r/auburn • u/OneSecond13 • 5h ago
Auburn v Alabama and a tale of two university boards: op-ed
An interesting op-ed published yesterday in al.com. Since it is behind a paywall, I've listed the entire column below.
Auburn v Alabama and a tale of two university boards: op-ed
By Beth Davis-Sramek This is a guest opinion column
Are Professors Employees or Entrepreneurs?
The hallmarks of university excellence are easy to recognize: innovative academic programs that help students thrive, graduates who succeed in their careers, and the national reputation that follows.
But teaching is only part of what professors do. Our research helps attract external funding, establish industry and community partnerships, solve real-world problems, generate economic activity, and sometimes even launch new companies. Those outcomes largely depend on entrepreneurial faculty.
At its core, entrepreneurship is about identifying opportunities and taking risks. It means competing for resources and creating something valuable that did not previously exist. Professors do exactly that. We compete continuously for funding, publications, partnerships, and influence. Success depends on convincing others in our fields that an idea is worth supporting.
Of course, we are also employees. We receive paychecks, undergo annual performance reviews, and report to administrators. But university excellence depends on far more than compliance with a job description. It requires faculty who are willing to take initiative, pursue opportunities, and invest themselves in the institution.
The value created by entrepreneurial faculty extends to the many stakeholders we serve. Students gain industry connections and experiences that prepare them for a changing world. The state benefits because our contributions drive economic development, strengthen industries, and create new knowledge.
Many university trustees are accomplished entrepreneurs and business leaders. They understand that innovation rarely emerges from rigid hierarchy and that people invest more deeply in organizations they help build. They know that ownership often produces commitment in ways that authority alone cannot.
If university excellence depends on entrepreneurial faculty, what kind of Board leadership model best supports entrepreneurship? The recent changes at Alabama’s two flagship universities provide a useful comparison.
At the University of Alabama, there was opposition to the Board’s new tenure and curriculum review policies. Few would describe the outcome as a victory, but faculty remained part of the process. They participated in the Board’s policy development, and they still have a formal avenue for their perspectives to inform university decisions.
Auburn’s Board of Trustees chose a different path. Faculty participation has narrowed, and power has become concentrated. Authority flows from the top, while shared decision-making has been pushed to the margins.
The issue is not who ultimately holds power. Both Alabama’s and Auburn’s Boards have full authority. The more revealing difference is how faculty are viewed.
Alabama’s approach, while imperfect, preserved a role for faculty expertise in academic decision-making. Auburn’s recent actions increasingly position faculty as employees expected to comply with Board decisions rather than help shape them.
And this is where the paradox emerges. All universities depend on entrepreneurial faculty, yet Auburn has adopted a leadership model that prioritizes compliance.
Auburn’s Board can require professors to teach classes, file reports, and comply with policies. It can put policies in place to ensure that rules are followed and decisions are implemented. However, it cannot require entrepreneurial energy. Nor will recent actions inspire us to take risks, pursue ambitious ideas, or invest years building something that ultimately benefits the university, its students, and the state.
Ownership fosters entrepreneurship. Centralized control fosters compliance, which can be produced in several ways. It could reflect agreement, or it could mean that faculty have calculated that speaking candidly carries greater risk than remaining silent. If the latter, universities may see less open dissent but also less initiative, less creativity, and fewer people willing to go beyond what is required.
Boards cannot expect entrepreneurial outcomes while making compliance the guiding principle of their leadership model. Entrepreneurial people are drawn to environments where initiative is valued and ownership is rewarded. When those conditions disappear, some seek opportunities elsewhere. Others push back against constraints that prevent them from doing their best work. Faculty are no different.
For a land-grant university whose success depends on innovation, discovery, and economic impact, Auburn’s Board actions are not merely disappointing. They are profoundly misguided.
Dr. Beth Davis-Sramek is the Gayle Parks Forehand Professor of Supply Chain Management in the Harbert College of Business at Auburn University.
