From the Editor

Posted by admin on Nov 24, 2005 in From the Editor | 0 comments

The sexual harassment complaint against Trinity Western University and its president, Neil Snider, has been resolved. As part of the resolution, TWU and the president delivered apologies to the complainant, and the university agreed to make certain changes to its policies and procedures and to conduct an internal review to determine whether any further changes are necessary.

While an in-depth review of the governing structures of our university is essential, it is impossible to see how the Board of Governors can adequately perform such a review on their own. Despite its quick resolution, it is incumbent upon the Board to seek out an open and external review to determine the root causes of this matter.

Dr. Guy Saffold, Executive Vice President, has indicated that one of the changes will be in regards to the university’s harassment procedure, particularly the procedure for dealing with a harassment complaint that concerns a senior person. Currently, the procedure for investigating such a complaint is inadequate, because as Saffold said, “We can’t investigate ourselves and have everybody take the outcome very seriously.” This does not just apply to individuals. An investigation into the allegations brought against the university cannot be conducted by the university itself and still maintain credibility.

When the complaint was filed, the Board of Governors established an internal Enquiry Committee to examine the allegations against both the president and the university. An initial report from this committee identified several areas of needed change, including the Board’s governance of the university, leadership style, and the administrative work environment.

Now that these areas have been identified, it is difficult to see how the board can continue to investigate itself and still be taken seriously. If the problem is one of board governance and leadership styles, how can the Board and our leaders do an adequate job of providing solutions? An investigation of the Board by the Board does not make sense.

In the last issue of Mars’ Hill, James Moes, President of TWUSA, published a statement that advocated for “an independent third-party investigation of the relational dynamics of the university’s Administration and Board of Governors,” and called for “openness to the whole community.”

An open, third-party investigation would be in the best interest of all the stakeholders of this university. As I wrote in my previous editorial, it would be distant enough from the problem to provide an accurate assessment. It would show our broader community that TWU is a stellar institution with nothing to hide. And it would give our community a common language in which to address the issue, as free from bias as possible.

In a letter to the community, Allan Hedberg, Chairman of the Board of Governors, wrote “I would like to express to the entire University community that the Board of Governors regrets and apologizes for our failings as a board in our active governance of the University.”

The first step in renewing a commitment to active governance is to listen to the constituency that you govern. At TWU, a large part of that constituency is the student body. This student body has spoken through its official mouthiece, TWUSA, and the message is clear: it is time for an open and independent investigation into the systems of accountability and power structures of this university.