Last year, the University acted as one in restricting the use of Harvard's name, a decision in which the Academic Advisory Group was very influential.

Fundraising, curricular development--particularly those aspects that involve several schools or departments--information technology, faculty planning and intellectual property are other issues that merit the attention of the group.

Many of these were discussed at the group's special meeting at the beginning of the year.

The Unification of Harvard

Although Harvard has traditionally been a decentralized university, no one so far has objected to the role taken on by the Academic Advisory Group.

"I found the meetings of the advisory group to be informative and helpful," says Joseph B. Martin, dean of the Medical School. "It is a format for me to learn about activities in the other schools and to think about areas of mutual benefits."

Rudenstine's other unification efforts, such as ADAPT, have not met with the same approval however.

Rudenstine created the $50 million initiative, Project ADAPT, aimed at coordinating financial record-keeping in the different schools. It will bring new computer software to offices across campus to centralize purchasing, benefits, grant management, payroll, accounts payable and receivable, and hiring.

Sources say Harvard's schools have been upset by the amount of personal autonomy Project ADAPT forces them to sacrifice for the cause of unifying the University information systems.

It also came under fire for the high costs individual schools must incur to implement the system. The $50 million budgeted for the project does not cover the funds the separate schools must lay out to set up the technology.

The difference in the reception of the two initiatives is perhaps indicative of the way that the schools prefer to approach Harvard's centralization.

Instead of forcing expensive changes on the schools, the forum of the Academic Advisory Group has allowed them to work more efficiently, co-planning projects like international outposts.

It is an initiative well-suited to both the schools' tradition of independence and Rudenstine's preference for leadership through discussion and consensus.

Within the advisory group, Rudenstine sets the agenda. The deans can discuss, come to a consensus and make recommendations, but, despite the voice given to the deans by the group, Rudenstine's voice is still paramount.

"[President Rudenstine's] authority doesn't get lost in the sense that he's not just a broker," says Kim B. Clark, dean of the Business School.

But, the deans say, Rudenstine does not impose his will on the other members of the group.

"It's a lot more like a family where you have strong family members," Clark says. "It's not a dictatorship. There's not a power issue."

The deans say they take the monthly meetings seriously and value the chance they have been given, as Clark put it, "to chart a course for the University."