Land-grant university governance: an analysis of board composition and corporate interlocks

Abstract

This paper was inspired by the intersection of Tom Lyson's interest in how power is concentrated in society's institutions and his concern for the role of the land-grant system in revealing and addressing inequities that occur as a result of such concentration. This study examines the power structure that governs land-grant universities by presenting social and demographic information on 635 trustees at the 50 US land-grant universities established by the Morrill Act of 1862. Along with these data, Fortune 1000 companies with which land-grant universities are connected through board member interlocks are listed and charted out. The research found that landgrant governing boards are characterized by some degree of demographic homogeneity, but they are less corporately interconnected than their private university counterparts.

Trustees versus Directors, Whom Do They Serve? Boards, For‐Profits and the Public Good in the United States

“…Boards serve various roles and functions in higher education. Studies note the responsibilities of the board as: setting the mission and purpose of the institution; establishing major policies; approving new programmes; approving the budget; selecting and monitoring the president of the institution; designing the president's compensation package; reviewing educational offerings; ensuring adequate resources are available for the institution; and preserving institutional independence (Kerr and Gade, ; Hermalin, ; Pusser et al ., ; Woodward, ). University trustees also serve as a key source of ‘information and legitimacy’ for institutional policy making (Pusser et al ., , p. 748).…”

“…Recent research has focused on board interlocks of college and university trustees with publicly traded corporations. These studies have been limited to select groups of institutions such as land grant universities (Woodward, ) and prominent research universities (Pusser et al ., ).…”

“…Board members are expected to act as a guardian protecting the institution from extreme outside political or economic interests and ensuring that internal interests are not served at the expense of societal needs (Taylor, ; Kerr and Gade, ; Woodward, ). Concurrently, lay boards at colleges and universities provide an important source of external influence on the institution (Kerr and Gade, ).…”

Educational Institutions Offering Hospitality Degrees and Farmers: Is There a Link? A Case Study from Alabama

“…In referring to the work of Hightower (1973), Woodward (2009) argues that land-grant universities (LGUs) have been perceived as neglecting farm workers, family farmers, the rural poor, and small-town business owners (p. 121). However, in many other instances, educational institutions have earned praise for taking a supportive approach toward farmers and, in the case of LGUs, these "will have a more prominent, visible role in the twenty-first century" (Thompson, 1994, p. 51).…”

Board interlocking, desempenho financeiro e valor das empresas brasileiras listadas em bolsa: análise sob a ótica da teoria dos grafos e de redes sociais

“…Como exemplo de pesquisas sobre questões do board interlocking, baseadas na abordagem de redes sociais, sobre essas potenciais especificidades, pode-se citar: i) Discutir a interferência que a existência de acordos de acionistas tem (juntamente com o poder de orientação de voto que, por sua vez, influencia/direciona o comportamento do conselheiro "independente"), em associação com a identificação do acionista majoritário (que pode determinar o representante no conselho); ii) contemplar questões culturais e geográficas na formação do board interlocking no ambiente brasileiro; iii) conduzir pesquisas qualitativas, com entrevistas em profundidade junto a conselheiros e executivos para aprofundar o entendimento das questões ao redor das motivações, obstáculos, vantagens e desvantagens do interlocking; iv) explorar redes de relações de bancos de investimentos e sucesso na distribuição de valores mobiliários; v) explorar associações entre características das redes sociais e a remuneração dos executivos e conselheiros das empresas listadas; vi) analisar a estabilidade dos laços presentes na rede de relações corporativas a partir de abordagens longitudinais; vii) verificar associações entre proeminência social e poder de negociação das empresas; viii) conduzir estudos comparativos entre o mercado brasileiro e outras economias do mundo, sejam países emergentes ou não, ocidentais ou orientais; ix) realizar estudos que abordem o interlocking entre empresas e outras organizações, tais como universidades (WOODWARD, 2009).…”