Letter to the Editor: Professor questions timing of Dell’Omos new university model

2 weeks ago

314 2 minutes read

By Richard Zdan

On Aug. 29, in his speech at the faculty and staff convocation, Rider President Gregory Dell’Omo announced that he had assembled a taskforce to develop a “new university model” that would radically restructure Rider to be a “leaner, more nimble institution.”

Less than two weeks later, on Sept. 10, Dell’Omo announced that he would be leaving the university when his contract expires at the end of July 2025.

Despite this announcement, reporting by Jake Tiger in the Sept. 18 edition of The Rider News indicates that, during his last few months serving as Rider’s president, Dell’Omo still intends to move forward with his plan to transform the university and hopes that his successor “will operate with a similar mindset.”

Imagine yourself applying for a management position with an organization. You have determined that your skills are a good match. You have developed a vision for the future of that organization under your leadership. But when you are interviewed, you are told that the outgoing manager is planning to eliminate certain parts of the organization, restructure others and possibly add new ones. Which parts? That is still to be determined. The outgoing manager hopes that you “will operate with a similar mindset” and have no problem with the transformative structural changes he is making on his way out the door.

Would you still be interested in taking this job under those circumstances?

Each candidate hoping to succeed Dell’Omo as the next president of Rider will need to consider whether their skills are a good match to meet the challenges Rider is currently facing. They will need to develop a vision for the future of the institution under their leadership. But how can a candidate do this if they don’t know what Dell’Omo’s “new Rider” will look like? Is tying the next president to Dell’Omo’s vision for the future of Rider going to help us attract the best and most innovative candidates? Certainly, candidates that share President Dell’Omo’s vision will not be deterred, but is limiting the search to individuals with “a similar mindset” really our best path forward?

There is a political term for an outgoing executive who, due to term limits, electoral defeat or an announced retirement, is known to have little time remaining in office: a “lame duck.” Unburdened by the need to stand for reelection or deal with any but the most immediate repercussions of any decisions they make, lame duck executives often feel greater freedom to use their remaining time in office to make unpopular, or sometimes even self-serving decisions.

In announcing his plan for a “new Rider,” Dell’Omo said that “we don’t have the luxury of time to go through this process.” If our situation is so dire that a radical restructuring of Rider cannot wait even one year so as to be overseen by the incoming president and his team, then that, in and of itself, stands as an indictment of the last decade of Dell’Omo’s stewardship.

The social and economic realities of higher education have changed in America – perhaps Rider does need to change as well. But Dell’Omo should allow any decisions about how, or even if, Rider needs to be transformed in order to better meet the challenges of the future to be made by his successor. Such a momentous decision deserves to be made by Rider’s new president, not by a lame duck.