Leaderboard

And that's exactly why tuition has been raising so rapidly. Schools aren't competing with one another to offer the highest level education at the lowest cost possible. They're competing with one another to build the tallest rock climbing wall, coolest lazy river, most extravagant dorm apartments, etc. then pass that cost along to the students. Schools are doing this because not so street smart 18 year old kids are willing to borrow thousands of extra dollars per year for these things and thanks to the government they have access to near limitless capital. Of course these same kids after graduating then complain once they have to start repaying those loans. That's a whole other discussion.

What we, and many schools like us, got caught up in was the "building process". Universities were building buildings for the sake of building buildings. Akron went through a much needed construction cycle. There was little thought put in to what would happen other than "if you build it, they will come". It was magical thinking but it made people happy because everyone likes new things. New provides a good energy and something leaders have to capitalize on. Ours didn't. When things started to go bad, they took it to another extreme and made cutting everything in their path the priority undercutting the mission of the university, which is to educate people and develop people into better citizens. The cutting process makes people upset because it is a symbol of failure and a very public one at that. As soon as possible, they need to stop talking about what is being cut and transition to talking about what the university does for the students alumni and larger NE Ohio community. Getting off of the negative should be a priority.

Paragraph 1: The problem is the only news you hear about the university and probably a lot of universities like Akron is what they are cutting from their budget. What the Idaho president was saying was these cuts are self defeating in many ways and we could be in much worse shape today. Again, takes me back a couple of decades now, but Jack Welch was the "cutting" guy. Basically, he became famous for making obvious decisions look complicated by wrapping Six Sigma around them. Did it really take a 12 month Six Sigma study to figure out that after NAFTA, a company could make more money off of a $15 toaster made in Mexico vs the USA? Over time GE became a shell of itself and could not support itself after the endless cuts. Five years ago, the stock closed around $30. Yesterday it closed around $8.50. Cuts may be needed, but they are not the same thing as thought and should not be defined as a success. Paragraph 2: Lofty goals are a good thing. I can't think of a worse idea than to tell the general public they no longer need their money. A university will always need money and in big chunks. On a positive note, I like the administrative changes our current president has made at the university. The consolidation of administration will cut a lot of overhead without sacrificing the mission of education. It was a thoughtful direction. Unlike how cuts at GE impacted their customers in a negative way, these changes should not impact the students in a negative way.