 

In... 11....

E. .. .\

.1.
k ya....,.% 9. r
.n
. .

maths!) 4 Wu

..i L

14

.0.

Va

Haul

0.. r.

xTLﬁd.

In

 

.. 3.: . . . 2.

.vﬁﬁ » 7 van.»

. 1.4; . . . I.
.Fs1.;.a....... .
as! . .

4 . N... .t . u

a. ‘
. . 5
gang:

I 5,:
Al... 4 3 it“
‘51” ,

.. t .
a. «.45».
. 3.:

32. :

sat-r

(ﬁn... .
, 3.9m.

L

x
J. 3.
4;

n; i!!!

I .

~ . .1. .
4&3...“ auﬂ$ .V

w 4
néhi‘i.
'-a~

i...
399.!
.

mm.

1:.”

n. :b...

:4“:
A in aw
, I II». I;
‘ - V11 4 ’1! o
.5. . an... .
ghizfaﬁfﬂr.
1:11
. “Au. sqxhw ..iu..
V. .nmﬁ. «mewfx
. S g
_ ‘0‘
« 44.3.31
or? ,
Um.”
I‘m)...»

»n4

 

t! . 1...: ‘ , , .
D4. _ .21.. 8.7

This is to certify that the

dissertation entitled

The Effect of the Electoral Process on the
Decision Making of the MSU Board of Trustees

presented by
Allyn Radcliffe Shaw

has been accepted towards fulﬁllment
of the requirements for

PhoDo degreein HALE

r professor

MW Ma
Q“!

 

Date July 30, 2002

MSU is an Afﬁrmative Action/Equal Opportunity Instilun'on 0427'"

 

 

LIBRARY
Michigan State
University

 

 

 

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6/01 c:/CIRC/DaIeDue.p65«p. 15

THE EFFECTS OF THE ELECTORAL PROCESS ON THE DECISION-MAKIN G
OF THE MSU BOARD OF TRUSTEES

Allyn Radcliffe Shaw

A DISSERTATION
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulﬁllment of the requirements
for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department of Higher, Adult and Lifelong Education

2002

ABSTRACT

The Effect of the Electoral Process on the
Decision-Making of the MSU Board of Trustees

By

Allyn Radcliffe Shaw

The purpose of this study was to examine how the electoral process effects
the decision making of the Michigan State University Board of Trustees. The
goals were to identify how trustees made decisions and what inﬂuenced the
outcomes. Eight Michigan State University trustee emeriti, from each dominant
political party representing the last four decades, were interviewed.

The research and theoretical foundation included stage theory discussing
decision making styles and inﬂuences on the process. This study was conducted
with qualitative methodologies. Data were collected through in-depth, semi-
structured interviews after completing an examination of previous board minutes.
The interview questions were guided by the research questions, the literature
review, the theoretical foundations and the ofﬁcial minutes of the Michigan State
University Board.

Analysis of the data revealed several key ﬁndings that included a life cycle
for the board of trustees’ tenure. The stage theory includes how the electoral
process effects how decisions by and inﬂuences to trustees are made over time.
The pattern demonstrates a speciﬁc decision making system utilized by the trustee

emeriti. The outcomes strengthen the existing literature.

The research discovered that six of the eight trustee emeriti strongly
agreed that the election process is the best method for selection to the Michigan
State University Board of Trustees. Most of the trustee emeriti stressed the
importance that citizens in the state of Michigan elect the individuals who
represent them at the three public research universities.

The research found that the orientation to the MSU Board of Trustees has
changed dramatically over the last forty years from a lunch meeting to a two day
workshop with a notebook on policies and procedures. The trustee emeriti
discussed and appreciated the more in-depth orientation workshop format which
enabled them to quickly assimilate with the current board members.

The research demonstrated that MSU Board of Trustees members follow a
speciﬁc pattern of decision making over the life cycle of their tenure as board
members. This is important when understanding how and why individuals make
decisions. The March and Cohen Garbage Can Theory (1986) in which decisions
are made by oversight, ﬂight, or resolution techniques and the political
frameworks suggested by Morgan (1986), and Bolman and Deal (1991) represent
a foundation from which the board members operate.

The electoral process was found to have direct and subverted effects on
the decision making of the individual trustees and with the entire board. The
structure of the electoral process inherently creates a political environment for
selection to the board and for subsequent decision making of the members.
Internal and external inﬂuences also were discovered to effect how the trustee

emeriti made decisions over time.

Cepyﬁght by
Allyn Radcliffe Shaw
2002

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I want to thank my family for the love, encouragement and support over
all of the years. My parents, brother and sister-in-law have helped me move
forward through each program and making me a better person.

I want to thank the HALE program faculty for all that they have taught me
over the years. The professors have taught me to be a better writer and thinker. I
appreciate all the care and concern of the professors in the department.

I want to thank my dissertation committee members (Elaine Yakura,
Marilyn Amey, Rhonda Egidio and Marylee Davis, chair). Michigan State
University, students, staff and faculty are very fortunate to have these four
extraordinary individuals in their lives. I cannot thank each of you enough for the
suggestions, the pushing, the prodding, and the, “Have you thought about. . .” Dr.
D. I never would have made it through without you. You are a very special
person and a great professor.

To all of the ofﬁces with which I have worked—Residence Life, the
Provosts Ofﬁce, Eli Broad College of Business Academic Services Center, the
Assessment Ofﬁce and especially the Admissions Ofﬁce, thanks for putting up
with me. Jim, Eileen, Kate, Kelly, Dr. Straney thanks for all of the support and
suggestions over the last few years. I can never thank you enough.

To the support group. . .you know who you are. . .thanks. Dr. Metcalfe
thanks for the support and suggestions are the last few years. You are a hidden

treasure for doctoral students.

To all of my friends, thank you, thank you, thank you. You have seen the
best and worst of me through the last few years. I want to give my appreciation to
Vickie and JoLee for editing. Jenny, Andrea, Simon, Lora, George, Jim, Ali,
Karen, Jane, Mike, Jen, Anne, Sherry, Leslie, Malayna, Freda, El vira, Steve,
Bruce, and everyone else who I may have missed. . .I would not have made it
without your editing, prayers, thoughts and prodding.

Thanks to my transcribist, Sharon Barker, who moved the project forward
with great speed and ease. All of the mistakes or omissions are mine. Thanks
also for the suggestions that you offered.

Finally, to the individuals I interviewed. Thank you for being great role
models who have done so much with your lives. I appreciate all of your time,
ﬁanlmess, and opinions. I am also encouraged by the faith that you had in me. I

am a better person for meeting each and every one of you.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER ONE—INTRODUCTION

Background of the Problem ........................................................................ 1
Purpose of the Study .............................................................................. 2
Major Research Questions Posed .................................................................. 5
Theoretical Framework ............................................................................. 5
History of Higher Education and Land Grant Colleges ............................... 5

Land Grant College Growth .............................................................. 9
Governing Boards of Land Grant Universities ........................................ 11
Signiﬁcance of the Study .......................................................................... 15
Conceptual Model .................................................................................. 16
Design of the Study ................................................................................. 18

CHAPTER TWO—REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Introduction .......................................................................................... 19
Deﬁnitions ........................................................................................... 19

Governance Deﬁnition ..................................................................... 21

Governance Responsibility ............................................................... 21

Land Grant Governance .................................................................... 22
Board Composition and Selection ............................................................... 23
Land Grant Board Member Selection Process ................................................... 24
Loyalties are Created Through These Processes ................................................ 25
Selection Procedures Inﬂuence of Sense of Representation .................................. 27
Literature Recommendations for Selection .................................................... 27
Michigan State University Composition and Organization .................................. 30
Theoretical Concept ............................................................................... 31
Limitations of the Literature ...................................................................... 38
Summary ............................................................................................. 39

CHAPTER THREE—RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Introduction ......................................................................................... 4O
Methodology and Research Design ............................................................. 4O
Rationale for Qualitative Research .............................................................. 41
Data Collection Procedures ...................................................................... .42
Interviews ................................................................................... 42
Instrumentation ............................................................................ 43
In-depth Interviews ........................................................................ 43
Primary Data ................................................................................ 43

vii

Validity ............................................................................................. 44

Sampling ............................................................................................ 44
Conﬁdentiality ..................................................................................... 45
Data Analysis ........................................................................................ 45
Limitations .......................................................................................... 46
Summary ............................................................................................. 49
CHAPTER FOUR—FINDINGS
Introduction ......................................................................................... 50
Theoretical Foundations ............................................................................ 52
Key Findings of the Study ......................................................................... $5
Stages of the Life Cycle of an MSU Board of Trustee Member .............................. 55
Beginning Stage ............................................................................. 55
Campaign Process ................................................................. 61
Campaign Decisions ............................................................. 63
Middle Stage ................................................................................ 65
President, Provost, Faculty Liaison Inﬂuence on Trustees’ Decision-
making .............................................................................. 66

Board Members’ Decisions When They Consider Constituents. . ...........68
Party Afﬁliation Affects How Trustees Emeriti Made a Decision. . . .. 69

Public Institution Philosophy Affect Decision Making ..................... 72

End Stage .................................................................................... 73
Inﬂuences upon the MSU Board of Trustees members ........................................ 74
Internal Inﬂuences ......................................................................... 74
External Inﬂuences 77
Inﬂuences on Individual Member’s Decisions on a Speciﬁc Matter... . ....80

Decision Making .................................................................................... 82
Dynamics Within Groups that Help Them Come to Consensus ..................... 93
Strategies Used by Those With Power to Make Board Decisions ................... 96
Training/Orientation Received ..................................................................... 97
Electoral Process is the Best Procedure for Boards of Trustees .............................. 97
Summary of Findings .............................................................................. 101

CHAPTER FIVE—SUMMARY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Overview ........................................................................................... 102
Summary ........................................................................................... 102
Conclusions ....................................................................................... 104
Board Member Selection ................................................................ 105
Board Orientation ....................................................................... 108
Decision Making Techniques ......................................................... 109
Limitations ........................................................................................ 1 11

viii

Recommendations for Future Research ........................................................ 1 l 1

Reﬂections .......................................................................................... 1 12
REFERENCES .................................................................................... l 14
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Solicitation to Participate in the Sample Letter ................................ 120
Appendix B: Informed Consent ................................................................ 122
Appendix C: UCRIHS Approval Letter ......................................................... 124
Appendix D: Conﬁdentiality Agreement ....................................................... 126
Appendix E: Trustee Protocol ................................................................... 128
FIGURES
Figure 1.1 Design of the Study of Decision Making Patterns of MSU Board of
Trustees ............................................................................ 18
Figure 4.1 Design of the Study of Decision Maldng Patterns of MSU Board of
Trustees ............................................................................ 53
Figure 4.2(A) Life Cycle of the MSU Board of Trustee Member with Decision making
Inﬂuences ........................................................................... 54

ix

CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Background of the Problem

It is virtually impossible to escape contact with boards. We either are

on boards, work with them, or are effected by their decisions. Boards

sit atop ahnost all corporate forms of organization--proﬁt and non-

proﬁt--and often over governmental agencies as well. The elected

forums of our political jurisdictions are board like structures.

John Carver
Houle (1989) cites the existence of approximately 4.5 million governing boards in the
United States. This number includes non-proﬁt, governmental (including local
legislative), and business boards. Drucker estimated that non-proﬁt organizations
"may now employ more people than federal, state and local governments put
together" (1978) and that "half the personal income of the United States (and of most
other developed countries) is spent on public service institutions" (1977, p. 17).

“The ﬁelds of public policy and policy analysis largely worship objectivity
and determinate rules. They aim to drive rules of behavior that will automatically
lead to the objectively ‘best’ results,” claims Deborah Stone in Public Policy (1988, p.
xi). “If one reads or talks very much about policy in academic settings, one cannot
help but notice a profound rejection of politics in favor of rational analysis. By and
large, academic writings disparage politics as unfortunate obstacles to good policy”
(Ibid, 1988, p. x). Many political scientists have contributed to this literature of
disparagement by demonstrating how actual policy making ‘deviates’ from pure

rational analysis. Stone continues to say that people are all political creatures in our

daily lives as well as in our governance. It is argued that each of the analytic

standards used to set goals, deﬁne problems, and judge policy solutions is politically
constructed. There is no “gold standard” of equality, efﬁciency, social measurement,
causation and effectiveness.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this research is to study the effect of the electoral process
on the decision-making techniques of the Michigan State University Board of
Trustees members. Some of the issues explored include the effect of political clout
on an elected trustee’s decision-making, concern for personal gain or retention of his
or her seat, and an individual’s inﬂuence on a decision that the board makes.

Michigan State University’s academic governing board selection process is
considered one of the most divisive in the nation (Healy, 1996, p. A43). The board
members are selected by Michigan’s major political parties to run on a state wide
ballot and then elected by the citizens of the state. Michigan is one of few states to
govern the three state research universities by this means.

The quality of trustees’ decisions is dependent upon the degree of
independence the trustees insist upon and exert, regardless of political afﬁliations,
professional loyalties or predilections, ethnic or religious ties. Elected trustees are
sometimes unduly sensitive to the constituencies that elected them; appointed ones
are equally sensitive to the political ﬁgures or bodies responsible for their
appointment. Both vitiate their contributions to the progress of the university and
endanger the university’s integrity when they allow it to be compromised by their

own lack of independence (Perkins, 1973, p. 223)

The more than 20,000 American citizens who serve on college and university
boards of control as regents or trustees have contributed immeasurably to the
interpretation and support of higher education, explaining signiﬁcantly the
phenomenal growth of the American system (Merrill, 1960, p. 42). Most trustee
members hold a ﬁll] time job in addition to representing the particular institution,
allowing them signiﬁcant contact with outside constituents. The institutions, as well,
are in need of products to function and conduct major research for the world. In
addition, many philosophical and monetary desires are wanted by people within
companies, political action and religious groups who are trying to inﬂuence campus
operations.

A trustee inevitably brings to the board a body of valuable knowledge
originating in his own experience. He may be a labor union ofﬁcial, a member of a
minority group, a banker, a medical doctor, or a social worker. While having several
roles both personally and professionally, a trustee should not serve as a representative
of any of these groups. A trustee’s responsibility is rather to make decisions that are
in the best interests of the university that further strengthens the educational process.
When a trustee operates otherwise, he weakens the university and raises doubts about
its intentions. Additionally, when the trustee interprets the role of representation
narrowly, it fosters an attitude of interference with institutional objectives. Such an
attitude often contributes to divisiveness among trustees and sharply limits the scope
of their interests and concern. (Paltridge, 1973, p. 223)

Each campus has internal inﬂuences such as the president’s agenda, the

faculty agenda, staff and student desires that could effect how a member votes for an

outcome. How does this inﬂuence manifest itself to the trustees and how do they
respond to the pressure? Is this inﬂuence different from an external inﬂuence, such
as an interest group or union, and if so what happens between conﬂicting forces?

Trustees must feel ﬂee to seek information ﬁom sources they deem
appropriate. The sources may be both inside and outside the university community.
Under ordinary circumstances, the university staff can supply the data trustees need.
However, in the event, that a trustee needs to augment such information with their
own, research should be carried on with the president’s full knowledge; otherwise,
dangerous political situations can develop—dangerous in that they destroy normal
channels of communications and encourage doubts about the validity of the staff
work (Perkins, 1973, p. 222).

Since trustees are the ultimate decision makers on policy matters in any
university, it is important to identify the ways in which they can enhance the quality
of their decisions. Hasty, incorrect, or undocumented judgments will lead to a
weakening within the institution. The outcomes can also lead to antagonism both in
and outside of the university, culminating in a loss of support. A certain amount of
human error in judgment is inevitable in any enterprise. A preponderance of error,
however, quickly destroys the reputation of a board and does irreparable harm to the
institution the board legally governs (Ibid, p. 221)

It is axiomatic that the quality of board decisions is in direct ratio to that of the
staff work provided by the president through his ofﬁce and other administrative

ofﬁces under his direction (Ibid, p. 221)

Several social scientists use metaphors to explain how decisions are made.
The researcher will utilize several authors’ theories and analogies to explain themes
within the data collected concerning how decisions were completed over time. The
theories and themes will help explain the effects of the political process on decision-
making.
Research Question

How does the electoral process affect the decision-making practices of the
Michigan State University Board of Trustees’ members?

A. What is the effect of political clout on elected trustees’ decision-making?
B. What is the effect of concern for personal gain?

C. What is the effect of concern for retention of the trustees’ board positions?
D

. How does a person desiring an appointment to the board of trustees alter his or
her behavior to inﬂuence being nominated by a political party?

E. Where does the balance of power lie regarding the board member and the
political party?

Beginnings of US Higher Education, the Morrill Act, and Land grant Colleges
Harvard (1636), Yale University (1701) and The College of William and
Mary (1693) were the only colleges chartered until 1745 and their missions were
combined to be both “theological seminaries and schools of higher culture for
laymen” (Brubacher and Rudy, 1976, p. 6). “They maintained that college was a
religious society whose basic and chief duty was to train its students to be religious
and moral men. . .religious instruction was to be emphasized” (McAnear, 1972,
p.465). Therefore, the boards of trustees, presidents and faculty were comprised of
ministers who created and carried out the academic curriculum and student services.

There was not a visible division between work and labor for the faculty.

Even though the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 set aside public land for the
creation of universities, it was not until the early 1800’s that these laws would be
supported. The Dartmouth College Case of 1819 changed higher education funding
and created the availability for the ﬁrst state—supported institution. In this case, “The
US. Supreme Court ruled that an institution of higher education chartered by the state
but not supported from public frmds could not unwillingly be taken over or controlled
by the state, because this would constitute unilateral violation of contract” (Brubacher
and Rudy, 1976, p. 145). Because “whoever pays the piper calls the tune,” signaled
the end of the use of public funds for private colleges and universities, it was now
apparent and certain that the states would develop and support colleges and
universities controlled by and for public purposes (Delworth, 1984, p. 7).

Thomas Jefferson tried to gain control of The College of William and Mary
and a New Hampshire institution as he believed that when necessary, the state could
and should gain control of a higher education institution’s ﬁnances and governance
because it comprised a public trust whatever the terms of the charter. In 1825,
Jefferson established the University of Virginia, the ﬁrst state-supported university in
the United States. Three signiﬁcant changes appeared with the University of
Virginia. First, the institution was secular and non-denominational; second, it was a
completely public-enterprise in its ﬁnance and governing structure; and, third, it not
only gave more advanced instruction than other existing colleges, but also offered
several curricular choices to its students. This was a major shift ﬁom the traditional,
private religious institutions and considered quite radical for students to have choices

in classes.

The Yale Report of 1828 was produced after the founding of the University of
Virginia and Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, and after President George Ticknor’s
unsuccessful attempt to reform and liberalize the classical curriculum at Harvard in
1825. This document was a backlash to all of the liberalizing ideas that were
presented over the last decade. “This document, which was supported by nearly all of
the inﬂuential church-related colleges of that era, was one of the principal factors in
the retarding of the development of secular, publicly supported institutions of higher
education for nearly forty years” (F enske, 1988, p. 8). The Yale Report offered
support for the traditional religious institutions to continue in their old steadfast
methods and resulted in strong opposition for the creation of secular, public
institutions. The Yale Report further helped fuel these arguments about the growth of
the secular movement and slowed this expansion until the end of the Civil War.

In 1862, for the ﬁrst time, the federal government intervened into higher
education legislation with the Morrill Land Grant Act. The federal legislature was
responding to pressures from the public about the lack of accessible public higher
education and created the ﬁrst phase of agricultural and mechanical institutions in all
states. Veysey (1965, p. 15) claims that despite the Morrill Act, “legislatures were
always ready to interfere with or curtail the operations of state institutions (as, for
example, at Michigan in 1877, when faculty salaries were reduced)” It was not until
1900 that the states were able to capitalize on the Act and follow the leads of
Michigan, California and Wisconsin in creating strong state systems (Delworth, p.

1984, p.9).

At the same time, there was a tremendous growth in the following of the
characteristics of German research universities. One major concept of the German
philosophy included the idea that students should be ﬁne of administrative or faculty
supervision of their academic and social affairs (Cowley, 1949, p. 19). With the
movement towards secular education and campuses, the growth of the German
research university followings, and coeducational institutions, the prototypes for the
Dean of Students positions were being created.

By the 1920’s, the ﬂames for our current higher education system were in
place. Most states had strong public systems and most private institutions were
moving away from the religious philosophies on which they were founded. The
number of junior colleges, precursors to the community college systems, was growing
at a rapid rate. The ﬁrst junior college opened in 1901 in Joliet, Illinois (Delworth,
1984, p. 10).

Along with the GI Bill, the President’s Commission on Higher Education
(Truman Commission) created the ﬁrst comprehensive plan for opening post
secondary instruction to all people. The elimination of racial, ethnic and ﬁnancial
barriers was recommended in the 1947 report as well as the creation of ﬁnancial aid
for all students. The report also recommended creating a network of low-cost
commuter colleges (Ibid, p.10).

The 1960’s and the 1970’s experienced a tornado of activity on the college
campuses—ﬁrst with the onslaught of new students, second with the requirement for
building, third with the intervention of laws by the federal government, including the

National Defense Education Act to strengthen math and science programs, and fourth

the increasing inequity between and amongst the students (Ibid, p. 11). The
availability of opportunities for all students was apparent, but not always appreciated.
Colleges and universities were slowly moving into a multicultural environment ﬁ'om
a traditionally strong homogeneous culture. Students in the 1960’s protested social
inequalities, the Vietnam War, American imperialism and continued limited rights of
students. With the rise of diversity among college students, much new and different
learning has been needed and produced. Today, we are just now starting to
understand the diverse and multicultural multiversity.

This history of higher education is included to demonstrate that governing
boards have directly affected the growth of the United States system over the last 300
years. The governing boards started with Harvard University and are utilized on
almost every campus in the country. The history explains the interdependence
between the governing board and the institution as well as the challenges each faces
daily. The trustees' role is critical to higher education
Land Grant College Growth

Justin Smith Morrill was elected to the US. House of Representatives ﬁ'om
1854 until 1867 and to the US. Senate ﬁom 1867 to 1898 representing Vermont.
Morrill believed “that a new and vigorous type of education was necessary because of
certain conditions that existed in the United States where public land was being sold
at a rapid rate. Morrill desired the English education method where agricultural and
mechanical curricula existed to teach the “common” man practical methods. Morrill

was concerned with the lack of agrarian methods to preserve soil and remove waste.

In addition, several states could not aﬁ‘ord adequate educational facilities (Eddy,
1957, pp. 27-29).

In 1862, the Morrill Act was passed by both Houses of Congress and signed
into law by President Abraham Lincoln. The Act, which evolved from a bill ﬁrst
introduced in 1857, provided that public lands could be granted by the states to
existing or to-be-established trustees bodies for the use or founding of higher
education institutions. These institutions became designated “land grant” colleges.
(Anderton, 1996, p.5)

The new type of populist-oriented education legislative action began in 1862.
It was “an educational revolution, but not of the kind to happen overnight and would
take almost one hundred years to complete” (Eddy, 1957, p. 46). Land grant
institutions would experience great change during this time. Abraham F lexner
described the initial character as an “organism” where the parts and the whole are
inextricably bound together (Kerr, 1982, p. 20) in one community. This organism
depiction evolved into what Flexner labeled “a federation” (Kerr, 1982, p. 6), a union
of organisms. As these institutions continued to grow in size and complexity, they
evolved into “the really modern university—the multiversity. . .[where] many parts
can be added and subtracted with little effect on the whole. . .It is more a
mechanism. . .held together by administrative rules and powered by money” (Kerr,
1982,p.6,20)

The Hatch Act of 1887 and the Smith-Lever Act of 1914 enhanced the land
grant act and its effectiveness. By providing for experiment stations and extension

services, this ‘three-legged stool’ of legislation ensured that knowledge coming from

10

these colleges and universities could be tested in a real-world setting and effectively
transmitted to a public beyond enrolled students (Anderton 1996, p. 7). The new
colleges faced immediate governance issues that began with the need to use or
dispose of the 30,000 acres of national land that every state was granted for each US.
Senator and Representative it had. Each state was to create an endowment ﬁom the
sales of the land from which income would support the operations of its land grant
college.

The land grants have grown to be some of the largest and most important
universities in the world. This has been possible because of the continued assistance
of federal moneys; the addition of state moneys; and room, board, tuition, grants and
endowment provided by students, alumni/ae, parents and friends (Anderton, 1996, p.
7). Individual campuses can have more than 40,000 students from more than 100
countries, 4000 faculty members, and programs ranging from agriculture to zoology
located on each of the earth’s continents. The undergraduate student body educates
the qualiﬁed masses while the elite graduate research and applied sciences programs
at the land grants involve many of the brightest minds whose work and discoveries
have impact around the world.

Governing Boards of Land Grants

The land grants’ early governance chartered under the 1862 Morrill Act can
be described as erratic.

The typical governing board was almost as ineffective in ﬁnancial

management as in educational direction. Selection by governor, legislature, or

in a few cases by popular vote, brevity and uncertainty, legislative

ll

interference—at times to the point of abolition or reorganization--and local

and group pressure all worked against administrative competence” (Ross,

1942, p. 99-100).

Since the beginning, state legislatures have developed governing boards of these
institutions composed primarily of individuals selected or elected through statutory
procedures and informal processes. Accordingly, these land grant governing boards
are established with individuals serving by appointment, election, or serving on an ex-
ofﬁcio basis because of their special ofﬁce or position (Anderton, 1996, p. 10).

Those appointed are typically selected by the governor and/or the state legislators in
which they serve. In 47 states (94 percent), governors, and/or legislatures make the
appointments (Trustee Selection, 1980, p. 15). The others utilize self-perpetuating
boards or elections—statewide or district.

Trustees are inevitably the court of last appeal in matters related to university
independence and integrity. They must understand that their reactions to external
pressure inevitably inﬂuence the ability of an institution to function effectively.
There is ample documentation in the history of American higher education to support
the validity of this point (Bargh, 1996, p. 224).

The question regarding election or appointment of university board members
is most often asked at election time. It is clear that the states and their politicians,
political parties, and political processes control the power and procedures for land
grant trustees’ selection (Anderton, 1996, p. 13). Many of these appointed and elected
trustees are political rewards. “Far too often, political cronies are selected by

governors to serve on these boards,” (Weiss, 1995, p. A30).

12

Election of trustees on a nonpartisan statewide basis would produce other
complications. Leading representatives of the type desired would not be interested in
becoming candidates. Those who would run for ofﬁce would be likely to reﬂect the
positions of whatever organizations provided the funds for their candidates.
Furthermore, it would be almost impossible to expect that such trustees would
achieve the desired balance of commitment and representation (Heilbron, 1973, p.
10).

Statistics indicate land grant governance is now big business. Land grant
institutions represent 105 of the 181 public research, state and territorial colleges and
universities that comprise the National Association of State Universities and Land
Grant Colleges (Anderton, 1996, p. 13). These institutions “enroll more than 2.9
million students and claim upwards of 20 million alumni. . .award approximately a
half million degrees annually, including about one-third of all bachelors and masters
degrees, 60 percent of all US. doctoral degrees and 70 percent of the engineering
degrees” (NASULGC, March, 1995, p. 2). The annual operating budgets of the land
grant institutions were $24 billion in the ﬁscal year ending June 30, 1994 (Minter,

J .W. & Associates, 1996, 94).

Thus, as trustees carry on their role as representatives of the larger
community, the strength, clarity, and honesty with which they adhere to the principles
of independent action become paramount in importance. Part of the role of advocacy
is to interpret academic, social, and structural changes within the university in terms
of the independence necessary to being then about. This is one major way to bring

about understanding and acceptance of what the university does. Support of the

13

university, including its continuing stability, depends on the success of this kind of
interpretation (Bargh, 1996).

The governing body representative holds something valuable in trust—the
classrooms, the libraries, the laboratories, the dormitories, the complex
interrelationship of students and faculty, the institution itself—for high purposes and
beneﬁts, not for himself, but for others (Heilbron, 1973, p.3). Magrath (1990, p. 3)
states, “all trustees share a basic responsibility, to hold in trust the college or
university, making sure that its fundamental mission. . .is fulﬁlled to the greatest
possible degree.” Similarly, Nason writes that a prime responsibility of trustees is “to
preserve institutional autonomy" (1980, p. 8-9).

It should be noted that the US. population has a special character. The citizen
taxpayers believe that they are entitled, as trustees supporting the institution, to voice
their views to the trustees on the conduct of the institution and to expect that proper
attention will be paid to them. Faculty and students may demand that the trustees
protect the “independence” of the institution against the pressures of the public. Are
public trustees committed to the town or to the gown? The answer is that they have
obligations to both. They must be concerned with their respective protests. If the
trustees can persuade the institution to be true to its purposes and the town to honor
these purposes, they will be acting in the interests of both parties. In a tense situation
this is more easily said than done (Heilbron, 1973, p. 5).

Signiﬁcance of the Study
The last major research concerning the MSU Board of Trustees and decision-

making was completed twenty years ago and the politics, the issues and the outcomes

14

have changed. Michael Born (1974) completed the last doctoral dissertation
concerning the MSU Board of Trustees. The research demonstrates that the private
schools had “people buy their way onto the board” and that party politics effected
who was elected to the boards of the public institutions. With this background,
speciﬁc groups controlled the decisions. As legislation and ideologies have changed,
board demographics have varied.

Federal legislation and ideological changes continue to alter who is
inﬂuencing the decisions. “Big business” and unions have greater inﬂuence as they
have the money to help fund major projects. The public action groups have their
agendas heard in a much easier fashion as they are in the public limelight. The
comparisons are important for understanding thedifferences in external inﬂuences
and patterns in a large public institution

Using the state of Michigan as an example can highlight the above problems.

“If [a trustee] sounds more like a politician than a turiversity regent, it’s because, in
Michigan, a person must have the skills of the former to become the latter. . ..
Michigan’s selection process [is] the nation’s most politically divisive method of
choosing state-university regents. . .. Each party makes two nominations for each
university; the top two vote getters on the November ballot win. . .. in recent years,
nominations have come down to litmus tests: republicans must be ‘pro-life,’
democrats ‘pro-labor” (Healy, 1996, p. A43). Because of these circumstances,
Michigan’s Governor, John Engler, “has proposed ending direct election of the
regents at the state’s three largest public universities, making them gubernatorial

appointees instead. . .Given our diminishing public resources, more attention to the

15

process of selecting trustees and to the problems created by current procedures
clearly seems warranted” (Haro, 1995, p. B1).

The trustees of the big state universities and the boards of trustees of the most
famous private universities have much in common. Both must contend with
powerful academic guilds that they cannot afford to offend, because there is as active
a market for big-hitting professors as there is for football or baseball stars (Duryea,
2000, p. 164). They are drawn from similar political, business and professional
elites. As such, much of their lobbying effort is directed to inﬂuencing the policies
of the hydra-headed federal government. Many of the most divisive issues, such as
afﬁrmative action, political correctness and sexual harassment, arise ﬁom legal
obligations that effect public and private universities equally. It is not surprising,
therefore, that in practice their governance cultures are broadly similar. Size, not
legal status, is the most signiﬁcant discriminator. Many state universities are multi-
campus institutions with hundreds of thousands of students; most private institutions
are single-site institutions much closer in scale to ‘old’ universities in Britain (Ibid,
p.164).

The Conceptual Model

The conceptual model (Table 1A) is constructed to explain a path for
decisions to follow. The concept describes how a decision tracks through the board
and what inﬂuences are evident. The model should make apparent themes within the
decision-making processes.

The model offered a tool to navigate through the qualitative study and offered

suggestions on how to proceed through each section of the research. Creswell (1994,

16

p. 11) discusses the need for a conceptual framework within qualitative studies. The
researcher used this design to learn more about the MSU Board of Trustees, trustee
emeriti, and inﬂuences upon the members to learn how to devise an interview survey.
From the interviews, transcriptions took place and the constant comparisons methods
created trends and themes within in the different interviews. The developmental and
decision-making theory offered grounding for themes that then helped decipher and

explain different patterns.

17

Table 1A

Design of the Study of Decision Making Patterns of MSU Board of Trustees

Members

        
 
 
 

Internal
Inﬂuences

Election

 

 

 

 

MSU

Board of

Trustees
Analysis of
relationships
of distinctive

 

 

 

Distinctive
patterns
attributable to
similarities in
key types of
decisions

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

types of

board

decisions
External

Inﬂuences

   
 

18

Identiﬁable speciﬁc
patterns of decisions
by members

 

 

CHAPTER TWO

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Introduction

This literature review represents what is known and written about elected
boards and decision-making described in the Introduction (Chapter I). The chapter
offers deﬁnitions and histories where appropriate and details published
recommendations from earlier research. It concludes with a critique of what is
written and what additional research could be done as a next step in addressing the
problem.
Deﬁnitions

Richman and Farmer (1974, p.5) describe a university “as a set of
interdependent parts that together make up a whole because each contributes
something and receives something from the whole which, in turn, is interdependent
with some larger environment.” Working in student development over the last ﬁfteen
years, the researcher utilized organizational and decision-making theories in this
study. Developmental culture (Bergquist, 1992, p.5) ﬁnds meaning primarily in the
creation of programs and activities furthering the personal and professional growth of
all members of the collegiate community. The members value personal openness and
services to others, as well as systematic institutional research and curricular planning.
They hold untested assumptions about the inherent desire of all men and women to
attain their own personal maturation, while helping others in the institution become

more mature. The developmental culture conceives of the institution’s enterprise as

19

the encouragement of potential for cognitive, effective, and behavioral maturation
among all students, staff, faculty and administrators (Ibid, 1992).

“One of the strengths of the developmental culture is its reliance on basic
behavioral sciences principles. . .tlre developmental culture provides a clear and
coherent theory that can readily be articulated by most members of the culture” (Ibid,
p. 103). Using Max Weber’s analysis of power and authority (1947), one can
postulate that the developmental leader makes use of “expert” power, rather than
“rational-legal” or “power ﬁ'orn position,” as the board member researches and is
involved with the university organizational culture. Organizational culture thus
provides that context for identifying authority in higher education.

...A public board performs in a glass bowl, conducting most

discussions and taking actions in the public arena and before the

press. . .it is important that the trustees bear in mind their public

posture. . .one consideration is whether the board appears to be an

effective instrument of governance. Does it seem to know what it is

doing? Does it seem informed about the problems and personnel of

the institution? Does it give the impression of groping for solutions?

More afﬁrmatively, does the board show leadership, a willingness to

grapple with issues, an understanding of the factors that underlie a

policy determination, a dedication to the welfare of the university?

(Heilbron, 1973, p. 31)

20

Governance Deﬁnition

The American Heritage Dictiona_ry of the English Langgage (1981) deﬁnes
govern as “to make and administer public policy; to control, direct, or exercise
sovereign authority actions and conduct of a person or group.” The New Shorter
Oxford Dictionm (1993) deﬁnes govern as to “rule with authority, conduct the
policy, actions, and affairs of a subject; direct and control, have under protective
guardianship.” Common to both deﬁnitions are the words ‘control’ and ‘direct’.
With respect to governance of higher education and land grant institutions, key
concepts embodied in these deﬁnitions are ‘policy’,‘inﬂuence’, and ‘guardianship’
(Anderton, 1996, p. 28).
Governance Responsibility

The critical rationale and responsibility of higher education institutions
governance is ‘the function of guardianship’ (Kerr and Gade, 1989, p. 12). “The role
of trustees and governing board members in representing institutional interests in the
fact of increasing external involvement has become more important” (Hines, 1988, p.
13). Higher education governing board researchers Nason (1982), Ingram and
Associates (1988), Kerr and Gade (1989) explain that there is common understanding
of 12 trustee responsibilities which have received wide acceptance and endorsement
in the literature. Included in these responsibilities is the task “to preserve
institutional autonomy’ (Nason, 1980, revised 1989, p. 8). Given the politically
driven conﬂicting representation matters associated with land grant trustees,

institutional autonomy can be perceived as existing in a ﬂuid state that is inﬂuenced

21

by the forces of and relationships with many competing constituencies and
stakeholders (Anderton, 1996, p.29)
Land Grant Governance

Beginning in the mid-19‘h century, land grant governing boards were
constructed through diverse methods such as selection by the Governor of the state in
which the institution is located, selection by the legislature of the state, elections
within the state involved, or the use of appointment by position to select them. Most
states use a combination of the preceding. However, in ﬁve states (Delaware,
Massachusetts, New York, South Carolina, and Vermont); boards are selected, in
part, by self-perpetuating methodologies (Ibid, p.30).

Kerr and Gade (1989) explained that every land grant institution has a
governing board and that the overall quality is suspect. Inferior board appointments
have led to poor leadership, which, in turn, has made these appointments unwanted to
many able, potential candidates. “This downward spiral leads to more interference by
the states because of perceived lack of leadership” (Kerr and Gade, 1989, p. 106).

Callan and Honetschager are also concerned with the quality of those serving
and add that “there is virtual consensus of those who have examined the issues since
1980 that the overall effectiveness of education governing boards is declining. . .Who
makes up the board makes a difference. . .The major factor to which all of these
analyses attribute the weakening of public governing boards is quality of board
appointments” (Callan & Honetschager, 1992, p. 3-4).

In the Michigan institutions, the elected boards are chosen for eight-

year terms, and two members are subject to election every two years.

22

Political party caucuses nominate trustees. Traditionally both parties

have nominated able and distinguished men for regents of the

University of Michigan, but apparently the other two universities have

not fared so well. Michigan State trustees are reported to be in a

constant state of partisan and ideological debate. . .Obviously, unless

the political parties act as conscientious screening agencies, the

representation on a statewide elective board will be uneven and

unsatisfactory. (Heilbron, 1973, p. 9-10)
Board Composition and Selection

Public institution governing boards average nine trustee members while those
of independent institutions average 28 trustees (Anderton, 1996, p.33). The number of
members can affect the board’s ability to perform as groups increase in size, it
becomes more difﬁcult to be focused and goal oriented (Kreeger, 1975). “Moreover,
as group size exceeds about twelve members, attaining consensus decreases
dramatically” (Reddy, 1994, p. 32). Larger groups are also less content and have less
pleasure and satisfaction derived from their work (Kerr, 1989, pp. 287-313).

Thirteen percent of public institution trustees are alumni of the institution they
serve while the comparative ﬁgure for independent colleges and universities is 31
percent (Anderton, 1996, p. 34). In 1985, approximately 90 percent of board
members were white and six percent were African-Americans. Hispanics, Asian, and
Native Americans composed the remaining percentages (Association of Governing
Boards of Universities and Colleges, 1986, p. 3-12). Minority representation on

governing boards has increased between the 1985 study and Grigsby’s 1995 article;

23

governing boards continue to be less diverse than the populations represented
(Anderton, 1996, p. 34). This lessens the “insight and ability to respond to
increasingly diverse educational needs” It is noted that in a “recent survey of public
higher education trustees in one state. . .71 percent of those currently serving on
governing boards are male, and 51 percent are over 60 years old” (Callan &
Honetschager, 1992, p.4).

The National Commission on College and University Trustee Selection writes
that, “One manifestation of improper governmental intrusion is what seems to be the
priority given to political rather than qualitative criteria in trustee selection
processes. . .. The lack of diversity and balance in age, sex, minority status,
geographic coverage, and professional expertise in board membership limits board
perspective and seriously damages the board’s legitimacy and credibility.” (National
Commission on College and University Trustee Selection, 1980, p. 14)

Land Grant Board Member Selection Processes

Governors appoint approximately 75 percent of all public university board
members. The pool of potential trustees is smaller since each of these trustees must
be a citizen of the state in which they serve (Kerr and Gade, 1989, p. 40). Each of the
land grant institutions designated under the Morrill Act of 1862 incorporates the use
of political processes to select some or all of their trustees (Anderton, 1996, p.36).
The states of Colorado, Michigan, Nebraska, and Nevada select their trustees through
district and statewide elections (National Commission on College Trustee Selection,

l980,p.15)

24

Callan and Honetschlager (1992, p. 5-6) list problems associated with the state
political processes for trustee selections as: governors pressured to use board
appointments to reward individuals and organizations for political support; no
systematic process exists for recruiting and screening potential appointees; board
appointments are considered politically sensitive, but unimportant; lack of explicit
criteria and reviewing process for qualiﬁcations or nominees. The literature makes it
apparent that political elections and appointments at public institutions are heavily
inﬂuenced by allegiances to politicians and/or parties and not necessarily to the needs
of the institution being served (Anderton, 1996, p. 40).

Some land grant universities have a number of board members selected
through self-perpetuating procedures. In these instances, “trustees often are selected
because they have the same educational, business, or social background as other
members of the board. . .. In such cases, board members tend to ‘clone’ themselves”
(Haro, December 8, 1995, p. 81).

Loyalties are Created Through These Processes

Loyalties held by individuals can and do effect their decision-making thought
processes (Kerr and Gade, 1989, p. 43). The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionm
(1993) deﬁnes the root of loyalty, i.e., ‘loyal’, as “faithful or steadfast in allegiance;
true or faithful to the obligations of duty, life, ﬁiendship. . .” Implicit in any subjective
selection procedure is the sense of loyalty or allegiance by those chosen to the
individuals or bodies doing the selecting. For those trustees selected through political
processes, their political loyalties can frequently conﬂict with those served.

(Anderton, 1996, p. 41)

25

Several examples are found when governors are trying to reduce spending, but
state-supported institutions of higher education need more ﬁrnds just to keep current
operations viable. “Typically, trustees and governors have understood that trustees are
intended to be above politics... [They are to] maintain an unfettered ability to
advocate for institutional needs. Whenever trustees seek to implement a political
agenda. . .they place higher education on the slippery slope to permanent
politicization” (Marcus, January/February, 1997, pp. 15-16). This indicates that if the
selection process works against establishment of trust, it also has negative impact on
commitment, loyalty, and productivity. Gardner states that loyalty, by itself, does not
represent “sufficient qualiﬁcations. I emphasize the point because more than one
recent President of the United States has had aides who possess no other
qualiﬁcations” (Gardner, 1990, p. 10).

Some disadvantages associated with the impact of differing loyalties on
decision-making can be resolved through mandating trustee disclosure statements
(Ingram, 1994, p. 5-7). Ingram formally deﬁnes ﬁduciary responsibilities before
having the individual list conﬂicts of interests, emphasizes, “all decisions. . .are to be
made solely on the basis of a desire to promote the best interests of the institution”
(Ibid, p. 5). In spite of this effort to prioritize responsibilities and disclose conﬂicts of
interests, Ingram (1993, p. 9-35) writes, “Tensions between elected political leaders
and the academy remain high. . .The dangers attendant to preoccupation with political
party afﬁliations in the boardroom are also very real—an unfortunate phenomenon

more commonly found in elected boards than appointed boards. . .. [The] factions

26

within the board that are based on politics or personalities rather than honest
differences on issues [are frequent]
Selection Procedures Inﬂuence Board Members’ Sense of Representation

The literature relating to trustee selection procedures’ impact on
representation and decision-making is essentially non-existent. Criticism exists,
however, with respect to political and government involvement in the process. “It
must be recognized that politics cannot be taken out of political appointments.” (Kerr
and Gade, 1989, p. 43) This decline of legitimacy and credibility has resulted in a
lessening of independence for public institution governing boards (Ibid, p. 106).

Former land grant presidents John DiBiaggio and Gordon Haaland and Steven
Sample, former president of SUNY-Buffalo, write that, “As a result [of the
politically-based selection process], many individual trustees come to the board with
a political agenda or feel compelled to represent a particular constituency. . .. At
private universities, the board... pays much less attention to the media and the
demands of various special-interest groups. . .. And as a general rule, it is possible to
attract people of much greater stature to private boards” (DiBiaggio, Sample, and
Haaland, 1996, p. 8-9).
Literature Recommendations for Selection

“It is time for a serious look at how public colleges and universities are
governed, including how trustee selection can be reformed. The gap in expectations
between and among elected political leaders, trustees, presidents, and faculty leaders

is widening dangerously" (Educational Record, Spring/Summer 1996, p. 51).

27

Kerr and Gade (1989, p. 41) note, “Among public boards . . .appointrnent is a
better means than election of selecting board members.” They state that many
qualiﬁed individuals will not involve themselves in an election process and
individuals that do run frequently make commitments to special interest groups to
ﬁnance their campaigns. They note that another drawback of an elected board is it
almost necessarily mandates a relatively small board [because of costs] (Kerr and
Gade, 1989).

Another method of improving the selection procedure and quality of board
members is to have individuals appointed by interested community representatives as
it is believed a diversity of viewpoints is important and links more constituencies and
stakeholders to the board (Schick, 1995, p. 19). Callan and Honetschlager provide
recommendations to include: meeting the needs of the institution; a non-partisan
screening process, which seeks diversity in representation; explicit statements of
qualiﬁcations; and on-going orientation programs (Callan & Honetschlager, 1982, p.
8-11). They also advocate inclusion of alumni associations in the screening,
nominating, and selection processes (Ibid, 1992, p. 6).

Ingram & Associates (1993, p. 378-379) presents responsibilities and
desirable qualiﬁcations for board members that include “defending the autonomy and
the independence of the university [and] to maintain an overriding loyalty to the
entire university rather than to any part of it or constituency within it.” With respect
to qualiﬁcations, Ingram & Associates seek board members that possess
“independence. . .. The capability and willingness to function as a member of a

diverse group in an atmosphere of collegiality and selﬂessness. .. [and

28

on]. . .overriding loyalty to the university and to the public interest rather than to any
region or to constituency” (Ibid, p. 379).

“Policies need not be solely in the educational ﬁeld; indeed, it has been
reliably determined that only 15 percent of trustees’ decisions are in this area. Many
other decisions are more in the reahn of management or important procedural
regulation. . .Rules governing institutional conduct are matters of policy” (Heilbron,
1973, p. 33-34).

The literature includes concerns for lay governing boards. Minnesota,
Montana and Oklahoma had failed referendums that attempted to replace education
boards with gubernatorial appointments. “These developments in Montana and
Oklahoma inject a disturbing element—a vastly reduced role for lay governance...
These two proposals...suggest higher education would be more responsive to state
needs if its authority was consolidated under closer control of the government”
(AGE, 1995, p. 6). In March 1995, Governor Jim Edgar of Illinois signed legislation
eliminating the Illinois Board of Regents, the two multi-campus system boards, and
the Board of Governors for Universities and replaced them with gubernatorial
appointees. If all of these initiatives were enacted into law, they would lessen the
autonomy and independence of land grant institutions advocated in the literature
(Anderton, 1996, p. 51).

In 1988, the state of Minnesota formed a Regent Candidate Advisory Council
(RCAC) that found good governance demands, “The selection process favor
qualiﬁcation over partisanship. . .the board and its electors recognize the essential

difference between a governance role. . .and political representation. . .the board must

29

concentrate on policy development and reduce the time spent on administrative
detail,” and that the regents primary responsibility is governance, not representation.
The study also found that the legislative election process handicaps candidates who
are not afﬁliated with a particular political group or party (Ibid, pp.52-3).

Michigan State University Composition and Organization

“Michigan State University is the land-grant university for the State of
Michigan, designated in 1863 by the Michigan Legislature to be the beneﬁciary of the
endowment provided by the Monill Act. . .it shares with its sister universities the legal
responsibility to provide a liberal and practical education for the agricultural and
industrial classes and all others, to prepare them for the various pursuits and
professions of life,” explains the Preamble of the Michigan State University Board of
Trustees’ Bylaws (January, 1980, p.1).

“The Constitution confers upon the Board of Trustees the freedom, power,
and responsibility to develop a free and distinguished university and to promote the
welfare of mankind through teaching, research and public service,” states the
Preamble of the Michigan State University Board of Trustees’ Bylaws (Ibid).

The Michigan State University Board of Trustees supervises the institution
and controls and directs the institution’s expenditures (Ibid). As outlined in Article
Four of the Bylaws, the Board consists of eight members elected for eight-year terms.
The ofﬁcers and organization of the Board include a chairperson and a vice
chairperson where all trustees will be chair and vice chair during their term as a

system of rotation is in place. The President is an ex aﬂicio member.

30

The board meets monthly in East Lansing for ofﬁcial business meetings where
quorum or majority of trustees is required. A smaller group of trustees may come
together to research and learn more about issues. The Board organizational meeting
structure, as outlined in the Preamble’s Article Two, state that the board meetings
shall be open to the public.

Comnrittees are deﬁned in Article Five where it says, “The Board may
appoint committees and prescribe their duties and functions. All resolutions and all
committee reports offered which involved matters for record in the minutes shall be
made in writing.”

“The business which the board may perform shall be conducted in compliance
with Act No. 267 of the Public Acts of 1976, being sections 15.261 to 15.725 of the
Michigan Compiled Laws, otherwise known as the ‘Open Meetings Act.’ Public
notice of the time, date, and place of the meeting shall be given in the manner
required by Act No. 267 of the Public Acts of 1976,” explains Act 269 of 1909 in
M.S.A. 15.1124. The state law and the university bylaws are congruent to allow four
or fewer Board members to meet in working meetings that are not open to the public,
but if quorum is met, the meeting becomes open. 1
Theoretical Concept

“When we look at universities as they struggle with problems of
reorganization, reform, choice, and survival, we are struck by one consistent theme:
Decision opportunities are fundamentally ambiguous stimuli” (Cohen, March, &
Olsen, 1972. p. 81). Although organizations can often be viewed as vehicles for

solving well-deﬁned problems and as structures within which conﬂict is resolved

31

through bargaining, they also have sets of procedures through which organizational
participants arrive at an interpretation of what they are doing and what they have done
while doing it. From this point of view, an organization is a collection of choices
looking for problems, issues and feelings looking for decision situations in which
they might be aired, solutions looking for issues to which they might be the answer
and decision makers look for work (Cohen & March, 1986).

Cohen and March, two social scientists who have studied decision-making
within organizations, offer a speciﬁc metaphor in their research. Some other
researchers who study decision-making processes include Yukl (1981), Birnbaurn
(1988), Morgan (1986), Bolman and Deal (1991), Schein (1980), Chaffee (1983,
1988), Bennis and Nanus (1985), and Westrneyer (1990). Metaphors or analogies are
most often used to explain how boards operate within organizations, and most
explanations include a political ﬁamework to explain completed decisions. The
political aspect of the aforementioned theories will be most utilized within this study,
as the electoral process of the board members is believed to be instrumental in
determining how decisions will be completed. The common thread running through
the concepts is that resources, whether human, conceptual, or tangible, will increase
in one area and be depreciated in another—that there is a ﬁnite pool of allocations,
and power lies within increasing the capital.

Morgan (1986) emphasizes a “way of thinking” within his metaphors for
explaining organizational functions within which decision making is a primary aspect
and they include: Machine, Organisms, Brains, Cultures, Political systems, Psychic

prisons, Flux, and Transformation. Each concept looks at organizations in different

32

ways with emphasis on how ideas and communication travel thus creating power
conduits. The information may ﬂow in one speciﬁc path or in several continuous
directions thus creating different believed power levels.

The political metaphor can be used to unravel the politics of day-to-day
organizational life. Most people working in an organization readily admit in private
that forms of ‘Vvheeling and dealing” through which different people attempt to
advance speciﬁc interests surround them (Morgan, 1986, p. 142). However, this kind
of activity is rarely discussed in public. The idea that organizations are supposed to
be rational enterprises in which their members seek common goals tends to
discourage discussion or attribution of political motive. Politics, in short, is seen as a
dirty word (Ibid, p. 142).

Morgan’s (1986) theory recognizes that politics and politicking may be an
essential aspect of organizational life affecting decision-making, and not necessarily
an optional and dysfrmctional extra. In this regard it is useful to remember that in its
original meaning, the idea of politics stems from the view that, where interests are
divergent, society should provide a means of allowing individuals to reconcile their
differences through consultation and negotiation. This provides a means of creating
order out of diversity while avoiding forms of totalitarian role, thus creating a non-
coercive form of social order (Ibid, p. 142).

Bohnan and Deal (1991) utilize ﬁnes for the metaphors in their
organizational and decision-making theory and they include: Structural, Human
Resource, Symbolic, and Political. The Political framework asserts that, in the face

of enduring differences and scarce resources, conﬂict among members of a coalition

33

is inevitable and power becomes a key resource. If resources are scarce, trade-offs
have to be made (Ibid, p. 187). This theory emphasizes that organizational goals arise
not from ﬁat at the top, but ﬁ'om an ongoing process of negotiation and interaction
among the key players in any system.

The political ﬁame views organizations as “alive and screaming” (Ibid, p.185)
arenas that house a complex variety of individual and group interests. The following
ﬁve propositions summarize the political perspective.

1. Organizations are coalitions composed of varied individuals and interest
groups.

2. There are enduring differences among individuals and groups in their values,
preferences, beliefs, information, and perceptions of reality. Such differences
change slowly, if at all.

3. Most of the important decisions in organizations involve the allocation of
scarce resources: they are decisions about who gets what.

4. Because of scarce resources and enduring differences, conﬂict is central to
organizational dynamics, and power is the most important resource.

5. Organizational goals and decisions emerge ﬁom bargaining, negotiation, and
jockeying from position among members of different coalitions. (Ibid. p.186)

The political frame views authority as only one among a number of other powers. It
also acknowledges the existence and importance of hmnan (and group) needs but
focuses on the situations of scarce resources and incompatible preferences where
different needs collide. The political theorist is more likely to view divergent

interests and conﬂict over scarce resources as an enduring fact of organizational life

34

and is less likely to be optimistic about distinguishing among better and worse
solutions (Ibid, p.193).

Garnson’s (1969) analysis of political processes focuses on two major players
in the social system: authorities and partisans. Authorities are deﬁned essentially as
the people who are entitled to make binding decisions. Gamson describes the
relationship between authorities and partisans in this way: “Authorities are the
recipients or targets of inﬂuence, and the agents or initiators of social control.
Potential partisans have the opposite roles—as agents or initiators of inﬂuence, and
targets or recipients of social control” (Gamson, 1969, p. 76). Social control is
essential to those in formal positions because their authority depends on it.
Ofﬁceholders, in this case, trustees, retain authority only if the system remains viable.

Even though partisans do not have authority, they do have a number of
potential sources of power. A number of social scientists (French and Raven, 1959;
Baldridge, 1971; Kanter, 1977) have tried to address the question, what must
individuals and groups have in order to be powerful? The most signiﬁcant forms 'of
power include the following: 1. Position power (authority); 2. Information and
expertise; 3. Control of information; 4. Coercive power; 5. Alliances and networks; 6.
Access to and control of agendas; 7. Control and meaning of symbols; and 8. Personal
power (Ibid pp. 196-7).

The presence of multiple forms of power constrains the capacity of authorities
to make decisions. People who rely solely on their authority often undermine their
own power; they generate resistance and are outﬂanked, outrnaneuvered, or overrun

by individuals and groups who are more versatile in the exercise of power. Expertise,

35

rewards, coercion, allies and personal power all help to close the gap (Ibid, p. 197).
Does the board rely on its own power or authorities to make decisions or do they
reach out to other information centers?

Cohen and March’s (1986) metaphor for decision making consists of a
garbage can, which focuses attention on the ways in which meaning changes over
time. It calls attention to the strategic eﬁ'ects of timing (in the introduction of choices
and problems), the time pattern of available energy, and the impact of organizational
structure on these. A key to understanding the processes within organizations is to
view a choice opportunity as a garbage can into which participants dump various
problems and solutions. The mix of garbage in a single can depends partly on the
labels attached to the alternative cans; but it also depends on what garbage is being
produced at the moment, on the mix of cans available, and on the speed with which
garbage is collected and removed ﬁ'om the scene (Cohen and March, 1986, p. 81). A
decision is an outcome (or an interpretation) of several relatively independent
“streams” within an organization. The four streams include problems, solutions,
participants and choice opportunities.

Within a garbage can process, decisions are made in three different ways:

1. By oversight. If a choice is activated when problems are attached to other
choices and if there is energy available to make the new choice quickly, it will
be made without any attention to existing problems and with a minimum of
time and energy.

2. By ﬂight. In some cases, choices are associated with problems

(unsuccessfully) for some time until a choice “more attractive” to the

36

problems comes along. The problems leave the choice, and thereby make it
possible to make the decision. The decision resolves no problems (they
having now attached themselves to a new choice.)

3. By resolution. Some choices resolve problems after some period of working
on them. The length of time may vary greatly (depending on the number of
problems). This is the familiar case that is implicit in most discussion of
choice within organizations. (Ibid, p. 83)

This summary information also includes examining problem activity, problem
latency, decision-maker activity, and decision difﬁculty.
Cohen and March found eight major properties of garbage can processes:

1. Resolution of problems is not the most common style for making decisions
except under conditions where ﬂight is severely restricted or under a few
conditions of light load.

2. The process is thoroughly and generally sensitive to variations in load.

3. Decision makers and problems tend to track each other through choices.

4. There are some important interconnections among three key aspects of
“efﬁciency” of the decisions processes speciﬁed.

5. The decision making process is frequently sharply interactive.

6. Important problems are more likely to be solved faster than unimportant ones.

7. Important choices are much less likely to resolve problems than are
unimportant choices. Important choices are made by oversight and ﬂight.

Unimportant choices are made by resolution.

37

8. Although a large proportion of the choices are made, the choice failures that
do occur are concentrated among the most important and least important
choices. Choices or intermediate importance are virtually always made. (Ibid,
pp.84-6)

The decision-making theories have common threads used for formatting
interview questions in the study and for analyzing the data. The study also reinforces
the change or the similarities in the style of decision making of the board over the last
forty years. The concepts are the basis for explaining how the decisions are made so
one can then interpret the effects of the selection processes.

Limitations of the Literature

There is little literature written about governing boards. The public and land
grant institutions governing board selection processes are authored by a small number
of proliﬁc authors causing there to be little literature. Most researchers are connected
with or work for the Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges
headquartered in Washington, DC. Chait, Holland, and Taylor (1993) write, “most of
these works, however, are ‘armchair studies’ or prescriptive exhortations by seasoned
practitioners” (Anderton, 1996, p. 53).

The material concerning the selection processes and the implications of
conﬂicts of loyalty on decision-making matters is politically inﬂuenced. This
literature cautions against using only political processes for creating governing boards
and describes several consequences resulting from abuse. The literature does not
compare politically selected boards with self-perpetuating governing boards. The

researcher could ﬁnd little documentation in the literature relating speciﬁc troubles

38

caused by mixed loyalties, although accounts indicate that the autonomy and
independence of land grant institutions is brought into question almost daily because
of trustees’ loyalties that are rooted in their political lives (Ibid, p. 54). Questions
relating to these issues are a major focus of this study and the focus of participant and
researcher thoughts about governing boards and decision-making.

Summary

Further research including previous and present board members and senior
administrators at other land grant institutions would add signiﬁcantly to the body of
knowledge on governing board selections. More studies including these matters
could be addressed in state legislatures and by a committee within the Association of
Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges.

The literature demonstrates a paucity of recent materials about governing
boards and their purposes. The materials also have a limited amount of information
about group decision-making. “At some level, boards and executives are well aware
of the historical deﬁciencies. An explosion of popular interest in management issues
beginning in the 1970’s sharpened the perception that governance is not all that it can

he,” claims John Carver (1998, p. 11)

39

CHAPTER THREE
Research Design and Methods
Introduction

Chapter three contains a description of the research procedures that were used
in this study. The topics addressed in this chapter include the rationale for qualitative
research, preliminary study, procedure, instrumentation, conﬁdentiality, validity,
sample, data analysis, and limitations.

How does the electoral process affect the decisions that board members make
on a daily basis? Can an individual help inﬂuence a decision that a trustee makes?
The purpose of this research was to study the effect of the electoral process on the
decision-making techniques of the Michigan State University Board of Trustee
members. The selection process for MSU trustees is considered one of the most
divisive in the nation (Perkins, 1973, p. 9). The qualitative study will showcase the
history of decision-making over four decades.

Methodology and Research Design

This was a triangulated qualitative study that included interviews and reading
primary data. Triangulating multiple sources of data enhances the study’s
generalizability (Marshall & Rossman, 1995). Triangulation is based on the
assumption that any bias inherent in particular data sources, investigator, and method
would be neutralized when used in conjunction with other data sources, investigators,
and methods (J ick, 1979, p. 602). The researcher used multiple methods of data
collection and analysis, which included interviews and data analysis. Eight previous

MSU trustees’ members were interviewed. The eight trustee emeriti were selected

40

representing the four previous decades and included equal numbers of members of
opposing political parties—republican and democrat. After reading board minutes
surrounding a speciﬁc topic in each selected decade, the researcher chose individuals
with opposing positions so viewpoints concerning how consensus, if reached or not,
could be learned. The process involved one in-depth semi-structured interview with
each member. The interview addressed how board members made decisions
concerning a speciﬁc topic. The data were tape-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed
by manual techniques (Miles & Huberman, 1994).

The study consisted of the reading of documents, studying the board of
trustees meeting minutes, the scheduling of interviews, conducting the interviews,
transcription with adherence to conﬁdentiality, constant comparison of interviews,
coding, and then discovering the themes. The interview protocol was created ﬁom
the theories, the reading of documents and the board minutes. The themes were
discovered from the theories in the literature and from the data in the interviews.
Rationale for Qualitative Research

The nature of this research problem is suitable for qualitative research.
Qualitative research allows for one to uncover the nature of experience with a
particular phenomenon and is used to uncover and understand that which is yet
unknown (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). Qualitative research methods allow one to delve
into a complex process and explore little known phenomena (Marshall & Rossman,
1995). Research questions were based on theoretical assumptions aiding in the

investigation of decision making for a major university. Qualitative research allowed

41

for explaining the complexity of details that are difﬁcult to convey with quantitative
methods (Strauss & Corbin, 1990).

Qualitative research also allows the research to build in ﬂexibility (Marshall
& Rossman, 1995). The minutes of board of trustees meetings offered additional
information, including some experiences ﬁom the trustee emeriti in the study. This
information was used to revise the interview guide and offer new avenues to explore
during the in-depth interviews, in the tradition of grounded theory research (Strauss &
Corben, 1990). Principles used in qualitative research allow for an emphasis on
creativity, spontaneity, and improvisation in research methodology (F onow & Cook,
1991). With the election of two board members in November of 2001, observations
of the two political debates enhanced the data

Qualitative methods provide the means to study the individual trustee emeriti
as the unit of analysis (Daly, 1992). This method can also accommodate multiple
perspectives and give a more rich account of individual tenure on boards as lived
experiences; better understanding how and why they made decisions (Handel, 1989,
in Daly, 1992). Using trustee emeriti as the unit of analysis made these experiences
possible to explore (Daly, 1992). Utilizing qualitative research, which allowed the
use of in-depth interviews, provided an opportunity to describe the board as a whole
and hem an individual basis.
Data Collection Procedures
Interviews

The researcher conducted interviews with trustee emeriti so the researcher was

sensitized to issues with which the board members dealt. These interviews consisted

42

of open-ended interview questions that were analyzed and assisted in the construction
of the outcomes or themes for this study.
Instrumentation

A demographic questionnaire was used before the beginning of each in-depth
interview. This questionnaire included questions regarding length of service,
occupation, ethnicity, education level and position on the board.
In-Depth Interviews

An in-depth interview is a standardized, open-ended interview that allows for
the researcher to explore general topic areas (Marshall & Rossman, 1993). The
interview questions were similar for all trustee emeriti that allowed for common
themes to develop. The questions were open-ended to allow the subjects to explain
how and why issues were resolved. An in-depth, open-ended interview was
conducted with each of the board members as the primary data-gathering tool. The
topic areas originated from the decision-making theory as a guide for the researcher.
The use of this instrument allowed the researcher the latitude to change questions
based on observations that were conducted (Miles & Huberman, 1994). The
interviews were audiotape recorded and transcribed. The questions, exploratory in
nature, were seeking to receive information about a naturally occurring event
(Marhsall & Rossman, 1993).
Primary data

The researcher examined minutes and agendas from board meetings over

several years to better understand trends in decisions or issues that were noticeable,

43

which then were included in the interview. The data helped strengthen any suggested
patterns in the board discussions over time.

The minutes from the board of trustees meetings explained what issues were
discussed and/or resolved. The preliminary review examined the major policy issues
in two-year periods that followed the election cycles for the board. The last section of
the interview asked for the subject to discuss the major issues during their tenure and
explain how the outcomes were determined. The researcher then compared board
minutes to the interviews to determine similarities between issues.

Validity

A qualitative study’s validity relies on the skills of the researcher (Miles &
Huberman, 1993). The more experienced the researcher, the more expertise held
about decision-making and boards of trustees, the more credible the researcher would
be. Although the researcher could not write from an insider’s perspective, he wrote
from the educated observer’s viewpoint.

The researcher discussed the research project with interested trustee emeriti
and several other individuals. Finally, the use of professional literature added ﬁrrther
validity to the study. The researcher continued to cite ﬁ'om sources and discuss their
relevance to the research.

Sampling

The researcher had a set pattern of members who were studied and
interviewed. Trustee emeriti were utilized in the study to preserve the conﬁdentiality
of those interviewed, as current board members are highly visible in the community.

The eight trustee emeriti were selected representing the four previous decades and

included equal numbers of members of opposing political parties—republican and
democrat. Gender, ethnicity and length of service to the board were represented in
the sample.
Confidentiality

The researcher was the only individual able to associate responses and other
data with individual trustee emeriti; thus, insuring conﬁdentiality. The identities of
the trustee emeriti were kept conﬁdential and reports of research ﬁndings did not
associate participants with speciﬁc responses or ﬁndings. This was very difﬁcult, as
the sample was limited and public. Data were not identiﬁed by participants’ names or
any other identifying information (i.e., demographic information). Care was taken to
ensure that personal descriptive information would not intentionally be identiﬁable by
someone within the community. Pseudonyms (letters A through H) were used for the
names of the trustee emeriti in ﬁeld notes and other written materials. Other than the
researcher, only a transcriber heard the taped interviews. The transcriber was asked
to sign a conﬁdentiality agreement. All written material and audio taped materials
were kept in a secure place to further ensure conﬁdentiality. The researcher also
requested that the trustee emeriti consent to the use of research ﬁndings. All trustee
emeriti were requested to sign a consent form. The interviews took place in locations
mutually agreed upon by both researcher and participants.
Data Analysis

One of the major purposes of qualitative research is to generate themes,
categories and patterns, and to provide meaning (Marshall & Rossman, 1993). The

data included accounts of experiences of being on the board provided through

45

interviews. The researcher was searching for similarities in decision-making
techniques, inﬂuences, word usage, issues and concerns expressed. The researcher
also used ﬁeld notes, the primary data and scanned for trends in the transcripts. The
interviews were constantly compared and the identiﬁed themes coded. The trends
were again compared with the interview data to solidify interview themes or to
explain unidentiﬁed topics.

As a researcher, I have a personal commitment to validating the current board
composition, and I recognize that can cause bias. The beneﬁts of using a qualitative
research methodology far outweighed the risks. The gap in the literature has not been
well documented. Qualitative research, which allows for the use of in-depth
interviewing and observational techniques, was the best way to capture these
experiences. The interviews allowed for the exploration of the issues the emeriti
faced as they ran for an important eight-year position. The ﬂexibility of qualitative
research was needed throughout the interviewing phase of this study. Although I was
consistent with the use of the interview guideline, I had the ﬂexibility of asking
follow-up questions when clariﬁcation was needed and asking additional questions to
obtain further information.

Limitations

The complexity of the topic created a lengthy approval process for the study
to be completed. The ability to create a balance between the conﬁdentiality of the
subjects and the right for the citizens of Michigan to know how their elected
representatives make decisions was complex. The researcher created a process to

protect the rights of all individuals involved with the study. The researcher met with

46

representatives from the President’s, the Provost’s, the Secretary of the Board of
Trustees’ and the General Counsel’s ofﬁces to discuss necessary safeguards for the
study. The dissertation committee approved the study contingent on approval from
these ofﬁces. The researcher appreciates the opportunity to have been able to conduct
the research.

The concern for conﬁdentiality completely negated the use of current board of
trustee members in the study. The trustee emeriti offered a larger pool of subjects to
interview but again the ability to offer conﬁdentiality was of paramount importance.
The sample size was a limitation, as it may not represent the views of all trustee
emeriti.

The ability to replicate the study was a limitation. The concerns for
conﬁdentiality created the need for several meetings to ensure that all of the
safeguards were in place. The researcher’s need to gather approvals, conﬁdentiality
safeguards and access to subjects could hamper future studies.

Also, the researcher’s personal values were an issue as the researcher has been
a member of the MSU community for several years. As a participant researcher, I
needed to understand my own values, so that bias was not apparent in the interviews
or in the outcomes. As an ethnographer, I was able to chart the actual process for
completing the study and better understand what external issues faced the study.

In order to be a responsible researcher, I consistently avoided undue risk to the
participants in this study. For example, I chose not to include information on the
nature of employment. There were times when identifying the speciﬁc career of a

particular participant would have helped to clarify a point, or strengthen it. Protecting

47

the conﬁdentiality of the subjects was a priority. The risk involved and the steps
necessary to protect the participants’ conﬁdentiality illustrate the extent that volatility
still exists in the political world even when no longer in ofﬁce. This was also evident
in my own personal struggle with how much to include regarding speciﬁc issues,
stories, individual backgrounds, or ﬁghts. This information would have addressed
and highlighted theories in action. However, information was omitted for fear of
putting the conﬁdentiality of the study in jeopardy.

This study is qualitative, and this type of research is not value free (Miles &
Huberman, 1994). Having a high personal interest in the research topic can cause
bias (Marshall & Rossman, 1995). I struggled with being a participant in the
community of the study for the last twenty years. In qualitative research, the fact that
researchers are members of the community being studied can add to the validity of
their study (Acker, Barry & Esseveld, 1995). This creates more sensitivity to
problems and issues that may otherwise be invisible. I am not a direct member of the
group studied, but I was both a student and employee of Michigan State University
during the tenure of several emeriti trustees. This experience let me ask questions
and explore thoughts that hopefully will add to the credibility of the research.

The use of in-depth interviewing in research involves personal interaction and
cooperation from the research subjects who may be unwilling or uncomfortable
sharing all that the researcher aims to explore (Marshall & Rossman, 1995). There is
also the risk of not properly comprehending experiences shared by the subjects. As a
validity check, I asked them if I was “on target” or asked for clariﬁcation when

unsure as to what they meant by a particular point.

48

Summary

The analysis involved abstracting “rights and duties” about interaction,
consistent categories for talk and concomitant valuations, and in general, much
microanalysis of board discussions. This means that the primary data source was tape
recordings of individual interviews, supplemented by the ﬁeld notes. The researcher
was given background information ﬁ'om trustee emeriti who were willing to share
news clippings on the studied topic with the institutional positions, their Secretaries
of the Boards’ minutes, and any related writings. The researcher kept ﬁeld notes of
what was discussed “off tape.” The researcher also received “contextual” information
about the university’s history, the trustee emeriti, voting records, recent and past
issues, and concerns for the various boards of trustees from the trustee emeriti and

from the minutes of the board meetings.

49

Chapter 4
Findings

But we found later that by tests we basically stirred the pot and changed the

world. We found that our actions in East Lansing affected the world and not

just the university community. No one really knew who we were before the

decision, but after we were welcome most anywhere.

Trustee Emeritus A

There was little interest by the general public in the trustee emeritus races. I

was wisely advised that there was little campaigning that I could do that

would make any difference. The race would be won or lost on the basis of the

top of the ticket.

Trustee Emeritus B

Introduction

This study explored the effect of the electoral process on the decision making
of the Michigan State University Board of Trustees by examining the experiences of
eight previous board members through in—depth interviews and the reading of board
minutes. The researcher learned how the trustee emeriti experienced their particular
elections, indoctrination to an existing group and how decisions were made while
sitting on the MSU Board of Trustees. Hearing these stories helped to identify the
major themes involved within the research and to describe trustees’ experiences as
they negotiated their individual tenure in the elected position. As the ﬁrst quote
above from one of the trustee emeriti illustrates, these members feel the position is an
honor and often overlooked by the general public within the state of Michigan. The
trustee emeriti’s stories provide a tool for potential board members to learn how

decisions are made and what ramiﬁcations are possible. The trustee emeriti’s

combined experiences could also enable the citizens of the state, and possibly

50

lobbyists, to better understand how the board makes decisions for their own personal
use.

The interviews consisted of eight former board members who were elected
through the previous four decades equally representing the republican and democratic
parties. All individuals belonged to, represented, and were initially endorsed by one
of the two major state political parties. The trustee emeriti consisted of ﬁve men and
three women, not all graduates of Michigan State University. In this chapter, each
emeritus has been designated with letters A through H to keep his/her conﬁdentiality.

The analysis is presented in three sections. The ﬁrst section, consisting of the
key ﬁndings of the study, discusses the life cycle of a board member in three stages,
from beginning to middle to end, and includes theoretical foundations. This section
also examines what the individuals thought they believed about internal and external
inﬂuences that were placed upon them during their tenures. The second section
examines the actual decision making while on the board of trustees. The trustee
emeriti described how decisions were made; inﬂuences, both internal and external;
styles of decisions, power and politics as well as philosophies that contributed to
votes and consensus building. The trustee emeriti also described board dynamics, the
culture, the environment and indoctrination to the MSU Board of Trustees. The third
section examined if the trustee emeriti thought the elected process is the best method
for creating a governance board for a major public university and what happens in the
process of being elected.

Each trustee emeritus responded to three major categories of questions

relating to Michigan State University governance. These responses, and the board

51

meeting minutes, provide background and data for analysis. It is not useful or
practical to include all responses in their entirety, or even extracts of all responses,
because of duplication and length. Included are excerpts of responses from a cross-
section of trustee emeriti that represent the range of all trustee emeriti perspectives.
When there were concerns about including or not including a response, inclusiveness
and breadth became the guiding principles. This chapter gives paramount importance
to accurately presenting the trustee emeriti responses to the questions from the survey
protocol (Appendix E). Also providing trustee emeritus conﬁdentiality created the
need to exnapolate quotes from some responses. The three categories of questions,
the subsidiary questions, and selected responses of trustee emeriti follow.
Theoretical Foundations

Developmental theory is the foundation that guided this study by guiding the
research protocol and offering deﬁnitions for the ﬁndings. The political ﬁ'amework,
described by Morgan (1976), Cohen and March ( 1972) and Bohnan and Deal (1991)
directed the study, which focuses on the electoral process, decision-making, internal
and external inﬂuences. As trustees, these individuals were inﬂuenced by their
environment, which includes family, work, politics, the board, and supporters. Figure
4.1, discussed in Chapter One (Figure 1.1, p.18), outlines the original decision—
making design pattern identiﬁed by the literature review and pilot studies. Each of
these issues eventually emerged in the data as environmental components that
inﬂuenced the research participants’ experiences, some more extensively than others.

Figure 4.2 (A) is a more extensive conceptual map (Area A from Figure 4.1)

that reﬂects the ﬁndings of this study. The life cycle of the board of trustees member

52

demonstrates how the inﬂuences upon the individual board member changes over
time which alters how decisions are completed with similar or disparate pressures.

4.1 Design of the Study of Decision making Patterns of MSU Board of Trustees

 
     
 

Internal
Inﬂuences

  
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Distinctive
Election patterns
attributable to
similarities in
key types of
decisions
MSU
Board of A
Trustees
Analysis of
relationships
of distinctive
? types of Identiﬁable speciﬁc
board

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Election patterns of decisions by
decisions mm
External

Inﬂuences

  

53

4.2 (A). Life cycle of an MSU Board of Trustees Member with
Decision making inﬂuences

Political party
Governor

Interest groups
Supporters

Board Members
Personal Beliefs
University Ofﬁcials

 

Electi Decision not to run

 

Beginning Middle , End Decision making
Deciding to run Election/nansition/reelectioh Last part of ﬁnal term

L7

 

 

---u---‘ --

Inﬂuences

Political party Personal Beliefs
Governor Family Members
Interest groups

Supporters

Board Members

Family Members

Employment

Personal Beliefs

The cycle repeats if the person is reelected to the position creating a spiral.

54

Key Findings of the Study

Thematic analysis of the data can be conceptualized into two key ﬁndings:
inﬂuences and decision-making. The process of being a trustee is highly intentional
and involves multiple decisions. The inﬂuences and the style of decision making
vary, but the political foundation remains. The ﬁndings emerged into themes that are
further explained with a Life Cycle model for an MSU Board of Trustee member.
Stages of the Life Cycle of an MSU Board of Trustees Member

The three stages of the life cycle of an MSU board of trustees’ member
include a beginning, middle and an end. Each stage has different foci or motivations,
inﬂuences and desired outcomes. The life cycle is a developmental stage theory
demonstrating the growth and changes in a board member. The time periods represent
the movement from the original thought of serving the university through the election
and then serving on the board. The cycle will repeat if the individual chooses to run
for reelection.

Beginning Stage

The beginning period, when a trustee emeritus is deciding if he or she is
running for an open seat, has very self-centered decision making processes. The
internal inﬂuences are critical as the individual is deciding what the beneﬁts are
personally and professionally. Most of the trustee emeriti talked about their own
immediate families and how the families are affected as a critical factor. Other
inﬂuences included the expense, the exposure and time. These issues were immediate

and apparent.

55

One’s political party was a critical external inﬂuence to the prospective
trustee. Since the political party is critical for the electoral process, that group is
heavily involved with the decisions that the person has to make. The party
representatives may have to convince the candidate to run, explain how the process
works or the beneﬁts to the individual, the institution and the state, or demonstrate
how personal and political parties are congruent. The trustee emeritus needs to
decide if the political party has similar philosophies and desired potential outcomes.

All of the candidates recalled being inﬂuenced to run by others who believed
in them, their philosophies and their experiences. Members in the political parties
were inﬂuential in that they helped persuade some uncertain candidates to see that
they would be helping the party, the institution or the state. Most trustee emeriti
described family support and giving back as the main inﬂuences to run for a position.

“I ﬁnally agreed to run to meet, as my Father had suggested, my obligation to
repay society for the beneﬁts I had received ﬁ'om a good education,” claimed trustee
emeritus B. “I had a completely different issue or platform for which I was working
across the state. I was trying to make a change in a different political arena but then
was approached by the party when MSU and my issues intersected. I had operatives
all over the state who highly encouraged me to run,” explains trustee emeritus A. The
trustee emeritus went on to say that the issue had created a network of people in all 83
counties working on the topic and each freely went out to promote this individual for
the trustee position. “When I saw that work that they were doing, I felt then that I had

to run as they believed in me.”

56

“I actually was helping a committee search for good candidates for the board.
The committee was made up of different people and we kept meeting and
interviewing people for the position. We met a lot of good people who were non-
political. The committee then approached some of us who were helping search for
candidates and asked us to run as we were the strongest that they had seen, so I ran,”
stated trustee emeritus B.

“I knew I was nmning for public ofﬁce when I was seven as my father and
grandfather were involved with [political party] politics. I did have to seem more
conservative to be able to get a more moderate agenda infused. I had to keep up the
legacy,” surmised trustee emeritus G.

“Perhaps the greatest motivation to run came from my parents. They
reminded me that MSU is a statewide school and should have [statewide]
representative[s] on the board. They also reminded me of the long history of public
service to which the family was duty bound. They were instrumental in helping me
address the fears of a campaign and very supportive once the nomination was in
place,” added trustee emeritus E.

Half of the trustee emeriti were asked to run for the board by their own
political party and the other trustee emeriti decided to try for the board out of
dedication to the university. Current board members, the Governor of the state of
Michigan or the head of the political party asked those that were asked to run. All
were involved in local, regional or state party politics and had some name recognition

in the political party or in the particular community.

57

“I was standing at the delegates’ meeting and was approached by the assistant
to the party chair to come behind this tall black curtain. It was late at night, as we had
been working all day, so I thought it was odd, but went. The party chair, who was
very powerﬁrl at the time, told me that I would be running as I had name recognition
in the party and was a nice person. ‘We have the votes already to get you on the
slate.”’ Trustee emeritus C went on to say that that was the beginning of a political
career and the person had not considered running before that time.

Another trustee emeritus had intended to run for the board as service was in
the family “blood” [tradition]. The family had expected the trustee emeritus (D) to
run for a position in the state. “As I had such a deep love for MSU and such fond
memories, this made sense for me to run for the board. There was no question after I
made this suggestion, that I would not be elected to the board.”

All of the trustee emeriti described the need to give back to the community,
mentioning speciﬁcally MSU, the region or the state. They all had an inner desire to
make a difference and believed in the value of community service. Two of the trustee
emeriti ran for the position as they had speciﬁc agendas that they wanted to
implement at the university and deliberately coveted a seat. The other six reported
they ran for ofﬁce to help make an overall difference.

“The governor approached me and said that the other party has a senator in
[Washington] DC that they want to put up for the seat. ‘We need you to counter
them, as we know that if anyone can handle their own affairs, it is you.’ I knew he
was trying to ﬂatter me and it worked and that is how I ran,” claimed a third trustee

emeritus (E).

58

Another trustee emeritus (F) said, “I was in a high proﬁle and extremely busy
position and this seemed a natural progression as I was heading towards retirement.

It was slower and a perfect complement to what I had been doing. As I had friends in
the party, I suggested it and they ran with the idea. It seemed fairly simple, until I
was elected.”

“I was asked by a group of students that I knew. I was involved with them on
campus and they approached me one evening to meet by the [Red Cedar] river. They
asked me then and told me that they would run my campaign—the interviews, the
meetings and all. I ﬁgured if they were that dedicated, I should be,” stated trustee
emeritus G. This person was the only individual who talked about MSU students
being involved in the campaign.

“I did not ‘campaign’ for the [party] nomination for the MSU board seat. I
was ‘recruited’ by the chair of the MSU board and the state party leaders. Situation:
the party ‘slate’ had been completed by the leadership prior to the state convention.
Two days prior to the convention, the chosen candidate was selected as the Lieutenant
Governor candidate, leaving a void in the state. . .I said no thank you but that was not
accepted,” added trustee emeritus H.

“I was born to be in politics. My grandparents were involved, my parents
were involved, and all of my relatives were somehow in local, state or national
politics. I lcnew it was my calling,” claimed trustee emeritus C. Trustee emeritus A
claimed, “1 had no desire to participate in an elected position, yes, some position, but

elected did not matter. Once I was approached and accepted, I became very

59

interested in the process. This was so much bigger than I had ever expected. I
thought it was a few chicken dinners and speeches, but it was so much more.”

Each of the trustee emeriti decided that, once they made the decision to run
for a board position, the process became more impressive and hectic than anticipated.
The process was much more involved in the beginning of the campaign than after the
delegates’ meetings. In the beginning of each campaign, the individuals discovered
that the majority of the campaigning was completed at the party level as the
candidates needed to be recognized at the delegates’ selection meetings so they could
be elected to the slate. Most trustee emeriti were in agreement that the timing helped
them stay involved in the process. They felt that the approximate three months before
the state political party conventions seemed to be a good amount of time to work hard
and then after the meetings, the party “machines” [respective political organization]
completed most of the work. This timing helped them realize that a run for the open
seats was obtainable.

Trustee emeritus E claimed, “1 did not want to campaign at all—I wanted the
seat, but I did not want to have to become that political. My family already was my
main priority and I did not have enough time with them. They were the ones who
pushed me into the campaign and said that I had to do it. So I did.”

Trustee emeritus C said, “I had no idea what I was getting into and said yes
too innocently. Looking back on it, if I knew what I know now back then, I probably
would not have run. Out of all my time involved, the electoral process, the ﬁrst time,

was the worst as it is the most wor .”

“I was not enthralled with the idea of participating in the ‘election process.’ I
did not look forward to going through the process of speaking at all District meetings
and selling myself. Several delegates from the sixth district (Ingharn County) were
related to MSU and had speciﬁc issues for which they wanted candidate responses.
Given the circumstances of my nomination, I was not prepared to address issues
raised related to MSU,” included trustee emeritus E. The individual did not attend
Michigan State University and was working in a different region of the state at the
time of the nomination process.

A trustee emeritus said that he was approached by an inﬂuential person in the
party who said he would get the person the nomination. “If you decide to do this, I’ll
help you any way that I possibly can. And lo and behold, I had to go to the state
convention and my competition was leadingiby far. Then the person I was running
against became the Secretary of Commerce for President [name’s] cabinet,” added
trustee emeritus C.

Campaign Process

All trustee emeriti talked of the traditional cycle of trustees in that the
candidates are usually swept into ofﬁce on the “coattails of the national or state
positions.” Each trustee emeritus said that what happened across the state or the
country usually was reﬂected in the individuals being elected to the board. A few
trustee emeriti said that they “bucked the trend, but they that they were rare.” Trustee
emeritus D explained, “Michigan tends to vote straight party so the particular
candidate on the stronger ticket in that campaign usually wins. Individuals usually do

not pay attention to the trustee position, unless it affects them directly. . .so this affects

61

how we campaign.” Most of the trustee emeriti spoke of their campaigns as
‘Wvorking” particular regions of the state. The strategy was to concentrate on
Southeast Michigan, Lansing area and Grand Rapids. All agreed that Grand Rapids
was a republican stronghold so that if resources were low, most candidates
concentrated on the other two areas. Most of the candidates discussed spending a
major percentage of time in the Detroit, Saginaw and Lansing areas. The candidates
remarked that they spent little time in the “thumb” (eastern peninsula) or the northern
Lower Peninsula. The Upper Peninsula was often forgotten during campaigns.

Trustee emeritus B said, “I went to every county in the state and talked to the
people. I was the ﬁrst candidate to travel through the UP. and I may still be the only
one to have done this. Just by showing up in the UP, I had tremendous support at
the nominating meeting—they all campaigned for me. They had been so excited that
I had cared to come to the UP.”

Trustee emeritus G described the decision not to campaign outside of his
immediate area. The trustee emeritus said that the press carried all of the interviews,
which gave name recognition. “I agreed to every newspaper, radio and television
interview so I would receive free publicity. I did not need to go out and campaign as
I had ﬁiends in the major markets so they came to me for interviews. It was cheaper
as I could not afford to campaign.”

The expenses of the campaign often were cited as issues since candidates had
to raise their own funds. Most said for that reason, they had limited print materials
created or commercials made. Many laughed when discussing the miles that they

covered in old cars that should not have been on the road. Only one candidate

62

claimed to have a bumper sticker, which had started as a joke amongst ﬁiends. A few
candidates indicated that to run a successful campaign almost $50,000 was needed.

“Only had one suit, one sport coat, one pair of loafers, two pair of pants, four
pair of j cans and one beat up car to last through the campaign. The ﬁrst meeting that
I attended I was asked to park elsewhere and had to show a picture from the paper to
be let into the lot,” remembered trustee emeritus G.

Campaign Decisions

“There are few decision points in these races. Historically, emphasis is given
to a candidate’s awareness of issues relating to the University and the logic of a
candidate’s position on the issue; personal association with the institution; and
reputation (good or bad). Very few in the public citizenry even know the questions to
ask. I had very few ‘decisions’ to make related to issues,” explained trustee emeritus
D.

The trustee emeriti described that most of the decision making was completed
before the electoral campaign started. Once the political campaigning started, the
trustee emeriti explained that most of the major decisions were decided within the
party. The candidates who were running for an additional term explained the added
complication of voting on issues on the board as well as campaigning. Ifthe trustee
emeritus voted differently than the party representatives wished, the support for the
campaign varied. The trustee emeriti reﬂected that they made some difﬁcult
decisions during this time as each decision affected the university, the campaign and

themselves directly.

63

“When seeking the nomination for my second eight year term on the MSU
Board, I had greater hurdles to jump. This was largely due to my having taken
positions while on the Board that went against my [party’s] colleagues’ preferred
positions. My decision to not seek a third term was based on the realization that I had
alienated the party powers and would not receive their endorsement,” concluded
trustee emeritus B.

Almost all of the trustee emeriti said that they did not change any fundamental
beliefs that were held prior to their service on the board. Several said that their
personal convictions were strengthened after being constantly conﬁ'onted on speciﬁc
topics. Several said that they were surprised that very personal beliefs were
challenged in that they thought such beliefs had nothing to do with academic
governance whether it dealt with religious convictions, abortion, or land use.

The trustee emeriti described debates and interviews as the most challenging
times in the campaign. They found when they were at the podium or on the dais that
the conversations often would move away from speciﬁc Michigan State University
issues to rather general issues that somehow could be tied to campus. Trustee
emeritus D explained that at one debate in a church the congregants asked about the
idea of co-educational residence halls. The trustee emeritus had thought before the
election that this would be an issue so visited other schools that already had co-
educational halls. The candidate spent a week in halls at different institutions to
better form an opinion. The individual decided that beneﬁts were very strong and
was supportive of the co-ed halls. The debate moved quickly ﬁ'om there to condom

dispersal, sexual education, premarital sex and abortion. The trustee emeritus was

questioned on personal beliefs and how it would make the person vote. “I was
shocked at how the questions moved from the halls to my personal beliefs. . .I had
been prepared to talk of the beneﬁts of co-ed halls and ended up feeling as I was
defending my own beliefs. That was hard.”

Trustee emeritus A said, “I was hammered on my opinion about abortion. My
party had a stand, but what did I believe. I tried to explain what the university stance
was and what the laws were, but everyone kept asking me what I believed. . .the
concern then became should Olin Health Center be able to complete abortions. Most
people ﬁgured if my personal beliefs were different that they would be carried out, if
it was different from the party’s [beliefs].”

“I had my eyes opened to the total world and from that you need to use
cooperation. Everybody can live by that; before compromise seemed like a bad idea,
but this position can be helpful. . .one does not always need to be steadfast. . .was quite
a revelation,” trustee emeritus G.

Middle Stage

The middle stage, during and immediately following the election, is self and
party centered in terms of the decision-making processes. If a person chooses to run
for reelection, he or she tends to stay in this stage until the ﬁnal term. The inﬂuences
are more external in this stage such as the political party representatives, other board
members, state and federal government ofﬁcials, and the UAW representatives all
wanting to create particular outcomes. The internal inﬂuences are strong as one is

searching for security and survival for and during reelection to the board.

65

The political party is very inﬂuential at this point as the individual wants to
keep the party representatives pleased with the work being completed. The trustee is
making decisions that will beneﬁt both the political party and the individual. The
importance of the institution becomes stronger but still may not be the primary focus
for the trustee.

President, Provost, Faculty Liaison Inﬂuence on Trustees’ Decision-making

“The president and provost are the major source of information and
perspective on all issues by virtue of their close proximity to all Board actions and
activities. As ‘visitors’ to campus, board members must necessarily rely on the
information provided by the administration,” explained trustee emeritus A. “As a
safeguard, the board liaison with faculty, staff and students were established to
provide the opportunity for independent input from individuals outside of the formal
administration. Decisions made by the board can only be as good as the information
provided to them as part of the decision-making process,’ said another trustee
emeritus (H).

All three groups are gatekeepers to the board either directly or indirectly. “In
fact, most issues don’t come to the board, except through them [president and
provost]. See it would be rare that we would bring an issue to the board
independently of the routing. We usually went through the president and the provost
if we brought something to the ﬂoor. Most of the time, they would add their own
opinion to the new topic,” explained trustee emeritus G.

“. . .I had been contacted by a faculty member about an issue which I did not

know. I raised the concern at the meeting and the response that I received ﬁ'om the

66

president was not what I expected. He said that they should not be contacting me.
This was different from what I thought but it sent a loud and clear message to the
faculty and the board,” offered trustee emeritus E.

The trustee emeriti were in agreement and said that the president and the
provost were aware that their opinions and actions inﬂuenced the board, as they were
the ‘gatekeepers’ for issues usually brought forward to the group. The trustee emeriti
all thought that the president and provost perceived that they had a greater inﬂuence
than they actually held. The faculty liaison was not considered to be a highly
inﬂuential person as the individual rarely speaks and offers opinions usually only
when asked. The board felt that the position is important, as it is independent of
direct administrative oversight but did not believe that it was highly inﬂuential to the
decision-making.

All eight trustee emeriti agreed that the president should have an opinion, but
not always a recommendation, on all topics brought before the board. They felt that
the president should guide the board members through the background, the rationale
for the issue and what he believed an outcome should be. They also all agreed that
the president should not expect them to vote with the administration on every issue.

“If a recommendation is coming from the administration, they are expected to
have an opinion and position on the issue. In the case of a strong president and
equally strong provost, it is not uncommon to have multiple viewpoints expressed
which do not necessarily agree,” offered trustee emeritus A. “If a board topic is

initiated outside of the university administration, their opinion is sought. If it is a

67

‘new topic’, the board would typically ask for administrative review and defer any
action or decision until the topic is researched further,” explained trustee emeritus H.

“They are very careful in most instances not to express those [opinions]
publicly. But they do with the board in the course of the public meetings, such as the
Thursday night or in one on one conversations, at some point or another in the course
of our two or three day meetings,” added trustee emeritus F.

Board Members’ Decisions When They Consider Constituents

“Even though you reach the Board as a political animal, most elected board
members realize that they serve a larger public once they are elected. You cannot do
this if you are beholden to a speciﬁc group or political body. I can think of very few
exceptions to board members approaching their role with any other perspective. . .they
relate more to the personal motivations of the individual choosing to run in the ﬁrst
place [affects how the individual will behave in ofﬁce],” hypothesized tnrstee
emeritus C.

Most of the trustee emeriti thought about how being elected affected their
decisions and usually responded about the difficulty in deﬁning possible constituents
and who they are. All of them were in agreement that the students should be the most
important constituents but rarely were. The only trustee emeritus who said that the
students came ﬁrst was the trustee emeritus who ﬁrst had been approached by
students who asked him to run for the open seat. “The students were so sincere and I
was doing this for them. I thought of them often, contacted them for opinions and

made myself available to students whenever I could,” stated trustee emeritus G.

68

The trustee emeriti listed different constituents to consider when making a
decision. Most added the constituents changed over the length of service and the
proximity to a reelection period. The constituents were listed as the Governor, the
political party, the legislature, those who were vested in the outcome, the students, the
staff, the faculty, labor unions, the president, the provost, the banks and those who
may have ﬁnancial involvement. The answer was closely divided among members of
the two political parties. The democrats more often said that the Governor and labor
unions were often dying to inﬂuence a decision, which could affect the outcome. The
republicans were more closely aligned with ﬁnancial stakeholders when considering
decisions.

“Different board members have different constituencies. Special interests all
participate in the nominating process at the state conventions. You do not want to
alienate anyone. The democrats are extremely sensitive to race and gender. The
republicans are sensitive to the economic power base—corporations, agriculture and
conservatives. When making decisions, these groups factor in every time,” explained
trustee emeritus F.

Party Afﬁliation Affects How Trustee Emeriti Made a Decision

This answer was ahnost split down party lines. The democrats freely
explained that the Governor or his ofﬁce representatives would become involved with
MSU issues. They all agreed that they had received phone calls, visits or invitations
to the Capitol to meet with the Governor. Most of the republicans said they could tell

when the Governor had visited their counterparts.

69

The republicans stated that they had rarely or if ever been talked to by the
Governor regarding university or trustee emeritus matters. With the exception of one
trustee emeritus who was a personal friend of the Governor, this individual often
talked with the Governor about speciﬁc MSU issues. The democrats agreed that the
republicans did not seem to have the interference or pressure from the republican
governors that they did from their own governors.

The democrats also talked about the inﬂuence of the United Auto Workers in
their party. They indicated that the UAW has become heavily involved in trying to
inﬂuence decisions—whether it is try to have the union expand on campus or
inﬂuence appropriations. The republicans also reported having been approached by
the UAW but on a personal level and not through the party.

“There was a lot of pressure to vote on the [issue] according to what other
democrats felt was the party line. I didn’t see it as having a political base one way or
the other, so I voted against them. That was another nail in the cofﬁn. . .if I had to
bend my principles or my personal integrity to be reelected, it wouldn’t be worth
getting reelected,” discussed trustee emeritus H.

“I had been approached by the labor unions, the Governor and other

strong democrats who wanted to make sure that I knew what way I

was voting. I was upset with this as I disagreed completely with what

they were thinking. I knew that if I voted against what they wanted I

would not be reelected—that was made clear. I had to vote my

conscience and that was my last term on the board,” explained a

different trustee emeritus (F).

70

“When actively seeking the nomination for my next term on the board, I had
greater hurdles to jump. This was largely due to my having taken positions while on
the Board that went against my Democratic colleagues’ preferred positions. My
decision not to seek a [time] term was based on the realization that I had alienated the
party powers and would not receive their endorsement. To them I had voted
‘wrong,”’ added trustee emeritus B.

Since the 1962 State Constitution was adopted, providing for the election of
the governing board members, partisan politics was the basis on with the board chair
and vice-chair were selected. Those positions were reserved for the board members
whose party held the majority of members of the Board. When an even 44 split
existed, the chair and vice chair typically split betWeen parties. That practice was
modiﬁed in 1976 and the current practice allows board leadership to rotate on the
basis of seniority on the Board. The chair and vice-chair positions are now
automatically given to the two most senior members whose terms are expiring within
two years. “This has de-politicized the board leadership and allows everyone a
chance to take that leadership role,” explained trustee emeritus E.

“Agriculture has aligned itself with the Republican Party and they are very
inﬂuential as they control a large segment of the economy. MSU started out as an
agricultural institution and has never moved away from that—added to, but has not
strayed. So therefore, they did have a lot of inﬂuence when I am seeking input on
issues,” explained trustee emeritus E.

“I just came on to the board, came to a solution [of party afﬁliation and

allegiance] that the only way that I could be honest to myself and my beliefs, was not

71

to seek reelection because there was no way that I could please the special interest
groups that I could foresee at the next democratic convention. Big question one, was
I a bigot? Two, was I anti-feminist,” offered trustee emeritus F. The individual
added, “anytime that you start talking about a fair process, you immediately become
opposition [to the usual process]. Well, when I made that choice, I was immediately
liberated and I could speak on issues ﬁ'eely and uncompromisingly.”

“I have always been a Democrat, always will be. They know that. But I have
the unique distinction, I think, of having good ﬁiends in both political parties.
Unfortunately, I think the last years, it is more difficult to establish those personal
relationships because of the horrendous animosity that grew within the two political
parties over the last ten to ﬁfteen years,” lamented trustee emeritus F.

Public Institution Philosophy Affects Board Members’ Decisions

Without hesitation, all board members concurred that the land grant
philosophy that the university incorporated into its mission in the 1860’s was the
strongest and the best foundation an institution could have. All of the board members
referenced the three-fold mission and how it helps the university, the state, the
country and the world. Each person outlined the beneﬁts of outreach and how it
enhances the university reputation and all were appreciative of what MSU has
accomplished around the world.

Diversity in students, staff and faculty also was described as a great strength
for the land grant philosophy. Individually, the trustee emeriti described racial,

ethnic, socio-economic, religion, sexual orientation differences as being enhanced by

72

the values listed in the philosophy. Some were careful to add a caveat that there were
struggles to move the university ahead in certain areas.

All board members strongly insisted that “accessibility to the masses” was
critical for the success of the institution and for the state. Many budget issues,
especially setting tuition rates, often were determined by what could the students and
or their families reasonably afford. “Decisions such as tuition increases often come
into conﬂict with the mission to educate the masses. Holding down the number of
students due to faculty and staff constraints, while seemingly inconsistent with our
mission, has contributed toward enhancing the overall quality of education MSU can -
provide,” explained trustee emeritus C.

End Stage

The end stage is when the trustee has made the decision not to seek reelection
and the decision-making becomes issue centered. The inﬂuences change dramatically
in this stage. The trustee has made a decision to either run for reelection or not and
then the importance of the political party shifts. Most trustee emeriti stated that when
they made the decision not to run again, it was a freeing experience. They no longer
felt beholden to the political party and could more easily make decisions closer to
their personal beliefs. Some of the trustee emeriti felt this was their favorite stage on
the board as they could think more freely and genuinely examine what was best for
the institution.

The political party in this ﬁnal stage loses importance and inﬂuence over the
board member, as the outcomes are not affecting the direct future of the individual.

Most trustee emeriti discussed that they had paid their “debt” to the particular party

73

and could most easily vote with their conscience. Some trustee emeriti concluded
that they did not want to have any outside inﬂuences and decided early in their tenure
that they were not seeking reelection so they could lose the political party inﬂuence.
Inﬂuences upon the MSU Board of Trustees Members

The inﬂuences discussed by the participants included internal inﬂuences such
as family, work and personal values as well as external inﬂuences such as the
political party, the Governor, supporters, interest groups, students and other board
members. These inﬂuences changed and had different magnitudes during the tenure
of the trustee. The inﬂuences also affected how a trustee made a decision when a
board member and if the individual chose to be considered for reelection.

Internal Inﬂuences

In the beginning stages, the internal inﬂuences came together to help the
individual decide to run for the open seat on the MSU Board of Trustees. Personal
beliefs were the most important internal inﬂuence each trustee had to consider when
determining whether to run for an open seat on the MSU board. The beliefs are listed
separately as some of the participants were approached to become candidates and had
no internal feelings to participate in the electoral process. These individuals explained
that they needed to understand if their personal and the requesting group’s belief
systems were compatible and comparable. Those who decided to run on their own
claimed to have taken a serious inventory before they approached the particular
political parties.

Individuals took into consideration the stress that was placed upon the family

by increased publicity, the time away ﬁ'om home, and the possible unpopular

74

decisions that would be made. All of the participants listed the family as the second
strongest inﬂuence on deciding to run for an open seat on the board of trustees. Some
of the trustee emeriti said that they knew individuals who chose not to be candidates
for the same reasons.

Most trustees also listed the work environment as an internal inﬂuence
because they were close with the other employees who could understand the impact
of the possible election on colleagues. Each individual has to decide if the trusteeship
takes away from the job, causes harm to the business, creates philosophical
differences, and potential costs to the company. Most trustee emeriti stated that after
the family, work associates was the group with whom they most discussed the idea of
campaigning for the board.

During the beginning stages, the internal inﬂuences were considered
extremely important to the candidate. Most individuals said that these inﬂuences
were strong and often lifted their spirits and desire to run for a position. These
inﬂuences were often credited with helping the participants better understand
themselves and what they believed.

In the middles stages, the internal inﬂuences were often overlooked or not as
often sought according to the trustee emeriti. The trustee emeriti often claimed that
these internal inﬂuences lost importance when making a decision as the external
pressures grew in importance. The family and work environments were still
considered important for personal strength, but not in helping create an opinion on an

issue. Some trustees said that they no longer talked about issues with family and

75

colleagues, as they did not want to hear contrary opinions to what the external groups
were wishing.

Some trustees said that they struggled most with their own belief system as it
often clashed with the political party’s or the govemor’s desires. When a trustee was
newest to the board or when considering running for reelection, the internal
inﬂuences were most often overlooked when making a decision. Some trustee
emeriti claimed to have become somewhat “depressed” at this stage and that was
what made them decide not to campaign for reelection.

During the ending stage, trustee emeriti maintained that the internal inﬂuences
once again became important and, for the ﬁrst time, personal values were the most
listened to or followed inﬂuences. Several of the trustee emeriti identiﬁed a small
“spiritual” journey where they could reconnect with their inner soul and could make
decisions free of external inﬂuences. The trustee emeriti agreed in that they made
their best decisions for the university at this stage.

“Opinions are frequently volunteered by the university committees established
to evaluate programs and policies to the University. If opinions are not volunteered,
they are frequently sought by board members, typically with the blessing of the
provost and the president,” explained trustee emeritus F. Another trustee emeritus
(D) added, “Individual issues brought by faculty, staff and students are often raised
privately with individual trustees and trustees typically make an effort to work with
the administration to ﬁnd a solution to the problem. Some exceptions include matters
in litigation as board members defer to the administration and are required to avoid

intervention.”

76

“I met some. great, great individuals at Michigan State. . .that is the people on
campus take themselves awful serious. When you get ﬁfteen miles off campus,
things are not quite as important as they think they are,” added a trustee emeritus (C)
when explaining how the internal inﬂuences are not as strong as perceived.

Utilizing diagram 4.2 (A), (page 54) one can see how the internal inﬂuences at
ﬁrst were supporting the trustee and helping create a strong foundation for decision-
making. In the middle stage, these same inﬂuences weighed down and hampered the
decision-making of the trustee. Internal inﬂuences often had contrary opinions to the
extemal inﬂuences thus causing turmoil within the trustee. Finally, in the end stage,
the trustee once again was supported by the internal inﬂuences and was able to utilize
them for a strong foundation. The internal inﬂuence voice was loudest at the end
stage, loud in the beginning stage, and quietest during the middle stage.

External Inﬂuences

During the beginning stage in the lifecycle of a trustee, external pressures
helped create a foundation for which the participant made a decision to campaign for
a position on the board of trustees. At this time, the political party gained prominence
as the strongest and most important of the external inﬂuences.

The political party representatives approached the individual to campaign for
a position on the board; worked with the individual to better understand how closely
aligned the philosophical bases were; worked to convince the individual to serve the
university, the community, the political party, the students and the state. The political
party representatives also explained to the prospective trustee how they would

support the individual ﬁnancially and personally through the campaign. Besides the

77

internal inﬂuences, at this stage, the political party was the strongest of the external
inﬂuences.

The governor, supporters, and interest groups rose in prominence as they
started to make themselves known to the potential trustee. The trustee emeriti often
discussed the role of these groups at this stage and how they explained what they
could offer to the campaign and to the participant. Most trustee emeriti stated that
these groups rarely indicated how they directly beneﬁted ﬁ'om helping elect a board
member. These groups, however, continued to rise in his/her inﬂuence at the middle
stage in the trustee tenure.

The external inﬂuences were very important during the middle stage as they
often had opinions about issues facing the board. Several trustee emeriti claimed that
they “owed” the political party and their supporters for helping them win the
campaign so they were more likely to listen to these outside groups at this point. The
trustee emeriti reported that these external inﬂuences changed at this point in that the
speciﬁc group members reminded the trustee that they had helped the person win the
seat or that they could control their winning reelection.

When the individual considered or planned a reelection campaign, the external
inﬂuences again rose in importance. The political party wanted a candidate closely
aligned with their agenda and their beliefs. Most trustee emeriti felt beholden to their
particular party at this stage. The participants spoke of great pressure to please
external constituencies, but rarely themselves. If they were able to please the external

constituencies and themselves, it was a major victory.

78

At the end stage, the external inﬂuences lost most of their importance to
participants and were unable to sustain their personal agenda, as the trustee was no
longer soliciting input on issues. The trustee emeriti spoke of a cathartic experience
when they made the decision not to campaign for reelection and felt beholden to no
one. Most trustee emeriti felt that they had paid back or were so upset with the
external forces that they owed these groups nothing. Most participants reported that
they consciously felt the difference within themselves when they made the decision
no longer to be inﬂuenced by their external constituencies.

At the point when the participant made the decision not to seek reelection for
a seat on the board, several things typically occurred. Some trustee emeriti explained
that they started having strong differences of opinion with an external inﬂuence and
started listening more closely to the internal inﬂuences, thus moving to a conscious
decision to split ﬁom the regular decision-making patterns. At this time, some
trustees ﬁgured that running for reelection was not viable, as they had lost support
from the political party or other supporters. Other trustee emeriti indicated they
decided that they had worked hard enough on the board and it was time to retire.

“As a general observation, the external public is relatively uninvolved with—
or interested in—the policy matters of the board. Legislators will periodically seek
trustee intervention for student admission to competitive programs or may share a
perspective based upon a constituent’s concerns,” lamented trustee emeritus D. The
trustee emeriti were in agreement that the inﬂuences were issue speciﬁc so they
varied with the individual concerns. “Issues effecting alumni frequently come

directly to the Board by way of letters and public comment, as do issues with great

79

public visibility or community interests, such as tuition increases, student/community
problems, or athletic activities. Boards react to the inﬂuences as necessary,” offered
trustee emeritus F.

The trustee emeriti were in agreement that external inﬂuences changed as they
were consistently issue speciﬁc. The trustee emeriti mentioned several inﬂuences
including the general state of the economy, student enrolhnent pressures or,
conversely, signiﬁcant drops in enrollees, the govemor’s budget for the university
and the response and action by the legislature, state or federal mandates for speciﬁc
programs, the larger and more inﬂuential groups associated with the University
programs or with campus personnel such as labor unions, agricultural organizations,
alumni groups, the cost of healthcare and other beneﬁts for University students and
employees, and the cost of new technology to remain competitive with research and
maintain faculty.

One trustee emeritus (D) laughed and said, “We read The State News [school
paper]. In fact, one of the nemeses for Michigan State is that The State News is
distributed at the [state] legislature. I always proposed that we sponsor and distribute
the Michigan Daily [University of Michigan newspaper] to the state legislature, so
they would know what was going on at [the University of] Michigan as they do with
MSU. The legislature is way too involved.”

Inﬂuences on Individual Member’s Decisions on a Speciﬁc Matter

“As a guideline, I would typically review the level of research and data

provided in support of a speciﬁc recommendation. If it made sense, it would be

supported. MSU also has active student and faculty representatives who serve as

80

liaison to the board. . .I would say internal reaction and input ﬁom those groups
inﬂuences board actions,” explained trustee emeritus B.

The trustee emeriti spoke about many spheres of inﬂuences on how individual
decisions were made for speciﬁc discussions. “It is similar to an onion. You will
have the core issue with many outer layers covering what is at the center. [Laughing]
Some of them do make you cry and some are very sweet, but they all have an
individual stake. These layers will change with the issue, the politics behind the issue
and the depth it will have in making a change,” offered trustee emeritus C.

Trustee emeritus (C) continued, “The labor unions wanted to control
education. They would do anything that they could. I did not believe that they
should and instead of criticizing them, I was elected so that I could stop them. It did
not and still does not seem right that labor controls what is taught. I was exerting my
own inﬂuence over the other board members for what I believed.”

Trustee emeritus H answered, “It depends on the board member’s personal
agenda. Board members were comparatively free from personal agenda and had the
interest of the university at heart. It’s the ﬁrst decisive factor in making decisions. . .if
for instance, you were in a business and the university was providing you with some
research consultancies. . .tell you have a strong obligation...that money was in your
pockets.”

One trustee emeritus mentioned concern about personal gain from the board,
which inﬂuenced personal board member decision making on speciﬁc matters. “In
order to maintain that personal relationship with administration, in order to help hire

friends as staff or travel or putting money in your pocket, their objectivity was

81

compromised. I think that the politics of the president also comes into play in how
the board, individual board members, sees issues. . .party loyalty often times overruled
the interest of the university anymore,” reﬂected trustee emeritus F.

Decision Making

“Decisions of the Board are by majority vote when matters qualify as policy-
setting. Many other matters may come to the Board, which may require only
consensus following presentation and discussion of issues, e.g., strategic planning
concepts. The origin of topics requiring decision-making is often misunderstood by
the university community and the broader public,” explained trustee emeritus H. “As
a general statement, actions of the Board typically originate ﬁ'om the President or the
Provost; they do not ‘start’ at the Board level. In other words, Board actions are
typically responsive to recommendations ﬁ'om University administration. The work
done in Board committees, likewise, is typically responsive rather than proactive,”
clariﬁed trustee emeritus A.

“It was a period of individualism. Today, they are led by sheep. The trustees
had a wide range of intelligence and taught each other much. They argued and
debated on the vote. Trustees were concerned with the issues. During this time, the
board was constantly in the news, each member had beliefs—lots of them and were
often quoted. These were all public issues, so they were discussed in public,”
claimed a different trustee emeritus (G).

The trustee emeriti explained that the decision-making processes were distinct
and different during the public and the private meetings or work sessions. All of the

trustee emeriti acknowledged that the patterns varied by the importance of the vote

82

and for the type and location of the meeting. Public image was mentioned several
times concerning the difference of appearances in the decision-making patterns.

”The principle decisive factor was what does the President want? And 99% of
the time that’s what happened. And a lot of times issues were handled way out of the
public’s eye, at our Thursday night dinners or in alternative [settings]. The president
would call several of the board members and say well what do you think of this
situation? He would then outline the situation and offer his opinion until he got the
votes needed,” explained trustee emeritus B.

As outlined previously, since 1976, any meeting that has a vote or a decision
or has quorum is open to the public. All ofﬁcial action, beyond discussion about
personnel, legal, or sale/purchase of property matters, will take place in an open
meeting. A business or working meeting will not have quorum, may not always be
open to the public, has the President or his designee in attendance and will not have
the possibility to take ofﬁcial action. Trustee emeriti were very careful to note the
distinction, as they did not want to violate the law. The responses were different for
the previous trustee emeriti who served before the Opening Meetings Act was enacted
and those who served after the law. Four previous board members stated that the
working meetings were where most of the fact-ﬁnding, background and possible
outcomes for decisions were ﬁrst discussed.

The smaller working meetings were noted for being lively and intense as
board members tried to convince fellow trustees that a certain decision was critical.
Philosophical differences were more apparent in the working sessions as the board

members felt that they could talk freely. “There were no cameras, no microphones,

83

no one watching us so we could pretty easily say what we were thinking with no
repercussions. The gloves could come off and we could ﬁght for what we believed,”
explained trustee emeritus C.

Two trustee emeriti offered that the smaller work sessions were also the time
to count possible votes so when a board meeting with an ofﬁcial action took place
there would not be a complete surprise or a perceived political party embarrassment
in public. “If we could count on our own [fellow political party] and then guess at
who we had convinced at working meeting, then we knew what would happen at the
board meeting and could be prepared,” shared trustee emeritus B. “I was a renegade
so no one could guess what my vote would be. I had my opinions and I was there to
serve the state, not my party, so the meetings were very interesting during my
tenure,” added trustee emeritus G.

The public monthly meetings were formal and more serious than the private
work sessions. “The monthly meetings rarely had any surprises as the members could
usually guess how colleagues were voting on an issue. The decision was not made
ahead of time, but rather ﬁnalized at the board meeting. Solidarity is important when
it comes to major votes—budgets, hiring of a president, and anything athletic—so we
can make a statement to the public on a particular issue,” explained trustee emeritus
D.

“The best part of the monthly board meetings was listening to the open
session when all guests could speak—the students, the faculty, the community and the
staff. I learned over and over how much people love the university and how they

want to make it better. It makes me work that much harder so I can fulﬁll my

84

obligations. All of the arguing that took place [around an issue] seems smaller when
listening to them,” described trustee emeritus H.

The decision-making patterns reﬂect the literature presented by Cohen and
March (1986), Morgan (1986), and Bolman and Deal (1991) describing political
metaphors and ﬁarneworks. Cohen and March present the garbage can theory for
decision-making. Morgan highlights the political ﬁarne as do Bolman and Deal as a
ﬁamework to better understand how key decisions are made.

Cohen and March (1986) describe decision-making theory as ﬂuid and
changing over time. The ﬂuidity was evident within the discussions with trustee
emeriti regarding how they made their decisions. Decisions changed with the
inﬂuences facing them and due to the experiences they had. The literature is similar
in its description of processes, which is, in turn, similar to the participants’
experiences during their board tenures.

Morgan (1986) emphasizes a ‘Way of thinking” in his metaphors for
explaining organizational functions within which decision-making is a primary
aspect. The political metaphor can be used to unravel the politics of daily
organizational life. This theory recognizes that politics and politicking may be an
essential aspect of organizational life affecting the decision-making, and not
necessarily an optional and dysfunctional extra Morgan discusses how speciﬁc
individuals attempt to advance speciﬁc interests through “wheeling and dealing” (p.
142)

Several of the trustee emeriti spoke of the political environment in which they

made decisions while sitting on the board. The very structure of the board of trustees

85

created an environment, whether obvious or subverted, in which one had to barter for
a result. With two major political parties with different philosophies represented on
the board, the governing group structure automatically creates a framework requiring
the need to consult and negotiate for a majority vote. Trustee emeriti spoke of
“horse-trading” that was required to pass a motion on a key decision as they had ﬁnite
resources and scarce time which were elements of the political decision-making
frame.

The trustee emeriti reported that the political decision-making environment
was the one continuous aspect of the board. Whether campaigning for a seat,
participating in orientation, leading the board, campaigning for reelection or deciding
not to run, “politicking” was always in the background. Diagram 4.2A (page)
demonstrates that decision-making of the board is enveloped with the political
environment. The curves represent the ebb-and-ﬂow of the environment as the
trustee emeriti discussed how the political “noise” would change with issues,
campaigns, media or other interested groups needing attention.

Bohnan and Deal (1991) utilize frames for the metaphors in their
organizational and decision-making theory. The political framework asserts that, in
the case of enduring differences and scarce resources, conﬂict among members of a
coalition is inevitable and power becomes a key resource. This theory emphasizes
that organizational goals arise not ﬁ'om ﬁat at the top, but from an ongoing process of
negotiation and interaction among the key players in any system. The political
framework views organizations as “alive and screaming” arenas that house a complex

variety of individual group interests (Bolman and Deal, 1991, p. 189).

86

The trustee emeriti most often felt that the major conﬂicts or debate occurred
with decisions involving the allocation of resources, not necessarily monetary, but
rather personnel or facilities. The trustee emeriti concurred that they spent little time
examining the budget but rather relied on the expertise of the budget committee and
the university personnel to create a strong and ethical budget. Trustee emeritus F
claimed, “We spent maybe three nrinutes looking over what the budget committee
recommended. We did not really talk about it much as we realized that we were not
experts and hoped that the President’s Ofﬁce and the group that worked on the budget
knew what they were doing. We rarely talked about it unless there was a speciﬁc
issue with a speciﬁc allocation.”

Trustee emeritus A said, “We spent way too much time talking about athletic
directors. How does this person really help with the academics of the university? I
am not even sure why it is a board decision really.” Trustee emeritus II had similar
concerns and stated, “I went through an AD [athletic director] [selection] and had
more awful discussions with other board members than I did with anything else I did
while on the board. I am not sure why some people were so invested who ran
athletics. Yes, money is important, but not our primary focus.”

Major debates occurred during the hiring of staff, changes in policy or when a
particular political party pressured for a speciﬁc point of view. The trustee emeriti
spoke of constant negotiations surrounding several smaller issues throughout the
board meetings or outside of the “public eye.” Board members considered how many
votes they had for an issue and then interacted with those they may have needed to

convince about the merits of passing a particular resolution. The debates were

87

described as objective and fair until a trustee felt pressure from an external inﬂuence
or was trying to garner power. At such times, the usual decision-making patterns
were not followed, as someone was not behaving per usual, so the need to preserve
personal interests interceded.

Combining Morgan’s (1986) and Bolman and Deal’s (1991) metaphor for
decision-making processes helped create a political ﬁamework within which the
MSU Board of Trustees members interacted. The environment created a foundation
from which the trustees made decisions. The atmosphere was open for negotiation
and conﬂict when debating issues and bringing those issues to resolution.

Cohen and March’s metaphor for decision-making (1986) focuses attention on
the ways in which meaning changes over time. It calls attention to the strategic
affects of timing (in the introduction of choices and problems), the time pattern of
available energy, and the impact of organizational structure on these. Within a
garbage can process, decisions are made in three different ways: by oversight, by
ﬂight, and by resolution. Cohen and March further explain eight properties within the
decision-making process which include who, what, how and when the issues are
addressed (Cohen and March, 1986).

The participants discussed how issues were brought to the board and how
decisions were made. The themes were similar to what Cohen and March (1986)
explained in their research. The trustee emeriti had several inﬂuences in this political
environment to help create a speciﬁc pattern for decision-making to occur.
Depending on the importance of the issue, the pattern occurred in similar fashion.

Most trustee emeriti agreed that the patterns were similar and had not changed much

88

over the last four decades. Participants feel that they are better informed today with
the advent of e-mail and the Internet. The trustee emeriti are able to ﬁnd out more
information from independent sources than the university ofﬁcials and they also do
not need to wait for traditional mail delivery to receive correspondence.

Cohen and March’s (1986) metaphor exempliﬁes how the MSU Board of
Trustees makes decisions. A key to understanding the processes within organizations
is to view a choice opportunity as a garbage can into which participants dump various
problems and solutions. “The mix of garbage in a single can depends partly on the
labels attached to the alternative cans; but it also depends on what garbage is being
produced at the moment, on the mix of cans available, and on the speed with which
garbage is collected and removed from the scene” explain Cohen and March (1986, p.
81). A decision is an outcome (or an interpretation) of several relatively independent
“streams’ within an organization. The four streams include problems, solutions,
participants and choice opportunities.

Following this metaphor, trustee emeriti described the baggage that one brings
with them to the board and what accumulates in the garbage can during their tenure of
service. This baggage affects which process is used and how they make decisions
within the system of oversight, ﬂight and resolution. The trustees discussed that
personal, work, and familial experiences were considered baggage that they brought
to the board. When making decisions, the trustee emeriti explained that many times
decisions were based on previous experiences, either positive or negative.

Continuing with the metaphor, trustee emeriti illustrated that the accumulation

in the garbage can usually involved interaction with other board members. Trustee

89

emeritus B explained, “I would not try to hold grudges. Believe me when I said it
was hard enough to make decisions for the university, but at times, I would remember
how someone treated me on a different issue and it could cloud how I made a
decision. By the actual vote, my head would clear and I would make a sensible vote.”
Most trustee emeriti described how they made decisions. Their processes were closely
aligned with what March and Cohen (1986) described. The trustee emeriti offered
examples of how they felt decisions were made during their tenure on the board.

Most trustee emeriti described three methods in their decisions, which were similar to
those explained by Cohen and March.

With the size of the board and the importance of the issues, few outcomes can
be decided by one particular method. Several groups are watching the decisions of
the MSU Board of Trustees so the members need to bring closure to issues. Within
the trustee emeriti’s interviews, they described three methods used to make decisions
that are reﬂected in the garbage can theory (1986). The trustee emeriti also discussed
how their decision-making changed with their experience on the board. The patterns
reported follow through oversight, ﬂight and resolution as deﬁned by Cohen and
March.

Oversight was the method most often described by the trustee emeriti for
decision making at ﬁrst as they were trying to understand how to be a legitimate
board member, so decisions were made without attention to the existing problems as
the newcomers were not aware of the history of the issues. Trustee emeritus H
explained, “My ﬁrst meeting I was being asked to make decisions on things I had no

idea about as I was not totally prepared on what to expect. I know I voted on some

90

items that I had no idea were included in the resolutions. After two years, I felt
comfortable with what I was doing.”

The trustee emeriti described decision making by ﬂight during the middle
stage of the lifecycle of the board member. In some cases, choices are associated
with problems (unsuccessfully) for some time until a choice “more attractive” to the
problems comes along. The problems leave the choice, and thereby make it possible
to make the decision. The decision resolves no problems; they have now attached
themselves to a new choice (Cohen and March, 1986). In this stage, many issues
were tabled or members asked for further research so that the group passed on
possible resolutions offered and delayed immediate action. A few of the trustee
emeriti said many problems and solutions “died on the vine and that is what the
president or the governor wanted.”

As the trustee’s tenure was closing, Trustee emeriti described wanting to
“leave their mark or to make a difference to the community,” so they worked to
resolve serious issues. This behavior is also seen when a speciﬁc outcome is
particularly important to the individual. Some choices resolve problems after some
period of working on them. The length of time may vary greatly; depending on the
number of problems. This is the familiar case that is implicit in most discussions of
choice within organizations (Ibid, p. 83).

The trustees worked relentlessly on a particular issue usually associated with
the original platform of the individual when campaigning for the position. Trustee
emeritus A explained, “I was elected by a group of people who wanted [topic]

completed for the state of Michigan, not just MSU. The issue grew in importance

91

while I was on the board and I worked hard at the end to have the board vote on
[topic] which turned out to be so much more than what I had started with several
years earlier.”

Trustee emeriti reported that the decision-making patterns shifted with the
importance of an issue. The more important problems found faster, more researched
solutions than less important topics as the media and other external inﬂuences forced
decisions to be made and ﬂight and oversight could rarely be utilized on these
considerations when a group was waiting for an outcome. Flight and oversight were
not utilized as resolutions because the outcomes were important to the external
inﬂuences that the trustees needed for support and who were informed on the issue.
At this point, the internal or external inﬂuences are exerting pressure on the trustee to
bring forth a decision by the board.

Trustee emeritus E described, “The UAW really wanted us to make a

decision on [topic], but no one on the board felt properly prepared.

We tabled the [issue] until we could learn more. At the next month’s

meeting, all of us learned that we had had letters and phone calls from

the UAW. Again, we did not feel ready as it took awhile to gather the

data. They were not happy as they felt we were dragging our feet.

Finally, in the next month, we voted; but the UAW was trying to push

the issue the whole time.”

The eight properties included in garbage can theory as described by Cohen
and March (1986) were deﬁnitely apparent from listening to trustee emeriti discuss

how the board made decisions. Trustee emeritus C explained, “I helped select two

92

presidents and an athletic director. What can be bigger than that? It seemed that not
much else happened in several meetings as we deliberated over what we wanted and
whom we wanted and why we wanted them. I think some policies may have changed
during this time [laughter] as we were looking at who was coming in to run the
university and not much else.” Important problems are more likely to be solved
rather than unimportant ones and important choices are much less likely to resolve
problems than are unimportant choices (March and Cohen, 1986. p. 83) were two
properties represented often in the interviews.

Trustee emeritus E discussed, “The meetings changed with the presidents’
styles and it was hard to move with the changes. It is his right to run a meeting how
he wants, but I had to get used to lively, not always friendly discussion. We most
likely came to the same decision but how we arrived there changed. Once I was used
to it [new style], I enjoyed the frank talks that we had on topics.” That decision-
making processes were ﬁ'equently sharply interactive (Ibid) was a property described
often as well.

Trustee emeritus A offered, “It seemed some problems would come back up
again and again. . .[the group] dug out a resolution that I had written a few years
earlier and brought it up again. It was fun to see the resolution come out of the ﬁle
but I did not want to discuss [topic] again and again. This [topic] seemed to follow
me through my time on the board.” Decision makers and problems tend to track each

other through choices (Ibid, p83).

93

Dynamics within the Groups that Help Them Come to Consensus

Each trustee emeritus claimed that the dynamics changed dramatically over
the length of their term or service on the board. The dynamics were described as
explosive, cordial, powerful, hidden agendas, politically driven, but overall the trustee
emeriti felt that ego played the biggest role in how the dynamics worked. “We all are
somewhat ego-centric and so we want things a certain way so the dynamics changed
with our interest in the topic. .We did have a few people who were just power hungry
and wanted the chair position so they were bullies,” claimed trustee emeritus D.

“Achieving consensus, as a rule, was relatively easy if the issue was non-
explosive and all board members were equally informed of the facts and
consequences of the action. Issues on which various boards have difﬁculty reaching
consensus: personnel issues; alumni; and budgets,” explained trustee emeritus H.
The members added that the explosive issues with personnel included the hiring of
Presidents, athletic directors and coaches as well as the delegation of authority to the
president for faculty promotions.

Key alumni issues included developing methods to meet their needs and
dissolving the separate Alumni Association and returning it to University control.
“The alumni are over 300,000 strong and are very vocal in all matters of the
university. Some want us to do more for them [alumni]; some want us not to spend
time or money on them. It is a double edged sword as they are our main contributors
and fundraisers,” explained trustee emeritus H. Raising tuition, raising faculty
salaries, and program reductions related to budget cuts were the main areas of

concern for budget issues.

94

Most agreed that for a majority of the time the dynamics of board members
were cordial. They all agreed that the dynamics ended up not being party driven but
felt that the length of the service on the board created cliques that worked together.
They stated that the longer an individual served on the board, the more one knew his
or her idiosyncrasies and voting patterns so one would be able to discern how the
trustee would act. One could trust someone more easily over time and better
understand individual voting patterns. At this point, the trustee emeriti said that they
could freely discuss inﬂuences that may alter the usual voting patterns. “The new
whippersnappers tend to think of party issues instead of what is best for the
university. The old timers were able to discern the two and would talk often. If we
had pressure from the governor or the UAW, we would let the other old timers know,
so they knew what to expect,” explains trustee emeritus C.

“As a general conclusion, it takes a strong president and board chair to help
the entire board reach consensus. The board chair needs to intervene when one
outspoken trustee tries to sidetrack an action. Typically, this has been true when a
trustee has a strong will or inside interests which conﬂict with the majority. It may be
nefarious, pure politics or it may be nothing more than personalities conﬂicting,”
added trustee emeritus A.

In the public meetings, rarely is dissension shown, but behind closed doors or
between meetings, the dynamics change. “At the Thursday night dinners or in the
alternative [sessions], the President would call several of the board members and say

well what do you think of this situation. . .Usually it occurs on a difﬁcult vote where

95

the president wants the board to be one, informed and in agreement with him,” said
trustee emeritus F.

“I remember one occasion in which the President lost control of the board and
the board voted against his proposal and he went ballistic and told one board member,
that he was betrayed. Only two or three times while I was on the board did we work
independent of the president. That’s a sad commentary on the board,” added trustee
emeritus G.

Strategies Used by Those with Power to Make Decisions within the Board

The trustee emeriti were in agreement that the strategies used to create power
varied with the individual personality of the board member. Each person used
idiosyncrasies, threats, “swapping of votes,” “this for that,” and other methods to
swing a vote or create a power vacuum. Some trustee emeriti spoke about individuals
utilizing the press as a vehicle for power. They said that those trustees would ask to
be interviewed by someone in the media so that the issue is moved into the public
arena and out of the private meetings or work sessions.

“I can say that my ﬁrst two years on the board that my philosophy was that
you hire the best administrator that you can ﬁnd and then you get out of the way.
What disturbed me was that whenever President [name] offered a suggestion that the
[opposing party] found problems with every idea. I started talking with newspaper
editors before the issues were released so the president had strong public support

ﬁrst,” explained trustee emeritus C.

96

Training/Orientation the Board Received

The training and orientation to the board changed over the time that the trustee
emeritus was in his or her position. The research participants served throughout the
last forty years with eight MSU presidents and eight Secretaries’ of the Board of
Trustees. The most recent trustee emeriti talked of a comprehensive training that had
started previous to the start in the position. The trustee emeriti with the earliest
service usually laughed and said that they learned as they went along. They said that
as board members they learned how to behave, what to ask and how to ask from
watching the experienced board members in the ﬁrst few meetings.

Most of the trustee emeriti explained that orientation to the board could not be
taught, but rather learned through working on the board. Most trustee emeriti felt that
towards the end of the second year is when they felt comfortable with their positions,
that they had earned trust, and that they consistently contributed to the conversations.
This timetable also demonstrated that a new election had taken place so they were no
longer the newest members sitting on the board.

Electoral Process is the Best Procedure to Create Boards of Trustees

One unexpected theme that appeared in the data included the actual electoral
process being the best procedure for selection. Six of the eight trustee emeriti
concurred that the electoral process is the best process for creating a governing board
at a land grant institution. All of the emeriti believe that it is important for the
citizens to be involved with the decision making of the land grant institution, but how
they should be selected varied. The six who appreciated the current system were

adamant in their support and were very supportive in maintaining this method. The

97

two individuals who wanted different approaches offered their preferred selection
procedures.

“I believe there is merit in seeking a Constitutional change in Michigan which
allows for an appointment process which includes the Governor, Legislature and
University administrators and alumni to set selection standards for governing boards.
Such standards should be set which preclude obvious political cronyism to assure the
selection of honorable citizens who are clearly committed to excellence in all facets
of University operations,” suggests trustee emeritus H. The individual added, “My
position. . .goes against the traditional philosophy and position of my [political] party.
As a general conclusion, I developed a personal bias against having University
governing board members elected on a statewide ballot. While it is inﬁequent, board
members have been elected who are, in my opinion, negative forces within the
governing board of Michigan State University.”

Trustee emeritus F, from the same political party, suggests, “I would suggest
dictatorial appointment and then I would do something that’s utterly unbelievable, I
would term limit the dictatorial appointment. In other words, you would be appointed
to a seven person board for seven to nine years without the ability to be reappointed.”
The trustee emeritus added, “You can’t trust the legislature to an active code of ethics
because they don’t like the term ethics. The [Michigan] Constitution already says
that they will establish a conﬂict of interest policy for elected ofﬁcials. The
individuals would need to be separated from the government.”

Furthermore, the trustee emeritus remarked, “I was discouraged with the

election process because I would look at the results and the difﬁculty is, the

98

applicable party had these kinds of litmus tests that they put on the candidates. And
then especially in the [Political] party and even now in the [Political] party they have
this, gender balancing. They have racial balancing in my party, and I am too old to
make adjustments for that.” The trustee emeritus concluded, “And I still believe that
neither race nor gender has any place in the decisions making process... [in a] true
democratic society, you have a fairness in which you deal with people on the basis of
their individuality... [which is a] utopian concept. . .I’m interested in abilities and
performance, and ethics. These do not come into play in the nominating process of
either party.”

Trustee emeritus G who believes the electoral process is preferred said,
“Control by the government is a no-no. These people would become the Govemor’s
cronies and an extension of his ofﬁce. Ifthe Chair [of the board] and the Governor
are ﬁiends then the board cannot think for itself.” Trustee emeritus E added, “It does
seem silly traipsing all over the state of Michigan asking people to vote for you, but
you get to hear what their concerns are. You are representing them so it is helpful in
knowing who you represent, that you are determined to be elected and have a desire
to do the best for the institution...if appointed, the Governor is more apt to appoint
people who are close friends or supporters ﬁnancially.”

“One reason I ran is to keep labor from having that much control over
education. No one group or group of individuals should be able to totally control a
land-grant institution. 1 was representing different constituencies. This process, with
the different parties, keeps one group, such as labor, from taking over the board,”

added trustee emeritus A.

99

The six trustee emeriti who seemed to be in agreement that the electoral
process was preferable remarked that it keeps government control somewhat at bay,
that it keeps cronyism from being a factor and that it lets the citizens independently
decide who is governing the school and spending education money. They also
concluded that through interviews, debates, dinners and campaigning, the members
were able to better understand which issues are immrtant to the voters. This process
also let the trustee emeriti better understand their own beliefs before they are in ofﬁce
and have to “try ﬁgure out what [we are] thinking.”

One concern that arose in several discussions was that the electoral process
keeps some of the best candidates from running for a position. Several trustee emeriti
said that some of the potentially best individuals may not want to enter a contest as
they are too busy, concerned for their privacy, intimidated by the process or not
wanting to be associated with a particular political party. “I know several great
people who would be great at moving the institution forward—the pedigree, the
varied experiences, the teachings, the big picture, the love for MSU, but they are so
apolitical or not afﬁliated to a philosophy that they choose not to run,” commented
trustee emeritus C . Another trustee emeritus (D) added, “Some of the best people are
thinking in ‘other worlds’ that they could not concentrate on a campaign or that they
want to have some balance with the family that they have made the conscious
decision not to run. It is a shame because they would be great, but this system [of

trustee emeritus selection] is [still] the best [system] as it is by the people.”

100

Summary of Findings

This chapter presented the major ﬁndings of this study. Findings revealed that
there is an identiﬁable lifecycle for a board of trustees’ position. Within the lifecycle,
the trustee emeriti experienced distinct decision-making patterns that changed while
sitting on the board. The transitions are cyclical based upon the number of terms the
individual serves with the governing group. The political decision-making
framework, discussed in chapter two, is apparent in all aspects of a trustee emeritus’s
experience, but changes in importance over time.

As the Michigan Constitution outlines the academic governance process for
Michigan State University, the selection process is inherently political by nature. The
political parties nominate individuals for the open seats thus magnifying the
importance of political decision-making strategies for the nominees. The trustees,
after being elected, then are representing the political party while governing the
university. As noted, representing one’s political party philosophy and clout is
critical for reelection to the seat.

The electoral process does have an impact on the decision-making of the MSU
Board of Trustees whether inherent, overt or underlying. The process affects all
stages within the decision-making, as it is the foundation for the governing board.

The Michigan Constitution through the electoral process bestows upon the political

parties incredible inﬂuence and access to the board members throughout their service.

101

CHAPTER 5

SUMIVIARY CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Overview

The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of the electoral process on
the decision making of the Michigan State University Board of Trustees members.
The goals of this research were to identify how daily decisions were made, the effects
of the electoral process on the decision-making, what the inﬂuences were, and to
describe the transition from being elected to a sitting member of the board. This
research was accomplished by interviewing eight previous board members whose
board service covered the last forty years and the two dominant political parties. All
trustee emeriti discussed in-depth their experiences. The complexity of the
participants’ stories was evident. This chapter will provide a summary, conclusions
and suggestions for future research.
Summary of the Findings and Conclusions

This study expands the literature on the decision making of governing boards
in higher education. It goes beyond simply identifying the decisions. It describes
how these decisions were experienced and categorized. From this study, one better
understands how board members make a decision during their tenure. One learns to
understand and work with the internal and external inﬂuences upon the board member
and when during the eight-year term, the pressures change. From this research, one

better understands that there is a lifecycle to being on the board of trustees. The study

102

demonstrates that the electoral process affects the decision making of the board of
trustees.

The research and theoretical foundation included stage theory discussing
decision making styles and inﬂuences on the process. This study was conducted with
qualitative methodologies. Data were collected through in-depth, semi-structured
interviews after completing an examination of previous board minutes. The interview
questions were guided by the research questions, the literature review, the theoretical
foundations and the ofﬁcial minutes of the Michigan State University Board.

Analysis of the data revealed several key ﬁndings that included a life cycle for
the board of trustees’ tenure. The stage theory includes how the electoral process
effects how decisions by and inﬂuences to trustees are made over time. The pattern
demonstrates a speciﬁc decision making system utilized by the trustee emeriti. The
outcomes strengthen the existing literature.

The research discovered that six of the eight trustee emeriti strongly agreed
that the election process is the best method for selection to the Michigan State
University Board of Trustees. All of the trustee emeriti believe that it is important for
the citizens of the state to be involved with the decision making of the land grant
institution. Most of the trustee emeriti stressed the importance that citizens in the
state of Michigan elect the individuals who represent them at the three public research
universities.

The research found that the orientation to the MSU Board of Trustees has
changed dramatically over the last forty years ﬁom a lunch meeting to a two day

workshop with a notebook on policies and procedures. The trustee emeriti discussed

103

and appreciated the more in-depth orientation workshop format which enabled them
to quickly assimilate with the current board members. Since the 1980’s, the current
board members also have had the opportunity and are encouraged to attend national
workshops on trustee governance.

The research demonstrated that MSU Board of Trustees members follow a
speciﬁc pattern of decision making over the life cycle of their tenure as board
members. This is important when understanding how and why individuals make
decisions. The March and Cohen Garbage Can Theory (1986) in which decisions are
made by oversight, ﬂight, or resolution techniques and the political frameworks
suggested by Morgan (1986), and Bohnan and Deal (1991) represent a foundation
from which the board members operate.

The electoral process was found to have direct and subverted effects on the
decision making of the individual trustees and with the entire board. The structure of
the electoral process inherently creates a political environment for selection to the
board and for subsequent decision making of the members. Internal and external
inﬂuences also were discovered to effect how the trustee emeriti made decisions over
time.

Conclusions

The nustee emeriti offered much insight into the selection and election
process to the MSU Board of Trustees, from the initial contact to service through
ending their formal association with the governing body. From their stories, one

learns much about how politics inﬂuences the trustee electoral process as well as

104

trustee decisions to sit and remain on the board. The political ﬁamework offers a
foundation from which the trustees can maneuver.

This chapter provides suggestions and recommendations, based on the
research, regarding: the overall selection process, board orientation, and decision-
making techniques that appear during the board tenure. The material presented
should help to demonstrate the life cycle of an MSU board member. The material
may serve as a discussion tool for states wanting to assess ways in which to improve
their higher education governing boards.

Recommendations for Board Member Selection

Six of the eight trustee emeriti strongly agreed that the election process is the
best method for selection to the Michigan State University Board of Trustees. All of
the trustee emeriti believe that it is important for the citizens to be involved with the
decision making of the land grant institution. Most of the trustee emeriti stressed that
citizens of the state of Michigan must elect individuals who represent them at their
public institution and that the governance should represent the interests of the people
within the state.

The six trustee emeriti felt that the electoral process was the preferred method
as it kept the state government from having too much control, kept one individual
group ﬁ'om having too much power or inﬂuence, and allowed all of the constituents
within the state to be heard concerning their particular issues. Undue inﬂuence by
any single group was the biggest concern discussed by these trustee emeriti for

possibly changing the current method of selection. The need to learn about all areas

105

of the state and their needs was also discussed by the trustee emeriti as a good reason
for state elections.

The two trustee emeriti who held differing Opinions felt the current system is
ﬂawed because the best individuals may not be selected. Several reasons trustee
emeriti offered that talented and qualiﬁed individuals exclude themselves in the
election process included the amount of the time away from family and work,
afﬁliation with an individual party, and a lack of sufﬁcient resources to conduct a
successful campaign. The concern also arose that political representatives would only
choose candidates with name recognition within the state or who may be seen as
biased because they were closely aligned with the party philosophies. Finally, the
idea arose that many Michigan citizens vote a straight party ticket and are not actively
engaged in understanding the platforms or abilities of trustee candidates.

The results of trustee emeriti conversations reﬂect the divisiveness of the electoral
campaigns and often the governing board literature identiﬁes the state of Michigan
campaigns as examples. The literature explains, “That litmus tests that are irrelevant
to higher education are included in the electoral process, the need for board members
to see heightened visibility and headlines around election times, and the lingering
inﬂuence of obligations owed to the agendas of those who helped nominate them,
contribute to their campaigns, or are responsible for their re-nomination” (Anderton,
1997, p. 249).

Another concern voiced by trustee emeriti and supported in the literature is
that the board of trustees (lees not always represent the demographic population of the

state of Michigan. Trustee emeriti discussed that the gender, race, economic status,

106

age, ethnicity, geographic region and religion are not always represented on the board
and such diversity should be included if the board is to truly represent the state’s
citizens. “. . .It does speak to the need to have board members, regardless of color,
age, econorrric status, etc., who can discuss and decides on issues while taking into
perspective the multi-faceted needs of the states’ population” (Ibid, p. 256).

It is my conclusion, based on this study, that the state legislature should not
have the ability to appoint members of the governing boards for Michigan State
University, Wayne State University and the University of Michigan. The state could,
however, create a group to ﬁnd or create a pool of candidates for the various boards
of trustees. The political party representatives then could interview the pool of
candidates to possibly represent the group on the slate for the board of trustees. The
need to represent the citizens of the state of Michigan is paramount for all
constituents to be heard.

Ideally, the selection group would consist of political party members,
individual university, regional and alumni representatives who would identify
possible candidates for the respective boards within the state. The pool of qualiﬁed
individuals would be suggested to the political parties, as they would maintain the
freedom to use other candidates. This group would assist in ﬁnding diverse,
interested qualiﬁed persons from which all parties could choose possible candidates
for the open seats on the academic governing board for the three major research

institutions in the state of Michigan.

107

Board Orientation

The orientation to the MSU Board of Trustees has changed dramatically over
the last forty years. In its earliest development, training consisted of a lunch; in its
current form, it is a two-day workshop. Since the 1980s, board members have the
opportunity to attend national workshops regarding academic governance. The
trustee emeriti discussed and appreciated the in-depth workshop to more quickly
assimilate with the current board members. The answers changed with the individual
tenure of the trustee emeriti but all wanted more information before they started
serving the university on the board. Several of the trustee emeriti suggested having
workshops in late November and December; the time was after they were elected but
before they took ofﬁce.

This research supports previous literature and demonstrates that members of
any new organization are more effective with sufﬁcient and strong orientation
programs. Immersion in the current board is suggested to help new individuals to
better understand the current culture and to understand how they are to become active
members. The literature suggests that efﬁcient and easily understood operating rules
are a good foundation for the new members. More important than teaching the
formal culture are the teachings of the informal culture so one can understand how to
better interact with the current board members.

Based on this research, I suggest expanding orientation to a six day orientation
for the new board members where they spend one day a week for six weeks meeting
with other trustees and university ofﬁcials. Several trustee emeriti suggested that one

day each week for six weeks would help new trustees. The suggested format was that

108

the new members spend half a day with current board members and the other half
learning more about MSU and all of its constituents.

This procedure would serve many facets of the orientation for new board
members by having them learn both the formal and informal culture for the academic
governance. The new trustee would learn about each of the six current members,
more about the other newly elected individual as well as more about the university.
This process would last for six weeks, and in that time span, it presents the
opportunity for the new board member to observe one or two meetings of the current
Board of Trustees. This additional time allows the individual to have more material
and experience with people within the group so each can feel more effective when
starting the term.

Decision Making Techniques

This research demonstrates that MSU Board of Trustees members follow a
speciﬁc pattern over the life cycle of their tenure. This is important when
understanding how and why individuals make decisions. The March and Cohen
Garbage Can Theory (1986) and the political ﬁ'ameworks suggested by Morgan
(1986) and Bolman and Deal (1991) represent a foundation from which the board
members operate.

Being able to identify patterns of decision-making was considered critically
important for the trustee emeriti. They discussed the ability to better understand the
importance of a particular issue by listening to the other trustees and how they were
contemplating voting. With this knowledge, the trustee would learn how easily the

vote will or will not pass. This information lets the trustee know how hard to ﬁght for

109

a resolution or to change a vote. These patterns assist trustees, internal and external
inﬂuences, and the public understand decisions to be made by the board. Those
individuals who want to inﬂuence an outcome can examine how a trustee or group of
trustees will vote and possibly discover a method to secure a particular outcome.

The lifecycle model diagrams what pressures, inﬂuences and decisions that
the trustee must endure while sitting on the board. Previous decision-making and
developmental theory literature, this study, and the diagram help explain how the
decisions are made and offer a suggestion regarding how other decisions may be
made. Some trustee emeriti discussed the importance of discovering patterns of
fellow board members when trying to resolve issues or looking for passage of a
speciﬁc item. “I knew that I could usually count on those within my party for
support, but then had to ﬁgure out who I could gain a vote from when I wanted
something passed. It was easier after I and they were on the board so I could guess
what was important to them,” explained trustee emeritus D.

Sharing the lifecycle diagram with potential and current board members can
help trustees better understand that their decisions will change over time and that
difference and change are anticipated and appropriate. The chart also lets them better
understand who is trying to inﬂuence them and why. The ability to better understand
one’s self will only make one a more effective trustee. I suggest distributing the
literature and research to the proposed group created to discover quality candidates,
the political parties, the MSU executive management team and current board
members. I suggest that the results of this research be included in the board

orientation as well.

110

Limitations

The sample of trustee emeriti in this study is not representative of all trustee
emeriti across the state or the nation. The goal was not to homogenize trustee emeriti,
but rather to understand the experiences, general inﬂuences and decisions they faced
as trustees. The sample size of eight is small. I do not claim that all trustee emeriti
commonly share the experiences of these trustee emeriti when they were
remembering their experiences on the MSU Board of Trustees.

My intent with this qualitative analysis was to identify general themes that
consistently were addressed by the sample. There is a risk of generalizing the
experiences of trustee emeriti with all trustee emeriti, elected, appointed or self-
perpetuating. Despite the limitations, the use of triangulation of methods enhanced
this study’s generalizability (Marshall & Rossman, 1993). The themes that were
identiﬁed during the in-depth interviews also emerged in the literature and board of
trustees meeting minutes.

This sample consisted of one trustee emeritus of color so there was not a
diverse race/ethnicity representation, so therefore I cannot speak to the particular
issues within this population. It is difﬁcult to report on the issue of race/ethnicity
when few were represented in a sample.

Recommendations for Future Research

Recommendations for future research include interviewing current board
members. This study was completed with trustee emeriti over the last forty years.
Replicating the study with current board members would add to the richness of data

and determine if the patterns are continuing.

lll

Another recommendation is to replicate the study at other institutions to
determine if these themes or suggestions are transferable to other colleges and
universities. A suggestion is to implement the study with academic governing boards
that are appointed, self-perpetuating or partially appointed/partially elected to
determine the similarities and differences or to replicate the study at the University of
Michigan and/or Wayne State University where their governing boards are also
elected on a statewide ballot.

The lifecycle diagram should be further examined to see if there is
generalizability with other groups outside of higher education. This addition to the
literature may help other groups better understand how their board makes decisions
and what pressures are exerted upon the board members. The additional use of the
diagram will also increase or decrease the reliability of the tool for other projects.

The over 20,000 individuals who serve the academic governing boards have
many pressures, inﬂuences and decisions that they must analyze daily. Hopefully,
this research will help them better understand what they are continually working with
when they are making decisions for a higher education institution. Working as a
quality academic governing board and knowing the inﬂuences are critical for the
future of higher education.

Reflections

The process of completing a dissertation is a labor of love. This particular

study followed the traditions of grounded theory where I observed and interviewed

trustee emeriti to better understand how decisions were made individually and then

112

with the entire board. I wanted to know more about the experiences that these
individuals had and if the outcomes changed over time.

I have learned much from this research project. As a qualitative researcher, I
learned more about the tools necessary to understand how and why individuals make
decisions. I was able to learn the strengths and challenges of my own research skills
as they were put to practice during the dissertation. As an ethnographer in this study, I
was much more of a participant than I than I expected. The entire process needed a
determined person to meet the needs of conﬁdentiality of the participants, the
concerns of the university and to accurately reﬂect the data in the ﬁnal product.

There were many surprises throughout the study. I thought I was researching
an unusual, but small topic; but as the study continued, many individuals wanted to
know the ﬁndings. The approval process took much longer than expected (over nine
months) so that the needed safeguards were in place. The care and concern by all
involved in the study to ensure positive outcomes was a pleasant surprise.

The trustee emeriti were an amazing group who shared ﬁ'eely and wanted to
learn more about the topic as well. I was surprised at what they thought was
important. From reading the nrinutes of the board of trustees’ rrrinutes, I was
expecting their concerns at times to be different than what they talked about in the
interviews. The trustee emeriti demonstrated a great concern for the Michigan State
University, the state of Michigan, the students, staff and faculty. At times, it was
overwhelming to hear them tell their stories about being part of the community. This
journey was a long and arduous task, but taught me much about myself, the university

and elected ofﬁcials.

113

References

Acker, J., Barry, K., & Esseveld. J. (1991). Objectivity and truth: Problems with
doing feminist research. In M. Fonnow & J. Cook (Eds), Beyond
methodology: Feminist scholarship in lived research (pp. 133-153).
Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

Anderton, J. (1997). Constituting governing boards of land-grant universities.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University.

Association of Governing Boards (1986). Composition of governing boards,
1985. A survey of college and university boards. Washington, DC:
Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges.

Association of Governing Boards (1995, September/October). Commission identiﬁes
four key issues: Clusters are established to investigate the role of higher
education in society and leadership issues for presidents, boards, state
governments, and business. Trusteeship, 3(5) 36.

Baldridge, J. (1971). Power and conﬂict in the university. New York: John
Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Bargh, C., Scott, R, & Smith, D. (1996). Governing universities
changing the culture. Bristol, PA: SRHE and Open University Press.

Bennis, W., & Nanus, B. (1985). Leaders, The strategies for taking charge.
New York: Harper & Row Publishers.

Bergquist, W. (1992). Fifty years of undergraduate education: Change and
stasis in the pursuit of quality. Indianapolis, IN: USA Group Fdn.

Bimbaum, R. (1988). How colleges work: The cybernetics of academic
organization and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Bohnan, L. & Deal, T. (1991). Reﬁ'aming organizations: Artistry,
choice, and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Born, W. (1974). The historical development of governing boards of state
universities in the United States: An analysis of some trends and portraits.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University.

Brubacher, J ., & Rudy, W. (1976). Higher education in transition: A history of
American colleges and universities, 1636-1976. New York: Harper and Row.

114

Callan, P., & Honetschlager, D. (1992). Policies for improving trustee selection
in the public sector. Washington, DC: Association of Governing Boards of
Universities and Colleges.

Carver, J. (1998). Boards that make a diﬁ’erence: A new design for
leadership in nonproﬁt and public organizations. San Francisco:
J ossey-Bass Publishers.

Chabot, J. (1997). Transition to parenthood: lesbian couples ' experiences
with donor insemination. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Michigan State University.

Chalet, R., Holland, T., & Taylor, B., (1991). The effective board
of trustees. American Council on Education, Boston: MacMillan Publishing
Company.

Chait. R., Holland, T. & Taylor, B. (1993). The eﬂ'ective board of trustees.
Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press.

Chickering, A. (1985). The modern American college (4th ed.). San Francisco:
J ossey-Bass Publishers.

Cohen, M., March, J. & Olsen, J. (1972). A garbage can model of
organizational choice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17, 1-25.

Cohen, M., & March, J. (1974). Leadership and ambiguity: The American
college president. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Cohen, M., & March, J. (1986). Leadership and ambiguity and ed.).
New York: McGraw-Hill.

Cowley, W. (1949). Some history and venture in prophecy. In E.G. Williamson
(Ed.), Trends in student personnel work. Minneapolis, MN: University of
Minnesota Press.

Creswell, J. (1994). Research design: Qualitative & quantitative approaches.
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Daly, K. (1992). The Fit between qualitative research and characteristics of
families. In J. Gilfun, K. Daly, & G. Handel (Eds), Qualitative methods in
family research (3-21). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Inc.

Delworth, U., & Hanson, G. (1984). Student services: A handbook for
the profession. San Francisco: J ossey-Bass Publishers.

115

DiBiaggio, J ., Sample, 8., & Haaland, G. (1996). Confessions of a
public university reﬁigee. Trusteeship, 4(3), 8-9.

Drucker, P. (1977). Managing the public service institution. In D. Borst and
P.J. Montans (Eds.), Managing nonproﬁt organizations. New York:
AMACOM.

Drucker, P. (1978, October 3). Managing the ‘third sector’. Wall Street
Journal, p.26.

Duryea, E. (2000). The academic corporation: A history of college and
university governing boards. New York: F almer Press.

Eddy, E. (1957). Colleges for our land and time: The land-grant idea in
American education. New York: Harper & Brothers.

Educational Research (1996, Spring/Summer). Study to examine governance
of public institutions. Educational Record. Washington, D.C.:
American Council on Education.

Fenske, R. (1988). Research and planning for higher education.
Tallahassee, FL: Association for Institutional Research.

Flexner, A. (1930). Universities: American, English, German. New York:
Oxford University Press.

Fonow, M., & Cook, J. (1991). Back to the ﬁxture: A look at the second
wave of feminist epistemology and methodology. Beyond methodology:
Feminist scholarship as lived research (1-15). Bloomington, IN: Indiana
University Press.

Gamson, W. (1969). Power and discontent. Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press.
Gardner,J. (1990). On leadership. New York: The Free Press.

Haro, R. (1995, December 8). Choosing trustees who care about things
that matter. The Chronicle of Higher Education, p. Bl-2.

Haworth, J. & Conrad, C. (1990). Curricular transformations: Traditional and
emerging voices in the academy. In Haworth and Conrad (Eds.), Curriculum
in transition: Perspectives on the undergraduate experience. Needham
Heights, Ginn: Association for the Study of Higher Education (ASHE) Reader
Series. ‘

116

Healey, P. (1996, October 11). Political clout and views on abortion sway
an election for a regent’s post in Michigan. The Chronicle of Higher
Education, p. 43.

Heilbron, L. (1973). The college and university trustees: A view from the
board room. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Hines, E. (1988). State governments and higher education, 1988.
ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 5.

Houle, C. (1989). Governing boards: Their nature and nurture.
San Francisco: J ossey-Bass Publishers.

Ingram. R. (1994). A guide to conﬂict of interest and disclosure issues.
Washington, D.C.: Association of Governing Boards of
Universities and Colleges.

Ingram, R. & Associates (1993). Governing public colleges and universities.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Ingram, R., & Associates (1988). Making trusteeship work. Washington, D.C.:
Association of Governing Board and Universities.

J ick, T. (1979, December). Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods:
Triangulation in action. Administration Science Quarterly, 24, 602-611.

Kerr, C. (1982). The uses of the university (3rd ed.). Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.

Kerr, C. & Gade, M. (1989). The guardians: Boards of trustees of American
colleges; What they do and how well they do it. Washington, D.C.:
Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges. (ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. ED 330 285).

Kreeger, L. (1975). The large group: Dynamics and therapy. Itasca, IL: F.E.
Peacock.

Magrath, P. (1990). Governing the public multicarnpus university.
Washington, D.C.: Association of Governing Boards of University and
Colleges.

Marcus, L. (1997, January/February). Boards of trustees and political agendas.
0n the Horizon. 5(1), 15-16.

Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. (1995). Designing qualitative research (2"‘1 Ed).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

117

McNear, B. (1972). College founding in the American colonies. In P.
Goodman (Ed.), Essays on American colonial history. New York:
Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Michigan State University. (1994). Michigan State University Board of Trustees
bylaws. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University.

Miles, M., & Huberman, A. (1994.) Qualitative data analysis: An expanded
sourcebook (2"d Ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Minter, J ., & Associates (1996). 94ﬁndat_diskette. Boulder, CO.

Morgan, G. (1986). Images of organization. Beverly Hills: SAGE
Publications, Inc..

Morrill, J. (1960). The ongoing state university. Minneapolis, MN: The
University of Minnesota Press.

Nason, J. (1989). Trustee responsibilities. Washington, DC: Association of
Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges.

National Commission on College and University Trustee Selection.(1980).
Washington, D.C.: Association of Governing Boards of Universities and
Colleges.

Newman, F. (1987). Choosing quality: Reducing conﬂict between the states
and the university. Denver, CO: The Education Commission of the States.

Paltridge, J., Hurst, J ., & Morgan, A. (1973). Boards of trustees: Their decision
patterns. Berkeley, CA: Center for Research and Development in Higher
Education.

Perkins, J. (1973). The university as an organization. Berkeley, CA:
McGraw Hill Book Company.

Peterson, M., & Mets, L. (1987). Key resources on higher education
governance, management, and leadership. San Francisco: J ossey-Bass
Publishers.

Reddy, W. (1994). Intervention skills: Process consultation for small groups and
teams. San Diego, CA: Pfeiffer & Company.

Richman, B., & Farmer, R. (1974). Leadership, goals, and power in

higher education: A contingency and open-systems approach to
eﬁ'ective management. San Francisco: J ossey-Bass Publishers.

118

Ross, E. (1942) Democracy ’s college: The land-grant movement in the
formative stage. Ames, IA: The Iowa State College Press.

Schick, F. (1995). The “local board ” in multicampus systems and universities.
Washington, D.C.: Association of Governing Boards of Universities
and Colleges.

Stone, D. (1988). Policy paradox and political reason. Glenview, IL:
Scott, Foresman.

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Grounded theory methodology. In Densin, N.
and Lincoln, Y. (Ed.). Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand
Oaks, CA. Sage Publications, Inc.

The American heritage dictionary of the English language. (1981). Morris,
Morris (Ed), Boston: Houghton Mifﬂin Co.

The new shorter Oxford English dictionary on historical principles. (1993).
Lesley Brown (Ed), Oxford: Clarendon.

Veysey, L. (1990). Stability and experiment in the American undergraduate
curriculum. In C.F. Conrad and J .G. Haworth (Eds.), Curriculum in
transition: Perspectives on the undergraduate experience. Needham Heights,
Ginn: Association for the Study of Higher Education (ASHE)

Reader Series.

Weick, K. (2001) Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems.
Making sense of organizations. Malden, MA: Oxford.

Weiss, K. (1995, October 20). Michigan governor would end direct election
of trustees. The Chronicle of Higher Education. p. A30.

Westmeyer, P. (1990). Principles of governance and administration in higher
education, Springﬁeld, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publishers.

119

APPENDIX A

SOLICITATION TO PARTIPATE IN THE STUDY LETTER

120

Appendix A
Dear MSU Board Member Emeritus,

My name is Allyn Shaw and I am a doctoral student in Higher, Adult and Lifelong
Education within the department of Educational Administration at Michigan State
University.

The purpose of this letter is to recruit for my dissertation research project examining
election and decision-making techniques of the Michigan State University board of
trustees’ members. As the selection process is considered one of the most divisive in
the nation because the board members are selected by the political parties and then
elected by the citizens of the state of Michigan, I aim to examine how the election
process effects, if at all, how daily decisions are made by trustees. I will identify and
explore the issues and dilemmas that trustees face being elected to a traditionally non-
political position.

I am hoping to interview eight MSU trustee emeriti and the previous secretary to the
board who are willing to share their experiences through an interview. I will also
observe two meetings of the current board. I will also read minutes from the previous
twelve meetings to better understand the issues presented to the board and discern any
patterns. Your conﬁdentiality will be protected throughout the interviews. All
interviews will take place in a mutually agreed upon location. I will pay for any
childcare or travel costs incurred during the interview time (approximately 1 hour).

My goal as an educational administration scholar is to contribute to growing literature
on policy making with college and university board members. I am committed to
sharing accurate stories of the election process and the decision-making techniques
needed to work with a Big Ten university. My hope is that my dissertation will
portray your stories and shed much needed light on the stage of becoming a university
board member.

If you are interested in participating and/or learning more about my project, please
contact me at (517) 337-7206 or at shawall@m§u.edu. I would be happy to share my
research plan with you.

Thank you and I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Allyn R. Shaw

121

APPENDIX B

INFORMED CONSENT LETTER

122

Appendix B
The purpose of this study is to identify and explore the issues and dilemmas that
MSU board of trustees members face with the election process and decisions made on
a daily basis for the university. This qualitative study will include an in—depth
interview with you, as well as observations at two board meetings. I am looking
speciﬁcally at the election issues and political behavior of trustees when faced with
making decisions for the welfare of the university.

Your signature on this form indicates that you have agreed to participate in this study.
You indicate your voluntary agreement to participate by completing and returning
this questionnaire. Please read the form carefully. It outlines your rights as a
participant in this doctoral dissertation research project. Your privacy will be
protected to the maximum extent allowable by law.

As a participant in this research study, I agree to the following
terms:
0 I will be voluntarily participating in a doctoral dissertation research project
that will explore the experiences of MSU board of trustees.

o I can withdraw participation from this research project at any time. I can also
reﬁise to answer a question.

0 I can ask questions of the interviewer at any time during the research process.

0 My identity will be conﬁdential. Pseudonyms will be used in all written
papers; both published and unpublished, in order to protect anonymity.

o I know that all interviews will be taped. All tapes will be destroyed or erased
after the dissertation is complete. The researcher will retain the transcripts of
the audiotapes.

o I consent to the publication of this study and accept that any information will
be anonymous in order to prevent any identiﬁcation.

0 If I should have any questions regarding the role and rights as a subject of
research, I can contact the Institutional Review Board separate from the
principle investigator. The Michigan State University contact is:

David E. Wright, Ph.D., Chair
University Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects

 

 

(517) 355-2180
Signature of Participant Date
Signature of Researcher Date

 

 

Allyn R. Shaw, 6251 Gossard Avenue, East Lansing, MI 48823 (517) 337-7206 shawall@msu.edu

123

APPENDIX C

UCRIHS APPROVAL

124

 

OFFICE OF
RESEARCH
AND
GRADUATE
STUDIES

ty Committee on
search lrmivlng
Human Subjects

an State University
inistration Building
Lansing, Michigan
48824-1046

51 ”355-2180

RX: 51 ”353-2976
:u.edu/uset/uuihs
ucrihsOmsuedu

ran We Mushy
:titm'aml Diversity:
arm/lam in Action
1 arﬁmrative-ambn,
ortunity inslllutrm' ' .

MICHIGAN STATE

UNIVERSITY

 

June 25, 2001

TO: Marylee DAVIS
420 Erickson

RE: IRB# 01-410 CATEGORY: EXPEDITED 2-F
APPROVAL DATE: June 20, 2001

TITLE: THE EFFECT OF THE ELECTORAL PROCESS ON THE DECISION-MAKING
OF THE MSU BOARD OF TRUSTEES

The University Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects' (UCRIHS) review of this
project is complete and I am pleased to advise that the rights and welfare of the human
subjects appear to be adequately protected and methods to obtain informed consent are
appropriate. Therefore, the UCRIHS approved this project.

RENEWALS: UCRIHS approval is valid for one calendar year, beginning with the approval
date shown above. Projects continuing beyond one year must be renewed with the green
renewal form. A maximum of four such expedited renewals possible. Investigators wishing to
continue a project beyond that time need to submit it again for a complete review.

REVISIONS: UCRIHS must review any changes in procedures involving human subjects, prior
to initiation of the change. If this is done at the time of renewal, please use the green renewal
form. To revise an approved protocol at any other time during the year, send your written
request to the UCRIHS Chair, requesting revised approval and referencing the project's IRB#
and title. Include in your request a description of the change and any revised instruments.
consent forms or advertisements that are applicable.

PROBLEMSICHANGES: Should either of the following arise during the course of the work,
notify UCRIHS promptly: 1) problems (unexpected side effects. complaints, etc.) involving
human subjects. or 2) changes in the research environment or new information indicating
greater risk to the human subjects than existed when the protocol was previously reviewed and
approved. -

If we can be of further assistance, please contact us at (517) 355-2180 or via email:
UCRIHS@msu.edu. Please note that all UCRIHS forms are located on the web:
http:llwww.msu.eduluserlucrihs

Sincerely,

\I

David E. Wright
UCRIHS Chair

   

DEW:bd

CC: Allyn R. Shaw
6251 Gossard Ave.
East Lansing, MI 48823

APPENDIX D

CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT

126

APPENDIX D

CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT

I promise to hold the information on the tapes provided to me by Michigan State
University in complete conﬁdence, to safeguard the materials while in my possession,
and to return the tapes and furnish the transcriptions to Michigan State University
without retaining any copies of them.

 

Name of Transcribing Source

 

Signature Date

127

APPENDIX E

THE BOARD OF TRUSTEESS INTERVIEW PROTOCOL

128

APPENDIX E

MSU Board of Trustees Protocol
Allyn Shaw Doctoral Dissertation 2001
1 hour duration

Research Question:

How does the election process effect the decisions that board members make on a
daily basis? Can an individual (adviser) help inﬂuence a decision that the board
makes? I am studying the effect of the electoral process on the decision-making
techniques of the Michigan State University board of trustees’ members as their
selection process is considered one of the most divisive in the nation. The board
members are selected by the political parties of the state and then elected by the
citizens. Michigan is one of few states to govern the three state research universities
by this means

Demographics:

Years of service:

MSU graduate:

Party Afﬁliation:

Positions held on the board:
Professional positions:
Other service positions:

Why:

Why did you decide to run for MSU Board of Trustees position?

What inﬂuences helped you make the decision?

How did you come to realize that you wanted to participate in the election process?

Electoral process:

How did the election process proceed while campaigning for a less visible position
than governor, senator or house or representative position?

How did nmning for an elected position force you to make decisions for the
campaign?

Did this process make you change any beliefs that you previously held?

Do you think this is the best procedure to create boards of trustees at the three major
Michigan research institutions?

Decision-making:

What kind of training/orientation to the board did you receive?

How does the board of trustees make decisions?

What inﬂuences the individual member’s decision on a speciﬁc matter?

How does being elected effect the decisions made by the board members when they
consider the constituents?

129

Does party afﬁliation effect how you make a decision? If yes, how?

How does a public institution philosophy effect decisions made by board members?
What are the dynamics within the groups that help them come to consensus?

What are the tactics used by those with power to make decisions within the board of
trustees?

How do the external inﬂuences effect the decisions by board members?

What are the external inﬂuences to the boards of trustees?

How do the internal inﬂuences effect the decisions made by board members?

What are the internal inﬂuences that affect the board of trustees’ members?

How do organizations help create the decisions that are made by board of trustees
members?

How do the President, the Provost and/or the faculty chair effect how the trustees
make a decision?

What does the President, the Provost, and/or the faculty chair think their inﬂuence to
the board is and why?

Is it expected by the board for the President, the Provost and/or the faculty chair to
have an opinion on all topics reaching the board for a decision?

Is there anything that I did not ask that you feel is important to know for this study?

Specific Topic:
Each of the last four decades had a consuming issue and the emeriti will be asked

about the topic in their particular decade. The topics will include the grape boycott,
South African divestiture, athletics, tuition guarantee and minority programs.

130