Governing Ideas

Members

Diane Miller - Chair Candace Boardman John Decker
Kathy Ermler Deb Gerish Tracy Greene
Kevin Kienholz Don Miller Sarah Schulte - Student
Taylar Turnbull - Student Jim Wayman - Community  

 

ROLE AND PURPOSE

Success and excellence do not happen by chance or in a vacuum – both require articulation and internalization of the fundamental purposes, aspirations, and core values of the institution. In charting its future strategically, the institution’s “Governing Ideas” should serve as a foundation for strategic thinking and planning.

This work group will:

  • Review and assess current statements of mission, vision, and core values.
  • Identify the core values that should characterize the University’s culture, and guide our daily conduct, the formulation of policy, institutional practices, and decision-making.
  • Propose a revised mission statement for the University based on the identified core values.
  • Propose a vision statement for the University based on the identified core values that expresses our desired future, inspires others to join and support us, and enhances our distinctiveness and comparative advantages. (The recommended vision statement should preferably be one sentence in length, easy to remember, and be understandable to both internal and external publics.)
  • The work group should also include in its recommended statements of Governing Ideas references to existing and/or potential attributes of institutional distinctiveness and distinction.

 

PROCESS GUIDELINES

The work group should refer to and use the concept paper on “Governing Ideas” provided by Dr. Moore, Penson Associates, Inc. in doing its analysis and preparing its recommendations.

The work group should collect data from a variety of sources including available documents and should invite expert witnesses to present relevant information.

The work group should sponsor open forums and/or focus groups as a means of collecting additional data and advice regarding their charge.

The work group should communicate and coordinate its deliberations with other task forces so as to promote constructive “cross fertilization” of ideas and recommendations.

The work group should maintain appropriate records of its proceedings and communicate widely with the University’s various constituencies.

OUTCOMES

  • Progress report due September 28, 2007
  • Preliminary Report due by October 12, 2007
  • Revised Report due by October 29, 2007