“This concern about reform was in the air and present in lots of conversations among people nationwide who were executives and also served as college trustees,” said Chait, who specializes in higher-education governance and advised the Corporation on the reforms.

Additionally, in the aftermath of the financial crisis the Corporation came under attack by faculty and alumni for a lack of transparency.

In December 2009—around the time that the review of the Corporation was launched—Harvard Professors Frederick H. Abernathy and Harry R. Lewis ’68 wrote an op-ed in the Boston Globe calling for some Corporation members to resign in the wake of the nearly 30 percent decline in the endowment’s value during the financial crisis.

In the op-ed, they called the Corporation “a dangerous anachronism” and said that “it is too small, too closed, and too secretive to be intensely self-critical.”

Robert D. Reischauer ’63, who heads the Corporation as its senior fellow, said when the reforms were announced that the changes would partly address these criticisms and that the Corporation would move toward increased openness.

That spirit is most evident in the Corporation’s newest member, William F. Lee ’72, the group’s newest member, who said that he would, for example, make himself available for interviews with The Crimson and meet regularly with students. Several other members of the Corporation declined to be interviewed for this article.

Chait said he expects that the senior fellow and the president of the Corporation will initiate more formal and informal conversations with individuals in the University to open lines of communication.

Abernathy, arguably the Corporation’s most vocal critic, said he is only “cautiously optimistic” about the reforms.

“The optimistic part is they’ve actually undertaken potentially some reform—it’s all potential and now the proof will be who they appoint. Let’s say if they appoint six Wall Street people, I would say it’s not an improvement at all.”

EXPANDING MEMBERSHIP

In the Corporation’s early days, the body consisted of a clubby group of Boston lawyers that served as a sort of informal kitchen cabinet for the University president.

As Harvard has evolved, the Corporation has gradually changed—but not always for the better.

Recently, the Corporation has come under scathing criticism for what many perceive to be an over the top commitment to secrecy and a troubling lack of accountability.

When Faust rolled out the reforms late last year, it was clear that the new policies were meant to address these criticisms head on. With the expansion of the body’s size from 7 to 13 members and the adoption of term limits, the body sought to become more specialized and responsive.

Still, even after these reforms, the Corporation remains the smallest board among its peer institutions. Private colleges and universities typically have boards composed of 25 to 60 members, according to Lucie Lapovsky, who runs a higher-education consulting firm that advises on governance issues.