Comments on: UBC’s Leadership Crisis Revealed in Unintentionally Leaked Gupta Docs

By: Peter

Peter — Thu, 11 Feb 2016 12:27:05 +0000

In my opinion the Deans’ statement on this matter published today is 500 words too long. They could have said what they wanted to say in just 3 words: “Crisis? What crisis?”

By: Oscar Pinto

Oscar Pinto — Wed, 03 Feb 2016 02:04:54 +0000

I think all of us at the UBC community should initiate a movement / petition to compel the Province holds an inquiry in the whole affair and makes it public. Then only will there be some corrective action in the whole Board.
A report with full transparency is due to all of us for the future good of the UBC.

By: Peter

Peter — Sat, 30 Jan 2016 21:42:39 +0000

Might we assume she (assuming she is a she) was taking her orders from Montalbano and his secret cabal (this cabal including the Chancellor)?

By: Dr. E

Dr. E — Sat, 30 Jan 2016 19:31:48 +0000

To “ex staff member” – Found your comment on “That said, the Board (especially the Board Liaison who was continually poking around units asking for feedback) had their own end game that was far more dubious than any actions Arvind ever took.” super interesting. I assume the liason is http://ubyssey.ca/salaries/employee/reny-kahlon – why would this person have any official reason to “poke around units asking for feedback”?

By: C

Sat, 30 Jan 2016 08:10:27 +0000

“We are deeply concerned that your office is not providing you with the information you need on a trusted and timely basis. The issue with the Dean’s in response to the Provost announcement was a catastrophic example that you are not either being informed in a timely manner or worse, the very people you are relying on are unable or currently not in a position to develop relationships of trust to provide you with the information you need prior to any major initiative.”

What Dean is referenced here and what did he/she say?

By: EX UBC STAFF MEMBER

EX UBC STAFF MEMBER — Fri, 29 Jan 2016 00:31:25 +0000

None of this is surprising.

Senior UBC admin had been very vocal within administrative units about their concerns with Arvind.

More interesting, however, was the lack of connection between Arvind’s executive staff (mainly Dave Hurford) and Arvind himself where information was intentionally withheld, manipulated, and selectively released to shape the man’s thinking.

Overall, he surrounded himself with the wrong staff, was in over his head, and was combative and over-confident in his treatment towards senior administration.

That said, the Board (especially the Board Liaison who was continually poking around units asking for feedback) had their own end game that was far more dubious than any actions Arvind ever took.

By: Ex UBC Employee

Ex UBC Employee — Thu, 28 Jan 2016 19:26:17 +0000

As a past UBC employee, there’s was always a sense that there was a boys club running things at UBC.

Now we see that the boys club has been exposed in these documents as the ad hoc board and predetermined that Arvind had to leave no matter what the president did or said.

Arvind’s mission was to make UBC a top 10 university. That doesn’t happen by being status quo and there had to be change. The board members resisted having their power upended.

By: M8

M8 — Thu, 28 Jan 2016 17:07:12 +0000

“change can induce anxiety and resistance. This is further magnified in a university setting; universities are places of great innovation, but also, historically, places which resist institutional and structural change [...] The current highly decentralized nature of UBC, often exaggerates this”

Having worked at both SFU and UBC in Management positions I can tell you that this is a statement of facts. I’ve witnessed million of dollars wasted because of resistance to changes by the power that be. The institutional culture at these two organization are so ingrained in the mentality of “this the way it has always been” that innovation and structural changes are nearly impossible to implement. Proven industry best practices are non-existent across the entire organization. It’s rather ironic that the institutions that are charged with furthering society are so slow to adapt to changes.

By: Sue

Sue — Thu, 28 Jan 2016 16:51:46 +0000

I think the entire board should resign along with Gupta. Gupta should have a second chance with a board whose opinion he trusts, because there was probably a lack of trust which led to the problems in this group.

By: Poppy

Poppy — Thu, 28 Jan 2016 12:30:20 +0000

@Emeritus.

Still the Board’s “disastrous mistake”, not Gupta’s.