Other University leaders and faculty members have expressed opposition to establishing a campus abroad, which they believe would diminish the meaning of “Harvard.”
Professor Harry R. Lewis, former dean of Harvard College, emphasized that some forms of expansion abroad could undercut the institution’s fundamental values. “I hope that [Harvard] would not follow Yale’s lead in creating a college campus with the Harvard name based in a country that does not hold to the standards of free speech and free inquiry,” he said.
“If you take Harvard out of Cambridge, it’s no longer Harvard,” said Lane. “You risk diluting what it means to be a Harvard undergraduate when you begin setting up campuses overseas.”
However, according to Fernando M. Reimers, a professor of international education at the Graduate School of Education, concerns about diluting the Harvard brand could impede necessary evolution. “Education can and should be reinvented,” Reimers said. “We don’t want people to look at us as the dinosaurs that never adapted.”
Indeed, some remain concerned that Harvard does not have the central infrastructure in place to craft a comprehensive international strategy given the University’s decentralized nature. William C. Kirby, chairman of the Harvard China Fund and former dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, noted that while other universities have large offices devoted to global strategy and planning, Harvard only has a small number of people in charge of determining the University’s international strategy.
Dominguez agreed, noting that the office of international affairs is comprised of just two other staff members aside from himself.
“To the extent that there is a legitimate criticism of what we’re doing,” he said, “it’s that we’re understaffed for the hopes that our undergraduates, our faculty, and our students have for the future of Harvard.”
Indeed, with the dissolution of the International Strategy Working Group, the fact that there is no centralized University body or forum for such discussion may be a cause for concern. “Unless there is some sense of where the University as a whole might be going, then you will see a proliferation of small Harvard offices all over the world, with potentially little communication between them, all of them reputationally carrying the Harvard name,” said Kirby. “You can already see that happening, and it’s worth contemplating whether that’s the future of our international strategy. I don’t think it will be.”
Like Yale, Harvard administrators also remain unsure to what extent the faculty will have a formal voice in any process of international expansion.
“It is always a smart thing to talk to faculty and to have formal processes to get their opinion,” said Kirby, “because you’re going to hear their opinion one way or another.”
A GREATER GLOBAL PRESENCE
At the heart of Harvard’s strategy is a philosophy of prudence—a conservative approach that recognizes potential opportunities without throwing caution to the wind. As Krishna G. Palepu, Faust’s senior adviser for global strategy said, “the most important thing we are doing is making sure that we understand our goals before we jump into any actions or initiatives.”
Some have urged Harvard to exercise caution in the wake of Yale’s gamble in Singapore.
“Harvard’s restraint strikes me as wise rather than backwards,” said Miller. “If Harvard can resist the Kool-Aid of empire-building...the institution will be much better off than Yale.”
Indeed, fundamental questions remain over the benefits of physical expansion abroad. According to Edelstein, Levin’s forecast that the world’s leading universities will all have international campuses by 2050 is “a bit unrealistic.”
“It’s not likely to happen in any large numbers, because I think the risks and costs are becoming more apparent,” he said. “You have to do something to be relevant, but what you do remains an open question.”
As the strategies of the nation’s top Universities diverge over the next few years, the advantages of each approach will soon become apparent.
“In the next five, 10, or 50 years, some of these decisions regarding internationalization will have a significant impact,” warned Edelstein. “If there are any leaders that ignore this at Harvard or Yale, they do so at their own peril.”
—Staff writer Michael C. George can be reached at mgeorge@college.harvard.edu.
—Staff writer Alyza J. Sebenius can be reached at asebenius@college.harvard.edu.