In an effort to reevaluate its responsibilities and workings in a “thoughtful and forward-looking way with an eye for sweeping improvement,” the Harvard Corporation announced this week that it will undergo a structural overhaul in order to implement critical reforms during a time of growing complexity for the greater Harvard community. Emerging from the longstanding 17th century governing configuration, the changes should allow the Corporation to better address new 21st century challenges and demands following criticism that stresses a lack of transparency, accountability, and community engagement. In light of such critiques, the Corporation’s move to nearly double its membership and form several new committees is a step in the right direction, as we expect that it will add diversity of opinion and expand the body’s proficiency in various realms. Likewise, we anticipate that the newly instated term limits will increase members’ responsiveness. However, while we appreciate that the Corporation is trying to address the criticisms levied at it, we hope to see further reform to resolve issues of transparency.

The governance review examined century-old structures and responsibilities that necessitated alteration to adapt to the current needs of the University. In the context of a newly enlarged Corporation that includes a greater diversity of opinions and experiences, the creation of several new committees is positive, as it will allow for specialization to more fully address specific needs of the Harvard community. Drawing from the specialized skill set of a wider membership, the Corporation will be better equipped to plan the future of the University and make critical decisions relating to its policy and strategy within the ever-changing fiscal climate.

Until now, the president and six other members have comprised the Corporation. Although adding six additional members should provide useful perspective, these individuals will be appointed by existing Corporation members themselves. As the Corporation aims to serve the greater Harvard community, accountability is particularly crucial; thus, the self-appointment policy requires reform. We hope that until this policy can be reexamined, Corporation members will hold one another accountable through the new term limits, which establish a six-year service period with the opportunity to extend service for six more years thereafter.

While the steps outlined this week are commendable, they do not appear to address a crucial shortcoming of the Corporation: it’s lack of transparency. The body must make efforts to keep the greater community better informed about its goals, proceedings, and decisions, and further reform may be necessary to institutionalize communication.

Despite these shortcoming, the restructuring underway promises to alter the future proceedings of the Corporation for the better, reflecting constructive dialogue on the part of the Governance Review Committee.