Alumni are common fixtures on college governing boards. They are better prepared to be trustees, the conventional wisdom holds, because they understand their alma mater’s culture. But a new study contradicts that notion, finding that alumni are no more prepared to serve on boards than are their colleagues who attended college elsewhere.
The paper, scheduled to be discussed this weekend at the annual conference of the American Educational Research Association, analyzed data from a 2006 survey of trustees conducted by The Chronicle. It found that, among the sample of 1,500 trustees at 1,000 colleges, the 58 percent who were alumni reported feeling no better prepared to handle important board issues such as dealing with the president, tackling budgets, and working on strategic planning.
Nathan F. Harris, a graduate research assistant at the University of Michigan’s School of Education and author of the report, “Ready to Serve? Examining the Relationship Between Trustee Preparedness and Trustee Characteristics,” said his findings suggest that a false assumption of alumni having a leg up on other potential board members may encourage some colleges to pass up quality trustee candidates.
“They’re limiting their potential pool of trustees to alums,” he said.
Readiness Issues
Rita Bornstein agrees. An expert on higher-education governance and president emerita of Rollins College, Ms. Bornstein says alumni trustees often suffer from “blind loyalty,” which can cause problems for a board.
“They tend to live in the past,” she says, “and tend to be rather insular.”
Ms. Bornstein stresses that alumni can make excellent trustees, and their potential shortcomings are the result of good intentions. But she says boards would do better to seek out a diverse set of trustees, with their alma maters being part of the mix along with ethnic, age, and gender diversity.
In her work as a consultant, she tells boards to “bring some fresh air into their deliberations. Have some comparisons.”
Mr. Harris cautioned that the data he used had some limitations, including that trustees rated themselves in the survey. He said research over all is sparse on the effectiveness of boards, and that more work needs to be done to help trustees learn how to do their jobs.
According to the study, alumni trustees reported being more prepared than their peers in only one category: dealing with campus politics.
Merrill P. Schwartz, director of research for the Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges, reviewed the report and agreed with its assertion that boards need to examine their training and orientation practices. Ms. Schwartz also pointed to the study’s finding that the best preparation for trustees is having served on another college board.
When training trustees, “it’s particularly important to offer information about faculty and academic matters,” she said in an e-mail message.
In addition to questioning the alumni advantage on boards, Mr. Harris’s paper included provocative findings about the preparation of trustees hailing from business—a background shared by about half of the nation’s college board members.
Trustees working in the corporate sphere reported lower levels of preparedness than those working in education, according to the report, including in the area of strategic planning.
A common assumption is that “we need captains of industry to be on our boards,” Mr. Harris said. That may be true, but “not any more so than people working in education.”
Trustees who hold advanced degrees also reported higher levels of preparedness, according to the study.
Ms. Schwartz said boards should include some members who have experience working in higher education, such as former presidents or professors from other colleges.
“However, AGB would not advocate experience working in higher education be the only criteria for board service,” said Ms. Schwartz. “A broad range of experiences are needed to accomplish the broad work of the board.”
