Although I hold a general disdain for "flagship" UT-K, I do not think the termination letter should have made public or - if publication is required - the letter should have been less nasty. Humiliation is not necessary.

Quote:I have decided that it is in the best interest of The University of Tennessee to change the leadership of our flagship campus and terminate your appointment as Chancellor of The University of Tennessee, Knoxville.

Your performance evaluation for Calendar Year 2017, a copy of which is being provided to you under separate cover, describes numerous areas of unsatisfactory performance. In several areas, even after I raised concerns early in your tenure and addressed them multiple times since then, you have been either unwilling or unable to improve, including:

1) The relationship between us, as well as that between you (and some members of your cabinet) and some on my leadership team continues to be unsatisfactory. More times than I find acceptable, there has been a lack of trust, collaboration, communication, and transparency in these relationships, and it has been counterproductive to the collective success of the university.

2) You would have benefited from a professional coach, and your unwillingness to routinely engage one, despite my recommendation that you do so, has been frustrating.

3) You have not acclimated yourself to the UT system and still appear unwilling to try to understand or acknowledge the value of the UT system. I continue to detect that you (and some members of your cabinet) have an “us (UTK) vs. them (UT system and UT Board)” mentality.

4) Your one on one, small group, and business transactional communication skills are very poor. I have had multiple people on multiple occasions complain that you do not listen to the person talking to you or pay attention to the details of written communications you receive. I also have received multiple complaints from multiple people about your ability to communicate orally. These complaints are consistent with my personal experience.

5) Regularly, you have problems with lack of organization, attention to details, timely follow-up.

6) You have failed to accept ultimate responsibility in some cases where subordinates make mistakes or errors and publicly have blamed administrators who held positions before you or others in dealing with problems you inherited.

7) You have failed to communicate to the campus a defined strategic vision of where you want to take the institution and a plan for its implementation.

As I indicated to you last Tuesday, I do not think you can be successful as the leader of our flagship campus and have decided that it is best to move forward with a change in leadership rather than putting you on a formal performance improvement plan after considering: (1) the number, magnitude, and fundamental nature of the areas that need to be addressed; (2) the lack of trust in our relationship; (3) your unwillingness or inability to address many of the areas that I brought to your attention early in your tenure and multiple times since then, which leads me to conclude that a formal performance improvement plan would not lead to the required changes; and (4) the broad-based concerns and compelling lack of support from Board of Trustees members regarding your leadership, and my belief that you will have similar problems with the new Board.

Effective July 1, 2018, in accordance with the terms of your appointment letter dated December 6, 2016, your appointment will be converted from your current administrative appointment as Chancellor to your full-time faculty appointment as Professor, with tenure, in the School of Communication Studies. As approved by the Board of Trustees, your compensation as Professor will be $438,750.00 (which is 75% of your initial base salary as Chancellor of $585,000.00) for four years. Beginning with the fifth year, your compensation in your faculty appointment will be adjusted to the average base salary of full professors in the department. Effective immediately, and until June 30, 2018, you will be placed on administrative leave with pay.

Obviously, this is not where either of us hoped we would be when I hired you. Personally, I am disappointed that this action is necessary, but as President it is my duty to make decisions that are in the best interest of The University of Tennessee. I wish you the best as you return to the faculty.

Sincerely,

Joseph A. DiPietro

President

I thought about placing the thread in the NTR forum because I think (and read) that the mishandling of the UT-K football head coach search is the primary event driving the action.

I dunno.

It's a very high-paying and competitive field, leading universities and university systems. Maybe this person really deserved it.

Well, HE apparently hired her. What is HIS excuse?


Another classy UT fiasco.

If anything, this letter makes HIM look petty and a large part of the problem over her.

(05-03-2018 09:41 AM)tigergreen Wrote:  If anything, this letter makes HIM look petty and a large part of the problem over her.

True, DiPietro looks petty. I think he and the UT counsel were letting her side know that a lawsuit would get very ugly, so Davenport should tread carefully.

(05-03-2018 10:57 AM)snowtiger Wrote:  Whoa.

‘The relationship between us’ , the first 4 words of his list of termination reasons, tells you all you need to know about DiPietro.

Honestly cannot believe he listed that first.

I read that as you continually lied to me and other administrators.

That will get you fired.

As usual, there may be more to the story....

This angle presents that she was booted out because of not only her botched handling of the FB coaching search, but her opposition to Haslam's attempt to outsource facilities & physical plant-type management at campuses across the state (by a company Haslam has ties to).

Haslam has already cleared out the board of trustees at UT, and appointed his own people in place. Sounds like he's moving on up the chain now. DePietro is rumored to be retiring soon, so he'll be gone soon as well.

https://theintercept.com/2018/05/07/tenn...sity-jobs/

Yeah, F Haslam too.

I've been very impressed with Haslam during his two terms.

He unlike most Tennessee Governors taken taxes from Memphis and just given us lip service.

He's spent a lot of time here in very diverse parts of the community & supported Memphis & the University of Memphis & proven it time and time again.

He's married to a Memphian.

I'd vote for him again.

As far as the financial connections: Haslam, who disclosed while running for governor that he had a major investment in JLL that he put into a blind trust, expressed disappointment with the decision. He then methodically moved to transform the system’s leadership. (It’s possible the blind trust has sold his shares since.)

Haslam could be a lot worse, I'll give you that. He's not near as bad as the rest of the state is right now, in general.

But privatizing UTennessee's maintenance rubs me the wrong way.

(05-09-2018 04:54 PM)AlonsoWDC Wrote:  Haslam could be a lot worse, I'll give you that. He's not near as bad as the rest of the state is right now, in general.

But privatizing UTennessee's maintenance rubs me the wrong way.

Exactly. This isn't a slam on Haslam overall, because I agree he has been more of a presence for Memphis than many past governors, but he has certainly attempted to steer things in this state to benefit him after he's out of office at the expense of common sense. Building management should not be outsourced.

He doesn't get his way on the privatization thing, so clear out the entire board, & bring in yes men & women who will go for it. If that happens, I'm sure that blind trust will re-invest in JLL.