As President Bok returned to his office after this year's opening exercises, he stopped to pick up some litter in front of Massachusetts Hall. Laughing, he told a passerby that his momentary role as Harvard's "head garbage picker-upper" was just another of his "many hats."

Running a large university on a day-to-day basis--Bok's principal "hat" requires its President to be well versed in the problems and questions facing its departments, large and small. He must spend endless hours in committee meetings, reading reports, writing other missives, overseeing the long term administration of the University, and fundraising. Carrying out all these in house functions. Bok is circumspect, working with a careful, methodical style that usually prevents unexpected catastrophes and sharp policy changes.

But as a spokesman for higher education and Harvard's representative to the outside world, Bok is visible indeed. He regularly journeys to Washington to testify before congressional committees and to discuss trends in higher education with other policymakers. He has spent the last year as honorary chairman of the American Council on Education, a political lobbying group. He was a prime mover behind a much publicized March conference between University presidents and industry leaders to iron out a proper relationship between and industry--authored Most recently he has released a book scrutinizing the role of universities in contemporary society reviews of which are beginning to roll in.

But linking all Bok's president responsibilities is a common approach: painstaking scrutiny Decisions are not made hastily in Mass Hall issues can drag on unresolved for many months or even years. Bok's celebrated delegation of power to a series of lieutenants seems to function smoothly allowing him to keep an eye on and a hand in the different projects without having to make immediate decisions.

* * *

The task that occupies most of Bok's time is reviewing faculty and other appointments. While many other universities allow their faculties to select professors administration approval here is anything but a rubber stamp. There is Bok explains "certainly nothing more important than choosing key people--deans and faculty." As a result, he often laboriously reviews the work of adhoc appointment committees--composed of professors administrators and outside experts--and not infrequently vetoes a department's nomination. Just three months ago for example Bok rejected the Sociology Department's recommendation of tenure for Alfred Stepan a Yale University specialist in Latin American politics. Stepan--considered an unorthodox sociologist--was recommended nearly unanimously by a department search committee but Bok had lingering reservations about his record.

Bok readily admits that he is not qualified to determine which candidate for a faculty post has done the best work in his field but argues that he can still make responsible judgements by gathering as much information from as many different sources as possible. "You don't make substantive judgments in your own mind as to whether you think someone's work in physics is as good as someone else's. You make the kind of judgment a judge makes," he explains. "Sure I'm not a physicist, just as a judge in an anti-trust case is not an economist, but you make a judgment."

After selecting a professor, Bok exercises less exacting scrutiny. He does not make any specific policy decisions for the different academic departments, but says he tries to stress philosophical implications of their approaches. "I obviously don't figure out what the plans should be for various schools," he says. "I can't dictate what medical education should be at the medical school, but what I can do is encourage deans and other heads of significant units to really think about what the large issues are."

And, say-his Mass Hall colleagues, he acts similarly towards his administrative lieutenants. Except for a few projects for which he takes direct responsibility--like faculty appointments--he says he is content to make sure things are running smoothly under other's direction. "He does rely a great deal on his staff to manage their areas of responsibility," says special assistant Nancy Randolph. But she says Bok would not hesitate to intervene if a policy goes awry. In general however Randolph says her boss's philosophy is that "decisions should be made by people most involved and not be heavy handed decisions coming down from the top"

* * *

The same reflective scrutiny is evident in his policy towards his public pronouncements. As his new book Beyond the Ivory Tower argues, he believes institutions should shun collective statements he seems highly critical of those who fail to evaluate issues completely. For instance, he rejects as simpleminded others criticism that the Corporation. Harvard's equivalent of a board of directors cannot adequately represent the entire University because it is composed solely of white males. Launching Corporation actions during the last decade he observes that since 1970 the University has adopted sex-blind admissions and financial aid policies instituted full athletic opportunities for women and tried to protect the rights of minorities "The idea that you can't expect a group of white males to make anything but white male decisions is a piece of political oversimplification which has really gone pretty fat," he contends

* * *

Bok takes seriously his role in evaluating questions facing modern universities, but once he has reached a decision tends to stand firm. But he makes few political statements on issues not connected to the University, explaining that he generally consider it wrong to do so. Having evaluated the implications of University investment in South Africa Bok notes that he has not changed his position since the issue erupted at Harvard Indeed, he predicts that the Corporation--which he chairs--will never vote for divestiture. By the same token. his new book reveals his similarly careful examination of the touchy issues of technology transfer--an issue that erupted here two years ago when the University was considering making a substantial investment in a planned genetic engineering company to be headed by a Harvard professor. Thanks largely to Bok, the University judged that the arrangement would seriously compromise academic freedom and as a result, the company never took off.

But it Bok's decision then generally drew praise, he would probably never follow. Yale President A. Bartlett Giamatti's footsteps in using a University platform to address a non-educational national issue, like when Giamatti blasted the Moral Majority during his opening address to freshmen last fall. It was only with great reluctance that the Faculty voted on a resolution condemning the Vietnam war early in Bok's tenure and the President's actions indicate the University is unlikely to ever formally condemn the arms race and nuclear was as Dartmouth's faculty did last month.

Bok does feel comfortable speaking publicity on issues confronting higher education. He has testified in front of congressional committees and spoken with White House Chief of Staff James A. Barker III about the effects of the Reagan Administration's cuts in financial aid, and he devoted his most recent annual report to the subject. That report drew harsh criticism for suggesting that financial and be limited to students who scored above some non specified minimum level on standardized tests. Bok was surprised by the criticism his suggestion was unfair and perhaps even subtly racist--an allegation some levelled because minorities on average score lower on SAT's than do whites Most observers have found it surprising that Bok didn't realize the controversial nature of the suggestion before the report came out.