We can certainly all agree that AU has its bureaucratic moments, but does hiring a consultant to identify the problems we've long lamented about do anything substantial for the university?
That answer very well depends on what you think the problem is. On one hand, navigating the processes of the Financial Aid, Registrar and Student Accounts offices is a grueling, degree-worthy endeavor - and reaching each by telephone is even more demanding. For obvious reasons, any assistance that helps these three crucial university offices communicate more effectively with students and other administrators is more than welcome.
But does AU really need to pay a consulting firm to reach that conclusion? At the very least, The Eagle has editorialized on these logistical lapses for years. And seniors, at the very least, who have lived and learned here for years, must know more about the university's faults than a newly hired (and well-paid) consultant.
True, the Student Government has done a commendable job including students in the early stages of the consultation process. Organized by former SG Comptroller David Teslicko, 10 students had the opportunity to share their AU office nightmares with Nancy Sinsabaugh, the consulting firm's president.
But is that intermediary necessary for change? In a discussion about decreasing bureaucratic red tape, it seems ironic that university administrators didn't moderate the conversations themselves. To be sure, they'll read the forthcoming report; but is this well-funded Word document a more valuable indication of inefficiency than students' personal experiences?
So, perhaps that's the real verdict on AU's bureaucracy-reducing efforts: While we commend the university for trying to relieve us from some unnecessary stress, we know as well as any consultant what's right and wrong with our university. And that opinion is certainly ripe for hire.
