William MallonThe American research university, like the modern metropolis, is sprawling, and the most significant growth is occurring in the suburbs, not the center. Activities such as for-profit curricular ventures, strategic research alliances, distance education, and technology transfer testify to the increasingly far-flung enterprise of higher education. In these congested suburbs of the university, new models of decision making have emerged. Consequently, this is where scholars need to focus investigations of academic governance. Some have already begun to do so. Kennedy (1993), for instance, argued for "new coalitions" of decision makers from both the institutional center and its periphery (p. 113). Bok (2003) called for new decisionmaking models for entrepreneurial ventures. Kezar and Eckel (forthcoming) considered how new kinds of academic workers make "shared" governance more complex and problematic.I want to explore conceptually what others have done anecdotally. Asserting that university governance is disjointed, I argue that certain structures, processes, and participants-in what I am calling the suburbs of the institution-have captured a role in decision making, infringing on how traditional governance works. I will examine the case of research centers and institutes in order to demonstrate how this disjointedness adds to and complicates traditional governance in the research university.