Strategic Planning Committee Minutes, February 25, 2002

Strategic Planning (SPC) Committee Minutes
February 25, 2002

MEMBERS PRESENT:Bruce Morton, Greg Johnson, Betsy Centa, Mark Sheehan, Kay Chafey, Mary Noll, John Carlsten.

MEMBERS ABSENT: Bill Brown, Jon Wraith, Jaynee Groseth, Michelle McLendon.

OTHERS PRESENT: Ben Sharp.

The meeting was convened by Chair Bruce Morton at 3:00 PM.

ANNOUNCEMENTS:

• There will be no SPC meetings March 8, March 11, and March 15.
  
• Mark Sheehan will discuss IT issues at the March 22 meeting.
  
• The Chair is scheduled to report on the progress of SPC at tomorrow's UPBAC meeting.
  
• The Faculty Council minutes of February 20, 2002, report the Chair's discussion with the Council on that date.
  
• Colleges are providing their strategic plans for SPC. They are being distributed electronically.

• "SWOT"s will probably be revised over time. However, to have input into the FY 03 budget cycle, SPC needs to develop a list of what is most important for UPBAC to consider at this time.
  
• An issue important to strategic planning may be the need to resolve differences between the perceived strengths of a "comprehensive university" vs. "traditional strengths of the state".
  
• What does "comprehensive university" mean? It could mean a balance among the different areas of the university, not the offering of every program.
  
• Do Montanans really want a comprehensive university? Is the state large enough to have an excellent comprehensive university?
  
• Part of a university experience may be the opportunity for students to take part in different academic programs and find one for which they are well-suited. This fact makes an argument in favor of a comprehensive university.
  
• Several years ago, the Montana Board of Regents moved away from unique missions for various units of the University System. Does this lead to program proliferation across the system? Should units reconsider greater specialization?

• It useful for SPC to break the strategic planning time line into short and long-term segments. Budgetary decisions made now are the building blocks for later. Current opportunities that are lost affect future opportunities.
  
• The political climate must be considered when decisions are made.
  
• How does the university system and Montana State University gain strategic support? It needs to connect with the legislature, the people in the state, and potential in-state and out-of-state students. There needs to be broad agreement that quality higher education is important.
  
• It was suggested there be discussion with the Commissioner of Higher Education regarding moving back toward unique missions for the institutions in the university system. Another possibility is that MSU and UM have unique missions and that the two presidents mold the two systems by paying attention to the missions of the units under their supervision.
  
• As noted at the February 18 meeting, two working assumptions are that the universities will function in a state where populism and inadequate funding are realities.