Alpha Partners advocate less student control
ASUCLA politics and short turnover hindered business
By Patrick Kerkstra
Daily Bruin Staff
For the first time in 14 years, the associated students’ Board
of Directors met without Jason Reed serving as executive director
of the organization. The difference on Friday was startling.
The tense, worried atmosphere that characterized so many of the
board’s earlier meetings this year was gone. Since Reed’s dismissal
on April 24, optimism and good humor has charged many association
officials.
Friday’s meeting was indicative of the association’s apparent
cultural change as well. Board members briskly and enthusiastically
conducted their business, finishing the meeting in three hours and
40 minutes, one of the shorter meetings this year.
Only slightly less surprising than the difference in atmosphere
were the dramatic changes the Alpha Partners turnaround consultants
said the board should consider.
Serving as the interim executive directors of the organization,
the consultants proposed the formation of a "Committee to
Restructure ASUCLA." The committee’s express purpose is to take a
look at the mission and basic structure of the associated
students.
"There are some competing theories on ASUCLA’s decline," Alpha
Partner Charles Mack said.
"There’s the theory that maybe there are some leadership
problems at ASUCLA on the management levels  on the other
hand, there’s the theory that there are some structural elements in
place which are fundamentally flawed and require a more drastic fix
from an organization and mission standpoint," he continued.
However, it was clear the consultants think the student majority
board should be further removed from the day-to-day operation of
the company.
One of the problems association managers encounter constantly is
the changing nature of the board and the impact that has on
business projects, the consultants said. Historically, a board will
set guidelines and long-term strategic goals, only to see next
year’s board change them, Mack said.
"You cannot underestimate the impact of the stop-and-go
environment that management has been subjected to. I would
encourage manager and board members to have candid conversations
and relay some of their experiences with the chilling impact the
stop- and-go environment has on business," Mack said.
In a report given to the board and others present at the meeting
titled, "What’s wrong with ASUCLA anyway?" the association urged
the board to "Insulate the business decision-making process of
ASUCLA from the political concerns of the student governments."
But the presence of York Chang and Todd Sargent at the meeting,
two of the candidates for next year’s undergraduate presidency,
indicated that the future of the associated students’ probably
would be an important political issue next year.
Both candidates were leery of some of the consultants’ language
and intentions.
"It seems they really want to take ASUCLA in the direction of a
company that reaps its profits from students. But the whole reason
of ASUCLA is to prioritize student needs above profit and capital
investments. We need to find a middle ground to make ASUCLA
financially viable, but student-oriented, too," Chang said.
Sargent was concerned particularly with the consultants’
suggestions to weaken student control.
"I have a strong concern for an associated students that doesn’t
take students as the primary decision-makers, or at least important
decision-makers. I definitely think students know what it will take
to make ASUCLA work again," Sargent said.
Either Chang, Sargent or the third candidate, Joel Elad, will
serve as the board chair next year. The undergraduate president
appoints the other undergraduate representatives as well.
The consultants repeatedly likened the board to "a mining
company run by environmentalists." With this reference, they tried
to explain the conflicts in operating a successful business while
focusing on short-term student benefits instead of capital
investment.
Current board members also immediately raised concerns about
maintaining student involvement in the organization. George Brown,
an influential faculty representative on the board, said after the
meeting that the board was unlikely to enact any major changes that
would move it away from student control.
Student representatives on the board also expressed reservations
about the plans.
"I do believe that political concerns sometimes hinder the board
and work against an effective association, but at the same time you
need to remember that first and foremost this is the students’
association, and students should be at the forefront," said Rob
Greenhalgh, undergraduate president.
The end result of the discussion was essentially an agreement to
let the newly formed committee come to the next board meeting with
a list of proposed changes.
In the same written report, Alpha Partners also targeted the
association’s belief that it could "do it all" Â meaning the
organization could maintain a successful company while at the same
time offer low prices and discounts to students. In their report,
the consultants pointed to the favorable business climate of the
1980s as the probable source of what they called the organization’s
unrealistic expectations.
But as expenses rose and growth slowed, the association chose
the short-term benefits of low prices over capital projects. The
consultants believe that was a critical mistake.
For years the association’s facilities were neglected, and new
business ventures were kept at a minimum.
Mack and Drumwright intend to reverse that immediately. At the
meeting, the association’s leaders presented a list of physical
improvements they’d like to make. The improvements totaled over $11
million.
Despite the debate over student involvement and the $11 million
in proposed improvements, the pervading feeling was one of
cooperation and goodwill.
The committee considering changes in the association’s structure
also agreed to meet in public. Their suggestions will be discussed
at the next board meeting.