↓ Download PDF ← Back to Library
A STATEMENT TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
ANTIOCH UNIVERSITY
DAN KAPLAN
June 6,2002
This is an important moment for this Board and for Antioch. I
think we are at a crossroads. Today, we can and we will shape
what Antioch will become. our actions
today, we can provide both the direction and the model.
Nearly three years ago, Bill Dietel met with us and made an
observation that our institution was in a state of disequdibrium. He
said the College, with its lack of resources, was the major
source of the problem and that if we were to truly reach our goal of
being a university, of reaching Antioch’ s fill! potential as a
university – we needed to correct the situation. Our answer was to
set in motion the steps to begin a capital campaign. A
campaign designed to do just that — to b
relationship amongst our campuses. To m
model of synergy. That has been the work
the past three years. For when this capital campaign is successful,
the non-residential campuses will be able to keep more of their
resources and thus be stronger and healthier and Antioch College
will be able to compete in a world where small liberal arts colleges
must have an endowment to be on a level playing field.
Our work must be focused not only on the Campaign, but on the
other governance issues which will drive that goal – moving from
dependency to synergy. In my letter I outlined other specific steps
which must be taken on this journey. But let me offer you another
example.
As the Board of Trustees, our job is to focus on the macro issues –
the kind that Bill Dietel referred to. Let’s spend a second on the
9 ‘f^ ^
& / 2 i^
kind of information we get and whether it helps us see the big
picture. Peter Drucker has said: What you measure you can
improve. That is the test, does the information we as a board
receive help us steer the instiution? I think the answer is no and if
you are like ou lived that first hand perhaps as you flew out
here yesterd
Let me give one example to you: as I sat on the plane yesterday
plowing through the financial documents we were provided, I
thought — I can not tell from all of this material, how we are doing.
Is this good news or bad news? I could not see the forest for the
trees. It is certainly not a lack of information we are getting.
Indeed, I think the problem is that it is the type of information we
are getting. We are receiving “management” information – not
“governance” information. For instance. How many students are
enrolled at Antioch? Is it more or less than last year? How many
faculty do we have? What are the faculty earning on average? Are
our enrollment numbers up or down? How is our retention rate
across all of our campuses? How do these numbers benchmark
against our performance in previous years? How do these numbers
benchmark against other similar instiutions? (Can you imagine the
Board of Directors of General Motors meeting and reviewing the
financials of their business without knowing how many cars they
had sold in the previous year!) These are the critical metric drivers
of Antioch9 s financial health. Not one of those questions was
answered in the document we received. How are we to make
decisions – important strategic decisions – if we are so focused on
the micro that we not see the macro? A
(“a^ At one private company board of directors on which I serve, they
call it the “dashboard” report. It provides the board with the key
information it needs to make the macro decisions. The key ratios,
the key benchmarks. If the board needs to drill down to get more
detailed information, it is readily available. This is a model I
propose for this Board. I will work with the finance committee,
with Glen and with Jim to give the Board the kind of information it
needs to make strategic, macro decisions.
I give that as but one example of how we as a Board, through our
business can influence the institution. If we pay attention to the
drivers of Anrioch’s finances instead of the details, we can help
shape how Antioch is. We can make the important decisions
because we can see where we are going.
This spring has been full of good Antioch experiences for me. In
the best of ways, I am still getting my Antioch education, still
learning and experiencing – and being better for it. I have attended
numerous Antioch-related meetings, many of them for the Capital
Campaign. I have spent time reading books and articles on boards.
In April I attended an AGB seminar. I have been learning best
practices and ideas from others which I think can help us be a
better board. I spent many hours – during evenings and weekends
in late April and early May putting together the letter which you
received. The letter helped me to crystallize my thinking and to
frame my point of view about what I see as the priorities for the
Board and Antioch and what my role would be as chair.
I had an opportunity to speak with many of you about the letter –
both on the phone and in person. I appreciate the comments you
made to me and the questions you asked. Through our discussions,
I got more concrete ideas – better ideas about how we could work
together as a Board. What a great model for Board dialogue.
I wanted to just say a few words about what I learned in the
discussions I had with some of you. Among the things I heard
comments on — many of you mentioned the consent agenda and
asked how that would work. There seemed to be a general
agreement that our agendas need to be more aligned with our
priorities and they should be less cluttered with housekeeping
matters. The work of the Future of Antioch Committee is now
beginning – and we must align our agenda with the work which the
Chancellor and the ULC are doing. Other trustees liked the idea of
attending AGB seminars on the various committees we have in
order to learn from others how we can improve how we work. I
had a good email discussion with a couple of people about the
kinds of information we should be getting as a board and how it
should be presented. This was good dialogue, and it’s the way I
want to work as Board Chair,
I also learned that it was important to the Board to have a choice in
electing a chair. To a person, everyone seemed glad that there
would be a choice. I share that opinion.
It is clear that there are significant issues on this board revolving
around trust and around perceptions there are “insiders” and
‘outsiders.” I have some good ideas about why this is the case.
One source of this issue is around the role of the Executive
Committee. The business of the Executive Committee is to transact
the business of the University only when it is not feasible for the
full board to meet. The Executive Committee must in no way usurp
the functions of the Board. That bears repeating.
We – as a board – or as an Executive Committee or as the
investment committee – must transact our business in open ways.
Everything we do must help to build trust, to use all the talents at
our disposal, and we must avoid anything, which undermines
. At the same time we must do everything we can
to build the group. Whatever the reality of the situation, it is the
perception that matters. I want this to go away. It gets in the way of
doing Antioch’s business, of building a better, stronger Antioch.
A year ago, the ad hoc committee put forth a recommendation that
the Executive Committee operate as a kind of kitchen cab*
because we felt the board chair needed a kitchen cabinet.
the Board Chair needed to consult more with members. The
problem is that you cannot legislate the way a board chair works –
just having an Executive Committee does not turn it into a kitchen
cabinet. I will work to change the culture of the Board – to one
built on a foundation of trust and inclusion. The way I worked this
spring – reaching out to nearly all of you is how I want to act as
Board Chair. But I am going to need your help. If you feel like you
are on the outside, for some reason, find a way to get inside. If you
feel your talents are not being called upon, speak up. This board
needs all of the energy, ideas, and spirit it can muster.
There is a historical context for today’s vote. One can trace what
we have done here over the past six years – beginning with the
work an ad hoc committee on governance led by Peggy began six
years ago. The meetings we have had with Bill Dietel – in
Washington and here in Seattle. The tremendous number of hours
that went into the Ad Hoc committee’s work with Fred Miller,
which the board adopted last June in Keene. The tremendous
contribution which Brace made in transitioning leadership at the
CEO level, and which Jim McDonald made in leading the
Financial Stabilization Committee. All of this work has helped
prepare Antioch for its future. And today we are on the
Let me share with you my list of the three favorite things I do as a
board member:
1. I love asking people for money for Antioch
2. I really enjoy the faculty and student presentations we get
during our board meetings and
3. I love going to Antioch graduations
In the past few years, I have attended the College graduation, Santa
Barbara, and this spring Keene. As I mentioned in my letter, the
impact that Antioch had and will have on the lives of those
oraduates reconnects me and I hope all of us with why we toil in a
these meetings. It is our shared purpose.
1 would like to end with a ouple of personal comments.
work, Antioch, an
love.
work here, I nk about my kids , or their
children and Its in our country. I want
to go to a place as special, as
lace where I went to College.
That is what drives me.
I know I be a good b och – 1 know
its strengths and I know it
