Joan Gabel has been named 19th chancellor of the of the University of Pittsburgh.

[formerlybis]

That's a tough job, obviously. The financial problems aren't unique to the U - no one saw the pandemic coming, of course, and that really accelerated the decline that was already happening in all of higher ed. That's not any one person's fault, it's systemic. A new president won't change that reality. Steering the big old boat in these difficult conditions is their job, but I fear they'll be fighting an uphill battle without acceptance of some sort of disruptive change in the business model. That is not the strong suit of such a traditional animal as the U, or academia in general.

 

[jamiche]

That's a tough job, obviously. The financial problems aren't unique to the U - no one saw the pandemic coming, of course, and that really accelerated the decline that was already happening in all of higher ed. That's not any one person's fault, it's systemic. A new president won't change that reality. Steering the big old boat in these difficult conditions is their job, but I fear they'll be fighting an uphill battle without acceptance of some sort of disruptive change in the business model. That is not the strong suit of such a traditional animal as the U, or academia in general.

Agree. However, somewhere out there is another Yudof. Somebody who has the brains and charisma to raise a ton of money and steer the boat in a different direction against the winds of entrenched interests. It starts with the board of regents, followed closely by the faculty.

 

[Holy Man]

Agree. However, somewhere out there is another Yudof. Somebody who has the brains and charisma to raise a ton of money and steer the boat in a different direction against the winds of entrenched interests. It starts with the board of regents, followed closely by the faculty.

I am more concerned about faculty than regents. But both need to be on board to do what is necessary by choice and vision and not because there are no choices left.

Higher education generally is in a change mode whether they like it or not. The leaders need to convince the middle management to make it a positive thing for their constituencies, and encourage them to go beyond their own self-interests. Not an easy task at all.

 

[formerlybis]

I am more concerned about faculty than regents. But both need to be on board to do what is necessary by choice and vision and not because there are no choices left.

Higher education generally is in a change mode whether they like it or not. The leaders need to convince the middle management to make it a positive thing for their constituencies, and encourage them to go beyond their own self-interests. Not an easy task at all.

You might just as well be talking about any faculty and regents at any big, public university. Again, not unique to the U. and therein lies a problem. It's incredibly difficult to change things at your institution that aren't being done elsewhere (assuming it requires some sort of sacrifice). It's the same for any kind of employer - if you make things hard on the employee, they'll find another employer who isn't - at least not yet. That's particularly an issue for top research dollar attracting faculty, who would be welcomed with open arms elsewhere - you have to be competitive.

Tough, tough job

 

[jamiche]

I think the Board of Regents should break some Minnesota cultural rules. I think they should offer the highest salary in the B1G if not for all public universities for the position. You get exactly what you are willing to pay for and we got Gabel, who decided pretty close to immediately that she was underpaid. Then she took ethically dubious steps to "rectify" her "problem," after having accomplished not much.

If the U offers tall dog compensation they will get a tall dog applicant pool. Let's not be satisfied with average!

 

[Gophers_4life]

I think the Board of Regents should break some Minnesota cultural rules. I think they should offer the highest salary in the B1G if not for all public universities for the position. You get exactly what you are willing to pay for and we got Gabel, who decided pretty close to immediately that she was underpaid. Then she took ethically dubious steps to "rectify" her "problem," after having accomplished not much.

If the U offers tall dog compensation they will get a tall dog applicant pool. Let's not be satisfied with average!

The Regents specifically enticed her with the ability to join a board to bolster her income. I believe I read that in someone’s post in the football board thread.

Quite obviously Pittsburgh did the same. Guessing a lot of major public systems as well.

So far, all I’ve seen in the two main threads on this is folks decreeing that it was an awful move, without much of any meat to explain why.

I remain unconvinced that the next president of the U shouldn’t also join a board.

 

[jamiche]

The Regents specifically enticed her with the ability to join a board to bolster her income. I believe I read that in someone’s post in the football board thread.

Quite obviously Pittsburgh did the same. Guessing a lot of major public systems as well.

So far, all I’ve seen in the two main threads on this is folks decreeing that it was an awful move, without much of any meat to explain why.

I remain unconvinced that the next president of the U shouldn’t also join a board.

There are plenty of boards to join where there isn't an obvious conflict of interest.

 

[Gophers_4life]

There are plenty of boards to join where there isn't an obvious conflict of interest.

So Gabel could choose any board she wanted and join that if her own unilateral decision?

She didn’t have to receive an invitation to join a board, first?

 

[Gophers_4life]

By the way, is Securian such an awful, amoral company?

Aren’t they a Minnesota founded and still HQ’ed company?


You’d rather send the money out of state? Chase? BOA?

 

[Holy Man]

By the way, is Securian such an awful, amoral company?

Aren’t they a Minnesota founded and still HQ’ed company?


You’d rather send the money out of state? Chase? BOA?

You’re dog with a bone bit is overlooking most of the issues brought up here. Her being on a board has nothing to do with Securian being a good or bad corporate citizen. I think you probably know that. It’s the fact that the U is a major client of them and her dual responsibilities to the company and the U is an obvious conflict of interest. It’s amazing to me that you seem to be such an outlier on an issue that almost everyone here, with widely differing perspectives on so many public matters, seems to agree on. It’s practically unbelievable.

 

[jamiche]

So Gabel could choose any board she wanted and join that if her own unilateral decision?

She didn’t have to receive an invitation to join a board, first?

My guess is that there are many companies in the Twin Cities who would love to have the president of the U join their boards. It's a prestigious and strategic addition, particularly if the U president is a woman.

 

[jamiche]

By the way, is Securian such an awful, amoral company?

Aren’t they a Minnesota founded and still HQ’ed company?


You’d rather send the money out of state? Chase? BOA?

Securian isn't awful and it isn't amoral. The problem is that it does a lot of business with the U. It's a clear conflict of interest.

 

[Gopherguy0723]

The Regents specifically enticed her with the ability to join a board to bolster her income. I believe I read that in someone’s post in the football board thread.

Quite obviously Pittsburgh did the same. Guessing a lot of major public systems as well.

So far, all I’ve seen in the two main threads on this is folks decreeing that it was an awful move, without much of any meat to explain why.

I remain unconvinced that the next president of the U shouldn’t also join a board.

That's because you're dim.

 

[Off-GridTNgopher]

That's a tough job, obviously. The financial problems aren't unique to the U - no one saw the pandemic coming, of course, and that really accelerated the decline that was already happening in all of higher ed. That's not any one person's fault, it's systemic. A new president won't change that reality. Steering the big old boat in these difficult conditions is their job, but I fear they'll be fighting an uphill battle without acceptance of some sort of disruptive change in the business model. That is not the strong suit of such a traditional animal as the U, or academia in general.

A whole political party saw the plandemic coming ...