Bok spoke in visionary specifics, outlining thedetails of his plans in public forums and gettingthings done in the public eye. By relying on anadministrative cabinet, Rudenstine has moreday-to-day effects on University decision making.
But he also ends up spending a lot of timepushing the bureaucracy along towardscollaborative and compromise objectives, and inthe end getting little credit for what gets done.
And so while Bok's shadow as an "educationpresident" still falls across the Harvard campus,Rudenstine may have a far smaller historicalpresence and little institutional record outsidethe Campaign.
Second, by building his entire legacy inboardroom cooperation, Rudenstine has made hisachievements vulnerable to consensus--where afuture president and more independent-minded cropof deans could easily sweep it away.
"[It would be] fairly easy to kill it," saysHBS Dean Kim B. Clark, one of Rudenstine's mostrecent hires, on the president's success atcentralization. But he adds, "The current deansreally like it, and I think will carry it on."
And Rudenstine's current goals, even ifcompleted fully by the time he leaves office, arenot likely to make more incontrovertible change.
His decision to make change privately andindirectly, allowing others to mold and takecredit for actions he begins, may make Rudenstineeasy to forget. From his leadership style andplans for the future, it seems that thepresident's legacy deficit is not likely to changeanytime soon.
"When the Corporation asked me if I wanted thisjob, they pretty much knew who I was," Rudenstinesaid last month.
"I can only be who I am, and I can only producethe kinds of results that I can produce," he said
--Nicholas A. Nash contributed to thereporting of this article.