The Boston College Office of Public Affairs
Boston College Chronicle  
Contact: smthsen@hermes.bc.edu
Date Posted: 9-06-96 
============================================================= 

Remarks by Executive Vice President Frank B. Campanella
Annual Faculty Convocation
Robsham Theater
Sept. 4, 1996


I want to talk today exclusively about Project Delta 
because it is so important to securing our future and because 
it will impact everyone here. But before I do, let me give 
you an update on our major near-term building projects: 
--  Middle Campus Project (approved by BRA and Mass. EPA)
Drawings are complete; we have Trustee approval and are 
poised to start digging.
Stalled in workload of Aldermanic Land Use Committee and 
limited neighborhood opposition.

Some things continue to confound me. Unlike other 
universities, our development strategy has been to build 
within the boundaries of our existing campuses, rather than 
acquire surrounding properties.  The middle campus project is 
a perfect example of employing that strategy.  Clearly it is 
our hope that we will be able to continue to pursue that 
strategy in Newton.

--  Higgins
					
Early stages of design Ñ Difficult but exciting project

--  Student Sport Center

Design complete--Architect developing drawings
Relocate utilities next Summer
Anticipate starting to drive piles for foundation early 
Spring 1998

--   Law School Classroom Wing

Design complete
Out to bid in April
Start construction next June.

INTRODUCTION TO DELTA

	Recent History	- Higher Ed last 20 years lots of "Cry 
Wolf"- BC Position- "Not a crisis"/plow ahead/get job done

	This is different- I believe a fundamental change to the 
economic structure of private Higher Ed has taken place, one 
that calls for bold initiatives.  Delta is a bold initiative 
that will call for "order-of-magnitude" changes.  Let there 
be no doubt that these changes will impact everyone here 
either directly or indirectly.

	That kind of change brings uncertainty.  We as humans 
don't like uncertainty and therefore resist change--both 
overtly and covertly.  For all of us, dealing with change of 
this magnitude will be a serious challenge.  For my part I 
continue to believe that uncertainty is the worst illness an 
organization can experience, and so I personally, and those 
involved with Delta will work hard to minimize the 
uncertainty we cause.

	We anticipate much of the success of Delta will rely on 
the creative deployment of new technologies.
	
	We have rejected the idea of making major investments to 
improve existing systems, which are based on 20 year old 
technology.  That strategy is costly.  Modified systems will 
be out of date when completed and will not provide either the 
levels of service or the productivity improvements we need.

	If there is any area of life where uncertainty is 
organic, it's in Information Technology.  We know, for 
example, that much of the software and related technologies 
we will need to implement large segments of Delta have not 
yet been invented.  

	So, there are gaggles and gigabytes of uncertainty we 
must face.  There is  organizational uncertainty on one front 
and technological uncertainty on another.
	
	The effort involved will be massive.  For instance:
	We will need the minds and commitment and involvement of 
our best people for extended periods of time.  I'm not sure, 
as I stand here, just how we can free them up from their on-
going responsibilities.  And so, add to the list, "managerial 
uncertainty".

	It is a struggle;  we don't have the answers.  We expect 
the struggle to continue.  In many ways when we launched 
Delta last January it was like sitting down at a typewriter 
to write the next great novel.  There's that first sitting at 
the typewriter, facing the blank page.  Lots of those kinds 
of experiences with Delta.  To a very great extent it's 
invention.

	To be very candid for all those reasons, there were 
times when I thought to myself, this is a bullet I want to 
avoid...but the bullet seemed to get broader and larger-ÑAnd 
I guess I'm not as nimble as I once was.


THE CASE FOR DELTA: WHY DELTA? WHY NOW?  

There are two conjoined arguments, one "External", the 
other "Internal" 
External --  pricing limits
	
It's simple: We can no longer continue to raise prices to 
finance all of the things we want to do.

In the mid-70's our tuition was $3,000/year 
In the mid-80's it had advanced to $9,000/year
Now in the mid-90's, it is just short of $19,000/year.
	
	That twenty year change in tuition rates provides the 
University with an additional $230 million per year ($100M 
per year if you factor out inflation).  That's what moved 
faculty salaries from the AAUP median to the 80-90 
percentile.  That's what financed all the new construction 
and renovations.  And, that's what financed the building of 
the library collection, and all the new technology.
	But we have reached the limit.

In 1975-76 our tuition was 21 percent of the National 
Median Family Income

Today it is 45 percent

Today tuition, room and board for one student for one year 
is 65 percent of MFI.
Some would argue that BC students are more affluent and 
therefore national MFI is not the appropriate measure of 
income.  So let's look at family income of $100,000 or 
greater.   Of the high school students from those families, 
there are just 50,000 with combined SAT's greater than 1300 
(using the re-centered SAT).  20,000 of these might come to 
private vs. public colleges and universities.  And so we are 
competing with all of the other private universities for this 
pool of 20,000 students.  And for both these students and the 
middle and lower income students, financial aid is playing a 
bigger and bigger role in their decision to select a college.
	
But, what is financial aid, except a return of tuition.  
Some call it tuition discounting.
	
The bottom line is the same, fewer tuition dollars.

Internal --  Aspirations

Although we cannot in the future count on financing our 
activities in the traditional way, through tuition increases, 
our aspirations abound.

--  We want our salary increases to continue to outpace 
inflation.

--  We want to qualify for membership in the Association of 
Research Libraries

--  We want to build new buildings.  I've already mentioned 
some of those.  But just those four projects will cost in 
excess of $200 million.  

    We want to care for the buildings we have--no deferred 
maintenance.  Look at the staging on the Bapst Tower--  
fixing leaks -- project cost is over $ 1/2 million.  

--  We want to pursue the UAPC initiatives.
	More focus on graduate education
	More focus on graduate student services
	More time for scholarly activity
	Improved research infrastructure
	Lower faculty workloads
	More support for the use of technology
	Continuous improvement of Undergraduate Education 
	Fewer part-time faculty

So, you see the paradox

Price constraint means doing with a lot less on the revenue 
side.  
	
Our aspirations mean wanting a lot more on the expenditure 
side.

The train called "restructuring of private colleges and 
universities" has left the station and is now speeding down 
the track.  You are either on the train or on the track.
When the train arrives at the next station, you will be 
transformed one way or the other.
 
PROJECT DELTA "THE PROJECT"

Objective:	Increase productivity
			Improve levels of service
			Pull cost out of the system
	"Restate" Pull significant cost out of the system

Strategy:	Make dramatic changes to business processes 
and delivery of services in order to eliminate work

		Examples:	--   Redundancies in silo organization              
					structure

				--   Pass on work to ultimate user
					Students register via telephone
					Faculty make Airline reservations
					directly on Internet

				--   Recognize some work simply doesn't 
					have to be done at all.

Scope:	All of university's business processes, and 
delivery of services.  Everything we do excluding faculty 
responsibilities when they walk through the door into the 
classroom or the door into a research lab, or carry on other 
scholarly work. But including  all support activities for 
teaching and researching and scholarly activities of faculty.
		
	Now here's where I get into trouble:
	"No Sacred Cows!" (Read my lips!)


Critical Success Factors:
			1) Aligned Managment - Trustees, President, 
Delta Executive Team

			2) Will to Change - The Executive Team 
believes there is nothing within the scope of Delta that we 
cannot change. And there is the will to do it.
		
The third critical success factor is Communications
				Communicate  -  Communicate - Communicate
				Means:  	Web
						Newsletter
						Face to Face 

From University Historian Charles F. Donovan, SJ's letter 
of Aug. 27:

"the time your team is spending on these face to face 
explanations may be one of your most important strategies for 
the success of the project."
						
					
I mentioned earlier that resistance to change can be overt 
or covert.  Overt criticism and debate and involvement is 
welcomed and necessary.  And actually I'm not worried that we 
won't have enough of that.  But that criticism will have to 
be more than "I don't like it" or "I like the existing system 
'better.'"  The existing is not on the table.  And the 
criteria for developing alternatives must include the same 
service and cost mix as proposed within Delta.

Recognize time required - All aspects of Delta will require 
major time commitments, perhaps none more than the need to be 
openly communicating.  Since January, I've spent about a half 
a day a week on Delta activities.  By mid-November, I expect 
that to increase to one-and-a-half to two days each week.

			4)	Culture - We are at Boston College as at 
other institutions of Higher Education not accustomed to 
change--Boston College is dramatically different today vs.25 
years ago. But the change was slow and steady. In our culture 
there is loyalty and trust and the recognition that while 
faculty and staff have a responsibility to BC, Boston College 
in turn has a responsibility to them. These shared values and 
experiences in our culture will help us to deal with change.

It's this esprit we feel when we meet with all kinds of 
people around the university to talk about Project Delta.  	

But let's face it.  There is also a good deal of 
apprehension out there but the response has typically been: 
"I've got a suggestion to improve that" or "How can I help?"  
or "How can I become a part of Delta?"

Change is difficult but I believe that our culture today is 
an enabling one and a big plus as we go forward.

THE PROJECT:

				Three Strands:

1)   Top Down Review of Existing Organization 
Find ways to change the organization directly, in order to 
reduce costs.
			
2)  Management Review Teams
B.C. and external experts conducting in-depth management 
reviews within departments.

3)  Focus on Processes	
-  Andersen Consulting role - outside consultant brings a 
structure and experience.

-  Core Team - has worked with Andersen since May to 
develop a game plan.  I want to acknowledge Core Team 
members: Graduate School of Arts and Sciences Associate Dean 
Pat DeLeeuw; Management Information Systems Director Joe 
Harrington; Employee Relations Director Richard Jefferson; 
Delta Project Manager Jim Kreinbring; Assistant Controller 
for Grants and Restricted Funds John Krieg; Enrollment 
Systems Director Rita Owens; Assoc. Prof. Hossein Safizadeh 
(CSOM), chairman of the Operations and Strategic Management 
Department; and Assoc. Prof. Ed Sciore (CSOM), chairman of 
the Computer Science Department.

-  Master Plan not yet complete;  will include a number of 
Major Initiatives. The two leaders among these will deal with 
processes that support students and processes that support 
faculty and staff. Beyond some 10 Major Initiatives, there 
are Infrastructure Initiatives	that deal with things like 
Imaging and Electronic Data Interchange.

	Finally, there is a listing of Short Term Opportunities.  
An office of the Future Pilot Project;  automation of weekly 
time reports are examples here.

THE BOTTOM LINE
				
The bottom line is: Reduced Costs-- There is a balance 
between what we think is necessary and what is realistically 
possible.  At this point we believe that we can pull $25 
million permanently out of the budget over the next 5 to 7 
years.  As we progress and develop more information, that 
number will be refined up or down.
				
The bottom line is: Improved Service -Happy students, 
parents and faculty

The bottom line is: Dramatic Changes - Not only the breadth 
of changes noted earlier, but change that goes to the depth 
of our organization.
				
1) Organizational Structure

--  One separate strand
--   Major realignments related to changes in Student 
Processes and Faculty, Staff service delivery. 

2) Roles and Responsibilities

Fewer professional and support staff but with more breadth 
of experience and knowledge and broader responsibilities.

We talk about making timely decisions at the appropriate 
level of the organization.

3) Measurements and Incentives 

Broader responsibilities will mean different performance 
standards, and compensation systems designed to reward.

4) Information Technology
						
Discussed earlier.

5) Skills and Training
						
New programs will be developed for training to enhance and 
develop new skills and knowledge.  

The training strategy in conjunction with voluntary early 
retirement incentives and normal attrition must be 
orchestrated in a way that will protect all of the people who 
are here today.  That's our culture too.  The fact that we 
are not in a crisis situation and that we have time, by 
beginning Delta now, gives us the opportunity to develop 
these strategies in a deliberate manner.

						
Bill [Academic Vice President and Dean of Faculties William 
B. Neenan, SJ] is about to talk to you about UAPC 
Implementation activities.  I see Delta and UAPC, in the most 
important sense, as one project for Boston College, making 
B.C. better capable of achieving excellence academically and 
managerially.  I believe that being the "best-managed 
university" in the country is within reach.
	
Delta and UAPC are about the necessary transformation of 
Boston College, the need to make Boston College stronger than 
it is, both academically and managerially.  We need to do 
this so that we can compete against the best, who are 
stronger than we are by some significant factors in areas 
like endowment, faculty reputation, libraries, laboratories, 
student centers, student advisement.  Many we are already 
competing against whether we ever wanted to or not.  Ten 
years ago our competition--for students, faculty and 
financial support--was defined by Villanova, Holy Cross and 
BU.  Today it is defined by Notre Dame, Brown, Georgetown and 
Harvard.  We can be proud of this, but not satisfied with it 
until we are in a position of regularly winning in this new 
league.

BC is an institution very familiar with transformations.  
Anyone who's been here since the 70's has experienced 
several.  We've had transformations in faculty quality, staff 
professionalism, residential life, fund-raising, library 
services, technology.  Sometimes you need an outside 
perspective to recognize just how incredible the total 
transformation has been.  I was recently invited to make a 
consultative visit to a university that has recently come on 
some hard times, but which certainly would have been ranked 
way ahead of us  back in the mid 1970s and early 80s.  Their 
invitation was interesting.  They asked me to come talk to 
them about "the BC miracle".  It was no miracle, of course, 
but hard work and excellent decision-making by faculty and 
administrators--by the very people in this room, by the very 
people who will be working through Delta and UAPC to take us 
through the next necessary transformation.