This topic is "taboo", as small people are not supposed to be informed that their leaders are mostly money-oriented, or that their big-mouthed words - before taking top positions - are empty. Probably that is the main reason why McGill's officials do not want to publish criticism about low morale at the top.

Please have a look at two versions of straightforward reflections about Mr. Pennycook's mysterious departure and a previous article about Heaphy.

In the Bible (Ecclesiastes 7, 1-4) it says, "The day of one's death is better than the day of one's birth, it is better to go to a house of mourning than to go to a house of feasting and the mind of the wise is in the house of mourning."

The last (x-journal), instead of "mourning" our departing Vice-Principal Bruce Pennycook (Information Systems and Technology), offered us "Life after Pennycook", a report from an arranged marriage with a new person for this position.

We should first analyze Mr. Pennycook's departure from our university before publicizing the next official. Prof. Bruce Pennycook has been portrayed as an outstanding member of academia with full acceptance of his visions/plans. Consequently, people with this sort of profile, together with publicly declared earlier commitments, are not expected to quit their jobs in the middle of an assignment or contract.

This looks strange and provokes speculation: Was he nudged out of his job; was he frustrated with too many problems and a small budget, or was he just following a path of Mrs. Phyllis Heaphy, the previously departed Vice-Principal, who controversially/arbitrarily traded our two golden eggs (McGill Bookstore and the MUSIC rights)?

Some people are not happy with the work-intensive Banner system, but it's a bit early for a final opinion. Probably it would be more fruitful for us to have a deeper analysis of his plan for one centralized unit of network servers, with 24-hour expert supervision and a constantly monitored security system? Why is it so slow? However, one of the most questionable issues for me is the minutes of the Senate Committee on ITS, published on his web-site, which stopped publication(*) on September 17, 1999.

Pennycook shouldn't be silent, as are many key figures who have discreetly already left our University! We can learn a lot from his dilemmas and his final conscious choice. The "explanation" provided in the article Life after Pennycook, that he "was leaving his position to become CEO of Montreal-based HBR Software Inc., a tech firm started by a former music student of Pennycook's" is too simplistic and readers have a right to ask for more explanations. The other issue is, whethever or not such direct questions are allow to be posted? - receiving answers or not is another issue (a free choice for our establishment but ...).

I remember very well Pennycook's "Management Forum" moderated by Mr. D. McCabe in 1998. With his presentation and the questions answered it was quite convincing that he would treat this job seriously, instead of just being a pawn in the hands of others who would like to control information, or only pretend to accept further computerization and budget-tweaking.

Pretending that nothing has happened(*) does not look normal, and so now Prof. B.Pennycook should be offered another opportunity to freely share his rich experience and opinions with us. I am sure that this high-principled person would accept this offer and the Leacook auditorium would also be full of people, while delicious "managerial cookies" could be served.

S.Poplawski

(*) "No minutes syndrome" - this should be treated as the best finger-prints or used as a litmus paper for detecting different hidden (covered up) problems. At present, six more minutes of the Senates committee on ITS meetings - when many changes had taken place - are still unpublished (to keep us in the dark). Shouldn't the ITS Vice-Principal set an example for others in keeing updated in a timely fashion?

----------

The first version:

In the Bible (Ecclesiastes 7, 1-4) it says, "The day of one's death is better than the day of one's birth, it is better to go to a house of mourning than to go to a house of feasting and the mind of the wise is in the house of mourning."

The last (x-journal), instead of "mourning" our departing Vice-Principal Bruce Pennycook (Information Systems and Technology), offered us "Life after Pennycook", a big fanfare for an arranged marriage with a new "personality" for this position.

We should first analyze Mr. Pennycook's departure from our university before trusting somebody who "received a call from ..." and was asked, did he "want the V-P's job?".

Everybody says that Prof. Bruce Pennycook was an outstanding member of academia. People with this sort of profile and publicly declared commitments are not expected to quit their jobs in the middle of an assignment or contract.

It looks strange and provokes speculation: Was he nudged out of his job; was he frustrated with too many problems and a small budget, or was he just an opportunist looking for more money?

Many people are not happy with the work-intensive Banner project - The Reporter published a letter on the subject already this year. It is astonishing that the minutes of the Senate Committee on ITS, published on his web-site, stopped on September 17, 1999 (without six more when many changes had taken place). Also, his plan for one centralized unit of network servers, with 24-hour expert supervision, has been put on ice. This plan was not only more economical and reliable, but also very good for small departments and other units without their own servers. However, it was very frightening for the "giants" (like library, medicine, arts, management etc.) who already have big budgets and many staff for their exclusive networks. Probably people at the top also did not accept his other far-reaching plans, but we can learn a lot from his dilemmas and his final conscious choice.

He shouldn't be silent, as are many key figures who have discreetly already left our university!

The "explanation" provided in the article "Life after Pennycook", that he "was leaving his position to become CEO of Montreal-based HBR Software Inc., a tech firm started by a former music student of Pennycook's" is too simplistic, considering all the questions surrounding the matter.

I remember wery well his "Management Forum" moderated by Mr. D. McCabe in 1998. With his presentation and the questions answered it was quite convincing that he would treat this job seriously instead of just being a pawn in the hands of others who would like to control information, or only pretend to accept further computerization and budget-tweaking.

Pretending that nothing has happened does not look normal, and so now Prof. B.Pennycook should be offered another opportunity to freely share his rich experience and opinions with us. I am sure that he would accept this offer and the Leacook auditorium would also be full of people, while delicious "managerial cookies" could be served.