DeanWuBlog

Communications

One of the most difficult aspects of the role as Dean is striking an appropriate balance in serving as the public face of the institution, especially with regard to subjects that are controversial, events that present a crisis, and criticism of decision-making. There is a new norm emerging, ironically perhaps due to technology such as blogging, of heightened public expectations of not only transparency in our operations but also immediacy of communications. I have tried as much as possible to be open as well as open-minded, to ensure I am accessible to our stakeholders as well as engaged with them, and to encourage everyone else with whom I work to do the same.

Yet I know I must to some extent maintain discretion, even -- indeed especially -- in the face of requests and demands for information and opinions. From time to time, people ask that I make a statement about a partisan political issue, pending legislation, recent judicial decisions, and so on, or they wonder how we made choices about our institutional policies. Most recently, I am aware there has been quite a bit of activity regarding a candidate for a faculty position who has had a callback interview on campus. This has attracted national media attention.

In many instances, it would be inappropriate for me to speak freely. There are many reasons. In some instances, I hold personal beliefs that are and should remain irrelevant to my work. For example, I don't generally discuss my religious affiliation. I must be sensitive to my responsibilities to the institution, including ensuring its continuing advancement by raising funds but extending beyond that task. If I placed my own views above these duties, I might appeal to some constituency groups but I would lose effectiveness as a Dean overall. In other instances, there are matters that are committed to various officials, and there is a process for deliberation that must be respected. It may be more appropriate for the President of Wayne State University, not the Dean of the Law School, to address some topics, or it may be necessary for me to preside over a democratic process by which the faculty determines our course of action. In these situations, there may be regulations that govern me, privacy considerations with respect to the parties involved, or simply the need for good timing and avoiding premature announcements. As to faculty appointments, I've previously explained in this blog that, as at most law schools, it is the faculty who determine whether to authorize an offer of employment to candidates for a tenured/tenure-track position. The Dean does not vote on these matters; nor does the Associate Dean. I follow a strict policy of not commenting publicly on any pending personnel matters, including consideration of individuals for faculty appointments, and I typically do not even express a position to the faculty on specific applicants.

Our students who are training to join the legal profession should understand these constraints, because members of the bar are required in virtually all contexts to maintain attorney-client confidences. These norms may not be popular with the public at large, but they have proven crucial to the ability to serve in a representative capacity.

So too for a law school dean.