- the president and the chairman of the board. That multiple-boss syndrome is less likely to cause problems when there is effective collaboration between the president and board chairman on the one hand, and the president and the vice presidents on the other.
Even where effective collaboration is the norm, however, vice presidents can find themselves being given directions by one or more trustees in addition to the president, sometimes with competing agendas, and then left to sort out how to respond in a respectful and appropriate manner.
One vice president recounted feeling caught between the board chair and the president in a dispute over accurately reporting the financial status of the college: "I found myself receiving confidential phone calls from the board chair, while also receiving calls and requests from the president. Given the gravity of the situation, I got the impression that they were avoiding each other. I often felt trapped and didn't know where to turn."
Trustees need to follow the appropriate channels for obtaining information (for example, through their committee or board chairs) and to be considerate of a vice president's workload when making requests.
A more serious consequence develops when trustees become too prescriptive. In that case, the trustee effectively "becomes" the vice president and either compromises the vice president's effectiveness or unnecessarily complicates the life of the president by creating tensions between the president's need to be supportive of the vice presidents as well as responsive to trustee "bosses."
Some vice presidents raised the issue of the role and voice of the vice president when the institution is experiencing poor leadership. One vice president asked, "What am I to do when a board member approaches me about the way the president is handling another college officer?" Another asked, "What if the question being asked by the trustee is about the president him/herself?"
It is clearly within the responsibility of trustees to monitor and assess presidential leadership. A well-structured, regular, and constructive method of assessing presidential performance -- one that includes the vice presidents and that provides for feedback to the president -- is not only appropriate but smart. When that happens, however, the anonymity of the vice presidents' comments must be assured.
Equally clearly, trustees should be asking probing questions of vice presidents. Such questions are often useful in leading a vice president to frame an issue differently. At Berea, for example, trustees have been helpful in asking important questions recently relating to the securities-law reforms of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. New policies on conflicts of interest, whistle-blower protection, and auditing practices have caused trustees and college officers to push hard on appropriate lines of responsibility for college officers and trustees. What could have been a compromising of college officers' authority instead resulted in appropriate and helpful policies and newly defined roles and responsibilities.
How and when trustees pose a question to a vice president -- in public or in private, for instance -- may be the real issue. The fact is, when a trustee asks a question, people listen. So it's crucial that trustees be clear about the kind of information the are seeking and its possible role in any decision-making process. At Berea, vice presidents serve on board committees, attend meetings, and are invited to speak so the chance of communication breakdowns is somewhat lessened. But such inclusiveness is not the case at all colleges, hence the frustration of some vice presidents.
Appropriate Involvement in the Life of the College
Most vice presidents want trustees to be interested in campus life. They want to see trustees at athletics events, faculty and community lectures, music and theater performances, and awards banquets. One administrator told me he wanted trustees on his campus to show a genuine interest in his work and in his staff, not to have his ego stroked but for the purpose of increasing the board members' understanding of the college.
That said, however, vice presidents also recognize that too much of the wrong kind of involvement by trustees can be disruptive and, if not part of the regular governance culture, can be viewed with suspicion. One vice president reported a trustee who undertook renovations of college property without consulting the president or the vice presidents.
Proper Preparation for Meetings
Vice presidents like it when trustees do their homework and come to meetings informed and are not surprised by issues that come before them. As one vice president said, "There is nothing worse than board members who are unprepared, who look to find problems because they are not prepared to offer solutions."
One vice president said the trustees on his campus asked for a major, updated facilities plan but then ignored it completely when several new trustees joined the board. "The board never asked for, or followed up on the request, even though hundreds of hours were spent on developing an updated instructional facilities plan," said the administrator.
Vice presidents cannot dictate in this area, but they can create conditions to help the trustees engage in a timely and substantial way. One of the most practical ways is for vice presidents and the heads of the board's various committees to meet in advance of the regular sessions. Berea uses WebCT online discussions before formal meetings to try to air issues in a collegial manner. In addition, of course, such communication happens via e-mail, conference calls, and personal visits. All who participate come to the formal meetings more prepared.
A Helpful Orientation
Many trustees come from the corporate world, and given the differences between that world and academic culture, a proper orientation is of critical importance. Here's what a good orientation should do:
-
Allow vice presidents to explain in some detail the specifics of their work and to provide a good overview of key areas.
-
Help trustees to see where they can add the most value in terms of committee assignments by helping them understand where their skills would fit best.
-
Provide opportunities for contact and exchange of ideas between trustees and students, professors, staff members, and administrators.
-
Serve to demystify "the trustees" on campus and foster a trusting and healthy organizational environment.
-
Broaden trustee acquaintance with the realities of institutional life.
At some colleges, trustees have a tendency to be too passive ("rubber stamps") and at others, to be too interventionist. The hope is that most colleges find the right balance, with the appropriate guidance, authority, and responsibility given to the campus-based leaders to perform their assigned duties.
If presidents, trustees, and vice presidents are to be effective, all must be affirmed for what they each bring to the table. The success of one largely depends upon the success of the others, and the college is the final beneficiary of thoughtful collaboration.
