-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!
Main Hall Prospect
- Thread starter CFallsGriz
- Start date
I think people should remember that the University of Montana is a business first and institutions of higher learning abandoned the education first model a long time ago. If UM wants to be truly successful then they need to hire someone with business acumen. The role of the president now days is to increase enrollment and increase the money for the university. There are other positions where the president can appoint people to manage the educational aspect of the University. Success is also knowing how to market the product (UM) to the masses, which they currently do a poor job of.
Jaredkuehn
Well-known member
Maxim said:
I think this was mentioned somewhere earlier in the thread. The higher education system is evolving. The advent of online, for-profit colleges is changing the landscape and rising tuition costs is turning people away from traditional universities. I think there will always be a place for traditional universities, but its going to take an innovator to keep UM relevant as an institution going forward.
That's why Bodnar's GE experience catches my eye. I'm not sure that I see most academicians as innovators, but maybe I shouldn't just assume that.
I am not opposed to Bodner. If in the process, he is the best candidate, then hire him regardless of the amount of time spent in or out of academia. With that said, the idea to just hire him because he is from the business world and is "different" is an asinine concept.
Hire the best candidate period. If he is it, great! If he is not, great! I just have to hope that the people who do the hiring do it right.
Hire the best candidate period. If he is it, great! If he is not, great! I just have to hope that the people who do the hiring do it right.
Given this final four is the product of 100 plus applications I am not impressed with the candidates. I am sad that my UM is in this shape.
Higher Ed....its costs skyrocketing out of reach. Those with deeper pockets or those with the willingness to incur huge debt represent students today. Took me a while to dig out of debt but many students today are absolutely buried in it.
Higher Ed....its costs skyrocketing out of reach. Those with deeper pockets or those with the willingness to incur huge debt represent students today. Took me a while to dig out of debt but many students today are absolutely buried in it.
grizatwork said:
As usual, great post grizatwork!
Sam A. Blitz
Well-known member
grizatwork said:
Very well put.
grizatwork said:
Did anyone suggest that Bodnar should be hired because he is from the business world and is different? Maybe someone did, I just don't recall.
I assume you also think it's asinine to hire a president just because he/she's from the academic world.
I found your opening line interesting, i.e. that you were "not opposed" to Bodnar. I agree that the best person for the job should be hired.
Ursa Major said:
Well it sounds asinine the way you put it anyway, and as usual Ursa has not much to add if there's no room for a funny. :thumb:
I don't recall saying, or anyone else unless I missed it, that he was "the best" for the simple, isolated fact that he's "from the business world." But rather that it's an added bonus along with his other experience and qualities, something few if any in the past have had.
People aren't looking at the entire case that was made. Also, in what I had hoped was my last post on this, I said that I didn't claim to 'know' any such thing, since I am not part of the search committee, and have never been involved with University business other than as a student. Just someone looking from the outside in that sees a need for a change of direction. That's not "asinine."
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
CFallsGriz said:
Next time listen to your instincts and don't post again. :thumb:
Not trying to call anyone out. I just get the impression that there is a sentiment that "we have to have him because he is different." If that is not how some of you feel, then don't be offended by my "asinine" comment.
I am for the process playing out and hiring the best candidate. I have to admit that I am intrigued by Bodner and am very impressed with what he has accomplished. If he turns out to be the best candidate after the race is run, then I am all for him. If another candidate seems like the better pick, then I am for him or her.
I don't have a dog in the fight and again I just hope the people that do the hiring, do their due diligence and get the right person for the right time for one of my favorite places in the world. The University of Montana.
I am for the process playing out and hiring the best candidate. I have to admit that I am intrigued by Bodner and am very impressed with what he has accomplished. If he turns out to be the best candidate after the race is run, then I am all for him. If another candidate seems like the better pick, then I am for him or her.
I don't have a dog in the fight and again I just hope the people that do the hiring, do their due diligence and get the right person for the right time for one of my favorite places in the world. The University of Montana.
I am not opposed to hiring someone who has mainly experience from academia. However, wanting to hire someone only because of experience in academia would be an asinine concept.
I saw your above post, Work. Understood. Just playing around. I assume the people making the final decision, based on considerable input, are the BOR.
I saw your above post, Work. Understood. Just playing around. I assume the people making the final decision, based on considerable input, are the BOR.
I don't like the notion that different departments, schools, etc. should be seen as mere "profit centers," like in business. Humans are not robots, to be trained in only one occupation, at least at the college/university level. It's ok for community and technical colleges, but not research universities. Our businesses, yes, need technicians, etc., and students who desire that narrow focus of their lives are welcome to it. But, business needs people who can rise above that narrow focus, and only a broad liberal arts education provides that.
You can hire a technician for his/her particular duty, but that technician can take a long time to become a leader of the business. OTOH, the liberal arts person can discern, perhaps not the details of the technician's job, but generally know what the tech's position does & how it fits into the overall organizational structure, and the broader view of the business's place in the commercial enterprise.
This drive for universities as businesses is due only to citizens being too cheap to fund these schools, to the extent that we distort the missions of these institutions to "be profit centers," rather than the broader mission of providing graduates with the vision to not just work for a company, but to lead it.
Only someone with an academic background can appreciate the broader, historical mission of higher ed., someone who sees more value in his/her school than producing technicians.
You can hire a technician for his/her particular duty, but that technician can take a long time to become a leader of the business. OTOH, the liberal arts person can discern, perhaps not the details of the technician's job, but generally know what the tech's position does & how it fits into the overall organizational structure, and the broader view of the business's place in the commercial enterprise.
This drive for universities as businesses is due only to citizens being too cheap to fund these schools, to the extent that we distort the missions of these institutions to "be profit centers," rather than the broader mission of providing graduates with the vision to not just work for a company, but to lead it.
Only someone with an academic background can appreciate the broader, historical mission of higher ed., someone who sees more value in his/her school than producing technicians.
Grizzoola said:
Royce had the requisite “academic background”, so how is it he failed so miserably that some want to go in the direction of a businessman or woman?
This thing with the U appears to have gotten past the point of determining how to simply “right the ship.” It’s going to take some different thinking to figure out what’s relevant to the prospective’s or it won’t matter what the credentials of the leadership are. It’s relevance that makes the difference. Like it or not, we’ve crossed the bridge to the age of disruption, old & established academic thought processes aren’t any match for determining paths forward when faced with a crisis of these proportions. Einstein was absolutely correct when he noted that we have to think differently about the solutions to the problems we caused.
Lament the passing all you want, but if you really want the U to pull itself out of the cycle some seem to think this is, it’s going to take an eye for running a business to do so.
Grizzoola said:
Once again--not hearing the whole discussion...did you read his thoughts on the job? Doesn't sound like it.
Ursa Major said:
See, now that's much better! Just stay in your wheelhouse
