Crimson-Faced, Part II

Apparently, things have not quieted down for Harvard president Larry Summers.  You'll recall that last month, he gave a speech about women's abilities in science and mathematics that created quite a furor.

Today's New York Times contains an article (sub. req.) describing yesterday's meeting of the faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences.  Suffice it to say things didn't go all that well for Larry. You notice the seasick smile in this photo?  And, this was taken before the meeting.

The Times headline reads, "Professors at Harvard Confront its President."  No unnamed sources here; the opposition is squarely out in the open.  Here's Dr. Arthur Kleinman, chairman of the department of anthropology:

"Many of your faculty are dismayed and alienated and demoralized," ... [Kleinman] said at the meeting, referring to a "crisis concerning your style of leadership and governance."

Uh, oh.  "Style of leadership and govenance"...hmm, that sounds familiar, doesn't it?

More from the Times:

"I've never seen a faculty meeting like it," said Diana Eck, a professor of comparative religion and Indian studies. "So many people stood and spoke from the heart about how they felt about his leadership." 

Professor Eck recounted part of what she had said: "My question, Mr. President, is one I ask only with reluctance and respect: how will you now respond to what is clearly a widening crisis of confidence in your fitness to lead our university?"

Oh shit, "reluctance and respect," "widening crisis."  This is not for the feint-hearted.

Dr. Summers, who has often been confrontational in his meetings with the faculty, began by apologizing yet again for his remarks and then seemed to take pains to listen. "If I could turn back the clock, I would have said and done things very differently," he said, according to The Harvard Crimson, the only newspaper allowed to attend such meetings.

OK, "tak[ing] pains to listen," that's good.

Several, including Barbara J. Grosz, chairwoman of a new task force on women in science and engineering, called on Dr. Summers to release a transcript of his remarks about science and women. Theda Skocpol, a professor of government and sociology, said, "President Summers appears to be apologizing profusely, yet he refuses to release for honest discussion his actual remarks." The result was that commentators have cast his critics as "unreasonable opponents of academic inquiry and openness," with Harvard "ridiculed as a center of close-minded political correctness."

Doh!  He hasn't done that yet??  I just thought I'd missed it!

Lawrence Katz, an economics professor and admirer of Dr. Summers, said afterward that he thought Dr. Summers was "humble and forthcoming, and he clearly articulated that he in no way intends to intimidate."

Well, that's unintentional intimidation; no harm, no foul...right?

In the last several days, the faculty has been preoccupied with the outcome of Tuesday's meeting.

"It's as if the business of the university has ground to a halt until this matter is resolved," said Prof. Henry Louis Gates, the chairman of the African American and African studies department, adding, "It is clear that much of President Summers's legacy will be determined by how he deals with this crisis."

Yikes!  "Preoccupied," "legacy determined."  That's not that good, right?

Wow, pretty amazing stuff.  So, what are those of us outside Cambridge to make of this?  The pattern continues:

1. Screw up
2. Get caught
3. Stonewall
4. Blame others
5. Express regret
6. Hope it blows over
7. Resign

How often do we have to see this pattern before the actual remedy is clear:

1. Don't be a jerk

If you violate rule #1, consider these:

1. Listen carefully
2. Own up fast
3. Listen some more
4. Get everything out, fast
5. Keep listening
6. Keep owning up

TrueTalk, it's simple, but it's obviously not easy.

Comments

[Aleah]

I'd say, if I am following your definition of true talk, some will get in trouble for their expression of their sincere beliefs. My advice to people with extremely strong and unpopular sentiments - run your own business on your own terms. Do not sit on a committee, serve as a chair, or participate in anything resembling democracy.

This leaves you two prime role models for blindly narcissistic, sincere assholishness: Donald Trump and President Bush.

[Tom Guarriello]

Good to hear from you again, Aleah.

We'll do a TrueTalk definition blog soon, but meanwhile you're pointing to an unfortunate development when you allude to the problems with democracy and truth: if you want to get elected, play the game.

Or, as you eloquently put it, go the blind narcissistic sincere asshole route!

For more on TrueTalk, check out our Web site.

[Connie Sartain]

He's toast. The first rule of business is to please your boss (more about whether Ms. Carly should have done this in the earlier post about her.) The second rule of business is to do what you have to do behind closed doors, i.e.'no confrontation'. If you're seen in a fight, nobody wins. Simple as that. Your authority has been questioned, by definition, spoiling the illusion of your in-charge reputation. Once the illusion is gone...the authority is gone. It was a figment of our imaginations.

Harvard may actually be demonstrating the real leadership they've previously only given lip service to...collaboration and creativity. Both are coming from the people who are capable of it...a group that obviously does NOT include the willfully blind President.

Who has more at stake in creating change? Certainly not the willfuly blind President, but rather those who would benefit from greater vision.

I sincerely believe that if there is to be change, real change in business or our hidebound government, women will be the catalyst. Here's why.

In fields where women are achieving parity - and that is what is at stake at Harvard, and in education - there have been profound leaps in thinking. In medicine, for example, gender specific medicine has revealed extraordinary differences in body functions, not just reproductive, but heart and digestive systems as well. If you connect the dots...you end up w/ mind body connection. There is evidence of a distinct feminine consciousness.

The issue, however, is not the differences in the genders - not which one is superior at math, science or tiddlywinks - but how they work together.

To explain, it takes both eyes to achieve depth perception. One sees to the left; the other to the right. It is the tension between the two that creates depth perception and changes the way we see and experience the world.

The greatest contribution of the feminist movement has been to create tension. So, the professor who walked out of Summer's speech walked the walk. And Rosa Parks walked the walk. And we can walk with them.

Sometimes we're lucky enough to see the process of change, playing out on the front page of a national newspaper, and now we have a space of our own - a room of our own - to join the conversation or change it.