And the fund-raisers shall inherit the earth …

That may be putting it a bit too strongly, but in this money-driven world, the ability to raise funds is becoming one of the most important qualifications for many jobs that used to be driven by other criteria.

It’s become apparent in the past several months, for instance, that money and the ability to raise money is a top priority in Kansas University’s athletic department and was a top consideration in Chancellor Robert Hemenway’s hiring of KU’s new athletic director. Other qualifications such as the ability to manage a staff or knowledge of college athletics probably were considered, but the ability to raise and make money for the department apparently had top billing.

Is the same true in other areas of the university?

Although many other factors may have contributed to the firing of the director of KU’s Spencer Museum of Art, the fact that progress toward a $20 million fund-raising goal to expand the museum had been slow may have been a consideration. Certainly deans of various KU schools are under increased pressure to spend time and money seeking and cultivating donors who might contribute to their budgets.

Has fund-raising become a primary, or even the most important, qualification for deans and other top administrators at KU? More important than the ability to work with staff and students or foster excellent teaching and research? It would be a sad state of affairs, if the need for money has caused the university to place fund-raising above academics.

KU is fortunate not only to have many loyal donors but to have the KU Endowment Association which works directly with deans and other campus administrators to pair donors and donations with university needs. These efforts are vital to the operation of the university, especially as state funding of the university has declined.

But judging deans, for instance, primarily on their ability to raise funds may have some undesirable results. University faculty members are extremely concerned about preserving their academic freedom. Contracts with companies like Coca-Cola have drawn protests because some fear the university will become too beholden to corporate interests. Some private donations also come with strings attached. How far should a dean go to please or appease a big donor? Could big money influence decisions on faculty tenure or other important matters that are the responsibility of a dean? The level of private giving for KU athletic programs certainly plays a central role in where the donor sits in Allen Fieldhouse.

There also is the fact that many people who would be excellent academic leaders may have little or no fund-raising talent. It would be tragic if such people weren’t considered for a deanship because of this failing. If the main job of a dean is mixing with alumni and potential donors and raising money, maybe schools should have both a dean and an academic dean, one to be the public face of the school and the other to handle the academic duties of the job.

It’s unfortunate that reduced state funding and KU’s need to compete with other universities for faculty, students and athletes have created the need to put so much focus on fund-raising. The fact that the funding situation isn’t likely to change any time soon makes it important for KU administrators to examine their fund-raising and hiring decisions and make sure they aren’t undercutting the academic mission of the school.