Another leadership crisis at Michigan State University went national on Monday, as the head of a prominent research association questioned the governing board’s apparent moves against Michigan State’s president, and the university’s own board chairperson condemned her colleagues for sowing confusion about Samuel L. Stanley Jr.’s hold on the job.
Public knowledge of the clash began with a report this weekend in the Detroit Free Press that board members had given Stanley until Tuesday to announce his resignation or face the possibility of being fired. University officials told reporters on Monday that there had been no such ultimatum, but they confirmed that board members were in conversation with Stanley about his contract.
If the reports are accurate, then this is inappropriate meddling by a board.
The debate over Stanley’s future, which appears related to his support of a popular business dean’s recent resignation, has once again exposed public rifts among members of Michigan State’s board, who are elected by statewide vote. The board has been at frequent odds over leadership since the scandal caused by Larry Nassar, a former university sports doctor who, for years, had sexually abused girls and women under the guise of medical treatment. Should Stanley resign or be fired, he would be the third university leader to leave the job unceremoniously in the past five years — a period that has been defined by public jousting among board members over who is fit (or unfit) to lead Michigan State.
Dianne Byrum, the trustees’ chairperson, issued a statement on Monday afternoon criticizing fellow board members for trying to bring Stanley’s tenure to a premature close, and voicing support for the president.
“In recent days, some members of the MSU Board of Trustees, for which I serve as chairperson, have created confusion over the future of our university’s president,” Byrum said in the statement, which was reported in various news outlets. “These actions do not represent how the board of an institution of higher education should act. MSU President Samuel Stanley has led our university through many challenges in recent years and attempts to remove him from his post before his contract is complete are misguided.”
(Stanley was named president in 2019. His contract runs through July 31, 2024.)
Stanley and Teresa K. Woodruff, the university’s provost, have both been criticized in the wake of Sanjay Gupta’s abrupt resignation, in August, as dean of the Eli Broad College of Business. Gupta’s resignation, university officials said, was “the result of poor administrative oversight, including a failure to adhere to our mandatory reporting guidelines.”
Public details about the dean’s apparent ouster have been sparse. But the university’s mandatory reporting policy states, “Unless identified as a confidential source, all university employees are obligated to promptly report incidents of sexual harassment, sexual violence, sexual misconduct, stalking, and relationship violence.”
Clearly, though, the board still has questions. On August 30, Dan Kelly, vice chair of the board, said in a news release that the board had “retained outside counsel to review the administration’s decision in this matter.”
In his statement, Kelly worked to thread a delicate needle: He conceded at once that the decision to remove Gupta rested firmly with the provost, with support of the president, while adding that the board was responsible for “oversight and governance” and would “review the administration’s decision in this matter.”
Kelly’s nuanced position has done little to assuage governance concerns. In a rare statement on Monday evening from the president of the Association of American Universities about one of the organization’s own members, Barbara R. Snyder wrote, “I am appalled at reports of interference in MSU’s day-to-day operations by the university’s trustees.” She added, “If the reports are accurate, then this is inappropriate meddling by a board charged with governance, not management.”
Noting that the trustees are elected officials, Snyder placed the Michigan State news in the context of recent politically motivated interference at public colleges. “In this time of deep ideological polarization in our nation, few institutions face more difficult pressures than our leading state universities,” she wrote. “In recent years, even prestigious state universities like Texas, Virginia, and others have struggled to navigate the rocky waters between the interests of state officials and their academic missions. Indeed, several leading public research universities have lost multiple presidents, chancellors, and other top officials because those waters proved impossible for them to navigate.”
(Kelly, the vice chair, did not respond to an email from The Chronicle. Byrum, the chair, provided her statement, but did not respond to an interview request. None of the board’s eight members spoke with The Chronicle in response to phone messages or emails.)
According to the Free Press’s report on Sunday, “The board’s officers, representing the full board, told [Stanley on] Friday he had lost the board’s trust and needed to step down, sources said.” In a statement on Monday, which was reported by The State News, Kelly said that he and Byrum, the chairperson, did not issue an ultimatum.
“This past Friday, Board Chair Dianne Byrum, Vice-Chair Dan Kelly, and President Stanley had a brief meeting,” Kelly said in the statement. “Contrary to recent media reports, at no time was the President threatened with termination or given an ultimatum regarding his employment. The Board has made no decision regarding any change in President Stanley’s employment status nor his employment contract.”
The dissent among trustees over leadership at Michigan State has echoes of recent history. In the immediate aftermath of the Nassar revelations, board members were slow to decide whether to force out Lou Anna K. Simon, before she resigned under public pressure, in 2018. The board similarly disagreed on the fate of her interim successor, John M. Engler, a former Michigan governor, who made insensitive remarks about abuse survivors. Engler, a Republican, resigned less than a year after Simon, citing changes in the political majority of the board.
Stanley’s hiring was celebrated by many as a turning of the page for Michigan State. A biomedical researcher who had previously served as president of the State University of New York at Stony Brook, he brought academic and administrative bona fides without any clear political baggage or connection to the recent controversies that had plagued the institution. Some at Stony Brook cheered his departure, though, stung by the way Stanley had handled institutional budget cuts.
Michigan State’s board has struggled to regain the trust of many on campus, who have called for greater transparency and lamented the regular upheaval at the top. In her statement, Byrum, the board chairperson, signaled that this latest dispute among trustees could undermine that work. “I am disappointed in the behavior of some members of the board which threatens to roll back the progress MSU has made and will continue to make,” she wrote.
The chairperson noted enrollment gains and a rise in academic rankings among recent accomplishments. She also signaled a view that, in the wake of the Nassar scandal, frayed trust was beginning to be slowly repaired.
“We’ve taken great strides to address relationship violence and sexual misconduct and to improve the culture on campus,” Byrum said. “At MSU, we are on the move and making progress. That’s why I take strong exception to the conduct by several MSU Board of Trustees who have sought to undermine and second guess President Stanley under the mistaken belief they are somehow better qualified to run the university. They clearly are not as evidenced by the outpouring of concern, bewilderment and outrage their recent actions have generated. It is my belief these board members should apologize, reverse course and refocus on their proper role as Trustees of this amazing institution. President Stanley should be allowed to complete his service to MSU without undue interference by the Board.”
