ADJUSTING SUPPLY TO A SHIFTING DEMAND
In 2006, the federal government launched an investigation into the possibility that Yale University researchers inappropriately used more than $3 billion in grants from over thirty federal agencies. The university eventually settled for $7.6 million, but the incident showcased the need for greater administrative oversight over research and scholarship at academic institutions.
This episode was a “major factor” in Harvard’s decision to open Research Administration Services, a new office that now employs 29 people to oversee federal research compliance, according to Associate Dean for Research Administration Patrick W. Fitzgerald.
“Our priorities at this level are to facilitate what faculty do, but to get them to comply with rules and regulations,” Fitzgerald says.
In this way, Fitzgerald—and other administrators like him—provides support to the faculty. “One of the reasons for staff growth is to relieve the administrative burden on faculty,” Dean of Administration and Finance Leslie A. Kirwan ’79 says. Kirwan, who is second in authority only to Smith in FAS’s governance structure, is the highest ranking non-faculty administrator in FAS.
Multimedia
In addition to expanding the base of administrators to manage greater external pressures, FAS leadership has also created new positions to help respond to student demands. When senior exit survey results indicated that students wanted more advising, for example, offices were created for academic support and advising, according to Jorge I. Dominguez, government professor and vice provost for international affairs.
But as administrative ranks swell with middle managers and support staff for hundreds of administrators—there are 69 with “dean” in their title and many other directors and executive assistants—faculty members say there is a new drag in the school. Implementing innovative ideas and getting answers to questions can now take longer.
“It’s not a structure that’s agile and can move quickly,” says Ali S. Asani ’77, chair of the Department of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations.
“Because of the large increase in the administrative apparatus, necessarily things have become more formal,” says Henry S. Rosovsky, who served as dean of FAS from 1973 to 1984. “Greater formality may make it less interesting or desirable for faculty to participate.”
According to some faculty, a rigid system of delegating responsibilities down a chain of command is gradually replacing the open dialogue among peers that has traditionally characterized academic institutions. Faculty members communicate more with department chairs than with the upper-level administrators who often wield the most authority.
“The relationship has a corporate kind of structure,” says Eric N. Jacobsen, chair of the chemistry department.
PASSING MEMOS
When Jacobsen petitioned FAS to authorize a new faculty search earlier in May, he placed his report on the divisional dean’s desk. Beyond that point, he says he does not necessarily know how the decision to say “yes” or “no” will be made.
“These critical decisions that impact the future of the department are [now] made behind a closed door,” Jacobsen says.
Smith, however, says that he maintains varied and frequent contact with the faculty. “I am a tenured member of the faculty. I work with faculty constantly,” he writes in an email to The Crimson. “In fact, no major decision is made at the FAS without significant faculty consultation.”
