Silent Search, Secret Search

Harvard's presidential search process is illegitimate. It is illegitimate because it fails to take into account the diversity of interests on this campus and because it excludes the voices of students, faculty and staff. This manner of decision-making is typical of the Harvard administration: undemocratic and unaccountable to those with the greatest stake in the outcome.

The failure of the Presidential Search Committee to consider the opinions of students, faculty and staff represents an egregious flaw in the presidential selection process. From review of tenure to student services to contract negotiations, the committee's choice will have an enormous impact on the lives and workplaces of everyone in the Harvard community. As such, it is only just that every member of the University be given a formal voice in the selection process. Many peer institutions, including Brown and Princeton, recognize the necessity of broad participation in deliberative processes like the presidential search--why doesn't Harvard?

This Politburo-style leadership is unfair and unseemly at Harvard. As an influential part of an institution which claims to be devoted to democratic principles, the committee should be promoting public discourse and encouraging participation from everyone in the University. But our best efforts to engage in a dialogue with the committee have been met with silence: the committee has gone to extraordinary lengths to shield itself from the eyes of the University and the public at large. It meets in secret, in undisclosed locations, and never releases its minutes. Our inquiries and requests for information have not even been acknowledged by the committee, indicating its unwillingness to subject the search process to public scrutiny and discussion. Instead of observing and participating in the presidential selection process, as is our right as members of this University, we have been left to gather what we can from scattered news reports and rumors.

We acknowledge the committee's minimal efforts to include the input of non-members by soliciting written comments from the constituents of the University. However, inviting us to express our views is not the same thing as giving us a substantial role in the decision-making process. There is no evidence that these solicited contributions have any bearing on the deliberations. There is no guarantee that they are even being read. And given the historic unwillingness of the Harvard administration to consider and respond to student concerns, we have good reason to believe that our input is being ignored.

It is time for Harvard to acknowledge its responsibility to those who live and work within its gates, and to the larger community of which it is a part. Major policy decisions, such as the selection of future presidents, should, at the very least, be conducted openly. In the future, all information regarding committee activities--membership, minutes and procedures--ought to be released to the public. Administrative bodies must also establish formal avenues through which non-members can engage them in dialogue. Deliberative processes should ideally include representatives from the student body, faculty and staff in order to ensure that future University policies will truly reflect the interests of each and every member of the Harvard community. Indeed, the Harvard administration will not be accountable to its constituents until a representative system is instituted.

While touting the ideals of democracy and self-determination, Harvard continues to deprive its members of any voice in the formulation of its policies. The administrative structure of this university has barely evolved since its charter was granted in the 17th century. Our administrative bodies are better fit for study by the Department of History than for the management of this institution. The authors of our Constitution recognized that a government should evolve over time--why is Harvard so reluctant to change its archaic ways? It is time for the Harvard Corporation, and the Administration as a whole, to move into the 21st century.

Lara Z. Jirmanus '01 is a biophysics concentrator in Leverett House. Nathan R. Perl-Rosenthal is a first-year in Hurlbut Hall. They are members of HarvardWatch.