Building Strength Together
May 5, 2004
It is a pleasure to be with you today and to share the podium with my
good friend President Sorensen. I should point out, however, that making
a joint presentation with Andrew breaks two of my long-standing and deeply
cherished rules about public speaking. First, never share the platform
with a Yale graduate. Second, never appear on the same program with a
preacher. It is, therefore, with some trepidation that I appear before
you today in what might be described as an exercise in risk taking.
Let me quickly point out, however, that Dr. Sorensen has been one of my most
trusted advisors. From his greater experience, he has given me wise counsel on
the challenges that face a university president. The best advice that I ever
received on that topic came not from Dr. Sorensen, but rather from Judge Alex
Saunders, the former President of the College of Charleston. Shortly after my
election as President of the Medical University, Alex told me that there were
three things essential to the success of any college president. First, one must
deliver winning athletic teams for the alumni. Next, you must provide parking
for the faculty. Finally, you must assure sex for the students. Well, the Medical
University has no athletic teams and we are building two parking garages. As
to the last matter, I am leaving the students to their own devices.
Having told you more than you probably wanted to hear about campus life, let
me turn now to the State of South Carolina. My favorite quote about the Palmetto
State goes back to the nineteenth century, when it was said that: “South
Carolina is too small to be a republic, but too large to be an insane asylum." A
century and a half later, that description still rings true. Among other attributes,
our beloved state is characterized by at least three principal features: small
size, limited resources, and crazy behavior. In my opinion, there is absolutely
nothing wrong with being small and poor. No doubt, those traits serve to foster
our strong sense of humility. The same cannot be said, however, for our predisposition
to crazy behavior.
What exactly do I mean by crazy behavior? You have probably heard the popular
definition of insanity, which is: to keep doing things the way you have always
done them, while expecting the outcomes to be different. For centuries, our state
has taken its meager resources and allocated them on the basis of multiple competing
regional interests. This strategy has understandable political appeal, but it
results in taking our small pie of resources and dividing it into slices so miniscule
as to strain the detection limits of the best nanoscientists at USC.
Nowhere is this divide and conquer mentality more evident than in our higher
education system. Without question, we have too many institutions competing for
too few dollars. It is a recipe that tends to produce mediocrity, or at the very
least, serves to undermine the opportunity to build strength and depth within
and across our academic programs.
Which brings me to the heart of my message: we have to adopt a different strategy
if we hope to achieve greatness for South Carolina. Personally, I am an optimist,
and I believe that we are capable of devising a better system if it can be shown
to benefit all of our citizens.
Speaking of optimism, there was a headline in the Post and Courier a few months
ago that caught my attention. Actually, there are a lot of headlines in the Post
and Courier that catch my attention, but usually it is out of self-defense. In
this instance, however, the article was quite positive - perhaps it was a slow
news day. Nevertheless, the headline read something like: “Charleston is
a Hot Place for Young People." No doubt, some Charlestonians shudder at
the thought of such a phenomenon. The residents of the Holy City are not a crowd
much enamored of anything young and trendy. Let me suggest to you, however, that
there could not be better news from an economic development point of view.
David Ginn, the head of the Charleston Regional Development Alliance, wrote recently
that: “According to a recent report from the U. S. Census Bureau, the Charleston
region ranked among the top 50 metropolitan areas in terms of growing its young,
college-educated population. Between 1995 and 2000, the number of area residents
aged 25 to 39 with a college education rose significantly, while most other areas
of our state actually lost members of this key demographic." That point
warrants repetition: most of our state is actually losing its young, college-educated
population. The brain drain that has depleted our state of its best and brightest
continues even today.
Mr. Ginn goes on to write that: “Charleston also has experienced significant
growth in the number of residents holding advanced degrees. Between 1980 and
2000, the number of local residents age 25 and older holding a graduate or professional
degree grew 109 percent, compared to overall U. S. growth of 11 percent for that
same age group." In other words, over the past two decades Charleston has
experienced 10 times the national average growth in highly educated people. I
would like to believe, and the data should confirm, that a substantial part of
that growth has occurred because of the expansion of the Medical University.
Why is the influx of young, educated people such an important underpinning for
economic development? The answer to that question lies within the pages of the
recent Richard Florida’s bestseller The Rise of the Creative Class. Florida
makes the case that the new technologically oriented economy is driven by creative
people who tend to cluster in certain environments. Quality of life is very important
to these entrepreneurs. They tend to settle in areas that are marked by three
attributes: diversity, tolerance and openness to new ideas. It is not a great
concession to admit that through most of our history, South Carolina would not
be characterized as the poster child for diversity, tolerance and openness to
new ideas.
For us to survive, and indeed thrive, in the new economy, we have to create a
culture of cooperation in South Carolina. This culture begins with the premise
that we will either rise together or sink separately. We must begin to operate
in the belief that we are mutually dependent, which implies that we will think
and act across traditional regional, racial and economic boundaries. Second,
the gap between our public institutions (such as universities) and the best institutions
elsewhere is so great, that we have to build strategic linkages in order to create
critical mass and compete successfully. Third, we must build mutually beneficial
partnerships across the public and private sectors. The resources simply do not
exist within the public coffers alone to make the magnitude of investment required
to build premier institutions within this state. Fourth, we must create an environment
in which entrepreneurial behavior is not only tolerated, but actually rewarded.
Without question, this agenda can be threatening to our existing institutions
and historical patterns of behavior. People are understandably reluctant to abandon
that which they know for that which is unknown. Moreover, whenever separate enterprises
are integrated, there is a natural tendency to focus on what might be lost or
otherwise diminished. For example, one might question whether the gain in collective
ability is worth the loss of autonomy and independence? One might also fear that
the other party will gain an upper hand and dominate the joint effort.
We have seen some of these apprehensions surface in the recent discussions about
integrating the USC and MUSC pharmacy schools. Concerns about potential loss
of control and identity have led some to question whether such a consolidation
is in the best interests of both schools. If we permit those fears to dominate
the discussion, however, we will be left with the current situation – two
independent, under-funded schools of modest size and ability.
You don’t have to take my word for it – just look at the data. On
average, the top 10 schools of pharmacy in this country as ranked by U. S. News
and World Report have 65 faculty members, whereas the average for our separate
schools is 37. The leading pharmacy schools have an average of 550 students,
whereas our schools have less than 300 on average. The top pharmacy schools in
the country average about $6.5 million per year in funding from the National
Institutes of Health, compared with less than $1 million for each of our separate
schools.
If we combine our schools, we can compete, or at least begin to compete, with
the best in the country. If we go our separate ways, however, we will not reach
our full potential and that would be a loss for South Carolina. President Sorensen
and I believe that our primary obligation is to build academic quality in this
state. If that means combining assets, then it is not only in our respective
institutional interests, it serves the greater good of the State of South Carolina.
I applaud the Boards of Trustees at both USC and MUSC for setting a course in
which these aspirations are encouraged. Ultimately, the Boards are charged with
responsibility for guiding our efforts, and they have encouraged us to build
strength together.
There are extraordinary opportunities on the horizon. Just last week, President
Sorensen and I joined our colleagues, Mr. Frank Pinckney and Mr. Kester Freeman,
the leaders of the Greenville Hospital System and Palmetto Health, respectively
to announce the formation of a new collaborative. The hospitals are joining with
the universities to create a matching fund for biomedical research centers of
economic excellence in South Carolina. By leveraging the endowed chair matching
funds from the state lottery, this collaboration will create an endowment of
$160 million of investment to recruit the best scientists into South Carolina.
These leading researchers will not only enhance the quality of our academic institutions,
they will improve the health care of South Carolinians and they will stimulate
the knowledge-based economy in our state.
It is through creative relationships, such as the hospital collaborative, that
South Carolina will build the critical mass necessary to compete with larger
and more established research institutions. I have every confidence that we can
develop a model of collaboration that will become the envy of the country. Should
fears of change stand in our way, may we remember the words that John F. Kennedy
spoke over four decades ago: “Let us resolve to be masters, not the victims,
of our history, controlling our own destiny without giving way to blind suspicions
and emotions."