Which Reminds Me
All this talk of fundraising invariably leads the mind to the subject of Neil Rudenstine, now comfortably ensconced in a Princeton study (or so one assumes).
And so, in a feast of self-promotion, I direct you to
the piece about Rudenstine I wrote for the Crimson following the women-in-science fiasco last winter.
And I quote:
Neil Rudenstine may not have had the kind of agenda that produces glowing headlines, but he did accomplish what he set out to do. And that begs the question of whether his diplomatic leadership style might not be better suited to advancing the university’s agenda than the more pugnacious style of its current president.To be fair, President Summers’ advocates say that his bull-in-a-china-shop style is exactly what Harvard needs. The rhetoric of that argument is powerful, but the logic curious. After all, Summers has repeatedly sandbagged his own agenda by igniting pointless and distracting controversies. In other instances, such as the curricular review, President Summers’ insular leadership has probably made his work less successful rather than more. What, exactly, has Larry Summers done that Neil Rudenstine could not have also accomplished, and without the trauma?
As it searches for a new president, Harvard doesn't want another Rudenstine, and it certainly doesn't want another Summers. But the question of leadership style and its relationship to goals accomplished (or not) is certainly one the presidential search committee (who are they, by the way?) should be considering.
