Task Force Minutes

MICHIGAN TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY - MUB ROOM 105

May 22, 1997

Jim Mitchell ‘65, President Elect, Board of Control opened the meeting at 9:05 am. Everyone introduced himself/herself and stated their job.

Mitchell remarked that we are here to begin planning for a major campaign. Our goal is to make MTU a leader and a premier university. MTU must become more like a private college in the way it raises money. The state now provides 39% of MTU’s operating budget, which is down from 67% twenty years ago. We need to take a fresh look at what we are doing and what we should be doing. This process will help form a strategic plan for MTU.

Dick Miller was introduced as the facilitator and Gary Anderson as campaign chair.

CAMPAIGN OVERVIEW - Gary Anderson

Anderson said he, Dick Miller, and Dave Hartley were representing the Michigan Tech Fund Board of Trustees. It has been about 10 years since we had a capital campaign so we are building from scratch. We have a big task ahead of us - it will be a five year activity. We need to develop a campaign mission and to have a very clear, concise vision. The role of this group is to define the vision. We need to look at the projects and prioritize them. We are looking at maybe a $100 M campaign, but we don’t know that now. Between now and the August and October meetings, we need to finalize our mission and vision. Our consulting firm of Bentz Whaley Flessner will talk with alumni, corporations, etc. to test the market at year end to see if they will support our projects to find if we are on target. When they give us a report, we will set a dollar goal.

We are now in the silent phase of the campaign. In 1999, the campaign will go public. We need an organized program to submit. We are trying to clean up on the four current building projects (Dow Bldg., Meese Center, Forestry Bldg., PAC).

Kim Maxwell, Michigan Tech Fund executive director, said the Michigan Tech Fund is the entity which raises funds for the university. The first step was to go forward with a campaign; it is a major undertaking. The task force will pass information on the campaign priorities to the capital campaign committee. The task force’ effort is to:

1) Prioritize the projects and see how they can be supported

2) Communicate campaign priorities to the campus

3) Move this university from what it is today to another level of excellence

Anderson said that another goal we want to accomplish is to keep raising funds after the campaign is over. We want to work together to continue raising funds and to make us stronger for the next campaign. We are asking the deans and department heads to be a part of this success.

Mitchell introduced President Curt Tompkins to talk about the mission and vision statement.

REVIEW MISSION AND VISION STATEMENTS - President Curt Tompkins

(Refer to handout Capital Campaign Task Force.)

The university’s goals are to be a premier, world-class public technological university, learning in a global context, and leading in engineering, science, and related fields.

Tompkins stated that Mining Engineering, Computer Engineering, and Biomedical Engineering will become MTU’s strongest programs.

Areas of special attention will be:

_ Integrated Manufacturing Systems

_ Initiative for the Environment

_ Academic Excellence and Affordability

_ Graduate Studies and Research

_ Fine Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences

_ Global Relationships

_ Infrastructure

Fred Dobney and others are working on updating the university’s master plan. We need to have a strategic plan to drive the master plan. $75.5 million in building projects are being wrapped up ($14M Dow Bldg., $15M PAC, $2.5M Forestry, $1.5 M Meese Center). All this brings us back to MTU becoming a world-class university.

Mitchell stated that the ability to raise $33 million for building projects is a milestone. MTU had lead the way in the state of Michigan justifying requiring a 25% match on all the buildings.

We need to take responsibility that the Basic Sciences - Mathematics, Chemistry, Physics, Biological Sciences - are strong at the university. We will eventually become a Research I university. This will just happen.

Tompkins continued that he hopes that our graduate programs will become ranked and the academic quality at MTU will continue to be a "best buy."

Anderson said he looked at the CASE Statements from other institutions that were available. We need to really focus on our commitments and have practical realities. Brochures are looking at the history - this campaign is the future, and we need to look at the future and preserve the past. How do we prioritize?

MISSION/VISION - Dick Miller, Facilitator

Comments/Concerns:

_ Radecki said he sees disconnect in committee charge

_ Fund with: 1) operating budget vs. 2) campaign 3) leveraged campaign dollars

_ 34 tents vs. subset of 34 tents - need to match with value statement

_ Felt disconnect - student + faculty vs. programs; education aspect - focus on people first vs. programs

_ Build history - people, faculty, and students

_ Past to six tents (stakes)

_ History - people - 6 tents (core competencies)

_ Radecki said he disagrees with six tents - we need to have more

_ Janice Glime said we need to have tents that say something other than engineering - add part of our mission statement

_ Use phrases of mission statement vs. six tents (need a theme)

_ Use themes vs. stakes. Under each theme list priorities

Howard Zollinger said MTU engineers are known to be practical and they hit the ground running. Alumni recognize that is something that sets MTU apart. Tahtinen stated that we need to find what is unique about MTU and we need to keep the word engineering in our statements.

_ Engineering and Wood Research theme

Barry Kunz said we need to differentiate between undergraduate education vs. excellent education and excellent at education vs. undergraduate education.

Steve Hackney talked about student involvement in technology such as the future car.

_ Sell practical projects - example, future car

_ "unsurpassed education" is a theme

_ creation and transmission of knowledge

Maxwell said to think of themes and values that tie into the strategic plan. Sellars said we are still looking at generalities, but we will have to make choices. John Crittenden said we need to start with our core strengths; we need to identify our core strengths.

_ define uniqueness and strength

Tompkins asked if we missed something. Mitchell said we have not mentioned the Center for Innovation. Tompkins’ response was to pass that on to Sellars any ideas you have.

STRATEGIC PLAN AND BENCHMARKING - Fred Dobney

(Refer to handout Strategic Plan Purpose)

_ Need to move beyond long-range planning to an implementation phase

_ Stimulate unit planning activities

_ Provide a process and context for prioritizing budget initiatives

_ Provide a mechanism for evaluating unit progress toward articulated goals and objectives

_ Enhance communication within the university community

Dobney discussed the following:

_ Structure of MTU’s strategic planning document

_ University Goals

_ Carnegie Classifications

_ Quantitative Context for Planning 2003

_ Strategic Planning and Budgeting

_ AGB Priorities

_ Benchmarking Institutions and Measures

_ NCA Self-Study

Miller asked if the NCA self-study in our goals? No, as it has just recently been completed. The study will be used to redefine our goals.

Rhonda Miklian said we have a lot of student leaders and need to recognize them. Dobney said we need to tell our alumni and industry about them when asking for support. Miklian brought up accountability - we need to emphasize the quality programs, faculty, and students.

Dobney said our goals should be:

_ Campaign must be accountable

_ NCA study is new criteria

_ Interdisciplinary, teams, communication skills, global appreciation, systems thinking, hands-on

_ How we connect with the outside world - coops, etc., partnering for innovation

How do you support goals? We must be careful in the communication we give to the outside world. We need to connect with the outside world.

RECAP OF BENCHMARK INSTITUTION’S CASE STATEMENTS - John Sellars

John Sellars talked about the benchmark institutions (refer to beige handout Recap of Benchmark Institutions Case Statements). He stated that there will be a couple projects added to the project list that have been recently received.

Some benchmark institutions and their campaign goals are:

_ Cornell University - $1.25 Billion

_ Georgia Tech - $400 Million

_ Purdue University - $250 Million

_ Iowa State - $300 Million

_ Clemson University - $200 Million

_ Colorado School of Mines - $ 60 Million

_ Lehigh University - $300 Million

_ PRI - $200 Million

_ Michigan Technological Univ. - $100 Million ???

We are in the process of looking at the wealth of our alumni and should have information by August 1. We have international students who have not been tapped; we have a long history of international students (since 1915).

MTU is talking of a $100 Million level campaign. We won’t know our capacity until the feasibility study is complete.

Similarities/Differences - what are the special needs of the university? Focus has changed in the last 10-15 years:

1) shift to endowments

2) private vs. public universities

3) the cultural differences

Take for example Georgia Tech, the state put money into education from the lottery.

MTU has high priorities.

Sellars passed out the Project Outline and the Criteria for funding projects.

Tahtinen said we need a broader view and longer term vision for facilities. The state will fund 75% of building projects, but will not be ready to do that again for probably five years from now. In 1999 proposals will be taken by the state, with eventual approval in 2002.

VISION/MISSION ACTIONS:

_ Did we miss anything? Attendees should submit to Sellars

_ Sort funding by: 1) operating funds 2) campaign funds 3) leverages funds (Sellars/Maxwell)

_ Document - Sellars/Maxwell/Seel/Warrington

- History - people (faculty, students, alumni)

- Themes come from mission/vision - specific projects

_ Themes are "practical engineers," best undergraduate education, etc.

_ Have team (Sellars/Maxwell/Seel/Warrington) rewrite vision/mission and publish to entire team for input prior to next meeting

REVIEW OF CAMPAIGN PRIORITIES - Dick Miller

Max Seel gave a report on Sciences and Arts. They did not list endowments on their project sheet.

Warrington passed out a summary of the College of Engineering projects and discussed them.

Gary McGinnis gave a report on the School of Forestry and Wood Products. Biotechnology is a leading edge are, he said. Three universities are setting up chairs in that area, and we could be on the cutting edge. Biotech includes the sciences, not just forestry. There is a gap between what industry needs and what we are giving them. Industry would like to help us bridge the gap with students between college and industry.

Tim Collins reported on the School of Technology. He discussed the reasons to upgrade the Programmable Controller Laboratory. Can cooperate with Computer Engineering Program and Integrated Manufacturing.

Gene Klippel discussed the five projects for the School of Business and Economics. They want to interface with industry and will need senior faculty to enhance their programs (chair funded). The pools have shrunk for business engineering students, and competition has increased. We need to at least stabilize enrollment by giving more full scholarships. Initial priority is to have the students. We need to talk with our alumni and develop relationships, and have started doing so.

Dobney discussed the General Academics priority projects - Athletics, Educational Opportunity, Library, Research and Students Affairs.

The committee wanted the projects organized by chairs, identify overlapping requests. Can we make the project easier by putting an endowed chair in each area? Is it important to have an endowed chair in each department? $40 million dollars would buy one chair in each department. Task Force would like to see the endowments in a list(faculty, students).

We need to:

1) articulate the needs of the university to the constituents

2) give alumni priorities and core areas that are critical to the university’s future.

3) look at where we want to spend our money.

We need everyone’s general agreement at the August meeting on the mission we are going to carry out and how we should break up the $100 million dollars.

If you had $100 million to spend....

_ Endowment Summary breakdown: faculty/students

_ Facilities: new buildings/construction projects within buildings

_ Initiatives: one-time expenses

Actions

1)Mission/vision update: a committee consisting of the two deans, John and Kim are to restructure the vision into themes so as to accommodate the university’s priorities under 5-6 themes versus 34 "tents." Completion date: June 17 and mail to entire committee for comments.

2)Deans are to prioritize projects and document a one paragraph description of each project...completion June 17 and mailed to entire committee.

3)Dobney...document financial payback/selection criteria. Also provide a financial overview on specific project benefits, especially on projects which cross departments across the university. Mail to entire committee on June 24.

4)Committee members...prioritize projects, facilities, and endowed chairs and return to Advancement by July 15.

NEXT MEETING: WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 6, 1997

MTU Memorial Union Bldg. - Room 105