Authors:
Maxey, Daniel B. R.
Abstract:
Considering their central role and unique authority in the governance of one of the most essential resources in American society���our public colleges, universities, and higher education systems���remarkably little empirical research has been conducted to contribute to understanding about board governance, in general, and the role of trustees, in particular. The purpose of this study was to conduct an examination of the construction of governing board roles���how they are constructed and negotiated, how they are interpreted by (...)
Considering their central role and unique authority in the governance of one of the most essential resources in American society���our public colleges, universities, and higher education systems���remarkably little empirical research has been conducted to contribute to understanding about board governance, in general, and the role of trustees, in particular. The purpose of this study was to conduct an examination of the construction of governing board roles���how they are constructed and negotiated, how they are interpreted by the trustees who serve on a board, and how these perspectives about roles influence trustees��� efforts to satisfy dual obligations to internal (e.g., administrators, faculty, students) and external (e.g., the public) constituencies. The research utilized a theoretical framework that drew upon Cultural-Historical Activity Theory to enhance a more traditional sensemaking approach to examine collective and individual meaning making in order to call attention to key elements within the social system of the governing board that had a part in influencing how trustees came to understand their roles. The findings provide a snapshot of the collective sense of roles and responsibilities interpreted by members of a public research university governing board. The study examines collective sense that was made, but also the ways that individual trustees lended their own unique identities to help make contributions to fulfill the board���s overall work. The findings include key details on some of the most influential inputs to trustees��� sensemaking. And, they raise important questions about the lack of understanding of the public dimensions of trusteeship roles and responsibilities, as well as the implications for the future preservation of the public good and public trust in higher education.
(Read More)