|
The Notre Dame Brand
BY Patrick Lencioni
May 17-23, 2009 Issue |
Posted 5/8/09 at 10:57 AM
Lest anyone think
that the current graduation speaker controversy at the University of Notre Dame
is merely a matter of partisan politics and media hype, it is worth a closer
look. What is happening right now in South Bend, Ind., is not simply a critical
moment of truth for a vaunted institution; it is also one of the greatest case
studies ever about organizational identity and core principles.
When Jerry Porras and Jim Collins
published their classic book Built to Last almost
20 years ago, they made the case that enduring institutions succeed by adhering
to a core ideology, a combination of core values and core purpose. And one of
the best ways to tell whether an organization is serious about those principles
— and not merely using them as marketing fodder on posters and in brochures —
is to see whether the organization will stand by them even in the face of
punishment and criticism.
One company known for its adherence
to core values is Southwest Airlines. There is a legendary story about an
unhappy customer who sent a letter to Herb Kelleher, the founder and then CEO,
complaining about the jokes that a flight attendant was mixing into his
pre-flight safety announcements. Keep in mind that humor is and has always been
a core value at Southwest.
Most CEOs in Kelleher’s situation
would have sent the customer a note thanking her for her input, reminding her
that she was a valued frequent flyer, and assuring her that safety was indeed
important to the airline.
They might also call the local gate
agents at the offending airport to remind them to keep the announcements
appropriate. But Kelleher took a different approach, sending the woman a letter
with just three words in it: “We’ll miss you.” There was no way he was going to
violate one of his company’s core principles simply to please a constituency
that didn’t appreciate the organization’s culture. To do so would be to sell
its soul.
This brings us to Notre Dame and the
unenviable situation facing Father Jenkins, the school’s current leader.
The first question that Father Jenkins
must answer is this: What is at the core of your institution, and what are you
willing to be punished and criticized for defending?
There are two clear choices.
One choice is the central teachings
of the Catholic Church and the school’s reputation of faithfulness to those
teachings. The other is the school’s reputation among academia and the media as
an elite educational institution open to all points of view.
As much as some people would like to
believe that Father Jenkins can have his cake and eat it too, there is no
avoiding the dilemma that one principle will have to take priority over the
other. And regardless of which way he goes, he will be criticized; he’ll just
need to decide whose criticism matters more.
A second question that Father
Jenkins needs to answer is this: Are there any issues that, if a president or
politician were to support, would justify rescinding his invitation? Or does
prestige and intellectual tolerance trump all other values? A hypothetical
might help Father Jenkins here.
Suppose that a U.S. president held
views that were clearly racist. Would Notre Dame still invite him to speak? And
would it defend that decision by touting his other good qualities and his
presidential stature? I would guess not. Why? Because one of the central
teachings of Christ and the Church is that all people deserve love and dignity,
something that racism always violates. Or would it be because it was
politically incorrect and would provoke an outcry — and rightly so — from the
media and academia?
What about a president who had made
it clear through his words and actions that he was completely indifferent to
the plight of the poor and to those with AIDS? Would he be awarded an honorary
doctorate in the humanities? I don’t think so. Why? Because those views would
fly in the face of the teachings of Christ and the Church. Or, again, would it
be because of the criticism it would provoke from the world?
All of this begs the question: Are
racism and indifference to the poor worse than abortion? In the eyes of much of
the mainstream media and many people in the secular world, probably. But in the
eyes of those who are faithful to the teachings of Christ and the Church he
founded, one could never make that case. Father Jenkins would certainly agree
with this.
So why would he even consider having
President Obama speak, let alone honor him with a degree, even after so many
have expressed their horror?
For
one, there is the pain of the criticism he would have to endure, something none
of us should underestimate. Rescinding Obama’s invitation would provoke a
backlash from the media and members of academia, some of whom are on his
own faculty who would say it was inconsistent, even racist. After all,
Presidents Carter and Clinton were both pro-choice/pro-abortion, and they were
allowed to speak. Is Obama different because he is African-American?
Regardless of whether the other
pro-choice presidents should have been invited, it is undeniable that Obama
goes far beyond them when it comes to his views on life. He has vowed, as one
of the primary goals of his administration, to destroy every restriction on
abortion put in place over the past 30 years, including the ban on the barbaric
and grotesque procedure of partial-birth abortion. He has cast the deciding
vote on two occasions to block the providing of care to babies who were born
alive after failed abortion attempts. He is threatening to force doctors,
nurses and Catholic hospitals to perform abortions and to do away with their
conscience rights.
He has dismissed the life of an
unborn child by referring to it as a “punishment” that someone who makes a
“mistake” shouldn’t have to endure.
Now, regardless of one’s personal
views on the issue of abortion, it is an objective fact that when it comes to
matters of protecting the lives of the unborn, partially born, and “mistakenly
born,” Barack Obama is more radical than any president or mainstream politician
in American history. This is why Father Jenkins’ decision is so momentous and
will have such a profound and irreversible impact on the school.
He will either bow to the pressures
of the secular and academic world and honor his invitation to the president,
choosing to disenfranchise those who see Notre Dame as Catholic first and
academic second, or he should even now politely and humbly rescind his
invitation to the president and make it clear to the world that more than the
need to please academia and the media, it is the adherence to the teachings of
Christ and the Catholic Church that is really at the core of the university. That
would speak louder than any poster, brochure or half-time television commercial
ever could.
Patrick
Lencioni is the author of seven best-selling business books, including The
Five Dysfunctions of a Team, and a Harvard
Business Review contributor.
Filed under
Advertisement
Advertisement
Make a Donation now!
Insightful. Informative. Uncompromisingly faithful. The National Catholic Register is more than a newspaper. It’s a cause. Your support for the Register funds important journalism that helps to build a Culture of Life in our nation, and throughout the world. Help us promote the Church’s New Evangelization by donating to the National Catholic Register right now.
Click here to donate
|