DEAN'S NOTES AND DRAFT LETTER: PREPARING TO NONRENEW LUCKE

The documents linked below represent a part of Dean Watson's preparations prior to nonrenewing Associate Dean Kathy Lucke.  Readers are particularly invited to check out her comments (no doubt echoing Legal Affairs' party line) concerning the act of nonrenewal itself. 

"I am not required to provide an explanation; this is not a nonrenewal for cause-'It is simply not working.'"

This is basically the lame party line handed to my Pediatrics complainant when the chair told her she wasn't a good "fit." 

Legally, nonrenewal is not a negative personnel action; someone's contract just isn't renewed.  They get to finish out their contract, so what's the harm, right?  People sure feel terminated, though.  In practice, many administrators hide behind this big loophole in management accountability so they don't have to explain anything or justify anything. Heaven help them if they ever have to justify what they do to people.  Finally, please note that we haven't even begun to explore the relationship of nonrenewals to tenure and due process in this posting.  We're just talking about nonrenewal in isolation. 

Download watson_nonrenewal_notes_re_lucke.PDF   

Comments

The Dean offering Dr. Lucke a day off and the opportunity to not let others know about being asked to step down...How generous! Sounds like Dr. Watson was trying to protect herself from the fallout. Guess that didn't work. I wonder what other wonderful opportunities the Dean offered to faculty who have left prior to Dr. Lucke. And she wonders why the faculty have trouble trusting her?

Is Dean Watson suggesting Dr. Lucke lie? We're not surprised.

As the blogmeister suggests, non-renewal is one big legal loophole that allows administrators to get rid of people without just cause. Perhaps no one has commented on this issue because we just don't want to think about how easily Dr. Lucke's career was demolished. We just don't want to think about how easily it could be any one of us. We just don't want to think about that.

I'd say it's not merely legal loopholes at issue here. Inappropriate use of non-renewal is symptomatic of a much larger problem. Insecure administrators using questionable tactics of any kind (from legal loopholes to illegal actions) to purge themselves of competitors are signs of marginal upper management. Seem to me that's the problem at the SON, not to mention Pediatrics, Ophthalmology, etc., etc. Finding a cure for marginal management is much harder than closing a loophole, but cures do exist and they doesn't necessarily include firing anyone.

Successful organizations have found "hiring up" is the key to winning in any marketplace, not "hiring down." What does this mean? It means a corporate culture that encourages every manager hire folks better than him/herself instead of hiring people less capable (or in this case, firing more capable). Hiring up means an A-type manager should surround him/herself with only A+ people. That means hiring people who are more, not less, capable than the hiring manager. B people should hire only B+ or A- folks, and so on. When that happens, the organization steadily evolves into a better and better unit.

The converse process, "hiring down," unfortunately, plays out more often in failing organizations. B managers hire only C people, and the C types hire only D types. And so, the organization spirals down into the abyss of history.

Insecurity can either kill you or save your life. Working with people more capable than you can be good thing if it inspires you to improve. Insecurity that compels you to purge your organization of its best and brightness is self defeating.

Insecurity is an obvious characteristic of the SON management. Hopefully Dr Callender knows the difference in the two types you describe, and hopefully he is interested in the Organization improving.

Good thought, where is Dr Callender in all of this?
I suggest you people meet with him, he is the one who can make the changes necessary.

[Anonymous]

We all know how Dr. Stobo encouraged this mess. Will Dr. Callender actually try to improve the situation, or just look the other way and let UTMB continue to be in a state of turmoil?

[Interested from afar.]

Indeed, where is Dr. Callender in all this? The only things seen from him so far are pep talks and org charts. Either he's asleep at the wheel or hiding under his desk when it comes to putting ideas into practice.

Time to roll up your sleeves and jump in, Dr. Callender. More and more UTMB departments are showing up on these pages as problem areas. They're not fixing themselves, as you can see. In fact, they're getting worse.

[another interested party]

I appreciate the above comments and they seem to have hit the nail on the head. However, the question is really what can faculty do? They have gone through the appropriate channels and it seems that no one listens or has the moral fortitude to actually do the right thing. I don't really think that the UTMB faculty want this issues played out here but it is a symptom of an ineffective organization and management.

[Interested from afar.]

What can the faculty do? The faculty can organize and work together as a team. Many voices speaking as one are hard to ignore, by the president of UTMB, by the press, or by legislators.

In short, join TFA. This is what a faculty union is for.

That is what the union is for. That is why this blog has gotten so active...

An additional strategy might be to approach the faculty senate also. I was told that if a quorum of faculty (12?) want an issue to be addressed by the faculty senate, then the senate has to look into the issue.

I agree, you all should approach the Senate soon for some additional support.
Hearing nothing from Adm on a fix makes it appear the complaints have fallen on deaf ears.

If you look at the similarities with the pediatric case, it has fallen on deaf ears. The pedi case gets appealed to whom: Dr Watson. She is another one of UTMB's hats. Wonder how that will end up. Oh, let me think.