Harreld offers first message on why he came to Iowa
- Thread starter cigaretteman
- Start date
Are you following the thread? Menace mentioned payroll, HR, and similar matters being the issue. Do you believe the only way to get this training is by being CEO or having worked in education?
That is NOT the issue. The issue is more with the interpretation of "shared governance"...the relationship between faculty, staff, administratrion and the BoR and Governor. In this case (which is by no means an isolated case), the Governor and BoR spoke with forked tongue. Unfortunately, Harreld is the "point man" for the BoR and Teflon. He was hired to be the President, not their whipping boy.
As soon as Brandstad tells him what his "vision" is.
His vision, hopefully, is to buck the wishes of the BoR and Terry Branstad. Hopefully he'll pull a "Harry Blackmun" on those boys and things will work out for the best.
That drivel was written by a publicist.
Harreld might end up being just fine as Iowa's president, but don't for a minute believe there are going to be huge dramatic changes that will drastically alter the focus of the university.
So, he's still issuing statements and meeting with people privately. More and more he doesn't impress me. A big time executive tackles issues head on. Harreld is in hiding.
Perhaps....but then again, maybe there is no need for change at the present. The BoR needs to be a wee bit more transparent....unless they are under a gag order from the governor's office. But Terry is soooo transparent...and certainly would never use his office to choose "winners and losers"...because he has said so.
I didn't say anything about your opinion.
You're just not a very intelligent person.
It's probably not your fault.
Stick with topics more to your intellectual level like the debate of American fries vs. hash browns.
And you can tell all of that from some posts on a message board . God I admire you. You are a very impressive individual. I bet you have some outstanding credentials .
Why is it so hard for people to figure out that what many of the faculty are looking for is acknowledgment from the BoR that they fvcked up the presidential search?
The people who think the consternation is only about Harreld's lack of appropriate qualifications are simply ignorant of the situation.
The Board of Regents are solely responsible for the less than amicable start of Harreld's tenure.
I think this is the whole mess as it lays out today. The faculty and staff understand they have NO SAY in what happens. They just want some of "their bosses" to fess up. I understand 100% the frustration of the UI faculty. If that would happen to any of "the defenders" here, they would be screaming bloody murder.
It's appropriate you realize my superiority to you, but don't 'admire' me for it. Leave that for individuals like the Dalai Lama.
One would think the man would meet with some of the more outspoken faculty members like Kembrew McCleod who wrote an article in Slate ripping the hiring. Who exactly is he meeting with in the faculty?
Don't for a second think he's a favorite among the clinicians in the hospital. Frankly, it doesn't help his cause if Robillard is in his corner. Robillard's not exactly buddy-buddy with the majority of us who are both clinicians and scientists. There's a significant number of us who see Robillard as nothing more than a politician despite his medical background.
Because you appear to be intellectually limited I'll try to make it easy for you to understand. The point is NOT about Harreld's non-traditional background of a university presidential candidate.
The point is about the Board of Regents parading 3 eminently qualified candidates for public forums and then 1 who they knew would not be well regarded among the faculty. Then they had the gall to ask for input only to completely disregard the input.
Then, for Rastetter to act surprised when the faculty decides to voice their disapproval of hiring someone they didn't want in the first place shows just what an asshole he truly is.
I realize this is probably too sophisticated for you to understand, but that's okay.
Tis true, but don't let that fool you. Ben Carson is highly intelligent as well. But, he's a bit of a nut. According to the papers signed by my doctors in as sane as the rain in June .
Last edited:
What is it that's causing him to not be well regarded or wanted in the first place if it's not his non-traditional background?
Because it makes so much sense to complain about the new president when people have their issue with the BOR
When they feel they have had their day in court. Some may never. This move by the BoR has set UIowa back in the eyes of the acadmics...and like it or not, they all talk with eachother and it will not be easy for UIowa to recruit outstanding intellectuals to the campus for teaching OR research.
Your position is reminds me of the old saying, "Until morale improves, the beatings will continue."
How long before Harreld gets into an ugly public exchange with some of the faculty?
One thing this won't be is boring.
One thing this won't be is boring.
[QUOkelucas80, post: 975776, member: 9608"]So, he's still issuing statements and meeting with people privately. More and more he doesn't impress me. A big time executive tackles issues head on. Harreld is in hiding.[/QUOTE]
you keep saying this over and over.
HE HASN'T STARTED WORK YET YOU FRICKING MORON.
you keep saying this over and over.
HE HASN'T STARTED WORK YET YOU FRICKING MORON.
you keep saying this over and over.
HE HASN'T STARTED WORK YET YOU FRICKING MORON.[/QUOTE]
He claims he has been meeting with all kinds of people, but no names. He hasn't met with some of the most vocal opponents. So what has been going on? I don't even think he has been in IC that much.
I wrote him an e-mail as an alum and UI contributor and he didn't answer that. I dont expect anything special, but some sort of response might be good. Barta has responded.
No, they shouldn't. The Governor and the BoR needed to be a bit more forthcoming about who they desired to appoint. Both the BoR and Branstad lied, deceived and misled the folks they should have been working closely with on this issue.
Well, for one thing he made enough errors on his resume that would:
A. Cause someone to be fired if found out after they were hired.
B. Prevent them from being a candidate for a job even at an entry level position.
He did. He is going to listen and collaborate.
Why are you wishing so hard for him to be a dictator?
[Dude, TE="joelbc1, post: 977243, member: 9268"]No, they shouldn't. The Governor and the BoR needed to be a bit more forthcoming about who they desired to appoint. Both the BoR and Branstad lied, deceived and misled the folks they should have been working closely with on this issue.[/QUOTE]
dude, THEY ARE IN CHARGE BECAUSE THEY WERE ELECTED OR APPOINTED BY ELECTED LEADERS. if you didn't like the process, too bad. the people crying are upset at the outcome despite crying about the process. had they picked any of the other three, they would be praising the "Shared Governance" concept. just because the Regents liked a different finalist more doesn't mean they are corrupt.
damn it, I really don't care for Terry but your agenda makes it hard not to defend him.
dude, THEY ARE IN CHARGE BECAUSE THEY WERE ELECTED OR APPOINTED BY ELECTED LEADERS. if you didn't like the process, too bad. the people crying are upset at the outcome despite crying about the process. had they picked any of the other three, they would be praising the "Shared Governance" concept. just because the Regents liked a different finalist more doesn't mean they are corrupt.
damn it, I really don't care for Terry but your agenda makes it hard not to defend him.
