Challenge 4

Strengthening the University’s Governance Structures, Policies, and Practices.

Institutional excellence requires a system of governance that provides clear policies and structures, deep understanding of appropriate roles and responsibilities in a complex shared governance environment, and consistent methods for continuous improvement.

As described in Part 2 of this self-study report, the mid-1990s marked one of the most challenging periods for University of Minnesota governance in its history.  Relationships among and between faculty, administrators, and the Board of Regents were strained.  The Governor, state legislators, and the news media – locally and nationally – offered their opinions and solutions.

As noted earlier, while the public controversy – which had gained national attention well beyond the higher education community – centered on proposed changes to the University’s academic tenure policy and other issues, as the 1996 NCA visiting team noted at the time, included claims of “political meddling” by the state, “micromanagement” by the Board of Regents, lack of understanding and appreciation of “the many academic and administrative challenges the University faces” by both the state and the governing board, and pervasive “faculty suspicion and distrust.”

In the intervening years, perhaps no University issue has received more time and attention from the Regents, faculty, and senior administrators than the restoration of a workable governance system that serves the mission and makes possible the achievement of University excellence, as envisioned in its strategic plan.

return to section menu

Board of Regents

The University’s Board of Regents now plays a vital and appropriate leadership role in preserving the mission, setting strategic direction, carrying out its fiduciary and other responsibilities, and communicating its role and decisions effectively to constituencies.  The Board of Regents consistently and intentionally focuses its time and attention on policy work, oversight, and providing advice and counsel to the President.

The 12-member Board of Regents is the governing body of the University.  The legislature elects one regent from each of Minnesota’s eight congressional districts and four from the state at large.  In 1988, the legislature established the Regent Candidate Advisory Council to provide advice on the election of Regents.

The Council’s duties are to outline criteria to be applied in recommending candidates, and recruit, screen and recommend at least two, and not more than four, qualified candidates for each opening on the Board.  The council consists of 24 members appointed to staggered six-year terms.

One of the four at-large regents must be a University student at the time of election.  Regents serve without pay for six-year terms.  The president of the University is ex officio president of the Board.  The Board meets nine or 10 months during each year.

The 2005 Legislature modified the process for selecting Regents.  The Regent Candidate Advisory Council will now make its recommendations to the Governor rather than the legislature.  The Governor then will submit to a joint legislative committee a slate of Regent nominations of one nominee for each vacancy.  The committee will forward the Governor’s Regent nominees for presentation to a joint convention of the legislature for final action.

Committees.  The Board of Regent’s committees include:  Audit; Educational Planning and Policy; Facilities; Faculty, Staff, and Student Affairs; Finance and Operations; and Litigation Review. Meetings of the Board of Regents and its committees are governed by the Minnesota Open Meeting Law (Minnesota Statutes 471.705). 

Current members of the Board of Regents are listed in Appendix A.

Board of Regents Responsibilities

Improvement Efforts:  Within the last several years, the Board of Regents has undertaken a variety of efforts to update its policies and procedures and and improve its effectiveness.  These efforts have included:

• Providing leadership and support to the University’s strategic positioning and accountability efforts.

• Clarifying its authority and which powers it delegates to the president through a new Board of Regents policy on reservation and delegation of authority.

• Instituting work sessions for the Board to discuss trends affecting higher education and enhance Regents’ continuing education.

• Developing and implementing a plan to review and revise nearly 120 Board of Regents policies.

• Reviewing the role of each Board committee and its information needs.

• Annual retreat with the president to review Board performance, set priorities informed by the president’s preliminary work plan, and discuss emerging critical issues.

• Hosting regular meetings of the Board leadership with the president, provost, and Faculty Consultative Committee leadership.

• Inviting the chairs of corresponding faculty committees to attend Board committee meetings.

• Hosting one annual dinner and discussion with the full Faculty Consultative Committee.

return to section menu

Faculty-Staff-Student Governance

Faculty, professional and civil service staff, and student participation in the shared governance of the University (Twin Cities campus and system-wide) is accomplished primarily through the University Senate.

The Senate is an elected body of faculty, academic professionals, and students which discusses and approves matters that affect the entire University. 

University Governance Bodies

The chair of the Faculty Consultative Committee and the president of the Minnesota Student Association consult with and make regular reports and recommendations to the Board of Regents.

Current committee rosters and meeting minutes are available at the Web sites indicated. 

Improvement Efforts:  Recent efforts to ensure the continuing effectiveness of faculty-staff-student governance have included:

• Starting in 2005-06, the University Senate will expand to include professional and administrative (P&A) staff and civil service staff. However, faculty and students will retain separate senates that permit them to speak with a clear voice on issues of concern to them.

• Faculty committees have been expanded to include P&A staff more systematically.

• Committee minutes are now available on the University Senate Web page, supplanting a limited paper-based system, thereby enabling committee viewpoints to be taken into account more broadly in University decision-making.

• Provision of staff support to every Senate committee.

• Distinguished faculty members (including Regents Professors) regularly serve on faculty standing committees and task forces, which demonstrates the seriousness with which governance is taken at the University.

• Increased number of committee meetings, reflecting growing agendas and increased consultation with administrators on University issues and directions.

• The Academic Health Center has worked to strengthen the administrative process of pro-motion and tenure, including workshops for academic administrators, informal meetings with tenure-track faculty about promotion-and-tenure policies and procedures.

Potential Areas for Improvement:  A number of areas and issues that could stand further faculty and administrative scrutiny and discussion are:

• The major time commitment required of committee members and, especially, chairs that comes at the expense of teaching, research, and public engagement responsibilities.

• Examination of how to incorporate committee service in the merit review process for faculty.

• Better coordination of issues between and among committees and with the administration members responsible for those issues.

Challenge Three  |  Challenge Five

Return to top of page