Trustees: Pay Attention to the Mission Statement

Lively debates between champions and critics of higher education fill the pages of print and online publications, from The Wall Street Journal to People magazine, and the airwaves, from NPR’s Diane Rehm Show to scores of local talk shows. Champions and critics discuss demographics, finances, and values.

Given the diverse and decentralized character of American colleges, these topics cannot be addressed in general and abstract terms. At a minimum, they require a review of the “calling cards” of specific institutions: that is, their published, official mission statements.

The processes by which mission statements are written or updated vary widely, depending on the size, history, and legal status of specific institutions. In every case, however, the mission statement requires the approval of a governing board. In every case, the trustees own the language they have approved, and are responsible for how the statement is interpreted and applied.

Let’s say you find yourself serving as a college trustee. You want to do the best job you can — but what does that mean? Your contributions will vary according to your abilities and preferences, but mostly according to the conditions of your appointment.

If you are a trustee of a public institution, be prepared to meet the expectations of the state governor who appointed you, or of the citizens who elected you. Be prepared as well for the reality that these expectations will often differ from those of other political appointees on the board and from those of internal constituencies, especially faculty and alumni.

Or perhaps you are serving on the board of a private nonprofit college. If you are an alumnus or a benefactor, be prepared at every turn to affirm your loyalty to the institution. Typically this means that you should open your heart and your wallet without asking questions that might disrupt the coziness of your new “family” or put the management team on the spot.

In either case, you are hearing a constant stream of comments from fellow trustees, from the chief executive, and from the media about the epochal changes that are reshaping higher education in our time. To perform your duties effectively, you have to listen, read, and reflect on a world that is different from the social and professional networks to which you are accustomed. The world of trusteeship will no doubt also be at odds with memories of your own student experience.

To a greater or lesser extent, you will already have been introduced to your duties. Your institution should have provided an orientation to local issues and to broader trends in higher education. You have been given access to the print and online publications of professional societies. Time and resources permitting, you might also have attended conferences and workshops for trustees.

As an accomplished leader in your community or profession, you are no stranger to board service. Especially if you have been a director of a publicly traded company, you may find that college-specific orientations are long on information (annual budgets, physical plant, athletics-conference participation) and on process (student code of conduct, “shared governance”), while short on those ethical and legal responsibilities that are unique to members of governing boards, whether in commerce or academe: the duties of care and loyalty.

Association-led programs may have helped you place your institution in the context of a complex, growing, highly stratified sector of our society and economy. But they may fall short of guiding and sustaining you at two crucial moments you will probably face: the formulation of a new mission statement as prologue to a strategic plan, and the hiring of a new CEO. Often those two moments coincide.

Whether you are a politically appointed or an elected trustee, you will hear concerns about mission creep (endemic in higher education), the cost of attendance, and your institution’s real or alleged failure to meet the work-force needs of particular communities or regions. Be prepared for debates and disagreements about the mission of your institution. You may clash with fellow trustees but perhaps also, as happened recently in Wisconsin, with the governor who appointed you.

At tuition-dependent public and private colleges, you may hear that the pool of potential applicants is drying up because what your college offers is no longer valued or can be obtained at lower cost elsewhere. This is happening at several historically black colleges and at denominational colleges as well.

At other institutions, you may hear that the mission statement is strong, distinctive, and relevant. Yet you may find that campus leaders and boosters circumvent the institutional mission in pursuit of other goals, such as athletics success and ambitious capital projects. An example of this predicament is Baylor University, whose trustees either took part in circumventing the mission or seemed blind to the perils of doing so.

Even if you avoid Wisconsin-style political confrontations or Baylor-style traumas, you should expect surprises. For example, a rigorous data analysis performed by independent consultants may indicate the need for board action to change institutional strategy, shore up an eroding market position, or seek partners.

You will recognize that higher-education trustees have the same responsibilities as trustees in other organizations, yet you and your fellow trustees may find that you are not free to act in the manner and within the time frame that those responsibilities call for. Constituencies that have no specific fiduciary duties and may or may not be willing to look at hard data can tie the board’s hands. Sweet Briar College and Mount St. Mary’s University are two recent examples of how board decisions can be delayed and derailed.

How can you perform your fiduciary duties in ways that prevent betrayals of the institutional mission? Use a common-sense approach: Trust and verify. For example, question any apparent discrepancies between mission statement and resource allocation, between brand promotion and measures of student success.

What can you do when a majority of board members have concluded that your institution is no longer viable academically or financially? If you do not concur with the majority opinion, you should resign. If you do concur, your job is to lay out the best available data and the options for moving forward. For ethical and legal reasons, however, you cannot hide behind vocal opponents, especially when they offer no practical alternatives to an unsustainable status quo.

Most important, once you have made your president or chancellor and the management team responsible for changing institutional strategy, or negotiating partnerships, or planning for an orderly closing of the institution, you must support them unequivocally. An incumbent president, especially if he or she has served the institution for many years, may not be comfortable implementing board decisions. If so, you and your fellow trustees need to hire a new one, with a clear assignment and a timetable.

Serving as a college or university trustee is an opportunity that comes with unique responsibilities. They cannot be overlooked, whether to remain in the good graces of powerful politicians and major donors or to appease internal constituents.

The work is hard, especially in these contentious times, but the rewards are great.

Clara M. Lovett is president emerita of Northern Arizona University.