Missouri Southern State

University

Shared GovernanceProject

Presentation to the Board of Governors

Presenter Topic RepresentationJack Oakes Project Background Faculty

AJ Anglin Taskforce Charge and Members Administration

Cheryl Dobson SG Definition Subcommittee Staff

Olive Talley SG Framework Subcommittee Staff

Stephen Schiavo SG Survey Analysis Subcommittee Faculty

Jack Oakes References Faculty

Shared Governance Project Presenters

Slide 1 of 22

The Higher Learning Commission (HLC) Handbook of Accreditation: Criterion 1 – Core Component 1d

“The organization’s governance and administrative structures promote effective leadership and support collaborative processes that enable the organization to fulfill its mission.”

Shared Governance Project Background

Slide 2 of 22

Shared Governance Project Background

HLC Handbook of Accreditation – Examples of Evidence

Board policies and practices document the board’s focus on the organization’s mission.

The board enables the organization’s chief administrative personnel to exercise effective leadership.

The distribution of responsibilities as defined in governance structures, processes, and activities is understood and is implemented through delegated authority.

People within the governance and administrative structures are committed to the mission and appropriately qualified to carry out their defined responsibilities.

Faculty and other academic leaders share responsibility for the coherence of the curriculum and the integrity of academic processes.

Effective communication facilitates governance processes and activities.

The organization evaluates its structures and processes regularly and strengthens them as needed.

Shared Governance Project Background

Slide 4 of 22

Spring 2008 HLC Peer-Review Team Concerns The previous president had a 25-year tenure which exceeds the

institutional memory of most faculty, staff, and Board members. As the new president and the campus constituencies strive to develop a culture of shared governance and open communication, it is likely that some members will struggle with change. It will be important for the Board to support change without becoming intrusive.

Under the previous administration, shared governance was not a part of the culture of the institution. Conversations with faculty and staff, including a focused meeting with the Faculty Senate Executive Committee, provided evidence that faculty had not helped determine the priorities for the institution, and so were less invested in a number of initiatives such as the First Year Experience Project than would be expected. This was verified in a number of site visit meetings including one-on-one conversations with several of the academic deans.

Shared Governance Project Background

Slide 5 of 22

Spring 2008 HLC Peer-Review Team Recommendations

Although the team recommended that the MSSU be granted a 10-year continued-accreditation status with HLC, it also required that a focused visit be conducted in spring 2011 to review the status of the institution’s system of shared governance.

Shared Governance Project Background

Slide 6 of 22

MSSU ResponseDuring the spring of 2009, Dr. Bruce Speck, MSSU President, appointed a Shared Governance Taskforce (SGT) to review and make recommendations for improving MSSU’s shared governance framework, policies, and procedures.

During the summer of 2009, the university began a process of significant change in its upper administration, which resulted in the taskforce being put on hiatus. By late fall of 2010, the President’s Council realized that the committee had been inactive for too long, an oversight that needed to be rectified. In early spring 2011, the SGT was reorganized and asked to proceed with its original charge.

Shared Governance Taskforce

Slide 7 of 22

ChargeThis taskforce is charged with developing recommendations for each of the following topics.

Definition of shared governance Shared governance framework

Improved committee organization Well-defined and effective communication policies and

procedures Criteria for evaluating shared governance

Subsequent to institutional approval and implementation of initial taskforce recommendations, the committee will monitor and make recommendations for maintaining the ongoing effectiveness of the shared governance infrastructure.

Shared Governance Taskforce

Slide 8 of 22

Shared Governance Taskforce

Slide 9 of 22

Shared Governance Taskforce

Chair

Jack Oakes

Name Area

Administration

Bruce Speck University President

AJ Anglin Vice President for Academic Affairs

Rob Yust Vice President for Business Affairs

Darren Fullerton Vice President for Student Affairs

Tia Strait Deans Council

Faculty

Cheryl Cifelli Faculty Senate

Paul Teverow Arts and Sciences

Scott Cragin Business Administration

Al Cade Education

Stephen Schiavo Technology

Staff

Olive Talley Staff Senate

Julie Wengert Athletics

Bob Harrington Business Affairs

Judy Wilmoth Business Affairs

Becca Diskin Student Affairs

Cheryl Dobson Student Affairs

Charge and Member ListDevelop a definition of shared governance at MSSU to include a philosophy statement and a list of principles and goals.

Shared Governance Definition Subcommittee

Shared Governance Definition Subcommittee

Name Representation

Terri Agee Administration

Tia Strait Administration

Roger Chelf, Chair Faculty

Carla Walters Faculty

Julie Wengert Staff

Slide 10 of 22

Recommendation 1: SG Philosophy StatementMissouri Southern State University is committed to providing its key constituents the opportunity to engage in a dynamic system of shared governance that promotes informed participatory collaboration, cultivates mutual respect and trust, and recognizes diverse levels of accountability for the ultimate advancement of the mission, vision, and strategic plans of the University.

This shared governance model shall be periodically reviewed in order to effectively measure the impact of its structure so that it may continue to cultivate the growth of the University.

Shared Governance Definition Subcommittee

Slide 11 of 22

Recommendation 2: SG Principles StatementShared governance at Missouri Southern State University is established upon the following principles:

Transparent Communication: Open dialogue and candid communications are encouraged in order to create an atmosphere in which constituents may speak freely without fear of retribution so that the primary focus of the constituents may be aimed toward the advancement of the University.

Accountability: Recognition of different levels of authority, responsibility, and expertise within the University community with the understanding that final decision-making authority rests with the President and the Board of Governors.

Informed & Engaged Decision Making: Utilizing the collective intelligence of the University community in order to engage in the decision-making process through genuine inclusive deliberations as it specifically relates to each niche of the University.

Shared Governance Definition Subcommittee

Slide 12 of 22

Recommendation 3: SG Goals StatementThe goals of shared governance at Missouri Southern State University are designed to align with the University mission in that they support our pursuit of providing students a quality education within a diverse society. Shared governance goals are:

To ensure appropriate governing bodies engage in thorough and meaningful deliberations within the established framework so that timely, educated decisions are made in support of the greater good of the University.

To promote a sense of community among constituents by fostering an environment that encourages checks and balances, and being cognizant of the domains of responsibility and accountability of all constituents.

To create a sense of ownership among constituents through means of inclusion and empowerment in the decision-making process.

Shared Governance Definition Subcommittee

Slide 13 of 22

Shared Governance Framework Subcommittee

Shared Governance Framework Subcommittee

Name Representation

AJ Anglin Administration

Tia Strait, Chair Administration

Rob Yust Administration

Al Cade Faculty

Cheryl Cifelli Faculty

Paul Teverow Faculty

Becca Diskin Staff

Olive Talley Staff

Judy Wilmoth Staff

Charge and Member List Develop recommendations for improving the shared governance

committee structure. Develop recommendations for well-defined and effective

communication policies and procedures.

Slide 14 of 22

Institutional Strengths Currently, the committee structure is adequate to do the work of

the University. The individual committees function appropriately. Protocols exist to evaluate the committee organization and to

update it when necessary. Over the past couple of years, advancements have been made in

the ways that information is shared with all university stakeholders.

Shared Governance Framework Subcommittee

Institutional Opportunities for Improvement The broadly participatory Strategic Planning process needs to be

permanently institutionalized. The Shared Governance Survey must be analyzed and an

appropriate response identified and implemented. A more well-defined and effective communication infrastructure is

needed.

Slide 15 of 22

Initial Recommendations Improve communication, transparency, and cooperation among the

shared governing bodies by reorganizing the Administrative Council. The Administrative Council will provide a forum for communication among Administration, Faculty Senate, Staff Senate, and Student Senate.

Rename and reorganize the Executive Budget Committee. Its new name will be the Budget Advisory Committee. The new structure provides for a broader and more balanced campus representation on this important committee.

Establish a new permanent administrative committee named the Strategic Planning Committee. This committee will be responsible for overseeing, and the ongoing assessment and improvement of, the university’s Strategic Plan.

Shared Governance Framework Subcommittee

Slide 16 of 22

Shared Governance Survey Analysis Subcommittee

Charge and Member List Analyze the Spring 2009 and Fall 2010 Shared Governance Survey

results to indentify current strengths and opportunities for improvement.

Develop recommendations for institutional consideration that are designed to produce improvement in the areas identified as opportunities for improvement.Shared Governance Survey Analysis Subcommittee

Name Representation

AJ Anglin Administration

Darren Fullerton Administration

Rob Yust Administration

Scott Cragin Faculty

Paul Teverow Faculty

Stephen Schiavo, Chair Faculty

Bob Harrington Staff

Cheryl Dobson Staff

Julie Wengert Staff

Slide 17 of 22

Shared Governance Survey Analysis Subcommittee

Institutional Strengths – Based on SG Survey Results

The campus community fosters participation and leadership by women, persons of color, part‐time faculty, and members of other underrepresented groups.

Structures, policies, and procedures for disciplinary and dismissal hearings, grievances, appeals, and allegations of sexual harassment are consistent with due process.

Institutional officers do not have votes on faculty and staff committees.

Faculty and staff members view participation in shared governance as worthwhile.

Slide 18 of 22

Shared Governance Survey Analysis Subcommittee

Institutional Strengths – Based on SG Survey Results

Faculty and staff respond expeditiously to requests from the administration, the President, and the Board of Governors for recommendations and action on institutional decisions.

Faculty and staff representatives to their respective senates, institutional committees, and other bodies keep their constituents informed and solicit constituents’ views.

The faculty sets agendas, chooses representatives and leadership, and establishes procedures for committees that oversee those areas in which the faculty has primacy.

The faculty periodically reviews and, when appropriate, proposes changes to the faculty handbook, senate by‐laws, and similar documents.

Slide 19 of 22

Shared Governance Survey Analysis Subcommittee

Institutional Opportunities for Improvement – Based on SG Survey Results

The advisory role of faculty and staff in the development of the institutional budget needs to be improved. The Framework Subcommittee has already addressed this issue.

The survey indicated that the role of the faculty in the evaluation of academic administrators should be increased.

According to the survey, the role of the faculty in the selection of academic administrators should be increased.

The survey indicated that the role of the faculty in the selection of the university president should be increased.

The faculty indicated in the survey that its relationship with administration and the Board of Governors needs to be improved.

Slide 20 of 22

Shared Governance Survey Analysis Subcommittee

RecommendationsThe subcommittee is in the process of determining this list. It is scheduled to report the status of its work at an April 19 meeting of the Shared Governance Taskforce.

Slide 21 of 22

Shared Governance Project References

MSSU Shared Governance Project Websitehttp://www2.mssu.edu/planning/governance/

MSSU Spring 2009 and Fall 2010 SG Survey Results

http://www2.mssu.edu/planning/governance/results.htm

HLC Peer-Review Team Report, April 2008http://www2.mssu.edu/selfstudy/archives.htm

MSSU Focused Visit Report, February 2011http://www2.mssu.edu/selfstudy/archives.htm

HLC Handbook of Accreditation, Third Editionhttps://content.springcm.com/content/DownloadDocuments.ashx?Selection=Document,10611003;&accountId=5968

Slide 22 of 22