Veronica Wilkerson Johnson

IDSL 895 - Assignment, Week 2

Board Policy Revision Process
June 27, 2014
On May 15, 2006, the Lansing Community College Board of Trustees adopted
a policy to insure that LCC partnerships with external entities would meet its
guidelines. The LCC Board operates under the John Carver Policy Governance
model. The specific policy guidelines for the partnership directive were
adopted (LCC Board Policies, 5-15-06):
Partnerships
I.

Purpose
Lansing Community College is committed to forging formal educational
partnerships and alliances which

lead to the betterment of educational possibilities for our students and for the
community;

enrich our own institutional and individual learning and development;

share mutually agreed upon goals;

can be shown to be mutually beneficial to all partners;

can be projected to succeed, and

can be adequately supported by College fiscal and human resources

II.

Scope
This policy applies to all College partnerships with academic institutions as
well as business and industry.

III.

General
The College will engage in such partnerships only with organizations which
maintain the standards of quality and service to which we hold ourselves. The
College should develop general guidelines to guide decision-making in the
establishment of formal partnerships and review partnerships regularly to be
sure that they are meeting the criteria described above.

Board Policy Revision Process, Page 2

IV.

Responsibility
V. The College's Provost is responsible for the monitoring and
implementation of this policy.
Failure to follow this policy may result in disciplinary action up
to and including termination.

The Board has the power to direct the executive leadership, the Provost in
this regard. The Provost faces a harsh penalty, which is spelled out, if the
end is not met. This is an extension beyond the previous policy that did not
as stringently guide on partnerships or penalties if policy adherence was not
maintained. It is conceived that real life concerns, such as the need for
responsible partnerships, bring about the need for policy revisions.
Somewhat conversely, in The Board and Its Policy Role (p. 89), Cindra Smith
stated "The board makes policy and the administration implements it." Smith
expounds further that effective boards stick to policy concerns and do not get
involved in the work of the college. Similar to John Carver's model, Smith
believes that "wise boards craft broad, future-oriented policies, which then
foster an environment that encourages staff creativity (p. 90)." Yet, Smith
encourages trustees to be active in their board's policy decisions, first
preparing themselves by investing time in learning how things get done at
the college, then respectfully sharing recommendations with the leadership
and staff (p. 94). Smith further states: "both the political and analytical
dimensions are important in policymaking. Relying on only one dimension will
result in weak policies. This balance is important in order to insure that
educational policies at the college are thoughtful, relevant, and responsive to
the needs of the students, staff and stakeholders who help to support the
institution. Also, Smith recommends a policymaking cycle: identify the need,
gather information, generate and assess policy alternatives, adopt the policy,
implement the policy, and monitor the policy (p. 97). And finally, Smith
recommends that board members ask relevant questions, including: why is
this policy change needed? What is wrong with the current policy? And what
are the implications of changing the current policy?
Smith's approach seems less stringent than the one taken by LCC regarding
the partnerships directive. This is a good example of how real life policy
guidelines in an organization do not always align with theoretical policy
approaches.
References:
Smith, C. (2000). Trusteeship in community colleges: a guide to effective
governance, Cindra J. Smith. January 1, 2000., p. 89.
Lansing Community College Policies. Adopted May 15, 2006. Lansing,
Michigan.
http://www.lcc.edu/policy/policies_7.aspx. Last retrieved 6-27-14

Comments
Feedback7/2/1412:48PM
HiVeronicaItwasuncleartomewhatpromptedtheBoardtoreviewthepolicy.Itisstatedthatthis
particularpolicywasadoptedto'meetitsguidelines'.Didtheguidelines(Purposes)change?Howdidyour
college'sadoptionofthepolicycomparetoSmith'scycle?I'malsoassumingthatIV.Responsibilityisnot
astandalonepoint,andthattheinformationinV.isactuallypartofIV.
Sue