"Shared governance" means something different to each group (perhaps even to each person) on a college campus. Whatever their definition may be, though, they know that governance is working when faculty, administrators, and other stakeholders listen respectfully to different perspectives and then work together to make decisions aligned with their shared understanding of their institution's best interests. Faculty and administrative leaders also sense when governance is not working, with potentially disastrous - even existential - consequences.

The Association of Governing Boards' landmark report, Consequential Boards, called for a more sustainable higher education not through a diminution, but through reinvigoration of faculty shared governance, including reviews of policies and practices with faculty. Your COACHE report provides a vehicle for such a collaborative review.

To understand why shared governance is more effective at some institutions than at others, COACHE conducted a study based on a review of the literature and on nearly two dozen interviews with chief academic officers. The study identified five factors that contribute to the vitality of shared governance:

• Trust: Do the stakeholders involved in governance trust each other and the decision-making processes at their institution?
• Shared sense of purpose: Are stakeholders with diverse interests and perspectives united by a shared sense of purpose?
• Understanding the issues at hand: Is decision-making informed by inclusive dialog that promotes fuller understanding of the complex issues facing the institution?
• Adaptability: Do stakeholders reflect on the effectiveness of their governance practices and pursue improvements in the status quo?
• Productivity: Does governance produce meaningful results?

The answers to these questions depend, to some extent, on an institution's governance structures and processes. More important, however, seem to be the culture and climate surrounding governance, which create the conditions that foster - or undermine - collaborative relationships between faculty and administrators. This is why our instrument draws attention not to the board, but to the faculty's own communication and decision making structures, on the culture among faculty, and on the working interactions between faculty leaders and senior administrators.