Evan Dobelle: Fair "firing" ?

[Albert]

Re: Evan Dobelle: Fair "firing" ?

Well, he did get a fairly harsh drubbing in today's Weekly, mostly explaining why he has so little support. Too many un-kept promises.

I was surprised, though, to read that he could actually stay at UH as a tenured professor. Can't imagine he'd want to it ...

[LikaNui]

Re: Evan Dobelle: Fair "firing" ?

I just don't get the praise that Dobelle is getting via the Letters to the Editor in both the Bulletin and Advertiser.

See the letter in today's Honolulu Weakly, which finally is one of the few that points a finger in Dobelle's direction (and it also mentions Meda's letter and directs people to Ian's website).

[Jazzaloha]

Re: Evan Dobelle: Fair "firing" ?

First, I want to give props to Lika Nui for post 25. I think he makes some valid points. It certainly does seem that Dobelle is manipulating the situation to make the regents look bad.

Anyway, Ruth asked wondered why readers seemed to like Dobelle. Here are some of the good things Dobelle claimed to do for the university:

creating a strategic plan, a medical school, a film school and an organizational structure that was broad throughout the islands;

making the two-year colleges entrepreneurial and offer baccalaureate degree on the neighbor islands and throughout Oahu (similar to the University of California system);

liberated the two-year colleges from being under the chancellor's silo into institutions that can now be entrepreneurial throughout all the islands;

helped secure a six-year contract for faculty with a 31 percent pay increase. He claims that this was his number one goal from the beginning and that "There's no other university in this country that has a six-year contract and refusing to raise tuition."

I consider this a pretty good showing, and I haven't heard anyone really talk about how these things are either not good for the university or why Dobelle does not deserve credit for them.

Furthermore, let's remember that we should evaluate his performance within three year period he has been here--a period in which 9-11 occurred, which would make fundraising even more diffficult. The key question is did we give he and his team enough time to prove themselves? The authors of the article "Dangerous Equations" remark that based on the two years Dobelle has been here, they don't see the world-class institution he said he would deliver. I don't think that's a realistic or fair expectation.

Maybe the Regents will have be able to make a strong case for their decision. I hope they do, and I hope their explanation removes any doubt about the wisdom and motives of their decision. But they have not done that so far, I can't help but feel cynical and skeptical that they will try to wait until the furor dies down.

A couple final thoughts. First, politics does not have to manifest itself specifically in the form of Dobelle endorsing Hirono. Dobelle angering connected university administrators or politicians with his changes could be another way that politics manifests itself in this decision. Let's remember that the BOR was also criticized for being political by one of the accrediting organizations.

Finally, I don't know what the exact reasons are for the firing, but I do know that change is very difficult to make in Hawaii. People who try to make change--especially big changes--are often attacked and crushed. Whether this is the case in the Dobelle situation is unknown, but it's a factor you can't easily dismiss.

[LikaNui]

Re: Evan Dobelle: Fair "firing" !

First, I want to give props to Lika Nui for post 25. I think he makes some valid points. It certainly does seem that Dobelle is manipulating the situation to make the regents look bad.

Thanks; and I think you're the first to reply to post #25. The lack of responses was interesting. Anyway, it was written because it was frustrating to read so very many comments from folks who apparently weren't following and assimilating the actual news. Perhaps the most telling point there was that it was Dobelle himself who insisted that the meeting be "closed" and not open!

Here are some of the good things Dobelle claimed to do for the university: creating a strategic plan, a medical school, [...]

The plans and ideas may have been okay, but the issue is his numerous proclamations that he personally could raise $160 million very quickly. A couple of years later, and the figure is next-to-zilch, but the project is well underway and UH is holding the bag to pay the tab.
And in other Dobelle news...
Did anyone see the article in today's Star-Bulletin?!? Check it out at http://starbulletin.com/2004/07/15/news/index4.html . A sample of that article notes:
"Fired University of Hawaii president Evan Dobelle used $45,000 of UH Foundation money for an opinion poll that asked whether his public image was damaged after he endorsed Democratic gubernatorial candidate Mazie Hirono, the Star-Bulletin has learned."
But it gets even more interesting, regarding the president of the polling firm Dobelle hired in a non-bid contract:
"The nonbid contract to conduct the poll was entered into on Oct. 24, 2002, and was signed by Dobelle on Nov. 5 -- election day. Gorman, a friend of Dobelle's, said he has known the former UH president since Dobelle worked for Massachusetts U.S. Sen. Ed Brooke in the early 1970s."
Hmmmmm. And then:
"The contract with Opinion Dynamics was for $90,000 plus expenses for two polls -- with a second poll to be conducted in June 2003. In a handwritten note on the contract, Dobelle wrote, "no more than $99,999 for both surveys." Under university procurement policies, all consultant contracts in excess of $100,000 require prior Board of Regents approval."
Heh.

[LikaNui]

Re: Evan Dobelle: Fair "firing" ?

Posted moments ago on the Advertiser's website:

http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/ar.../br/br03p.html

"The University of Hawai'i Board of Regents has postponed for a week any discussion of a potential mediated settlement with fired president Evan Dobelle." (etc.) "The regents promised a fuller statement later today."
Far more interestingly, it also says:
"The regents offered Dobelle's attorneys a chance to open today's meeting to the public. But his attorneys declined."
So. Once again, Dobelle wants a public meeting to be closed. As Arsenio Hall used to say, "Things that make you go 'Hmmmmm'..."

[Albert]

Re: Evan Dobelle: Fair "firing" ?

I saw Dobelle in the Safeway at Manoa Marketplace yesterday, mentioned it on hawaii.test and that rascal "raf" asked if he was filling out an application.

[pzarquon]

Re: Evan Dobelle: Fair "firing" !

The contract with Opinion Dynamics was for $90,000 plus expenses for two polls -- with a second poll to be conducted in June 2003. In a handwritten note on the contract, Dobelle wrote, "no more than $99,999 for both surveys." Under university procurement policies, all consultant contracts in excess of $100,000 require prior Board of Regents approval.

That's priceless. "I want to help you, so since I can only pick you if the cost is less than {x}, please make sure your bid is for {x-1}." I mean, it's an open secret that this kind of stuff happens, but to think he left physical, personally-linked proof like this just diminishes any estimation folks might have as to his supposed brilliance.

[ruth]

Re: Evan Dobelle: Fair "firing" ?

Hey Jazz and LikaNui,

Thanks for your responses.

Perhaps I was jumping the gun in saying that Dobelle should have "something to show for" during his presidency. Certainly he has made some accomplishments to move the University forward, which Jazz mentions.

For anyone wanting to read the context of Dobelle's defense (from which it appears Jazz acquired some of his points), here's an interview from MSNBC:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5353461/

About the medical school - In late 2001, just months after Dobelle's presidency began, he was able to lobby the Legislature to provide $150 million for the Medical School in Kakaako - kudos to him. Yet, the other $150 million that he has promised to raise has not been secured. We broke ground with that uncertainty. At the the center of the disappointment with Dobelle is, as LikaNui mentioned, his inability to follow through on his promises.

I will say that the strategic plans for a system similar to the UC system is something I do support.

Regarding faculty contracts, I find that Dobelle taking credit for the faculty agreement to be somewhat insulting, considering that even a full professor doesn't make as much as some of his lower-paid executive staff. In addition, there is a possibility that a tuition hike in 2006 will help pay for the steeper salary increases in the later years.

See http://starbulletin.com/2004/04/09/news/story3.html for more information. Also, check out John Radcliffe's response to Dobelle's claim in this Starbulletin LTE:
http://starbulletin.com/2003/07/17/e...l/letters.html

The approved contract provides for:

- 1 percent raise retroactive to July 1
- 3 percent raise this year
- 2 percent raise next year

The 5, 9 and 11 percent raises come 2006 through 2008.

Those are manini increase rates when viewing increased pay he was commanding for this staff in just *one* year:

General counsel: $130,008 (before Dobelle), $256,248 (after)
VP Academic Affairs: $133,968 (before Dobelle), $260,000 (after)
VP Administration: $125,164 (before Dobelle), $227,016 (after)

That's just a snippet of the table provided in the Dangerous Equations article. Of course the table includes many executive posts that didn't exist before. It's amazing the excruciating process required for faculty to get such tiny pay increases, but for executives, the huge salaries happen at the blink of an eye.

Let's just say that I welcome any leader who can affect change in Hawaii. I'm just not certain that if all the change Dobelle's brought (or claims to have brought) - some of them good, some still unrealized, some cosmetic - are worthy of his price tag as well as the cronyism inherent in his style. For instance, I would think (or *hope*) there are leaders out there who can develop a strategic plan for UH without doing so by means of having us pay for overpriced Bachmannite friends. This simply doesn't sit well in my gut.

Jazz, like you, I hope the Regents come up with substantial reasons for Dobelle's ouster. They might in fact not be able to present legal ground for their actions, though we'll simply have to wait and see.

For me personally, his cronyism and approaches (depicted by Meda Chesney-Lind's letter) are enough for me to not want him around. However, that alone is not "cause" by definition. I had a queasy feeling about him when he was first hired, and it really has never left.

I do think the mess caused by the firing will make it horribly difficult for Hawaii to find a competent replacement, which ultimately is very sad whether we agree with what the Regents did or not.

Thanks for engaging this discussion.

Ruth

[Jazzaloha]

Re: Evan Dobelle: Fair "firing" ?

LikaNui,

I've talked with prominent politicians recently, and many of them complained about the way the press breeds mistrust in public officials and institutions. I can't help thinking about this when I read that Starbulletin article you quoted above.

The title "Dobelle used $45,000 for Image Rating Poll: One question asked if his support for Hirono was viewed negatively." My first impression was that the poll was strictly conducted to determine the public's perception of Dobelle. But later the according to the the company conducting the poll 90-100 questions were asked about the issues affecting the university--ranging from "what programs are important and community college funding." A poll like that seems appropriate to me. In addition, asking the public what they liked or didn't like about the actions of Dobelle are legitimate questions, imo--especially since those aren't the only questions being asked (which is what the title implies).

The article and title seems written to sound scandalous. Now, the poll and the hiring of Dobelle's friend may or may not be scandalous, but the journalists would have to answer some questions for this to be so:

1. Was the poll a legitimate tool to improve the university?
2. Was the poll done well?
3. Given the poll and the way it was conducted, was the cost appropriate?

These are the main questions. If the answers were negative, then I think it would be fair to write the article in tone that conveyed a scandal. But the article does not answer these questions. Mentioning that Dobelle limited the contract to $99,999, contracted a friend and asked about the public's perception of himself is all innuendo. If the poll was a legitimate tool, done well and was given for a fair, price the issues in the story would mean very little.

I want to reiterate again that we must evaluate Dobelle's accomplishments within the three year period--and I would argue we should factor in 9-11, especially when evaluating his fundraising performance. Do people feel he fell way short of what he should have accomplished given this time period and given his salary (and the salary of his team)? I'd like us--and the Regents--to focus on this question. If they, or anyone else, can make a strong case that he did fail given the time frame, etc., I would totally support his firing. But we haven't come close to answering this question.

Instead, we hear about his high salary and the high salaries of his team (as if they are instantly guilty because of these high salaries); we hear about his arrogance and his extravagant life-style. (Hey, I'd rather have an arrogant president that's transforming the university into a great academic institution, than a humble president that creates a mediocre one any day!) To me, if he has made significant progress given the three year time frame, etc., these criticisms are irrelevant. What is troubling about the press is that they don't seem to recognize this. They do seem to be trying to answer the questions most, and I can't help but feel that they care more about creating reporting a scandal to sell more papers.

Ruth,

I want to address some of the points you raise.

First, until Dobelle, have all university presidents and his/her staff gotten instantly quick pay raises? Like the frontline workers, many public administrators struggle to get an increase in pay. I think it's important to remember that the BOR had a say in these pay raises, so we shouldn't blame Dobelle exclusively for them. Second, didn't the BOR recently approve of a really high pay hike for one of the clerks (or some position related to the administration)? Seeing the huge increase doesn't look very good, but that by itself is not proof that they have not performed well or committed a wrong. We need to ask if it is reasonable and fair. And do we get our monies worth.

You obviously don't feel like the increase is worth it, but I would like to hear why you feel that way. I'm bothered by the fact that many people seem to think that the increase in salaries--by themselves--are enough to condemn Dobelle.

I feel the same about "cronyism." Who Dobelle selects is irrelevant if we feel like these people produce the results we want--given the specific time frame we are evaluating them. Think of a football coach like June Jones. Is it "cronynism" if he selects his friends or people he likes for his assistants? We could care less, as long as his teams win. And that's appropriate. I think it would be unfair to restrict the Coach Jones from choosing his staff. Doesn't this also happen with CEO's in the private sector? Why is it appropriate in the private sector and "cronyism" in the public sector?

When the UH hired Dobelle, and allowed him to choose his staff, I was really happy that they were going to give this approach a try. Give him the money, let him choose the staff, and give him freedom. If he does well--in a reasonable amount of time--then we can keep him. If he doesn't, fire him. That's fair to me. It just seems like we have given up on this approach prematurely.

[Linkmeister]

Re: Evan Dobelle: Fair "firing" ?

One of the things I've noticed in all this coverage is the appearance of envy in most stories. The attitude seems to be "he was making too much, so he deserved to get fired." Channel 4's reporters seem offended at his salary. (I'm only singling them out because that's what I watch at 5:00 and 6:00pm).

It would be interesting to learn what other University Presidents at institutions of comparable size make.

[ruth]

Re: Evan Dobelle: Fair "firing" ?

I did not say the Regents can do no wrong. If they are partly to blame - then blame them. I have no problem with that.

You were the one who pointed out the salary contract as one of Dobelle's "accomplishments." I was just pointing out why it was so absurd for him to claim that accomplishment, given the alternate value system he has for his staff.

I feel that the "why" of your question has been adequately answered in my earlier posts, supported by the public criticisms made by everyday people at the university. I provided the references and links. And there are many others. We both have Google.

Apparently, we differ in philosophy. You believe the end justifies the means:

I'd rather have an arrogant president that's transforming the university into a great academic institution, than a humble president that creates a mediocre one any day!

I don't think it has to be one or the other. How about a humble president who transforms the university into a great academic institution.

I'm already not warm to Dobelle based on what I've read so far. But, like I said, we'll just have to see what the Regents have to say. I probably will save further discussion until that time.

[LikaNui]

Re: Evan Dobelle: Fair "firing" ?

>> Mentioning that Dobelle limited the contract to $99,999, contracted a friend and asked about the public's perception of himself is all innuendo. <<

Not innuendo, but fact, apparently. The report said that there was a handwritten note from Dobelle on the contract itself saying it had to stay under $99,999! Assuming the report is true, then it's certainly not innuendo. It's only surprising that Dobelle did that and left himself wide open to such a flagrant case of cronyism and such a glaring example of trying to beat the system.
And that's just one of a whole lot of complaints about Dobelle, including his massive absenteeism from the state for extensive travel which brought precious little, if anything, for UH in return. Plus his intentionally missing not one but two regent meetings to discuss his position; how the regents rescheduled a meeting at his request and then he still skipped it; how it was Dobelle himself who insisted that the meetings be closed to the press and public, etc. etc.
The truth is out there. We just won't know it until the mediation is finished and the parties are allowed to speak.
BTW, I recall some media reports that when Dobelle left his prior job the staff and teachers held a "thank God he's gone" party; it would be interesting to get more factual details on that, as well.

[Jazzaloha]

Re: Evan Dobelle: Fair &quot;firing&quot; ?

Ruth,

So you're saying the contract for the UH faculty was not good? Most people seem to believe that the contract was a pretty good one. I would like to see how it compares with faculty at other universities.

I don't know if I'm saying "the ends justifies the means." What I'm saying is that performance matters. Furthermore, performance, ultimately, matters more than if a president is arrogant or not. (How do we define arrogance anyway? I don't think there are many successful executives that have not been accused of being arrogant. There's a fine line between arrogance and confidence.) Sure, I would prefer a president that is humble and performs well, but I would not oust a president that can deliver the goods just because he/she is arrogant. Let's flesh out what I mean by "delivering the goods." I'm talking about a university that provides a top notch education and a set of marketable skills for more of Hawaii's citizens; about a institution that helps diversify the economy--perhaps developing ideas and industries in health care, agriculture, film, sustainable energy and envrionmental issues; and a university that strengthens Native Hawaiian culture. I'd tolerate some arrogance if a president could bring these things about.

I hope you don't feel like I'm attacking you, but I wanted to comment on one other thing you said earlier:

"For instance, I would think (or *hope*) there are leaders out there who can develop a strategic plan for UH without doing so by means of having us pay for overpriced Bachmannite friends."

I don't think you have to overpay friends to get a good strategic plan, but I think you have to pay a significant amount to get talented people that can develop a good strategic plan. I think good administrators/managers are really crucial to running a successful organization, and if you want really competant individuals you have to pay a considerable amount to get them (or else they leave to go the private sector).

Lika,

What is innuendo is that Dobelle did something improper and scandalous. Those facts, by themselves, hardly prove that. The writer makes it appear as if he did something wrong, and the article is written that way, too.

The fact that he went $1 under the amount that would require approval (or scrutiny) from the BOR is not something wrong in and of itself. The effective principals, public administrators "beat the system" everyday just to do a good job. You wouldn't be able to function if you had to follow every single procedure and rule in bureaucracy. Many public administrators find loop-holes or play with the procedures just to function. I don't know if you remember Pat Hamamoto's speech to the Legislature, but she talked about principals and administrators in the DOE having to work around the system. Now, there are times when people work around the system from bad motives. That is something we should not condone. But the fact that people manipulate the system, does not mean they have actually committed something that they should be punished for.

The fact that he hired a friend is not bad in and of itself either. Is that friend a respected professional in the field? Are the fees he charged typical to the services he provided? Is it not unnusual for other universities to conduct such polls? Did the friend actually provide a valuable service and a reasonable cost?

If the Starbulletin dug up facts that showed Dobelle hired someone who was not highly regarded, paid that person a fee that is way above typical fees, and that many well-respected university officials would call such a poll a waste of money, than I believe that is scandalous and Dobelle should be blasted for that. But without these kinds of details, it's just innuendo.

Regarding the absenteeism, I don't know if that's something good or bad. I'd also like to know more details. What was he doing while he was away, and what happened as a result? Did his absence hurt the running of the university?

Regarding his skipping meetings. I think he bears responsibility for that. Those incidents you mention suggest that he and the board were having difficulties. Where the blame lies is not clear.

I would argue that without the facts to the above questions the facts that the starbulletin did print, along with the way they wrote the piece, is innuendo.

[pzarquon]

Re: Evan Dobelle: Fair &quot;firing&quot; ?

There's a fairly long piece in tomorrow's issue of The Chronicle of Higher Educationabout this whole brouhaha: Wipeout in Hawaii. It's always helpful to see how a tempest in a teapot looks like from afar. Dobelle has some choice quotes:

Mr. Dobelle chalks his problems up to micromanagement by regents who were resistant to change. "It's time for them to come off the plantation," says Mr. Dobelle, who characterizes his firing not as a squabble between a board and a president but "a battle for the soul of Hawaii."

Mr. Dobelle, 59, is quick to point out his accomplishments, saying he has turned the university system around. "I accomplished everything I set out to do," he says, seated on the verandah of the presidential house on a green hillside near Waikiki Beach. "I launched a new era."

Hmm. Manoa Valley is near Waikiki Beach? I suppose by Mainland standards...

[Mocha]

Re: Evan Dobelle: Fair &quot;firing&quot; ?

Very interesting Pzarquon! I didn't know that Evan Dobelle did not have a doctorate and assumed that having a doctorate was a requirement. Thanks for the link...more to come I guess in this on-going saga.