SCUP’s Proposed New
Governance Structure

• You will be asked to vote for amendments to the bylaws in late September 2012. The bylaw changes will be published online in August for your review.
• You will still vote for candidates for the board of directors and for your regional representative.
• You will still be able to volunteer to serve on the national council or one of its supporting volunteer groups.

As a result of these changes, we believe that SCUP will be a stronger, more flexible organization with great events and professional development opportunities and that it will attract a wider audience from areas of campus that represent all four of the society’s planning academies, which translates into a better and broader planning experience for all of our members.

For many good reasons:

• SCUP is not organized effectively to achieve its vision of being the premier organization for the advancement of integrated planning in higher education.
• SCUP has essentially had the same governance process as when it was founded nearly 50 years ago. Governance best practices have evolved significantly in the past 10-15 years.
• The planning environment in higher education has changed significantly over the past 50 years. Sharpening its strategic focus is essential for SCUP to keep pace with the monumental changes brought on by evolving technology, demographics, and funding.
• The society has never comprehensively evaluated its governance structure and process, though it has periodically reviewed and tweaked board composition and roles.
• There is a limited pool of available candidates for time-intensive volunteer leadership and governance roles.
• Governance experience/expertise has not been a major factor in considering potential board nominees.
• SCUP has not rigorously trained its board members in governance best practices, nor has it rigorously assessed board and director effectiveness.
• Current board discussions generally focus on operational issues rather than mission fulfillment and organizational strategy.

The timing was right. First, with our immediate past president, Tom Longin, we had the skill set to accomplish this monumental task. Longin is a senior consultant for the Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges (AGB) with expertise in restructuring governing boards in higher education. Second, as SCUP prepares to celebrate its 50th anniversary in 2015, we felt it was a good time to introduce change in order to ensure that the society will continue to thrive in its next 50 years. Professional associations everywhere are being challenged to demonstrate their value to new generations who may not share the same interests as association-joining "baby boomers." Now is the time for SCUP to position itself with a board of directors that is strategic in focus, and to keep the energy and enthusiasm of our volunteers alive and well in a national council.

The work began with an October 2011 board retreat on governance facilitated by an external governance consultant. The board was asked, “Is SCUP achieving its vision of being the premier organization for the advancement of integrated planning in higher education?” and “Is SCUP’s board and governance structure organized effectively to carry out that work?” The board agreed that SCUP had made progress in achieving its vision but much work remained to be done. A task force was formed and provided the board with initial recommendations in April 2012. A second governance consultant was hired to critique the recommendations. The board approved the final proposal at its July 7, 2012 meeting.

Yes, members will still elect new members to the society’s board of directors annually by voting on a single slate of candidates. The board’s governance and leadership committee, on an ongoing basis, will be responsible for identifying, attracting, and cultivating the best possible future SCUP leaders based on their qualifications and professional expertise. The board is striving for balance that mirrors SCUP’s values and its vision of integrated planning. Candidates will represent academic and strategic planning, finance and budgeting, development, institutional research, and technology, in addition to facilities and master planning.

Members can vote down the single slate or submit and vote for write-in candidates, but we are confident that these actions won’t be necessary. We believe that pulling together strategic minds from across the academy and from firms that serve the academy will truly represent the diversity of SCUP membership, attract new members from underrepresented non-facilities areas, and result in higher member satisfaction and retention.

The board of directors seeks to address the current overrepresentation of particular disciplines or types of institutions among candidates that results from an election process that is not focused on strategic leadership and effective governance. Under the current nominating system, SCUP is not assured of achieving a diverse balance of candidates. The proposed changes should decrease the randomness of the current process and help ensure that an “old boys network” doesn’t develop.