Post by sader1970 on Apr 19, 2018 9:58:42 GMT -5
Full disclosure: I am NOT a FaceBook subscriber/member, whatever you call it.
But I am reading the latest issue of Time Magazine's article about FaceBook and what appears to be a dichotomy within that organization with Zuckerberg "still considers himself above all a product person, a code-wielding engineer." COO Sandburg is "concerned with business, strategy or sales, view data as a tool." The article characterizes Zuckerbeg as almost naive in his quest to make a better world and sees the members as customers whose privacy needs to be protected while Sandburg seems to believe the members are a source of data for advertisers and a means for revenue and profits.
As I read this, it struck me how on one hand Holy Cross seems to be content to let Holy Cross "sell itself." On the other hand, another faction seems to want to enhance the "brand." I may be alone but my impression is that like FaceBook, Holy Cross does not have everyone pulling in the same direction.
It it seems to me that Holy Cross needs to define (or redefine) itself beyond "men and women for others." Other Jesuit educational institutions say the same thing. What EXACTLY is Holy Cross? Is it still primarily a Catholic Jesuit liberal arts college? Or does it strive to be something else? What exactly is the role of athletics? To win or just "participate?" Is the College trying to be all things for all people? Should it stick to its core?
Whatever it is, it should put it in writing and market it strongly. Everyone: Admissions, Athletics, Development, Faculty, Students and Administrators need to "buy in" or move on.
This is is what the BoT should be doing, not getting rid of mascots.
But I am reading the latest issue of Time Magazine's article about FaceBook and what appears to be a dichotomy within that organization with Zuckerberg "still considers himself above all a product person, a code-wielding engineer." COO Sandburg is "concerned with business, strategy or sales, view data as a tool." The article characterizes Zuckerbeg as almost naive in his quest to make a better world and sees the members as customers whose privacy needs to be protected while Sandburg seems to believe the members are a source of data for advertisers and a means for revenue and profits.
As I read this, it struck me how on one hand Holy Cross seems to be content to let Holy Cross "sell itself." On the other hand, another faction seems to want to enhance the "brand." I may be alone but my impression is that like FaceBook, Holy Cross does not have everyone pulling in the same direction.
It it seems to me that Holy Cross needs to define (or redefine) itself beyond "men and women for others." Other Jesuit educational institutions say the same thing. What EXACTLY is Holy Cross? Is it still primarily a Catholic Jesuit liberal arts college? Or does it strive to be something else? What exactly is the role of athletics? To win or just "participate?" Is the College trying to be all things for all people? Should it stick to its core?
Whatever it is, it should put it in writing and market it strongly. Everyone: Admissions, Athletics, Development, Faculty, Students and Administrators need to "buy in" or move on.
This is is what the BoT should be doing, not getting rid of mascots.
