“There are different styles of leadership, and I would probably characterize myself as one who aims to move and direct and lead a Faculty—very possibly in a more reserved way,” Kirby said in a Jan. 20 interview. “I think it’s important that this process be collective, that we discuss and move as a body.”

Some have criticized Kirby for taking this leadership style to an extreme by allowing Summers to take more control over FAS affairs at the expense of Faculty autonomy.

“I think that from early on, the President has pushed very hard to have his way of the running of things in University Hall and that the Dean didn’t have the strength to oppose it,” said one member of the Faculty Council—the 18-member governing board of FAS—who requested to remain anonymous in order to avoid any appearance of personal confrontation with Kirby, who chairs the Council.

“Looking at what’s happened to University Hall, I think he’s been pushed further than he should have allowed himself to be,” the professor said, adding that Kirby should have been prepared to threaten to resign when his power was excessively undermined.

But Kirby’s supporters say that his famously genteel demeanor—especially in contrast with Summers’ more brusque style—has led to the misperception that Kirby has been overpowered by the president.

In reality, they say, Kirby’s restrained public face masks his more privately-expressed advocacy for the Faculty and resistance to some of Summers’ ideas.

“Kirby is not somebody to mince words when it comes to matters of principle. The fact that he hasn’t advertised his talks with the President one-on-one doesn’t mean that he hasn’t had them. In fact, I’m sure he has,” said one department chair who asked to remain anonymous so that he could speak plainly about what he called “sensitive issues.”

Ultimately, Kirby’s fate is tied to Summers’.

Even if neither of today’s censure motions passes, Summers will likely be forced to amend his leadership style substantially, which would give Kirby more breathing room to fulfill his responsibilities to the Faculty.

But some say that if those changes do not come fast enough, professors may lose their faith in Kirby’s ability to represent their concerns in the face of Summers’ aggressive leadership.

If Summer does not change his leadership style, “then I think there’ll continue to be very serious problems, because there’s a lack of trust,” said one senior faculty member who asked to remain anonymous.

FINDING THE LEADER

Kirby’s at-times conflicting roles explain the Faculty’s mixed reactions to his leadership.

According to some professors, Kirby deserves to be criticized for failing to ensure that the Faculty is capable of self-governance. They say that not only is Summers too strong a leader, but that Kirby is too weak a defender of the Faculty—and that now is the time for him to shore up this role.

“Faculty members, I believe, are eager to have that kind of [strong] leadership [from the Dean] to hold us together so that we don’t end up turning against each other,” said Jan Ziolkowski, chair of the Folklore and Mythology department.