Letter to the editor: COO position

Last week in one of my classes, the topic of OU’s new COO was brought up and it led to an interesting conversation.  I, like most of the students I have talked with, had no idea about the recent hire.  After class I decided to do some research and find out what exactly happened with our new COO.  First, I wanted to know what more about the role of a COO. Second, how was Scott Kunselman selected, and lastly what it means to the University as a whole.                                                                                                                      

First a COO, or the Chief Operations Officer, is one of the highest-ranking executive positions in an organization and he or she is responsible for the day-to-day activities of the organization.  Essentially, this individual is the second in command at the organization or in our case the University. This is a major position of both power and prestige — a position that should be filled after a thorough consideration of candidates.  The process of finding the right candidate for the job is what leads to my second concern about how Scott Kunselman was selected for the position.                                                                                                     

According to press releases from OU as well as articles in the Daily Tribune and the Oakland Press, there was no actual search of candidates for the position. In fact the position was only offered to Kunselman.

Kunselman is a former member of the OU Board of Trustees as well as Chief of Automobiles Safety at Fiat Chrysler. In one article, members of the Board of Trustee stated that Kunselman was qualified for the position — I do not doubt that this is the truth; however, I wonder why no one else was considered for the position.  

Trustee Ronald Robinson, the only member who voted no for Kunselman’s appointment to the position, explained that OU does not need a COO. He stated that many other universities of similar size and status, such as Wayne State University, Eastern University and the University of Michigan do not have a COO. What makes OU different? This question leads to my final concern, which is the reason for the position as well as its potential impact on the University both socially and financially.                                                                                                                                             It’s important, first of all, to understand the University’s reason for the creation of the COO position. In several interviews with different sources, President Hynd explained the purpose behind hiring the COO is to allow the President more time to tell OU’s story to potential and current donors. Having the COO run the day-to-day activities allows for more opportunities for the President to reach out to donors.

I understand the need to find additional resources for the University and I think sharing OU’s story with donors is a great way to do this; however, would it not be better to have students be the ones sharing OU’s story? The majority of students with a major in either Public Relations or Communication studies are required to participate in an internship before graduation. These are the students that are mastering the art of articulate speaking — would they not be ideal candidates to share OU’s story? 

Although in the previously mentioned interviews it was stated that the COO’s salary would currently come from the University’s general fund and not the 8.5 percent tuition increase  — what type of impact will this new position have on the University’s resources in the future? Will this always be the case? Also, where will the funds for the projects or other costs that would traditionally come from the general fund come from? Will this cause another tuition increase? And the biggest question: what will be the long-term impact of the COO position on the resources and students of Oakland University?                                                                                                                  

Overall, if this position is one of power and will be beneficial to the campus, why was the process kept from the mass majority of staff and students until after the decision was made? 

I’m not saying that we don’t need this new hire, that OU purposely kept it quiet, or that it will be a negative impact on the campus community. But it would put the minds of the staff, students, and supporters of OU to rest if the administration were more open and transparent with their decision-making process, as well as their hopes for the long-term future.