The Corporation is already full of business types. This time, how about an author? Or an activist?

OVER THE NEXT year or two, nearly half the seats on the Harvard Corporation will be filled by new members.

Last year at this time, the Corporation consisted of four corporate mavens and three academics, including President Derek C. Bok. With the death last year of corporate executive Colman M. Mockler and the impending retirements of Robert G. Stone '45 and good ol' Charles P. Slichter '45, the Corporation will have to appoint three new colleagues. And with these vacancies comes a chance to diversify the board dramatically.

GRANTED, the Corporation is a corporation. Harvard undoubtedly benefits from having some people with business sense at its helm to expand the endowment and make sound financial deals for the University. Corporation members' business know-how has raised the money that makes scholarships, research funds and other essential programs possible.

But the advantages of having a body of corporate board members must be balanced with the handicap of their homogeneity. The fact that the Corporation does more than just raise money means that more than just financial interests should be represented on the board. The board also approves and oversees many academic decisions, including new professorships and research programs. We hope--naively, perhaps--that the Corporation will fill its openings with some nontraditional choices.

Why not select an author? Or a social activist in the Marion Wright Edelman mold? Anyone could bring fresh perspective to this crusty old body. And the presence of professors on the board will ensure that the Corporation's decisions are in the best interests of academia.

In addition, the inclusion of women and minorities in governing the University should remain a priority for the Corporation. There is only one woman on the board, and there has never been a member of a racial minority group. We are, after all, nearing the 21st century. A little diversity among Harvard's ruling elite would be appropriate for the times.

WE CONTINUE to hope that the Corporation will wake up one day and realize that it's time to open up its star chamber in the spirit of academic glasnost. Such a nondemocratic, self-selecting, highly secretive body is an anachronism. Open discussion, not edicts handed down from on high, should determine the course of the University.

We urge President Neil L. Rudenstine--the newest member of the Corporation--to take advantage of this time of transition on the Corporation to modify its selection criteria. Of course, we can only trust that the Corporation members themselves have these goals at heart.

Naively, perhaps.