Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Saving Alma MaterA Rescue Plan for America's Public Universities$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

James C. Garland

Print publication date: 2009

Print ISBN-13: 9780226283869

Published to Chicago Scholarship Online: February 2013

DOI: 10.7208/chicago/9780226283883.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM CHICAGO SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.chicago.universitypressscholarship.com). (c) Copyright University of Chicago Press, 2018. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in CHSO for personal use (for details see www.chicago.universitypressscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy).date: 15 November 2018

What Price Shared Governance?

What Price Shared Governance?

Chapter:
(p.97) 8 What Price Shared Governance?
Source:
Saving Alma Mater
Author(s):

Ernst R. Berndt

Publisher:
University of Chicago Press
DOI:10.7208/chicago/9780226283883.003.0009

This chapter presents a case study of Miami University to illustrate the cost of shared governance. In 2004, Miami University had 193 standing committees above the departmental level. It is found that a six-person committee meeting for two hours costs the university more than a thousand dollars. The question of value is partly a matter of relative efficiency. In academia, the question of value is muddied by the intentional symbolism of shared governance. It can be a major challenge to structure such committees so that no group feels disenfranchised. It is a common experience for those who appoint search committees to begin with aspirations of creating a small “working” committee but then to find that complaints from the campus compel them to add members. The important point is that the stated goal of finding the best candidate often succumbs to the community pressure for broad participation. These two objectives tend to be in conflict. Not only can large committees be nearly unworkable from the perspective of organizing meetings and having productive group discussions, but such committees are also frequently drawn to lowest-common-denominator candidates whose primary attribute may be the ability to present themselves as outgoing, affable, and nonthreatening to any of the represented constituencies. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the same phenomenon in case of presidential leadership

Keywords:   shared governance, decision making, public universities, college education, higher education, cost analysis, presidential leadership

Chicago Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs, and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.