Mark Kennedy new, but soon to be old CU President - Official CU president Thread

[dio]

I do want to state that everyone likes to rag on CU, but the institution on a whole is very well-rounded. Not elite, but good in a variety of models that serve Colorado. A good flagship campus with solid pedigree, a couple decent commuter schools in UCCS and UCD, and a good medical campus in Anschutz.

A major block for CU, however, is that they haven't unified those campuses. Internally they very much operate independently, with a huge variety of independent operations and infrastructure AND they are competitive with one another to boot! Kennedy is trying to centralize the campuses based on technology, but I think this is the wrong place to start, and instead want a leader that looks at the core charter of each school, aligns those charters with a goal of cross campus collaboration and financial equity/redistribution. You find a leader that can do that, then you find a truly transformational institution. You eliminate a huge number of inefficiencies and political battles, you likely cut administrative costs, and most importantly you align the student with the right support and placement for wherever they are in their journey.

The amount of vision and political will required to pull something like that off is astounding, and Mark Kennedy will never be able to do that. Rice has the right skills, but probably the wrong political alignment. Someone cut like Madeline Albright might be able to make it work (obviously not her at her age, but you get the idea)

 

[Gramburglar]

This is definitely happening, but CU is also trying to create dedicated online students. The problem is that 1) the market is viciously competitive at this point 2) CU is a decade behind and 3) Kennedy has chosen not to make an campus for dedicated online students, instead choosing a campus partnership for the online office. This presents a multitude of problems... Most notably that it becomes extremely difficult to holistically manage an online student when fragmented w campus services.

CU can pretty quickly kick CSUs ass in this space, they haven't evolved and their brand sucks... But it is the other peer and specialty institutions that will make this rough.

Just go google Online MBA and see all the good, reputable schools you have to grapple with.

Question; as you seem to be in-tune with the online learning space.

What is preventing the University of Colorado undergraduate system from combining some classes into the hybrid Online Lecture and In Person Recitation model. For example I’ll propose Intro to Geology (my career, passion and a class I taught at a university level).

UCB, UCD and UCCS all teach the same lecture and lab component. 80% of the students enrolled in this class use it to fulfill credits for graduation. Why not teach a LARGE online lecture across all 3 campuses then break out into the labs on campus. The curriculum is all the same, student quality is not going effect how a Core class is taught.

 

[dio]

Question; as you seem to be in-tune with the online learning space.

What is preventing the University of Colorado undergraduate system from combining some classes into the hybrid Online Lecture and In Person Recitation model. For example I’ll propose Intro to Geology (my career, passion and a class I taught at a university level).

UCB, UCD and UCCS all teach the same lecture and lab component. 80% of the students enrolled in this class use it to fulfill credits for graduation. Why not teach a LARGE online lecture across all 3 campuses then break out into the labs on campus. The curriculum is all the same, student quality is not going effect how a Core class is taught.

Students today can pursue hybrid options - meaning some online and some on-campus, with little difficulty.

But I can't answer your question around lecture/recitation. Seems self-evident to me that that is a GREAT option for many students

 

[Denver_sc]

I do want to state that everyone likes to rag on CU, but the institution on a whole is very well-rounded. Not elite, but good in a variety of models that serve Colorado. A good flagship campus with solid pedigree, a couple decent commuter schools in UCCS and UCD, and a good medical campus in Anschutz.

A major block for CU, however, is that they haven't unified those campuses. Internally they very much operate independently, with a huge variety of independent operations and infrastructure AND they are competitive with one another to boot! Kennedy is trying to centralize the campuses based on technology, but I think this is the wrong place to start, and instead want a leader that looks at the core charter of each school, aligns those charters with a goal of cross campus collaboration and financial equity/redistribution. You find a leader that can do that, then you find a truly transformational institution. You eliminate a huge number of inefficiencies and political battles, you likely cut administrative costs, and most importantly you align the student with the right support and placement for wherever they are in their journey.

The amount of vision and political will required to pull something like that off is astounding, and Mark Kennedy will never be able to do that. Rice has the right skills, but probably the wrong political alignment. Someone cut like Madeline Albright might be able to make it work (obviously not her at her age, but you get the idea)

This is a great, great point.

How many times have the participants on this board seen institutions fail at transformation because they start with the IT structure? I can count a number of examples I've lived through personally, unfortunately.

 

[dio]

Kennedy is out - or at least will be transitioning out over the next 12 months

 

[J.R. Ewing]

Kennedy is out - or at least will be transitioning out over the next 12 months

Scoooop

 

[buffaholic]

His letter is such crap though. The makeup of the B.O.R.'s has changed.... I replied "good riddance you political hack".

 

[Ringer]

His letter is such crap though. The makeup of the B.O.R.'s has changed.... I replied "good riddance you political hack".

I just got this letter by email:

May 10, 2021 Dear "Ringer" The Board of Regents and I have entered into discussions about an orderly transition of the presidency of the University of Colorado in the near future. The Board of Regents has a new makeup this year, which has led to changes in its focus and philosophy. We have made great progress in each of the major areas we identified when I was honored to become president, including strategic planning; diversity, equity and inclusion; online education; fundraising; and technology transformation. I appreciate the many smart and dedicated people who work hard every day to help the university meet its mission to serve its students and the state. CU is one of the country’s great public universities and it will continue to build on its strong reputation. It is on an upward trajectory and I have every confidence it will continue to meet its mission and serve its students and the state. All the best,

Mark R. Kennedy President

 

[Not Sure]

I feel like he was doomed to fail from the day he started. He was an uninspired choice who is an ineffective leader. I have very little faith that the current BOR won’t screw up the next hire. That said, whoever they choose will be controversial in the current environment. Hell, Hank Brown and Bruce Benson were both controversial, and both turned out to be very solid Presidents. Whoever they choose will have to deal with an immediate backlash and pretty strong headwinds.

 

[Denver_sc]

He was such a poor choice; I'm very glad he's on his way out.

BUT HOW DOES UNCLE PHIL STILL HAVE A JOB?!

 

[MtnBuff]

I feel like he was doomed to fail from the day he started. He was an uninspired choice who is an ineffective leader. I have very little faith that the current BOR won’t screw up the next hire. That said, whoever they choose will be controversial in the current environment. Hell, Hank Brown and Bruce Benson were both controversial, and both turned out to be very solid Presidents. Whoever they choose will have to deal with an immediate backlash and pretty strong headwinds.

Unfortunately CU has had more than it's share of leaders in the Presidents office and down who fit that description. Dr. Phil fits it, so did Bitsy Hoffman

Kennedy may not have been an inspiring leader but he is a smart guy who understands politics so it's a fair bet that his contract is going to get him paid.

I wonder how many of those who complain about the school paying for fired football coaches contracts will be complaining about paying Kennedy to "not work." This even though those are virtually always paid by donors, and since athletics is required to be self-funding they wouldn't take money out of the general budget anyways.

 

[leftybuff]

Unfortunately CU has had more than it's share of leaders in the Presidents office and down who fit that description. Dr. Phil fits it, so did Bitsy Hoffman

Kennedy may not have been an inspiring leader but he is a smart guy who understands politics so it's a fair bet that his contract is going to get him paid.

I wonder how many of those who complain about the school paying for fired football coaches contracts will be complaining about paying Kennedy to "not work." This even though those are virtually always paid by donors, and since athletics is required to be self-funding they wouldn't take money out of the general budget anyways.

This. Paying Kennedy not to work when that money could be going to a cure for cancer.

 

[buffs233]

Not some hardcore supporter of MK but two years in this position, especially during COVID-19, is not an appropriate sample size. Consistency matters. This was purely a political decision by the Board and I fully expect the hire to be equally politically driven.

 

[Darth Snow]

Did he accomplish anything besides getting his underling hired? Meh. Chance for growth. Or failure. But better to cut bait now instead of lose 10 more years doing nothing of note.

 

[Agent Dave Kujan]

This. Paying Kennedy not to work when that money could be going to a cure for cancer.

...or for a better football coach!

 

[The Monk]

Unfortunately CU has had more than it's share of leaders in the Presidents office and down who fit that description. Dr. Phil fits it, so did Bitsy Hoffman

Kennedy may not have been an inspiring leader but he is a smart guy who understands politics so it's a fair bet that his contract is going to get him paid.

I wonder how many of those who complain about the school paying for fired football coaches contracts will be complaining about paying Kennedy to "not work." This even though those are virtually always paid by donors, and since athletics is required to be self-funding they wouldn't take money out of the general budget anyways.

Who is complaining about paying fired coaches to the point of demanding their retention?

 

[MtnBuff]

Who is complaining about paying fired coaches to the point of demanding their retention?

Most recently when running for the office Jack Kroll made specific statements about athletic spending (which clearly showed that he didn't understand athletic funding by the way) and referenced coaches pay and paying fired coaches.

Other regents or regent candidates have done the same as well as some members of the Boulder community.

No reference here by the way to demanding retention, only a reference to frequently heard complaints about paying football coaches instead of curing cancer or funding other favorite programs, despite the fact that those funds would not be there to fund those other things if athletics weren't there.

John Q. "Big Bucks" Donor isn't going to say " Well since we don't have a football team I'll just donate my six figure check to the fine arts department." It doesn't work that way.

 

[dio]

Will be curious to see what happens here - Kennedy's stuff is mid-stream, and it will be highly disruptive if funding gets pulled.

I actually tend to agree with @buffs233 - which may be a first. 2 years is just enough time to get momentum around things and losing that consistency is going to hurt CU for what is definitely a political move. Whomever takes this position is taking over a tougher situations compared to 3 years ago

 

[The Monk]

Most recently when running for the office Jack Kroll made specific statements about athletic spending (which clearly showed that he didn't understand athletic funding by the way) and referenced coaches pay and paying fired coaches.

Other regents or regent candidates have done the same as well as some members of the Boulder community.

No reference here by the way to demanding retention, only a reference to frequently heard complaints about paying football coaches instead of curing cancer or funding other favorite programs, despite the fact that those funds would not be there to fund those other things if athletics weren't there.

John Q. "Big Bucks" Donor isn't going to say " Well since we don't have a football team I'll just donate my six figure check to the fine arts department." It doesn't work that way.

Doesn't fit with empirics regardless of what one regent said. If there was actually any significant portion of people who cared about paying fired coaches, we wouldn't have a football team after two decades of losing --let alone a half dozen head coaches and capital program upgrades.

 

[Buffs35]

I'll finally be able to sleep again.

 

[MtnBuff]

Doesn't fit with empirics regardless of what one regent said. If there was actually any significant portion of people who cared about paying fired coaches, we wouldn't have a football team after two decades of losing --let alone a half dozen head coaches and capital program upgrades.

Nobody is saying that these people are anything resembling a majority. They are however irritating and can sometimes distract the focus of conversations from where they should be.

They are also certainly not solely a CU phenomenon. Many schools in the country have vocal critics of focus and funding on athletics and at some of those schools (maybe many) where athletics is funneling large amounts of money away from academic and research functions their talking points are probably valid.

 

[CPVbuff]

Anybody else think this sets up a disaster. It’s always appeared to me with Benson structuring everything at the University as it’s own cost center, it at least hedged runaway political spending on bull**** research and pet projects.

it seems to me the Last decade and a half the University as been balanced, grown and progressed well. A highly left political driven President coupled with an established left of center administration can only lead to exploding expenses when revenue across the university is under duress because of Covid This only leads to dramatically rising tuition costs

 

[MtnBuff]

Will be curious to see what happens here - Kennedy's stuff is mid-stream, and it will be highly disruptive if funding gets pulled.

I actually tend to agree with @buffs233 - which may be a first. 2 years is just enough time to get momentum around things and losing that consistency is going to hurt CU for what is definitely a political move. Whomever takes this position is taking over a tougher situations compared to 3 years ago

Anybody else think this sets up a disaster. It’s always appeared to me with Benson structuring everything at the University as it’s own cost center, it at least hedged runaway political spending on bull**** research and pet projects.

it seems to me the Last decade and a half the University as been balanced, grown and progressed well. A highly left political driven President coupled with an established left of center administration can only lead to exploding expenses when revenue across the university is under duress because of Covid This only leads to dramatically rising tuition costs

Nobody questions that the hiring of Kennedy was a purely political, completely partisan move. The BOR was divided on political lines and the majority at that time decided to demonstrate brute political majority power.

All of that doesn't make the current BOR making a purely political decision to undo that action and likely replace it with a purely political decision going the other way the right thing to do.

CPV is asking some very relevant questions. Some may think that with shifts in the political winds that we will see more public funding for higher education but that isn't guaranteed and in fact if certain mandates come out of Washington budgeting may get even harder.

Meanwhile, and similar to some coaching jobs, if the university gets a reputation as a place where a President is subject to political whims and a meddling BOR hinders rather than helps it may become more difficult to find highly qualified candidates willing to work in that situation.

 

[AeroBuff99]

 

[BuffsNYC]

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that this guy failed. One of his most important tasks was to keep all the stake-holders relatively happy, yet he couldn't stop a faculty censure--because in two years he wasn't able to build trust with the faculty. He clearly was not the right person for the job, best to move on quickly.

 

[DBT]

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that this guy failed. One of his most important tasks was to keep all the stake-holders relatively happy, yet he couldn't stop a faculty censure--because in two years he wasn't able to build trust with the faculty. He clearly was not the right person for the job, best to move on quickly.

Why is it a one way ticket that he couldn’t build trust with the faculty and not that the faculty couldn’t build trust with him? Did they even try? If they did could you cite the evidence? At least the faculty can be happy now. Maybe they will get someone more to their liking.

 

[onealcd]

Will be curious to see what happens here - Kennedy's stuff is mid-stream, and it will be highly disruptive if funding gets pulled.

I actually tend to agree with @buffs233 - which may be a first. 2 years is just enough time to get momentum around things and losing that consistency is going to hurt CU for what is definitely a political move. Whomever takes this position is taking over a tougher situations compared to 3 years ago

Any of these initiatives will be pushed through with the new president or are they so far out there that the new person will want to reverse course?

 

[Uncle Ken]

Why is it a one way ticket that he couldn’t build trust with the faculty and not that the faculty couldn’t build trust with him? Did they even try? If they did could you cite the evidence? At least the faculty can be happy now. Maybe they will get someone more to their liking.

He's the president, DBT.

Sometimes it feels like your mind does backflips to characterize a white male as the victim.

He's the ****ing president. He gets paid a lot of money to make sure things run smoothly and progress. That takes trust. It's his job.

I can acknowledge that the faculty can be difficult to work with, and I'm not even sure Kennedy was given a fair chance. But honestly, who has to be accountable in this situation? Leaders face tough challenges all of the time.

 

[BuffsNYC]

Why is it a one way ticket that he couldn’t build trust with the faculty and not that the faculty couldn’t build trust with him? Did they even try? If they did could you cite the evidence? At least the faculty can be happy now. Maybe they will get someone more to their liking.

Because that’s just the way it is. A leader has to connect with his bosses and employees . . . and everyone else that matters.

 

[Not Sure]

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that this guy failed. One of his most important tasks was to keep all the stake-holders relatively happy, yet he couldn't stop a faculty censure--because in two years he wasn't able to build trust with the faculty. He clearly was not the right person for the job, best to move on quickly.

I would argue that there was little chance of him ever building trust with the faculty. That’s not an endorsement of his job performance, merely an acknowledgment that his was an impossible job from the get-go.

I already feel sorry for the next person, whoever that may be.