After spending a contentious summer reviewing the size, composition and electoral processes of the Board of Trustees, the Board's governance committee will reveal its findings and propose changes at the Board's retreat this weekend. The announcement is the focal point of months of highly publicized debates over Dartmouth's governance practices and the College's legal obligations to its alumni.
The debate, which has received national media attention, reached its financial zenith in late August when an anonymous group called the Committee to Save Dartmouth College rolled out a $300,000 campaign with ads on The New York Times' website and in the print editions of The Times and the Wall Street Journal, urging alumni to "Save Democracy at Dartmouth."
The slogan touches on the central question the governance committee has been examining all summer " to what extent democratic representation of alumni should govern Dartmouth.
A unique Board game
"Democracy has always been an important part of governance at Dartmouth," Chairman of the Board Ed Haldeman '70 said in an interview with The Dartmouth. "We have, at present, the most democratic form of governance of any peer institution."
The Dartmouth Board consists of 18 seats: One for the College president, one for the governor of New Hampshire, eight for trustees chosen by the Board (dubbed charter trustees) and eight nominated by alumni (dubbed alumni trustees). The equal number of alumni-elected trustees and Board-selected trustees is rare among institutions of higher education and is unique in the Ivy League.
Despite the system's history at Dartmouth, a number of trustees and alumni believe that there are problems with applying the principles of democracy to governance of Dartmouth.
"I think people have to understand that Dartmouth is not a democracy," said Bill Hutchinson '76, president of the Association of Alumni. "The Board of Trustees is responsible for the well-being of the College and if alumni can support that effort then all the better."
Haldeman, who heads the governance committee, said he thought the divisive nature of recent alumni elections has hurt the College and that other governance structures could provide for better decision-making.
"It's my sense that if we had had a democratic vote of the alumni body at that point in time, Dartmouth would not have gone coed and I think that would have created substantial damage to the College. I think the College is a much better place because there were trustees who voted in favor of coeducation even though the majority of the alumni might not have," he said.
Haldeman said that the governance committee is considering the democratic nature of the College's governance in its review and "is trying hard absolutely to do what is good for Dartmouth in the long term and still be respectful of the history and traditions that make it so special."
A group of alumni and trustees, however, believe that the uniquely democratic nature of the College's governance structure is an indispensable Dartmouth tradition. This group fears that the governance committee will propose changes that will reduce the proportion of alumni trustees or change the rules whereby alumni rise to the Board.
"As a result of its unique tradition of former students representing current and future students, Dartmouth has remained distinct among its peers," Todd Zywicki '88, an alumni trustee, wrote in an Aug. 3 op-ed in The Dartmouth. "To change this tradition would be to change Dartmouth itself."
Of the many speculations about potential proposals of the governance committee, a "Harvard Plan," to which Zywicki refers in his op-ed, has been fodder for a great deal of speculation. The Harvard Corporation, which has the power to hire and fire the university president, is self-perpetuating and consists of the university president and six fellows. The university is also governed by its Board of Overseers, a group of 30 alumni-elected officers whose role are mostly consultative.
An Aug. 31 editorial in the Wall Street Journal states that Dartmouth's Board will most likely adopt this structure because it "would preserve the faint form of democracy while arrogating most power to an unelected internal committee."
"If a Harvard style of governance were adapted that would mean that the trustees who were not lucky enough or in good favor enough to be on that committee would be ceremonial trustees and effectively lose their power," T.J. Rodgers '70, an alumni trustee, said in an interview with The Dartmouth.
Who are the shareholders?
Rodgers contends that, if the Board does decide to alter its composition or electoral processes, it will signal a departure from the standards of good governance accepted in the marketplace.
"There are certain standards of governance in corporations that are best practices," Rodgers said, citing the nominating committee that looks after the interests of shareholders in his company, San Jose-based Cypress Semiconductor. "[Dartmouth President James] Wright, by sitting on the governance committee of the Dartmouth Board, selects people that review him in the future and that form of governance could compromise the independence of the Board of Trustees."
Rodgers characterized the debate over the governance review as "libertarian versus totalitarian."
"In the libertarian position we argue for debate and conversation," Rodgers said. "The totalitarian position is where one side takes control, their ideas are the only ideas, and you do what they say."
Anne Neal, the president of the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, a nonprofit organization based in Washington D.C., says that the debate over the governance committee's review has raised many issues about the governance of non-profit institutions.
"The debate has raised important questions about whether or not boards should be small and self-perpetuating or whether they should, as Dartmouth has traditionally, invite alumni to participate democratically in important matters because they understand and know the institution and are fond of it," Neal said. "If this kind of arrangement were in place in a Fortune 500 company we would have some real issues."
A number of trustees and alumni, however, do not think that corporate standards of governance are applicable to governing an institution of higher education. In a 1990 speech given to the Association of Alumni, Kate Stith-Cabranes '73, then a trustee at the College, argued that claims to corporate models of governance are not ideal Dartmouth or any other institution of higher learning.
Haldeman agreed, saying that the owners or "shareholders" of Dartmouth are not just one group, but rather include the current student body, parents of current students, faculty members, members of the administration and alumni.
"One of the problems is that democracy is given to just one of those stakeholders," he said. "In the marketplace I think ownership is more easily identifiable. If we take a look at a business we can identify who the owner is."
A check on change
A number of alumni, including Rodgers and Zywicki, believe that Dartmouth graduates' extensive involvement in College governance have kept Dartmouth from shifting away from its historical undergraduate focus.
"I think one of the reasons Dartmouth has not fallen into the trap of becoming a second-tier research university that neglects undergraduate education is that those very undergraduates, like me, once they go into the world, treasure Dartmouth in many ways and one of those ways is electing alumni trustees to make sure that Dartmouth continues on the true path," Rodgers said. "Dartmouth is the best undergraduate school in the world and I am unabashed about proposing that and I am tireless when it comes to defending against losing that."
The College's willingness to change is at the heart of this debate. Rodgers credits alumni representation with historic resistance to change and Haldeman credits the power of a small group with the ability to make an unpopular but sound decision, such as the one that brought women to Dartmouth.
But Haldeman rejected Rodgers' suggestion that commitment to undergraduate education requires that the alumni select trustees, noting that all of the members of the Board of Trustees, including the president of the College and the governor of New Hampshire, attended Dartmouth as undergraduates.
"What would make anybody think that any of those 16 would not have as an important part of their agenda the strength of the undergraduate education?" he questioned. "I disagree with the notion that elections are required to get alumni to focus on undergraduate education."
