EAST LANSING, Mich. (WXYZ) — The recent ousting of Michigan State University's business school dean is revealing fault lines on the school’s board of trustees, raising questions over the future of the school’s president.
On Sunday, the Detroit Free Press first reported that President Samuel Stanley faced an ultimatum from board members: agree to resign by Tuesday, or face the risk of being fired.
No official reason was given, but sources indicate there has been friction between the board and Stanley dating back to COVID-19 precautions and his leadership style.
But a recent decision by MSU’s provost to push out Sanjay Gupta, the dean of MSU’s Broad Business School, appears to have been the last straw for at least some board members.
Gupta, a longtime MSU business school professor, was found by MSU to have violated the school’s mandatory reporting policy which ensures that reports of sexual violence or harassment be reported up the chain of command.
MSU has been tight-lipped about the nature of the report, but has said that Gupta did not follow proper protocol.
Some on the board of trustees weren't convinced Gupta broke with policy at all, or at least did not deserve to be removed as dean, and have pushed back at the provost’s decision.
Gupta ultimately resigned, MSU says.
Monday, board President Dianne Byrum took to task her colleagues working to oust Stanley.
"I am disappointed in the behavior of some members of the board, which threatens to roll back the progress MSU has made and will continue to make," she said in a statement.
Byrum added: "... I take strong exception to the conduct by several MSU Board of Trustees who have sought to undermine and second guess President Stanley under the mistaken belief they are somehow better qualified to run the university. They clearly are not as evidenced by the outpouring of concern, bewilderment and outrage their recent actions have generated."
Within the hour, Vice-Chair Dan Kelly — said to be pushing for Stanley's removal — issued a statement of his own that walked back reports of an ultimatum for the university president.
“Contrary to recent media reports, at no time was the President threatened with termination or given an ultimatum regarding his employment," Kelly said. "The Board has made no decision regarding any change in President Stanley’s employment status nor his employment contract."
On campus Monday, students were pressing for more transparency over the feud by MSU’s board.
“I feel like the students should know,” said Nolan Gergar, a neuroscience and psychology sophomore. “I mean, we’re paying for this place and this is our president."
Emily Guerrant, an MSU vice president and spokesperson, said news reports had overstated the board’s ultimatum, with some referencing a Tuesday deadline for Stanley agree to resign.
“The conversation that’s happening is a discussion of President Stanley’s contract and Michigan State University,” she said.
Stanley came to MSU in 2019, tasked with repairing a culture that allowed Larry Nassar to abuse women for decades and reform how the university handles Title IX complaints.
By most measures, his three-year tenure has been successful and free of the scandals that plagued his predecessors.
Less than a year ago, the board awarded him a 20% pay increase — bringing his total compensation to just under $1 million annually — and gave him high marks.
Association of American Universities President Barbara R. Snyder released a statement Monday:
As president of AAU, which represents Michigan State University and our country’s other leading research universities, I am appalled at reports of interference in MSU’s day-to-day operations by the university’s trustees, who are elected officials. If the reports are accurate, then this is inappropriate meddling by a board charged with governance, not management.
In this time of deep ideological polarization in our nation, few institutions face more difficult pressures than our leading state universities. In recent years, even prestigious state universities like Texas, Virginia, and others have struggled to navigate the rocky waters between the interests of state officials and their academic missions. Indeed, several leading public research universities have lost multiple presidents, chancellors, and other top officials because those waters proved impossible for them to navigate.
Governing boards of universities and the professionals those boards hire to lead those institutions must work together to advance their core missions: educating students to be citizens, workers, innovators, scientists, artists, and public servants and enriching the cultural lives and the economies of the towns and states where they are located. Micromanagement and partisan politics have no place on a healthy university board.
