Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute President Shirley Ann Jackson invited the faculty to a meeting to “discuss where we are and how, together, we can continue to move Rensselaer forward.” Following are President Jackson’s remarks, made prior to the question-and-answer session.

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute President Shirley Ann Jackson
President’s Meeting with Rensselaer Faculty
Friday, April 28, 2006

I have always felt it a privilege to be here. Rensselaer is a very special place — a very important institution with a rich history (it is the oldest technological research university in the U.S. with many contributions to the world — yesterday and today). I was committed, when I came here, to helping it live up to its rich history. I felt, and was told, when hired, that earlier financial stringencies, and various changes in direction, had caused Rensselaer to drift, and to not make the progress it should have. I found a great university, but one also that had a kind of inferiority complex. Most importantly, it was not well endowed. I felt we needed some new directions to both ignite change and to help bring Rensselaer into areas deemed important to major research universities today. We needed a bold, visionary, comprehensive plan — one not at 30,000 feet but at 10,000 feet. Namely, the plan had to be visionary, but with clear goals — necessary, achievable, but stretch goals. We have this in The Rensselaer Plan.

We jump-started The Rensselaer Plan by placing bets on new directions — to place Rensselaer squarely in the circle of top-tier universities, to signal our shift, and to ignite imaginations inside and outside the Institute. If the bets pay off, and they are paying off, they will help to sustain and enhance traditional programs. But we already have invested in our traditional and other programs as well — across the Institute and across many fields. Dr. Jared Cohon, President of Carnegie Mellon University and head of our Middle States Accreditation Assessment Team, noted that with such a bold plan, we are undertaking substantial risks with faculty, facilities, and financially, but prudent and manageable risks. A plan like this naturally places stress on existing activities, especially as we work to have new revenue streams develop: through such activities as summer programs, undergraduate programs, but especially research and fund-raising.

At the same time, as a comprehensive plan, our plan touches everything. There is no stone left unturned — because we are about Institutional transformation, coupled with (I must say) civic change (because we are inextricably tied to “where we live”). So our implementation of the plan affects people, programs, platforms, and policies across the Institute.

The plan has brought about change: change that Middle States says is, “at a speed and scale perhaps without precedent in American higher education.” No institution has changed so much, so fast. As a consequence some (perhaps many) feel disaffected. Communication may not be as frequent, or as two-way, or as effective, as you would like with the administration, and especially with the President — with me. People want to know what is happening. They say they want to be engaged.

But, what about me, since this has been a referendum on me and my leadership style? Let me tell you a little about me in the context of what I found when I began as President here. In my first forays out as President — to our alumni/ae, our friends, to the science and engineering community, to corporations, and into other arenas, I was taken aback. Many people did not know us, or confused us with lesser places. Many felt we had slipped. Many alumni/ae harbored their own bitter taste about how they were treated as students, especially as undergraduates — by faculty, sometimes by staff, and by the Institute as a whole. Many corporations did not know us, except for our traditional relationships (and there were not as many of those as I had thought), and even for them, we were not, in general, a top-tier relationship in terms of partnerships, sponsored research, and philanthropy. I felt we expected and accepted too little. I was frightened about our relative under-endowment.

All of this meant that we needed our alumni/ae. We needed new corporate partners, new friends, and we needed our existing friends and supporters to think of us and to support us in bigger ways.

So, I felt (and still do feel) that:

We needed to create belief by getting things done and by projecting ourselves more. I felt it was important to drive the plan — hard and quickly, since we had no time to lose. I felt it was important to leverage any notoriety and connections I had to project the Institute, especially into places where it was less well-known. I felt I had to work hard with the Board of Trustees to get their buy-in and support. They wanted change, and I wanted to be sure that they understood what change meant and that they understood the costs. They do, and they are 100% supportive of where we are going and what we are doing. But it is clear that I have not spent enough time with you. I have been bearing, or trying to bear, a lot of the burden of transforming Rensselaer — personally — especially in the eyes of the outside world, probably in the eyes of many of you. I thought, to be honest, that most of you would inherently understand, even appreciate, what I was trying to do. But that has clearly not been the case. Too many of you have felt left out, that I have been aloof. I need to engage you, and the truth is: no one achieves anything alone. We do need to engage because we are making progress because of what so many of you are doing every day — in your teaching, in your research, in your service to Rensselaer and to your professions. I thank you for that.

While this has been a wrenching experience for all — and this has been especially wrenching for me — I am interpreting what has happened as an offer, by you, to engage with me. Engagement begins with better communication — communication that I am trying to begin — here and now. I am going to reach out to you, and I hope that you will reach out to me.

I will listen to you. But you have to listen to me, as well. You cannot refuse to meet with me and say I do not communicate. You cannot refuse to participate in established processes or propose to effect new ones and then say I do not involve you. You cannot not reach out to me while saying I must reach out to you. You cannot hope to get my attention and cooperation by vilifying me or trying to embarrass me publicly.

We all have to reach out to each other. I have to believe that once we communicate, once we all are engaged, we all will have a better sense of our challenges and our opportunities, and our responsibilities. Communication does not mean there is always unanimity. There may be cases where, after we have talked, we may not all agree. That does not mean we have not communicated.

But engagement is not just about communication, it is about getting things done. This is important because, again, as Middle States has said, our competition is not standing still, so I will not stop. Rensselaer cannot stop — we cannot stop. We have a collective responsibility for working through issues and challenges, and for how Rensselaer progresses. No one can sit on the sidelines. You cannot win the ball game if you do not come to the ball park. 

As we think about engagement:

Engagement does not mean that everyone does everyone else’s job. It is not the role of the administration to do the faculty’s job. It, likewise, is not the role of the faculty to do the administration’s job. Clarity comes from knowing the difference. You have your decisions to make. The administration, and the President, as the agents of the Board of Trustees, have their decisions to make. It is an appropriate role for the administration to solicit input in a disciplined way — to outline goals and objectives and boundary conditions, to carefully consider all input, and to make the decisions that are its responsibility to make in its best judgment.

But engage we must.

Clarity also comes from appropriately choosing the areas for collective engagement, and then using any existing avenues of engagement while searching for new and better ones.

But the path to clarity, to engagement, to progress begins with civility and mutual respect. We need to put aside the rancor — on all sides. This does not project a good face to the outside. It does not help us to attract and retain students, to attract and retain new faculty, to attract donors and partners, or to solve our problems. Most importantly, it does not help us to live and to work with each other.

We do not have to all love one another, but we must work together with mutual respect. Let us work to turn intimidation, fear, retaliation, and embarrassment into fairness, empowerment, and support.

To begin this process, I am reaching out to you. Are you willing to reach out to me? Responsibility for effective engagement is mine, but it is also yours. Faculty-to-faculty engagement is equally important. I cannot solve problems alone. I have to depend upon the cabinet, the deans, the chairs, and all of you, and your interactions among all of you, as well as your interactions with me.

When I came here I was committed to driving change, to developing and living the Plan, to leaving Rensselaer better and stronger than I found it. I am not going away. And while I am here, I remain committed. I am part of this community too.

In the days and months ahead, I will do what I have said. In my reaching out, I will continue to have dinners with small groups of faculty. I will have visits to departments, meetings with chairs, and meetings with the Faculty Senate — Jim Napolitano and I began today. I will expect the provost, the academic deans, and the department chairs to engage you directly in performance planning and in other ways on issues of concern. In order to resolve issues, I have to know what the issues are. I will propose a list of issues I believe have to be resolved. I ask you to do the same (in a prioritized way).

I will work to broaden the dialogue even further to understand your concerns and fears, and to help you to understand who I am, and where I hope to lead this great university, and the great people in it.

So let us turn the page and start anew. I challenge you to take more responsibility to move us forward. To suggest solutions, not just outline problems.

But, more than anything, even though it will take time for all to heal, let us turn to each other and say I am sorry, so we can accomplish great things together. 

Thank you for your attendance and your attention.

Contact: Theresa Bourgeois
Phone: (518) 276-2840
E-mail: bourgt@rpi.edu