Corporation Loses Key Perspective

With the departure of Charles P. Slichter '45 as a member of Harvard's highest governing board, the University had the opportunity to define the direction to take into the next millenium.

Slichter's resignation from the Harvard Corporation, announced on November 16, was particularly significant as he was the only outside academic on the seven-member board. Many at the time expressed their hope that the University would select an academic to take Slichter's place.

As the University prepares to welcome James R. Houghton '58, named this week as the latest addition to America's oldest corporation, those faculty who harbored such hopes are surely shuddering.

Like most academics, Houghton's name has been in print and his work has been critiqued--not in the scholarly journals, however, but in corporate publications such as Business Week, due to his work as a top business executive.

As the chair and chief executive officer (CEO) of Corning, Inc., Houghton received an MBA from the Harvard Business School in 1962. In June he will become one of four members of the Corporation who hail from the corporate world.

As a member of the Corporation, Houghton will be in a position to wield immense influence over Harvard's basic operations, particularly fiscal management and policy concerns.

More powerful than its alumni-elected Board of Over- seers counterpart, the Corporation consists offive Fellows of Harvard College as well as thepresident and treasurer of the University.

Houghton's qualifications and experience in hisfield are garnering praise from top Universityofficials.

After Corning in 1964 as the European areamanager, Houghton has since worked his way upthrough the corporate ladder. He served as thevice chair of the board of directors for 12 yearsbefore becoming CEO in 1983.

In addition to his duties at Corning, Houghtonis a director of Dow Corning Corp., MetropolitanLife Insurance Company, J.P. Morgan & Co., Inc.and Exxon Corp. He also serves as a trustee of theCorning Museum of Glass, the Pierpont MorganLibrary and the Metropolitan Museum of Art.

But Houghton's business experience certainlyisn't unique on the Corporation. When he assumeshis post in June, the number of businessexecutives serving on the Corporation will betwice the number of academics on the board.

And some observers regard the replacement of anacademic with a business executive--especially inthe face of raised concerns over a lack of facultyinput--as a slap in the face to members of theFaculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS).

Indeed, Houghton joins a growing cadre ofbusiness leaders on the Corporation, whichincludes University Treasurer D. Ronald Daniel, anofficer at McKinsey & Company, Inc.; Richard A.Smith '46, CEO of Harcourt General, Inc.; andRobert G. Stone Jr. '45 of the Kirby Corporation.

The lone academics on the governing board areRudenstine, who has spent most of his career as anadministrator, and Geyser University ProfessorHenry Rosovsky, a former dean of the FAS.

Judith R. Hope, a lawyer in the Washington,D.C. firm Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker,rounds out the Corporation as the fifth Fellow ofHarvard College.

Absence of Scientists

In addition to the swing in the previously-evenbalance between academics and business executives,Slichter's departure marks the first time indecades that the Corporation is left without ascientist.

Slichter was the Center for Advanced Studyprofessor of physics and chemistry at theUniversity of Illinois and a former physicslecturer for Harvard.

As a physicist, Slichter provided a perspectivethat English Renaissance scholar Rudenstine andeconomist Rosovsky may not have shared.

And that perspective is especially importanttoday, faculty and administrators say, whenscience funding for universities is facing itslargest challenge in years due to possible budgetcuts inCongress.

But some say Houghton's position at a companyinvolved in scientific research may provide theneeded knowledge.

"He comes from an organization, Corning, thatis [very much] based on innovations based onscience. I'm sure he's a person with a very [good]perspective on science," says Baird Professor ofScience Dudley R. Herschbach. "If you lookinto...Corning, it's one of those companies that'sbeen science-based for much of thecentury."

"I wouldn't call him just another CEO," addsHerschbach, a Nobel laureate in chemistry.

Some observers, however, question the level ofscientific experience that would come from abusiness expert instead of a scientificresearcher.

In addition, the University has made littleprogress towards a coherent policy regulating therelationship between Harvard scientists and theprivate sector--especially since the departurelast spring of Leverett Professor of PoliticalEconomy and former provost Jerry R. Green, whochaired the Committee on Science Policy.

Indeed, the issue has been put on the backburner by Rudenstine since Green left office. Theloss of Slichter's voice as a scientist may provedetrimental to the University within this realm.

"Charles Slichter added the perspective of theacademic and scientist to the Corporation,"Rosovsky said in an interview with The Crimsonjust after Slichter announced his departure. "Hewas a tremendous upholder of academic values. Hefought hard if he ever thought the University wascompromising its teaching or research."

Rosovsky was a member of the search committeethat chose Hougton, along with Daniel, Stone,Rudenstine and Overseers Renee Landers and ThomasMurphy.

Although Rosovsky has previously endorsed theidea of including academics on the committee, hestopped short, suggesting a limit of the number ofseats available.

"The difficulty is that the Corporation is toosmall to set aside certain seats for certain kindsof people, but we will keep [that] in mind,"Rosovsky said in November.

Apparently, however, the committee's decisionwas not even contentious.

"I think it's pretty obvious that he was thehands-on top choice," says Rev. Theodore M.Hesburgh--who was newly reelected to a second termas president of the Board of Overseers--in aninterview on Wednesday.

Temporary Loss

Still, many faculty and governing boardsmembers say that the loss of the valuableperspective offered by Slichter is only temporary.Many observers note that retirement seems imminentfor Rosovsky, Stone and Smith--all of whom arenear 70.

"If you look at the ages [of the Corporationmembers], two or three more people are likely tobe replaced in a two-three year span," Hesburghsays.

Therefore, Hesburgh notes, "you don't have tomake the" decision to appoint an academic rightaway.

Hope agrees that several people are likely tostep down in the next few years, providing theCorporation with the opportunity to replenishitself with a third academic, perhaps a scientist.

"I'm sure we'll have opportunities for manydifferent [perspectives] to be brought to theCorporation," she says.

Two other overseers, both requesting anonymity,also point out that other replacements are likelyto be forthcoming.

Other members of the faculty and Universitygoverning boards add that because the boardfocuses on long-term policy concerns, thetemporary absence of an academic won'tsignificantly affect the Corporation.

"You know that the Corporation thinks in termsof decades," Hope said in a telephone interviewfrom Washington yesterday. "Charlie Slichter hasbeen an extremely [important influence] on theCorporation, but you do have Neil [Rudenstine] andyou do have Henry [Rosovsky]."

Hope adds that she might be more inclined toagree "if this were a snapshot. But I think thatthe kind of talent that Charlie brought issomething that will get to be well-represented."

Ironic Timing

The appointment of Houghton, ironically,arrived after the central administration cameunder intense fire for ignoring opinions of FASmembers.

In particular, a controversy over benefitreductions erupted last fall with Rudenstine'sreport suggesting a one percent cut in facultybenefits.

The controversy, which took Rudenstine bysurprise, brought to a head tensions which hadbeen brewing within FAS for some time. The facultyannounced distrust towards an administration thatthey said they felt was run more like acorporation than an academic institution.

"It seems as though we were being treated moreand more as employees of a business than membersof a community," McKay Professor of ComputerScience Barbara J. Grosz said last fall.

Mallinckrodt Professor of Applied Physics andProfessor of Physics William Paul, who has been onthe Harvard faculty for four decades, told TheCrimson in November that he has noticed adisturbing trend to exclude faculty fromhigh-level decision making.

"You have to understand what consulting is allabout. If you don't tell them what you propose,you're not really consulting," Paul said at thetime. "It is quite clearly a change from thepast."

But faculty members have not yet expressedcriticism towards the University's appointment.

Most interviewed say that they have yet to meetHoughton, adding that they haven't thought aboutthe possible effects of the new imbalance betweenbusiness executives and academics on the dynamicsof the Corporation and its ultimate impact on theUniversity.

Others say that this fall's outcry over benefitcuts should not have been the major factor in theappointment of a new Corporation member.

"I wouldn't have thought it would be prudent tobase a change on that incident in particular,"said Gund Professor of Economics and of BusinessAdministration Richard E. Caves, who co-authoredthe FAS investigation on Harvard's benefits reviewtask-force.

Indeed, at least one professor says that theloss of an academic voice might not produce anegative impact--so long as FAS succeeds inconvincing the Corporation to rescind benefitsreductions.

"We'll have to wait and see whether theCorporation is sympathetic to the present benefitstask force," Paul says. "We'll have to see whatthat reaction is. I think the thing to look outfor is that now that the FAS committee [has madeits] report, what is the reaction of the powersthat be that report. That will be the test."

An Historical Lack of Academics

Though many would like to see one of their ownon the committee, academics have historically beenthe exception rather than the rule on theCorporation.

Slichter was one of two academics appointed tothe Corporation in the late 1960s, Rosovsky says.

As the first two outside academics appointed tothe board in decades, they were named to deal withthe problems sweeping across college campuses atthe time, Rosovsky says.

"It was a time of turmoil, Rosovsky has said."The idea was to put people on the Corporation whoknew how universities function from the inside."

Caves likewise notes that academics have beenthe exception rather than the rule, and says thatit's too early to pinpoint any movement away fromacademics.

"It's difficult to see that as a trend," Cavessays. "In the past...there hadn't been academicson the Corporation."

"It better be a business or it'll go broke witha budget over $1 billion every year," Hesburghsays in response to faculty complaints about theCorporation's corporate make-up. "Trying tobalance the budget is pretty important at both auniversity and in a business."Crimson File PhotoPRESIDENT NEIL L. RUDENSTINE is one of justtwo academics remaining on the Corporation.

Houghton's qualifications and experience in hisfield are garnering praise from top Universityofficials.

After Corning in 1964 as the European areamanager, Houghton has since worked his way upthrough the corporate ladder. He served as thevice chair of the board of directors for 12 yearsbefore becoming CEO in 1983.

In addition to his duties at Corning, Houghtonis a director of Dow Corning Corp., MetropolitanLife Insurance Company, J.P. Morgan & Co., Inc.and Exxon Corp. He also serves as a trustee of theCorning Museum of Glass, the Pierpont MorganLibrary and the Metropolitan Museum of Art.

But Houghton's business experience certainlyisn't unique on the Corporation. When he assumeshis post in June, the number of businessexecutives serving on the Corporation will betwice the number of academics on the board.

And some observers regard the replacement of anacademic with a business executive--especially inthe face of raised concerns over a lack of facultyinput--as a slap in the face to members of theFaculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS).

Indeed, Houghton joins a growing cadre ofbusiness leaders on the Corporation, whichincludes University Treasurer D. Ronald Daniel, anofficer at McKinsey & Company, Inc.; Richard A.Smith '46, CEO of Harcourt General, Inc.; andRobert G. Stone Jr. '45 of the Kirby Corporation.

The lone academics on the governing board areRudenstine, who has spent most of his career as anadministrator, and Geyser University ProfessorHenry Rosovsky, a former dean of the FAS.

Judith R. Hope, a lawyer in the Washington,D.C. firm Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker,rounds out the Corporation as the fifth Fellow ofHarvard College.

Absence of Scientists

In addition to the swing in the previously-evenbalance between academics and business executives,Slichter's departure marks the first time indecades that the Corporation is left without ascientist.

Slichter was the Center for Advanced Studyprofessor of physics and chemistry at theUniversity of Illinois and a former physicslecturer for Harvard.

As a physicist, Slichter provided a perspectivethat English Renaissance scholar Rudenstine andeconomist Rosovsky may not have shared.

And that perspective is especially importanttoday, faculty and administrators say, whenscience funding for universities is facing itslargest challenge in years due to possible budgetcuts inCongress.

But some say Houghton's position at a companyinvolved in scientific research may provide theneeded knowledge.

"He comes from an organization, Corning, thatis [very much] based on innovations based onscience. I'm sure he's a person with a very [good]perspective on science," says Baird Professor ofScience Dudley R. Herschbach. "If you lookinto...Corning, it's one of those companies that'sbeen science-based for much of thecentury."

"I wouldn't call him just another CEO," addsHerschbach, a Nobel laureate in chemistry.

Some observers, however, question the level ofscientific experience that would come from abusiness expert instead of a scientificresearcher.

In addition, the University has made littleprogress towards a coherent policy regulating therelationship between Harvard scientists and theprivate sector--especially since the departurelast spring of Leverett Professor of PoliticalEconomy and former provost Jerry R. Green, whochaired the Committee on Science Policy.

Indeed, the issue has been put on the backburner by Rudenstine since Green left office. Theloss of Slichter's voice as a scientist may provedetrimental to the University within this realm.

"Charles Slichter added the perspective of theacademic and scientist to the Corporation,"Rosovsky said in an interview with The Crimsonjust after Slichter announced his departure. "Hewas a tremendous upholder of academic values. Hefought hard if he ever thought the University wascompromising its teaching or research."

Rosovsky was a member of the search committeethat chose Hougton, along with Daniel, Stone,Rudenstine and Overseers Renee Landers and ThomasMurphy.

Although Rosovsky has previously endorsed theidea of including academics on the committee, hestopped short, suggesting a limit of the number ofseats available.

"The difficulty is that the Corporation is toosmall to set aside certain seats for certain kindsof people, but we will keep [that] in mind,"Rosovsky said in November.

Apparently, however, the committee's decisionwas not even contentious.

"I think it's pretty obvious that he was thehands-on top choice," says Rev. Theodore M.Hesburgh--who was newly reelected to a second termas president of the Board of Overseers--in aninterview on Wednesday.

Temporary Loss

Still, many faculty and governing boardsmembers say that the loss of the valuableperspective offered by Slichter is only temporary.Many observers note that retirement seems imminentfor Rosovsky, Stone and Smith--all of whom arenear 70.

"If you look at the ages [of the Corporationmembers], two or three more people are likely tobe replaced in a two-three year span," Hesburghsays.

Therefore, Hesburgh notes, "you don't have tomake the" decision to appoint an academic rightaway.

Hope agrees that several people are likely tostep down in the next few years, providing theCorporation with the opportunity to replenishitself with a third academic, perhaps a scientist.

"I'm sure we'll have opportunities for manydifferent [perspectives] to be brought to theCorporation," she says.

Two other overseers, both requesting anonymity,also point out that other replacements are likelyto be forthcoming.

Other members of the faculty and Universitygoverning boards add that because the boardfocuses on long-term policy concerns, thetemporary absence of an academic won'tsignificantly affect the Corporation.

"You know that the Corporation thinks in termsof decades," Hope said in a telephone interviewfrom Washington yesterday. "Charlie Slichter hasbeen an extremely [important influence] on theCorporation, but you do have Neil [Rudenstine] andyou do have Henry [Rosovsky]."

Hope adds that she might be more inclined toagree "if this were a snapshot. But I think thatthe kind of talent that Charlie brought issomething that will get to be well-represented."

Ironic Timing

The appointment of Houghton, ironically,arrived after the central administration cameunder intense fire for ignoring opinions of FASmembers.

In particular, a controversy over benefitreductions erupted last fall with Rudenstine'sreport suggesting a one percent cut in facultybenefits.

The controversy, which took Rudenstine bysurprise, brought to a head tensions which hadbeen brewing within FAS for some time. The facultyannounced distrust towards an administration thatthey said they felt was run more like acorporation than an academic institution.

"It seems as though we were being treated moreand more as employees of a business than membersof a community," McKay Professor of ComputerScience Barbara J. Grosz said last fall.

Mallinckrodt Professor of Applied Physics andProfessor of Physics William Paul, who has been onthe Harvard faculty for four decades, told TheCrimson in November that he has noticed adisturbing trend to exclude faculty fromhigh-level decision making.

"You have to understand what consulting is allabout. If you don't tell them what you propose,you're not really consulting," Paul said at thetime. "It is quite clearly a change from thepast."

But faculty members have not yet expressedcriticism towards the University's appointment.

Most interviewed say that they have yet to meetHoughton, adding that they haven't thought aboutthe possible effects of the new imbalance betweenbusiness executives and academics on the dynamicsof the Corporation and its ultimate impact on theUniversity.

Others say that this fall's outcry over benefitcuts should not have been the major factor in theappointment of a new Corporation member.

"I wouldn't have thought it would be prudent tobase a change on that incident in particular,"said Gund Professor of Economics and of BusinessAdministration Richard E. Caves, who co-authoredthe FAS investigation on Harvard's benefits reviewtask-force.

Indeed, at least one professor says that theloss of an academic voice might not produce anegative impact--so long as FAS succeeds inconvincing the Corporation to rescind benefitsreductions.

"We'll have to wait and see whether theCorporation is sympathetic to the present benefitstask force," Paul says. "We'll have to see whatthat reaction is. I think the thing to look outfor is that now that the FAS committee [has madeits] report, what is the reaction of the powersthat be that report. That will be the test."

An Historical Lack of Academics

Though many would like to see one of their ownon the committee, academics have historically beenthe exception rather than the rule on theCorporation.

Slichter was one of two academics appointed tothe Corporation in the late 1960s, Rosovsky says.

As the first two outside academics appointed tothe board in decades, they were named to deal withthe problems sweeping across college campuses atthe time, Rosovsky says.

"It was a time of turmoil, Rosovsky has said."The idea was to put people on the Corporation whoknew how universities function from the inside."

Caves likewise notes that academics have beenthe exception rather than the rule, and says thatit's too early to pinpoint any movement away fromacademics.

"It's difficult to see that as a trend," Cavessays. "In the past...there hadn't been academicson the Corporation."

"It better be a business or it'll go broke witha budget over $1 billion every year," Hesburghsays in response to faculty complaints about theCorporation's corporate make-up. "Trying tobalance the budget is pretty important at both auniversity and in a business."Crimson File PhotoPRESIDENT NEIL L. RUDENSTINE is one of justtwo academics remaining on the Corporation.