Dear Editor,
Everyone knows that when more tasks, more projects, more assignments, and more work is given to them that their focus, attention, and time would be more divided - less - for each individual task. It is common sense. An excessive workload can result in significant drops in job performance. Just common sense.
Yet, we are being asked to believe in this tragicomical absurdity: that loading up a single person/position with significantly more work that “provide(s) our Andrews University diversity officer with an expanded title and role” would, against all commonsense and all lived experiences, magically enhance the necessary work and stewardship of diversity at Andrews University.
Every student knows that there is a huge difference in focus, attention, and time management between taking 2 credits and 16 credits. Every administrator, every homemaker, every dogcatcher, lemon juice vendor, multinational corporation CEO, Prime Minister, or President, knows the inverse ‘mathematical’ relationship of this universal truth: the more you have to do, the less you can focus on each individual task. Everybody knows it, that’s why it’s called commonsense.
This newly proposed Assistant to the President position according to the posted job description will be involved in and tasked with at least 16 responsibilities. In addition to being the chief diversity officer they are also assigned the following: university mission (still undefined), university culture (still nebulous), spiritual leadership, administrative leadership, academic leadership, missional activities liaison, multiple reporting functions, institutional change officer, conflict resolution, policy development, initiatives implementation, diversity training coordinator, multicultural coordinating and mentoring, recruitment and retention strategies for underrepresented populations, curricular and instructional infusion of diversity, and Title VII compliance.
Can any single individual you know realistically do all these tasks and assignments? Is there any person that has all these capabilities and skills? Is there any person with all these qualifications and experiences? How can a single person do all this? How can they do all this well? How can they do all this while enhancing the work, stewardship, performance, and results of being chief diversity officer? This position as it is currently described is by commonsense set up to fail by virtue of its excessive workload. It is not an upgrade but a major downgrade of our diversity commitment as a university that significantly benefits in revenue and reputation from diversity. This position is ill-conceived, unrealistic, and destined to fail, based on simple commonsense. It unnecessarily messes with a goose – diversity - that lays one of AU’s golden eggs.
To make matters even worse, many of the responsibilities listed in the job description encroach on established positions and portfolios already held by experienced and qualified persons within our university administrative and staff structure. What are the limitations, demarcations, and specific guidelines addressing the encroachments built into this proposed position. It basically sets up organizational chaos and confusion, which its launch is unmistakably engendering, on and off campus. Together, chaos and confusion, is perhaps now its singular crowning achievement. 1 Corinthians 14:33 is crystal clear that “God is not the author of confusion, but of peace.”
As a chemist, I know dilution. I know concentration, I know density. This newly proposed position is dilution, plain and simple. It effectively and practically demotes the priority, position, importance, and commitment to diversity, at exactly a time when greater focus and attention, stewardship and time is needed in the form and functions of a Vice President for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion at Andrews University. The diversity density function at Andrews University is precipitating exponentially. It could impact our demographics, brand, reputation, and revenue. Most everybody knows it. US News & World Report surveys and rankings will reflect it. For most of us, this is just common sense. And so will be the consequences. Is this the side of history we really want to be on?
Desmond Hartwell Murray
Associate Professor of Chemistry
The Student Movement welcomes submission of thoughtfully written letters by current members of the Andrews University community (students/staff/faculty). Our next issue will be published in late January. Published letters may be lightly copy-edited. Submit to smeditor@andrews.edu
The Student Movement is the official student newspaper of Andrews University. Opinions expressed in the Student Movement are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the editors, Andrews University or the Seventh-day Adventist church.