YSU’s Sweet awarded high marks from board

By Harold Gwin

The positive evaluation also came with a list of improvements for the president of the university.

YOUNGSTOWN — Youngstown State University President David C. Sweet has received a “thumbs up” evaluation on his job performance from the university’s board of trustees.

“The board is pleased with the progress on the main goals identified by the president for 2007-08,” said board Chairman Scott Schulick, adding that the board feels Sweet has a very good working understanding of the university.

The evaluation, completed this month, lists areas of the president’s strengths as well as areas the trustees would like to see improved, but, overall, it is “absolutely” a positive rating, Schulick said.

The process included trustee interviews of campus and community constituents as well as individual trustee assessments.

The evaluation found Sweet “intensely focused” on three initial goals he identified when he first came to campus a decade ago: increased diversity, enrollment growth and campus partnerships.

The staff feels the president has a vision and is moving that vision forward, and both the board and the community feel Sweet has done an excellent job working in the community, the evaluation said.

Other areas of strength include the fact that Sweet is a “quick study,” has fund raising and partnership-building strengths, is a purposeful, self-motivated executive and is “hands-on” and knowledgeable about the university.

Ironically, that same hands-on strength is also listed as an area needing improvement.

“Sometimes our strengths are sometimes our weaknesses,” Schulick said, explaining that some constituents feel the president is too hands-on and his leadership style is excessively top-down and he should be more inclusive.

The evaluation also notes there is a concern of disharmony among the cabinet-level management/senior leadership team.

“That seemed to be a perception,” Schulick said, noting it came out of interviews with cabinet-level administrators, senior executives and community representatives.

“Perception is reality,” Schulick said, explaining that, even if the feeling isn’t based in fact, it needs to be addressed by the president and the senior leadership team focusing on being a cohesive unit.

Other areas listed for improvement are: Empower the senior leadership team to think and act creatively and independently; student concerns that the president is detached from campus life and doesn’t care about student issues; concerns that the president doesn’t listen well; and continued progress on campus visibility, improved communications with faculty and staff, academic leadership and ability to delegate.

gwin@vindy.com