In short, McArthur's presentation stoleRudenstine's thunder.

That same day, the Business School's entirefaculty assembled in a closed-door meeting toreview the results of an internal report of theirown. Commissioned 18 months earlier by McArthur,the report recommended a dramatic overhaul of theschool's flagship M.B.A. program, including areduced reliance on its trademark case studymethod.

Results of the review were not supposed to bereleased until November 8, when the report is tobe distributed to the school's students. Instead,however, the recommendations made in the documentwere widely leaked, and reported in the Mondaypapers.

The coverage didn't stop there. By Tuesday, astrongly worded article in the Boston Globesuggested that McArthur's public appearance atYale, and his remarks at the June 1992 retreat,were a deliberate effort to derail Rudenstine'svision.

The release of McArthur's comments, the Globestory implied, was calculated to coincide with therelease of Rudenstine's report. The story painteda picture of a Business School, under McArthur,trying to throw off the yoke of Rudenstine'sleadership, and trying to excise itself from anysignificant degree of participation in the funddrive.

"McArthur is seeking to maintain as much of theschool's independence as possible," wrote Globecolumnist David L. Warsh '66. "A potentiallybrutal internecine battle is in the offing."

McArthur did not return a phone call yesterday.But Rudenstine vigorously disputes Warsh'sanalysis.

"I think the timing was purely coincidental,"Rudenstine says. "I'm sure John had no idea whenhe set up [the Yale visit] that my report wasbeing published."

"I don't think this bears on [the BusinessSchool's participation in the capital campaign] atall," Rudenstine adds.

In addition, the president says he believesMcArthur's comments about the Business School'sfinancial crisis were misinterpreted.

"The references to a financial crisis had asmuch to do with the past as with the present,"Rudenstine says. "I don't think the dean wouldcharacterize the school's economy as being incrisis right now."

But the dean's critics within the Universitypaint a different picture. Some suggest that thetiming of the last week's events has been lessthan ideal, and hint that McArthur's motives maybe suspect.

"The questions are fair," says one seniorUniversity official of Warsh's article. "I thinkthat anything that raises unnecessary issues isnot a happy event."

"I happen to think that in this case it may nothave been as purposeful, but who knows," says theofficial, speaking on condition of anonymity."It's hard to figure out."

McArthur's critics suggest that he has neverbeen fully cooperative in the capital campaign,and that the last week has merely served toheighten public awareness of his battle againstthe central administration.