A Chronicle of Higher Education article says that communications at Syracuse University “didn’t help” the racial issues. In the past few weeks, videos, slurs, and drawings, such as swastikas, culminated in a rumor that a “white-supremacist manifesto” was sent to students’ phones. The manifesto was said to be a copy of the one associated with the March New Zealand shootings, and Chancellor Kent D. Syverud responded, “It was apparent that this rumor was probably a hoax, but that reality was not communicated clearly and rapidly enough to get ahead of escalating anxiety.”

The response didn’t address student concerns, which have been bubbling for years. Syverud was criticized for his response in 2014 during campus protests about climate. To the recent racist incidents, students are demanding quicker and more direct action. The chancellor’s choice of words is also at issue, as expressed by Mona Lisa Faz, a graduate student of communications:

“Since when did calling someone the n-word or creating a swastika in the snow ever count as bias?” she wrote in an email to The Chronicle. She called Syverud’s response “a whitewashing and playing down of what is really happening. I get you don’t want to alarm people, but I’m a Latina, and when you play down a hate crime, THAT is alarming to me and my community.”

The University is trying to catch up, posting a chart showing students’ demands and actions taken.

Notes image source.
Protest image source.

Discussion:

• Read more about the Syracuse University situation. What were the administration’s major missteps? How can they best recover now?

• What’s your view of the chart? What works well about this approach, and how might it fall short?

• Some are calling for the chancellor to resign. Should he? Why or why not?

• What leadership character dimensions are illustrated by this situation?