[Invictus0]

You haven't presented enough evidence to show that there is a problem. If the alumni relations department is bringing in donations greater than their salaries, they are a net benefit to the university. Even if they don't bring in that amount every year, it might still be a net plus: it might bring in better students, spread the word about the university, and it might lead to big gifts later down the line.

[prepend]

The alumni donations total about $50k/year and I think there’s only like 200,000 alumnis that exist. The department is five years old and the growth is minimal as donations were like $30k with no department at all.

My anecdote wasn’t intended as evidence.

But there’s definitely a problem. You can look at official sources [0] for evidence showing that admin expenses are 21% at public, four year schools.

I found this article while looking for the official stats [1] that claims the average university in the US has 45 people in DEI. DEI is very important, I think, but 45 employees boggles the mind and seems to be more of a symptom of runaway costs and lack of controls that would allow for so many admin staff on a single topic.

[0] https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=75 [1] https://www.heritage.org/education/commentary/administrative...

[evolve2k]

I also reject the assertion they shouldn’t exist. The “Alumni network” is listed as one of the additional benefits when enrolling for a degree.

Further when the engineering firm you started after graduation with some of your classmates wines a National science award. Getting that profiled in the alumni newsletter could be unlocking a range of oppprtunities for your firm from grant funder interest to new commercialisation opportunity, all coming out of the alumni network.

Just cause the work is quiet doesn’t mean it’s pointless.

[prepend]

An alumni network is great. I think the issue is having so many admin staff working on low value activities like magazines and newsletters.

I’m a big fan of quiet work, but this is pointless. It’s not pointless because it’s quiet. It’s pointless because it has minimal to no positive impact.

[muh_gradle]

Administrative bloat in higher education is well known at this point, and it's absolutely a part of where student money is going. All I see is a lot of "mights" in your post.

[didericis]

> Even if they don’t bring in that amount every year, it might still be a net plus

Or it might not.

Thats the root of the problem. The administrators are the people coming up with the metrics and arguments to justify their own existence.

I’m sure many of them believe they’re making a positive contribution, and the situation is more complex and tragic than just “these are the baddies” type arguments suggest, but there’s still an accountability problem that needs to be reckoned with.