UMass Amherst Alumni Association
About Us
Board of Directors Meeting Minutes
Wednesday June 13, 2007
Double Tree Hotel, Westborough
6:30 p.m.
Board Members: Mary Custard, Marc Rossen, Bill Carroll, Ron Grasso, Joel Slovin, Hal Lane, Kathleen Mitchell, Ed Rubin, Mike Fiorentino, Bob Shaughnessey, Tom Campbell, Anna Symington, Kerry Mulcahy, Kim Sherman, Sara Cody, Jackie Govoni, David Hautanen, Ed Godek
UMass Amherst Alumni Association Staff: Deb Masloski, Elena Lamontagne, Norma Heim, Kevin Fleming
Guests: Bob Goodhue, Keith Motley, Katherine Smith, Peter West
Welcome and Introductions
Hal welcomed all those who attended the meeting, and thanked Keith, Katherine, and Bob for joining the group. Each person at the meeting provided their name and their position within the UMass Amherst Alumni Association or the UMass system.
Discussion and Q&A
After each person at the meeting gave their name and position, Keith Motley began to discuss the reasoning behind the recent “One University” proposal. He conveyed that the proposal came about from an endeavor to bring together the different pockets of excellence present at each campus, and convey the greatness of the whole University to the world rather than about each campus individually. He recognized that the Amherst campus is the flagship, but that all of the talents of the campuses compose an entity that is internationally renowned. The “One University” proposal is an effort to convey the message of greatness in a way that makes sense, and one that brings everyone to the table and enhances the value of a UMass degree. He expressed gratitude to the UMass Amherst Alumni Association Board for our help towards those ends.
Katherine Smith discussed some of the misconceptions in the media about the “One University” proposal. She noted that the conversation about the plan with campus constituents did not start well, and that President Wilson’s office takes full responsibility for that. She noted that the plan is a discussion occurring at the President’s Office that they would like alumni input on, and that they hoped that this meeting was a beginning to working together. She emphasized that the discussion was one idea on how to make the whole greater than the sum of its parts and claim their place as a world-class University, and that there is no proposal in place to replace Chancellor Lombardi with President Wilson. She cited several examples of how the power of all the campuses had been leveraged to do great things for the Commonwealth and the world, including Governor Patrick’s awarding of the $100 billion life-sciences program to UMass because of the synergy created by the campuses.
Katherine also conveyed that they have no plans to centralize alumni relations. They would like to be able to advertise good news broadly, and allow UMass alumni to participate in activities on all of the campuses. Their goal is to allow alumni to convene by whatever affinity appeals to them, whether that is campus-based, professionally based, etc., and while they recognize that to some degree alumni relations will always be campus-based, having all of the campuses involved greatly increases the networking power in many realms. She provided the example of “women in philanthropy,” and noted that instead of being limited to UMass Amherst women in philanthropy, women in this category can expand their network to alumna in philanthropy throughout the UMass system. They care about the career networking potential, and not particularly which campus people are from. She also discussed that President Wilson’s Office does not intend to take our revenue streams, but would like to have discussions regarding how to partner on revenue generation. Katherine cited career services as an example of a good revenue generator that might benefit from a broader network, and each campus could get the revenue from their alumni who participate. Katherine also asserted that they will definitely not be collecting dues from alumni, and that it is the UMass Amherst Alumni Association’s purview to do so.
They also noted that we will still have the ability to pull alumni data exactly as we do now (should the Vice Chancellor of the campus decide this is best – it is the choice of the Vice Chancellor at each campus), and that we will have all the access to alumni data as we currently possess, but hopefully more utility. They also hope to improve access and reporting capabilities, have discussions on “control of direction,” and how to collaborate. Katherine noted that all Vice Chancellors have been given opportunities to provide input regarding data access and control, and that they would like to have best practices shared amongst Alumni Directors and their staffs. They also hope to create more efficient avenues for alumni participation, and seek opportunities for collaboration that each campus feels comfortable with. She noted the current collaboration between campuses on the Online Community. Four campuses entered into a partnership and the Amherst campus negotiated separately, but they collaboratively participated in the vendor review. All campuses worked alongside each other, each benefited from the collaboration, and no campus was required to join the initiative – each campus was allowed to participate in a way that they were comfortable.
Question and Answer Period
Hal noted that the UMass Amherst Alumni Association would like to be more collaborative going forward, but also wanted assurances that we would retain our autonomy as well. He also noted that President Wilson has stated in the past that alums would give to their school first and their campus second, but were not inclined to give to the system. He asked how President Wilson’s office plans to proceed, balancing collaboration with autonomy. Keith responded that President Wilson is keen on collaboration and transparency with constituents. He also noted that, because the UMass Amherst Alumni Association is well developed, they hope staff and volunteers involved will lend their expertise to the Alumni Associations of other campuses. By getting the key alumni staff and volunteers from each campus together, they can develop an alumni plan for the Board of Trustees that creates synergy between the campus alumni programs. Keith also noted that he was impressed that, at this meeting, the UMass Amherst Alumni Association had come to President Wilson’s representatives asking how we could be a resource for them, and thought that this was a powerful message to bring back to President Wilson.
Bob discussed an experience that he had in which a student from ISOM was conducting a study on disabilities, but was not having much luck getting responses from people in the financial industry. Bob organized a reception for people in the financial industry with about 75 alumni from the different UMass campuses, and selected 12 ISOM students to attend. They made it clear that they were not there to ask for money; they just wanted to help the students who attended. Many of the students in the room got jobs out of that interaction. Moreover, relationships with the management programs of each campus developed to a point that an academic program grew out of it, allowing management students from all campuses to manage real money before they graduate. Additionally, Bob reiterated the collaboration between campuses on web vendors. He noted that the four other campuses were going to contract with PCI for their web services, but upon working with the UMass Amherst Alumni Association, they were able to make a better decision on their web vendor. In collaborating on vendor reviews, both campuses were able to make good choices and benefit from their collaboration, even though the UMass Amherst Alumni Association contracted separately from the UMass system. Bob noted that these instances exemplified the collaboration the President’s Office intends – one that benefits each campus by extending the network available to each student and alum.
Hal also noted his concern that, since fundraising power is centralized in the Boston area, it becomes even more important to have protections that maintain autonomy, and for the Amherst campus to play a large role in discussions of organization and collaboration. Katherine responded that the UMass Amherst campus would absolutely have a “seat at the table” in these discussions. She also noted that “fundraising will always be campus-led,” and that the campus “is where the affinity lies and always will.” She noted that it is beneficial for all involved to have alums connected to the campus, and noted that no alum will ever feel connected to an amorphous system.
Ed asked what the President’s Office considered the most helpful thing that the Alumni Association could do to enhance participation and engagement. Katherine responded that she hopes we focus on engaging young alumni in activities, and connecting them back to campus. She noted that research shows that people who give at an early age have a much higher retention rate than those who give later in life.
Kathleen noted that the UMass Amherst Alumni Association does a very good job at two things: engaging alums and programming, and asked that President Wilson’s Office help manage that message better to get over the current public relations blip in the road created by their office. She noted that the meeting occurred because of that blip, not because we want to feel warm and fuzzy. Kathleen also stated that it sometimes takes those kinds of mistakes to bring people together, and she asked that the President’s Office better distribute the positive messages that were shared at the meeting to the broader population. President Wilson’s representatives agreed. Bob Shaughnessey asserted that alumni need to hear that their achievements over the past generations are recognized, and that this review is a result of a new achievement rather than the result of something wrong. Keith noted that the intention has always been that UMass is a University that has done a great deal and will continue to reach new heights, but because of competition from other institutions, the UMass story needs to change and we need to do a better job of selling our story. Keith also noted that they realize the ways that the Amherst campus is a vital component of the UMass story.
Peter thanked the President’s representatives for the success stories they had shared. Given these successes, he asked what it was they were hoping to fix, and how they hoped to measure their success. Tom echoed this question by asking if there was a precipitating event or circumstance that led President Wilson to think he needed to address a specific problem. Keith responded that it was the early stages of a plan, and that they hoped not to change the direction of what campuses currently do, but to enhance it. He and Katherine discussed that the review resulted from a long-term strategic need to actuate the potential of UMass to compete at the highest level, particularly given the increasingly competitive environment of higher education and the fact that we are surrounded by some of the “crème of the crop” private institutions. He also told the group that the measures of success will be developed as they proceed with discussion amongst all the campuses. Peter asked if there was data from previous years to measure against. Keith noted that he is not worried about making the criteria for success; he is more worried about creating the collaborative environment to allow all the players from different campuses to establish those criteria. Katherine noted that, prior to her arrival, each campus had different ways of measuring and reporting gifts, and that they were not to CASE standards. After bringing people together to discuss gift reporting, they collaboratively generated the measures of success and now have consistent financial reporting from each campus.
Ron asked what President Wilson’s representatives considered the downside of these discussions for UMass Amherst Alumni Association. Katherine said that, if President Wilson’s office did not live up to their word, they would disenfranchise the campuses, but she noted that this is not in anyone’s best interest. Ron then asked how they plan to proceed with overlapping programming. Bob noted that there is some disconnect, and used Glen Mangurian’s networking breakfast list in Boston. Glen had built this list as a volunteer by serving an alumni population that was underserved. We currently do not have that list in our hands, but Bob noted that UMass certainly benefits from that program. The program has become its own entity, and somewhere along the way they have to figure out how to incorporate this group into what we do. Hal noted that the Alumni Association is very concerned about the UMass Amherst alumni database and having full and speedy access to it, and asked if our access would change under their plan. Katherine noted that we will have the same full and speedy access we currently have, with hopes of enhancing our access capabilities.
Joel asked how we get the plan to become a reality or a mission statement rather than a concept, and Mary asked how and when we will take part in these discussions going forward. Keith provided a history of how this was leaked out to the public. He noted that the plan was a concept that was being discussed. President Wilson likes to conduct meetings by providing a topic and letting the people at the meeting discuss it, and then develop a working document from those ideas. He emphasized that the bad press resulted from a brainstorming session that had been leaked to the press, which they misrepresented. Katherine noted that Deb and Toivo would always be involved at all of the conversations about how to progress, and that President Wilson’s Office would work with them on the composition of task forces and where it was appropriate to involve volunteers.
Mike noted that there is a personality component involved with some of the proposed changes. While he does not question President Wilson’s right to make personnel changes, he feels that we need to know the reasons why they are occurring. He noted that we have built strong relationships with these individuals, and changeover greatly affects how we operate. Keith agreed with this statement, and Katherine noted that there was a feedback mechanism in place. She cited that there were 2 surveys and a link to information within an email that was distributed that day.
Hal thanked Keith, Katherine, and Bob for attending the meeting, and thought that it was the beginning to a collaborative journey. Katherine thanked those present for the invitation, and noted that President Wilson really did want to meet with representatives from the Board.
Motion – Anna made a motion, seconded by Mike to enter into Executive Session, with all new Board members and staff invited to stay.
Adjournment – The meeting adjourned at 9:11 p.m.
