New dean restructures Admissions Office

Although it has only been three weeks since new Dean of Admissions Eric Furda took over, changes are already evident in the Admissions Office.

Furda, who began July 1, appointed two new vice-deans to serve as his seconds-in-command and has "restructured" the department to be more streamlined and efficient, he said.

"Specifically, what I wanted to achieve with a restructuring of the office was ... accountability at each level of the organization," he said, adding that this concern led to his decision to hire Quenby Mott as vice dean and director of admissions and David Phillips as vice dean of admissions and director of operations and management systems. Neither position previously existed.

"The former structure wasn't as efficient as it needs to be in the 21st century, [when offices are] using technology and always remembering the human contact," said Mott, who also started July 1. Phillips will begin his new role in mid-August.

Compared to last year, Furda said, "Every individual is having some type of change to their dossier."

Besides organizational changes, there has been high personnel turnover in the Admissions Office recently. Former Associate Dean of Admissions Bruce Chamberlin's position was "discontinued" in the restructuring, Furda said. About six officers left, most to pursue graduate degrees.

This sort of turnover every few years, according to Furda, is not unusual, because many officers are hired directly from college. Mott said half of those positions have been filled and the office is expecting to fill the remaining positions by mid-August.

And while the organizational structure of the office is the most visible change thus far, admissions consultants said that the biggest changes are yet to come.

"You have to adopt a wait-and-see attitude," said Michele Hernandez, president of Hernandez College Consulting.

"It's fairly normal to reorganize, . [but] suddenly things might be different because the new director has different priorities," she said, pointing out that former dean Lee Stetson's long tenure meant that his personality had a strong influence on the office.

And according to Steve Goodman, another college consultant, the dean's new priorities will only become more pronounced in the coming years.

Because of the steady turnover in admissions, he said, admissions officers whose priorities are in line with the office's new "philosophy" will eventually fill the ranks and change the emphasis of the office.

Some new areas of emphasis, Furda and Mott both said, will be tying in admissions more closely with University President Amy Gutmann's Penn Compact and better integrating demographic data and technology into the admissions process.

According to both Hernandez and Goodman, it will be at least one admissions cycle - from early decision through the waitlists - before the changes will begin to be seen.

Comments (11)

A lot of buzz words here ... what does it all mean, in plain english?

buzzwords are used to control information flow and to detract from the real reasons behind the necessity of multiple buzzwords. It sounds like the place was a mess. Accountability, efficiency, lack of technology, streamlining? Sounds like leadership wasn't doing their job and got away with it until now. What was the "old philosophy" that Furda feels was in the office prior to his presence? That's an insulting thing to say about people who it sounds like were working in an inefficient, backwards, chaotic environment with no support from leadership. There's more to this and hope the DP continues to pursue more info for us.

In the admissions world, everyone knew the penn office was the least well run & the most oppressive - the turn over was atrocious every year losing countless admissions officers, sometimes nearly 50%. It's about time things changed. Good for Penn for making this change - shame on for Penn for having it last so long.

The Stetson mystery deepens. Whatever else was going on - or not going on - he gets credit for boosting the USNews ranking during his tenure. Of course there are those who say he gamed the system to a fare-thee-well, and maybe this is what tripped him up in the end. I'd like to see Penn drop early admissions, like Princeton and Harvard have.

Former Staff Person-I'm also former staff, and I completely agree with your comments. We are "survivors". The systems in place in that office were atrocious-everything was hand managed and retyped to look presentable. The office culture was one of fear and control. Many people who worked in that office did speak up to the Penn Administration, but no one would listen to them or believe them even when presented with documentation. It appears now someone has listened or a few brave souls truly raised the red flags.(?) Some dedicated staff members who were/are very hard working were completely taken advantage of. You would see them completely overwhelmed while others were dumping their work others, on personal calls all day long, etc. Some individuals would get work dumped on them repeatedly, and the "pets" would get away with murder. Some staff members would outright bully other staff and were allowed to get away with it. Most of the "senior staff" used to take advantage of their positions-they would block direct access to Dean Stetson, dump their work on other staff, LIE to staff, and I also believe misprepresented/hid information from ex Dean Lee Stetson. It was so bad inside that I truly believe one must have worked there in order to understand how oppressive it was. I've mentioned a few details to friends and they didn't believe what I said until I called up another staff member and had them verify my anecdotes. The office was in a state of shambles. It took a lot of strength and courage for staff not to go public. But why would we? When you follow the proper Penn channels and inform administration only to be told "Oh, it couldn't be that bad" or "We're aware of x,y, and z, but our hands our tied", it jades your image of what Penn should stand for.

Former Staff 2: I can not speak to the Stetson regime and can only comment on the transition period before Furda. However, the transition period was deeply rooted by Stetson's tenure. Regardless, certain enablers were finally removed from their positions. Kudos to Furda for cleaning house and realizing the office needed to move out of the 1950's (both culturally and in system/process).

The "old philosophy" was built around fear, oppression, control and belittlement. And this was post-Stetson! Leadership was not concerned because systems, however antiquated, were in place and would not be messed with during the transition period. It's amazing to me that this culture existed at Penn.

I'm also former staff. I can't speak about the transition year but the important point here is that the current administration is taking corrective measures. Shame on Penn Administration, however, for allowing so many problems to fester and reach a crisis stage. Unfortunately, the predominant office culture was one of misdirection, lack of communication, lack of accountability, and lack of training. That negative environment can wear down even the most resilient of individuals. Yes, there were many serious issues. Staff turnover was high. The "senior leaders" provided little if any leadership. Staff resentment increased and fuelled discord and mistrust. People were afraid to voice their opinions. Those who expressed concerns were ignored-or-told not to ask questions. Workload imbalance was prevalent. Hopefully things will improve.

Was all this why Dean Stetson's head had to roll a year before retirement, or was it something else?

Well in order to feel good in an office, you have to work on it, restructure it from time to time, otherwise you'll get bored of it. Or a better idea would be to use and many people guarantee it's quality and effectiveness. I look forward to hearing your opinion too about this prestigious office.

nsibility is that exteriorly replicas watches dont differ from their high-priced individualistic copies. forasmuch as you engagement rest assured no demur to gaze at the case on your advocate which was unreal pull Switzerland. You will discern the surrounding individuals batty. But zot would apperce

Comments are closed for this item.