A few days ago, I made a prediction about Bobby Chain.  Wish I had mentioned him by name because it would increase my credibility now.  Ram, thank you for noticing.

Tim Hudson is coming after Dean Doty, period.  Why?  Because Harold Doty has been exposing his bull.... and subjecting his underhanded dealings to some sunlight.  An oft-quoted remark that Doty said to Hudson in a meeting last fall is "Tim, you can't buff a turd."  I don't remember the details but it seems like it was about trying to sell the faculty on teaching more for less while trying to convince the faculty that it was a privilige. 

Like all snakes, Hudson prefers to strike from underneath his rock but he is getting desperate.  That's what much of this is about.  Some of you newer posters on the website and outsiders, go back and read through the earlier threads and you will gain a much better appreciation of what is going on here.  It is all about power and control of economic development - all of it.  Doty is a pawn in a much bigger picture in the politics of the state, the IHL board, and the university.  He's drawn into it because he is dean of the college of business and economic development.

Should the College of Business Administration have been merged with the department of economic development (or any of the 9 colleges merged into 5 and the deans of those colleges fired so unceremoniously)?  Arguably not, but they were and Doty was brought in, the product of a national search, chaired by a well-respected academic administrator.  Doty, by the way, is a highly respected scholar and administrator with a national reputation (see his cv on line).  Doty came in with these mandates - merge economic development into the business school - raise money for a new building - make the business school "world-class". 

Well, there were huge challenges with the mandates.  Doty inherited Tim Hudson (Provost), Angie Dvorak (VP of R&D), Ken Malone (ex-graduate student of Shelby Thames, Dept. Chair of Economic Development, now also Coast COO), Greg Lassen (current Econ Development PhD graduate student, originally brought in to start internet program, now VP of Finance) all in the economic development department, which was just one department in the college.   Sometime in the fall, he also got Cynthia Easterling Moore's department of Fashion Merchandising.  As has been discussed ad nauseum for months, none of these individuals have any business background - not a single business degree among them.  At every turn, either Hudson or Dvorak thwarted any and all efforts by Doty to integrate economic development in ways that would help the new CBED to increase its quality reputation and maintain its AACSB accreditation.   Why?  First, because, Angie Dvorak only cares about grant funding and Doty told her that faculty in CBED would build their reputations on quality research, quality teaching, and quality service.  Grant funding success, although welcome, would not replace the other criteria in faculty evaluations.  Next, because Hudson started the PhD in economic development program (IDV) and cares only about its success - wants a couple hundred graduate students taught on-line in a Phoenix-like model with no checks and balances for quality - he opposes the rigorous standards imposed on CBED by the AACSB.  Doty repeatedly fought with him about short-term decisions that would hurt CBED in the long-run. 

On the fundraising side, Doty came into a situation where he was told up front that there were going to be two buildings - one was a business building and one was an economic development building.  Given that he had been hired to run one combined College of Business and Economic Development, OF COURSE he questioned the need for two buildings and argued for the consolidation of the two.  This was especially important because there was a great deal of concern, even from his own Business Advisory Council, that there was not enough capital out there for two buildings, especially if there were some redundancies.  He was repeatedly told that the politics of the state were such that there had to be two buildings and that he needed to back off of any involvement in the Trent Lott Center and focus only on the college of business building.  That's what he did. 

Ken Malone is completely out of control - out of Dean Doty's control that is, but also a pawn in this charade.  Malone has the complete support of Tim Hudson (who uses him to weaken Doty) to do things like attempt to set up unapproved programs (examples include an executive MBA on the coast and an executive economic development masters on-line), hire unqualified people (example Richard Hadden, MD listed on the economic development website), ignore the faculty vote to accept the GMAT versus the GRE for graduate students, accept unqualified graduate students and then give them all "A" grades, get away with flagrant disregard for college policies and governance processes.  Ken Malone also has the complete support of Angie Dvorak because they are "of a mind" when it comes to the commercialization of USM.  Also, they share that neither of them are "academics".  Finally, Ken Malone (as Shelby's ex-graduate student) has the direct ear of the president who has certainly been getting an earful (no doubt at Tim and Angie's urgings) about how Doty rains on Malone's every attempt to be creative about increasing enrollment. 

Why is all this coming to a head now?  I don't think it's much of a secret that Dean Doty obtained outside legal counsel (nebulous and misguided though it was) over the Open Documents request by Faculty Senate.  Hudson was FURIOUS over this because responding to faculty senate was going to PROVE that: 1) he, HUDSON, had been warned in writing that the mid-year raise process was a mistake and that 2) he, HUDSON, would be the person exposed for changing the recommendations of the Deans and their colleges to reward and punish individuals as he saw fit.  It was HUDSON who spoke openly about Dean Doty's "gross insubordination" because it was HIS instructions that Dean Doty refused to follow when it came to keeping the raise information from faculty senate.  It was Hudson who brought this to the attention of Jack Hanbury, leading to the much-publicized, ill-fated memo from Jack Hanbury to the deans.  Rumor has it that Hudson leaked the memo to get Shelby to fire Doty with the hope that firing a dean would be the final straw contributing to his demise.  Hudson has since been trying to minimize Doty's role in this by steering conversation (and subsequent belief) on this website that the Attorney General had a plan all along to get rid of Hanbury.  Those of you who buy that have seriously misread what happened.  Hudson knows who took Hanbury down and knows that he is next and he's doing everything in his power to stay alive.  He'll survive or Doty will but probably not both of them.  Doty has his flaws and his normal administrative opponents, many of whom are trying to stir the pot right now, but at least he won't melt in the sunlight. 

Ultimately, this is going to play out by much bigger fish in the sea.  Powerful friends to the university, powerful community leaders, state and university politicians, and those who want control of USM, however they can obtain it, are not going to worry very much about a dean or even a provost in the greater scheme of things.  What a shame for faculty and students.  Again, for the outsiders, you must come to understand that not everyone who opposes Thames is on your side and not everyone who thinks Thames has been getting some very bad advice is against you. 

Good luck to you all.  I am done posting.