200 likes | 326 Views
McMaster University President’s Contract Disclosure Case. A Submission to the 2009 A.W. Page Case Study Competition. Introduction. Multi-faceted case Public sector example from Canada Opportunity to explore reputation management during a controversy
E N D
McMaster University President’s Contract Disclosure Case A Submission to the 2009 A.W. Page Case Study Competition
Introduction • Multi-faceted case • Public sector example from Canada • Opportunity to explore reputation management during a controversy • Deepen understanding of university operations
Overview of McMaster University • Founded in 1887 • 23,000 current graduate and undergraduate students • In Top 100 universities in the world (one of 4 Canadian schools) • Most research intensive university in Canada • “McMaster model”
President Peter George • McMaster’s longest serving president (15 years) • 40 years on faculty at McMaster • Doubled operating budget • Tripled research budget • Grew endowment from $100M to $500M
Public Sector Salary Disclosure Act • Became law in 1996 as an accountability measure • Public sector organizations must release names, titles, salaries and taxable benefit information of all employees who make more than $100,000 per year • 2007/08 McMaster reported 734 employees, 30 of whom made > $200k • President George topped the list as highest paid university president with $504,792
Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act • Changes came into effect June 10, 2006 so universities no longer exempted • Transparency measure • Province largest revenue source of Ontario universities • McMaster received 27.7% in 2006/07
University Funding in Ontario • Limited to 5% tuition increase • Strong growth in endowments – 55% increase nationally from 2002-2007 (although many now compromised due to crisis in the financial markets) • Population growth in the Greater Toronto Area • Private sector partnerships, ancillary operations = “corporate agenda”
McMaster’s Financial Performance Good News • Debt per full-time equivalent down 34% • Endowment per full-time equivalent up 40% • Raised $258M of $400M fundraising campaign • Diversified, stable funding base Bad News • Post-retirement benefits liability total $223.3M • Unfunded pension liability of $98.8M • Credit rating downgraded to negative • Total debt to grow by $100M to $257M
Operational Tightrope • increased inflationary costs out pace new revenues • increased provincial funding uncertainty • increased dependence on onetime funding • reduced operating net assets available to re-invest • increases in debt financing to meet space needs • increased student faculty ratios and class sizes • increasing cost of future employee benefits
The Battle Begins • Initial request in August 2006 • McMaster refused on the grounds it was a privacy issue • The Spectator appealed to the Information and Privacy Commissioner • Information and Privacy Commissioner decision of Jan. 31/08 ordered McMaster to release info by Feb. 29/08 • McMaster refused again; requested judicial review of the entire case • McMaster relented and on June 26, 2008, released President George’s contract
Public Outcry Erupts • Charges of greed, misuse of public funds, serious lack of transparency, betrayal • $99,999 post-retirement benefit given as an “academic leave” • Statement from McMaster University Faculty Association condemning senior administration of concealment and misrepresentation
Fallout for the University Sector • Maclean’s website set up to compare president’s salaries • Globe & Mail delves into exorbitant salaries and perks, questions value for money • McMaster student leader supports President George • University of Guelph’s president – the exception to the rule
Current Dilemma • Faculty contract renegotiation year • Reputational damage • Serious financial challenges • Maintaining fundraising momentum • Re-establish credibility, trust with key stakeholders
Applying Page Principles • Tell the truth • Failure to do so raised suspicions • Lost opportunity to promote President George’s value • Prove it with action • Proactively disclose financial plans • Listen to the customer • Meet directly with representatives from media and faculty/staff to discuss best way to move forward
Applying the Page Principles, cont’d • Manage for tomorrow • Don’t go to court • Universities must see themselves as part of larger society • Conduct public relations as if the whole company depended on it • Issues management can help foster a culture where all employees learn to recognize reputational risks and opportunities
Applying the Page Principles, cont’d • Realize a company’s true character is expressed by its people • Communicating a strong, high-integrity leader is essential for universities • Compare McMaster to Guelph University • Remain calm, patient and good-humoured • Increase visibility of President George so he can use his good nature to discuss situation with engaged publics
Reputation Management Principles • Visibility: “The more familiar you are to the public, the better the public rates you” • Authenticity: “To earn the benefit of the doubt, organizations have to convey absolute honesty in all their interactions with stakeholders – otherwise, any discredit by one stakeholder will instantly be communicated to all of them, reducing the degree of support they feel for the organization”
Reputation Management Principles • Consistency: “An organization’s reputation platform has to be consistently enacted across all stakeholder groups and through all of the organization’s communications and initiatives” • Distinctiveness: “Distinctiveness builds strength of association and comes from a company’s success at building a reputation platform (its customized slogans, unique trademarks and logos, and personalized corporate stories) that is strategically aligned and emotionally appealing” • Transparency: “Research has shown that the more transparent an organization is, the more likely stakeholders are to rely on their disclosures and to have faith in the organization’s prospects”
Discussion Questions: Contract Disclosure • How could McMaster have pre-empted or reduced the negative impact of the contract disclosure issue? • If you were in charge of McMaster’s public relations function, how would you have advised the president when the initial request for his employment contract came in from the Hamilton Spectator? • What other approaches could McMaster have taken in handling this issue? • How could McMaster have better communicated its justification of the contract terms offered to President George when they released this information?
Discussion Questions: Next Steps for McMaster • How would you evaluate and prioritize the risks to McMaster’s reputation in the wake of the contract’s release? • What opportunities exist for McMaster to improve its reputation following the disclosure? • Based on Fombrum and Van Riel’s reputation management framework, what strategies should McMaster and President George use to re-establish the conditions of trust in its relationships with faculty, potential donors and the general public? • How should McMaster address its relationship with the Hamilton Spectator now that the president’s contract has been disclosed?