Clear divisions emerged on the LSU Board of Supervirsors this afternoon near the end of a specially called virtual meeting to discuss the future of LSU’s leadership structure.
Following a nearly two-hour report from consultants, who outlined several leadership scenarios but did not recommend any particular one, several board members, including Blake Chatelain, James Moore and Stephen Perry, said they think it’s too soon to deconsolidate the joint position of LSU chancellor and president, which was combined into one in 2012 following an earlier AGB study.
“My tendency would be to stay the course for a couple of years, at least until we get through this tumultuous time,” Perry said. “Then, once the president’s search is accomplished, we could have the president lead the search for a separate LSU chancellor, should the board decide it wants to do that.”
But board members Robert Dampf, Remy Starns, and James Williams argued that the LSU A&M campus in Baton Rouge has been underserved by a single administrator, who oversees the entire system, while the other LSU campuses and institutions have felt neglected.
“We have seven institutions that don’t feel like they have a president because he spends all his time being the chancellor of A&M,” Starns said. “The only one of our institutions that doesn’t have a full time chancellor is A&M in Baton Rouge, the largest of our institutions.”
The discussion was the first public debate board members have had around the issue, which was generating a lot of interest in political circles early this year until the coronavirus pandemic, and their opposing viewpoints underscore political divisions on the board.
Chatelain, Moore and Perry are all holdovers from the Bobby Jindal-appointed board, which was responsible for combining the positions in 2013 and hiring F. King Alexander to serve as the first joint president chancellor.
Dampf, Starns and Williams were all appointed by Gov. John Bel Edwards, who has publicly said he favors splitting the positions.
The board did not take any action on the report today. It meets again May 22.
Prior to the discussion, consultants said the board needs to decide what it wants LSU to be: a single university or a system of eight campuses and institutions with distinct missions.
For the past two months, the consulting arm of the Association of Governing Board has been studying LSU’s leadership structure, as the board moves to find a replacement for former president F. King Alexander, who stepped down at the end of last year to take a position at Oregon State University.
At the meeting, AGB consultants outlined five possible options, ranging from keeping the existing leadership structure to going back to a setup that more closely resembles what LSU had in the past and several hybrid scenarios in between.
The report stops short of recommending that the board go in one direction or another. It does say that whatever option the board chooses, it’s important to be transparent, apolitical and clear about the overarching goals for LSU.
“The board needs to be cognizant that no matter what decision it reaches, how that is communicated will either build or erode trust moving forward,” AGB consultant George Pernsteiner said.
In personal and telephone interviews with more than 100 administrators, faculty and students on all eight LSU campuses, consultants say they determined the current structure has worked well in creating a common identity across campuses, improving collaboration among the foundations, increasing the number of shared services among campuses and reducing conflict between A&M and the president’s office.
On the other hand, many on the A&M campus believe they need an identifiable campus leader, while those on other campuses believe the president may be more favorably disposed toward A&M than toward them.
“There are also those who believe the president’s job is either too big for one person or may have inherent conflicts in it,” Pernsteiner says.
Perhaps more importantly, a couple of consistent themes emerged in the interviews that consultants say need to be addressed regardless of the leadership structure, namely: a lack of collaborative research among campuses, a lack of transparency around financing and budgeting, and a perception that LSU’s strategic plan is more about the A&M campus than the overall university.
The study says LSU could do one of five things with its current leadership structure.
- Keep the current structure with a single president and chancellor.
- Keep the current structure, but create additional positions under the president, including a COO to focus on day-to-day operations, and an executive to improve collaborative research among campuses.
- Expand the position of provost on the A&M campus, and increase its duties.
- Reinstate the position of chancellor for the A&M campus.
- Reinstate the chancellor position for the A&M campus but add resources for research and staffing in the president’s office to address concerns about the need for more collaborative research across campuses.
There’s no word on when the board might take action on the study, much less begin its national search for Alexander’s replacement or replacements.
(Editor’s Note: This story has been updated from an earlier version to include additional comments from board members.)
