 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
| |
Volume 11, No. 1, Spring/Winter 01 | Return to Table of Contents
Chairman’s Report to the Corporation
 Last year, I concluded my report to you by noting that the state of the MBL was good and that prospects for the future were excellent and exciting. I could not have guessed then that within a few months we would be starting a search for a new Director and CEO. John Burris’ resignation was not expected, but—as John Dowling and I wrote in our letter to the corporation—it provides us with both challenge and opportunity.
Today, I would like to review some of the achievements of the Burris years so that we can see the challenge in proper context, and bring you up-to-date on the search process to explain how we hope to seize upon the opportunity provided by the appointment of a new Director at this point in the MBL’s history.
It will take some time for the near-decade of the Burris administration to be absorbed comprehensively into the 112-year history of the Laboratory and fully understood. We can leave that to future historians, but even now we can single out some features that are important.
It is, of course, the first administration to operate under the changes in governance instituted in 1993. In particular, and of utmost importance, under Burris’ guidance, the Science Council, elected by members of the Corporation, has filled the intended role of primary advisor for the MBL on scientific and professional matters.
I cannot list everything, but here is a sampling of MBL achievements during the Burris years. I say MBL achievements because, as Dr. Burris would be the first to point out, these advances required the efforts of the entire MBL family—scientists, support staff, administrative staff, and volunteers. They include examples from each of the Laboratory’s four important facets—resident research, summer research, the educational program, the MBL/WHOI library—and include fund-raising results, and tackling of deferred maintenance.
The year-round scientific staff has grown substantially during the Burris years, while the size of the support staff has remained constant. When John arrived in 1993, the staff numbered about 150. By 1995 it was approaching 200 and it is now 256. Almost the entire growth has been among the scientific staff.
With this growth in scientific activity, there has been a substantial growth in the Laboratory’s annual operating budget—from about $17 million to $27 million.
During the Burris years the Laboratory has added fiscal muscle. The endowment has more than doubled from about $20 million to $45 million thanks in part to an extremely successful Capital Campaign and to prudent investing.
Annual giving has also doubled, membership in the Whitman Society is up, and the Capital Campaign met its goal, exceeded it, and is still rising.
The educational program has never had a better era. Within the decade, the number of MBL courses has grown from 12 to 22, including exciting new titles and extending the course calendar substantially. While the Molecular Biology of Aging course is just beginning this week, the course on Frontiers in Reproduction had already ended by the beginning of July. This year the MBL has hosted the largest number of students in its history, and is receiving diversified support from federal agencies and private foundations.
With budget surpluses almost every year of his administration, Burris was able to direct funding to long-deferred maintenance of MBL infrastructure. Many projects were undertaken, too numerous to list here, but here are some examples: modernizing Lillie labs, deleading and refurbishing cottages, and so on. We sometimes forget that the Laboratory has more than 100 buildings that need to be maintained. The new Environmental Sciences Building, now under construction, will complete the MBL quadrangle in Woods Hole village.
John Burris leaves behind a legacy of accomplishment, responsible management, and a fine institutional self-image. The challenge we have before us is to build on the positive aspects of the Burris years and move forward and upward. As I have said on other occasions, our generation of scientists has a sacred responsibility to leave to those who follow a healthy and thriving MBL. At no time does that responsibility weigh more heavily than on the occasions when new leadership for the Laboratory has to be selected and appointed. This is perhaps the most important function of a Board of Trustees.
The Board intends to meet this challenge by carrying out an open, far-reaching search, screening a broad constituency of potential candidates. The Executive Committee of the Board, bolstered by significant staff representation, has been constituted as the Search Committee, but final decision will be by the full Board of Trustees.
We have a tentative—and aggressive—timetable that could result in completing the search and approving a new Director by the end of September, just two months from now. I emphasize that this is tentative and we have no intention of rushing to judgment in order to meet an arbitrary calendar. If more time is needed, we will proceed prudently, having the time to do this thanks to the willingness of the Interim Director, Dr. Speck, to serve as needed.
The MBL is privileged in having a network that reaches far into academia and everywhere else where biological and biomedical science is carried out or supported. Many Corporation members have already submitted names they recommend as potential candidates and this process will continue throughout this month. Other names have been added in response to advertisements in Science, Nature, and the Chronicle of Higher Education. Still other candidates have been identified through the network of individuals and institutions familiar to the executive search firm the MBL has engaged.
The search gives us the opportunity to raise the bar of scientific achievement and stature for the next Director of the Laboratory. It is an opportunity to seek a leader who can carry science and MBL’s role in science to new heights. Many in the MBL family have had an input in preparing the job description that is now a public document. Some of the qualities sought, emphasizing scientific background, are
listed here.
And, finally, the goals of the next Director are clearly defined, emphasizing those items that need to remain high among the Laboratory’s priorities in the years ahead.
I started by reminding you that last year I told you that the State of the Laboratory is good and that future prospects are excellent. I remain confident of that analysis, confident also that the transition to a new administration will be seamless and will give us an opportunity for exciting advances for the MBL and for science in general.
—Sheldon J. Segal
Chairman of the Board of Trustees
August 4, 2000 |
|
|
|
|
