The story that just won't die (or just keeps giving as we say in our business) is the ongoing saga surrounding the appointment of James Moore as the next chancellor at UNBC.
Quick summary for those who missed previous seasons of this ongoing series of dramatic and political intrigue:
- a chancellor is the figurehead of a university with some honorary responsibilities, similar to being the king or queen of the school.
- James Moore is a graduate of UNBC. He was a Conservative MP and served in Stephen Harper's cabinet before announcing he would not be seeking re-election.
- In November, the UNBC board of governors announced Moore as the university's next chancellor starting this May.
- Shortly thereafter, an online petition opposed to Moore's appointment attracted more than 2,000 signatures.
- The UNBC senate feels it wasn't adequately consulted on Moore's appointment, which came from a recommendation from the alumni association.
- The graduate students association is officially opposed, while the undergraduate students association is not taking a stance on the issue.
- The UNBC Faculty Association is strongly opposed to Moore's appointment, particularly how it was done, and has been joined by the Confederation of University Faculty Associations of B.C. and the Canadian Association of University Teachers.
This week, redacted minutes from the November meeting where Moore's appointment was decided were released. They show that the 14-member board was divided, with seven votes in favour, six against and one abstention.
Since the decision to name Moore as chancellor was made public, board chair Ryan Matheson has been defending the board and its choice, most recently last week in a lengthy email to faculty and students.
Until the documents were released, the level of support from the board was unclear.
On one hand, a split vote should change nothing. A proper working board of directors of any kind will always have disagreements between its members. After the vote is taken, however, those in the minority should respect the views of their colleagues and support the final decision, even if they continue to disagree. Once a vote on a motion is done, it doesn't matter whether the outcome was 12-1 or 7-6, the motion stands or is defeated.
Yet it never should have come to this and that's where this mess falls directly onto Matheson. It is the role of the board chair to build consensus because the directors need to be all rowing together in the same direction as much as possible to be most effective. Motions that split the group evenly down the middle need to be revisited, other options need to be explored, compromises need to be found. Simply having enough votes to push a motion through might win the battle of the day but everyone loses the endless war sure to follow.
The board is responsible for filling two positions - the president of the university and the chancellor. While naming a president, the school's CEO and senior administrator, is critical, the chancellor position is of symbolic importance since that person serves as an ambassador for the university. Both positions should be filled by someone that everyone in the university can feel good about. Their professional credentials should be impeccable and their support of the university, higher education and the pursuit of scientific knowledge should be unquestioned. There might be disagreement about whether there were better candidates but there should be confidence that the process in place was followed and the chosen candidate meets all of the requirements for the position.
The split vote reveals that half of the board of governors does not share Matheson's confidence in Moore as chancellor. That is hardly a ringing endorsement and that opposition should have been enough for Matheson to work with his fellow directors on finding a different candidate, someone with broader support and someone whose announcement would have unified, not divided, the UNBC community as Moore's appointment has.
Coming on the heels of last spring's faculty strike, the board of governors under Matheson's guidance made a terrible error naming Moore.
At this point, informing Moore that his appointment has been rescinded upon further review and going back to the drawing board would be the right call. For Matheson and the board of governors, that's not a defeat. Admitting a mistake and taking meaningful steps to fix it is one of the bravest forms of leadership.
