News, Views and Careers for All of Higher Education
June 29, 2006
Larry Ellison has abandoned his planned $115 million gift to Harvard University — and there is widespread skepticism at the university about the technology guru’s profferred reason for doing so.
Ellison, the CEO of Oracle Corp., told Britain’s Daily Telegraph this week that he no longer planned to contribute funds to create a global health institute at Harvard. He attributed the decision to the departure of Lawrence H. Summers, whose tenure as Harvard’s president was cut short largely by faculty disenchantment. “The reason I didn’t finish my gift to Harvard was because of the way Larry Summers suddenly left Harvard,” he told the newspaper. “I lost confidence that that money would be well spent.”
That news came at roughly the same time that Ellison said he would give $100 million to his medical foundation (which will then distribute the funds to other charities) to settle a lawsuit brought against Oracle by unhappy shareholders.
Harvard officials had little to say about the news. Sarah J. Friedell, director of media relations for Harvard’s office of alumni affairs and development, said university officials had received no formal word from Ellison or Oracle about the decision. Beyond that, she offered only this terse statement: “We are disappointed with Mr. Ellison’s decision to withdraw his commitment.”
But some other officials at Harvard say Ellison’s rationale for abandoning the gift don’t quite ring true, given how events unfolded in the more than two years since Harvard and Ellison reportedly began talking.
Although the discussions apparently began in 2004, they did not make their way into the public eye until May 2005, when Ellison, in an interview with the San Francisco Chronicle’s editorial board, boasted that his Ellison Medical Foundation was preparing to make a “big announcement” with Harvard. A month later, TheWall Street Journal published an article with this headline: “Oracle’s Ellison Gives $115 Million to Harvard Study.”
Harvard officials say that lawyers for Ellison and the university worked through the early summer on documents to wrap up the deal, and that they sent paperwork to Ellison. But in the fall, they say, Ellison went strangely silent. Christopher Murray, the Richard Saltonstall Professor of Population Policy, who had been tapped to head the new institute, told Bloomberg Wednesday that Ellison had cut off communication with Harvard officials — including Summers — last November, months before Summers resigned in February.
“I am not sure what to make of Ellison’s remarks as he was not willing to speak with Summers on this topic despite repeated attempts,'’ Bloomberg quoted Murray as saying. Murray did not reply to messages seeking comment.
Harvard officials also said it struck them as odd that Ellison seemed to cut off talks with Harvard at about the same time last fall that he settled the shareholder lawsuit and was ordered to pay $100 million to charity.
In an interview Wednesday, Bob Wynne, a spokesman for Oracle, stood by and amplified Ellison’s comments. He challenged the suggestion that Summers’s departure could not adequately explain Ellison’s change of heart, given that the Oracle honcho seemed to lose interest in the Harvard gift long before Summers’s resignation but then did not formally abandon the donation until months afterward. Ellison “was well aware of the troubles that Summers, who he saw as the source of the whole effort, was having,” Wynne said. “He might not have had a conversation with Murray since November, but he was watching the Summers situation unfold. He considered it for a few months, but ultimately decided that the situation was not right.”
Wynne also said the Harvard gift and the settlement of the shareholder lawsuit are “totally unrelated.” “I know the number amounts are similar, but one is a court-ordered settlement that Larry’s meeting the requirements of, and the other is a contribution to Harvard under the guidance of Summers, who is no longer there.”
The Oracle spokesman also noted that there was “never a signed agreement” between Harvard and Ellison.
That is true. But what is also true, some at Harvard noted, is that Ellison may be be developing a pattern for undelivered big gifts. In 2001, he told The Wall Street Journal that he would give $150 million to either Harvard or Stanford Universities for a center to study the interplay of technology, politics and economics. That gift never materialized.
Want it on paper? Print this page.
Know someone who’d be interested? Forward this story.
Want to stay informed? Sign up for free daily news e-mail.
Advertisement
The operating style of Larry E. has been written extensively (e.g., brutal, non-specific, unclear).
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/...sp?z=y&isbn=0060008768&itm=3
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/...esults.asp?TTL=Larry+Ellison&z=y
The court ought to have L.O. oversee the obdurate at Harvard A&S.
Most likely, it would be a grueling experience for both, a learning experience not soon forgotten, foundation for reality TV that would make Saddam and bin Laden seem like puddy-tat’s.
Bart J., at 7:45 am EDT on June 29, 2006
Doug,
Your article on Mr. Ellison is of interest on both a professional and personal level. Professionally, it’s a major gift for the academy at-large. We all are aware that such gifts are rare and that we all benefit from such research initiatives, especially under the auspices of a leading university during this collaborative age. On the personal side, this decision is not unlike a few made by my former boss. I had managed a major philanthropic interest for one of the nation’s wealthier financiers and came to realize that some dynamics seemed common among his peers. On a few occasions he noted that “kings talk to kings.” At first this seemed a bit self-inflating, but I came to understand it as deals and gifts matured. In short, he held that the strength of an organization was tied closely to its leader. The point in the case of Ellison (whom I did not meet during my former position) is not whether the academy (Murray and his trustees in particular) agrees with him, but whether he agrees with the trustees. He seemed to have reasons to be cautious. The Ellison’s of our world did not become wealthy by making uninformed decisions; my former boss usually knew as much about an organization as some of its executives. Again, I do not know Mr. Ellison but can only assume that he became concerned with Summer’s “interesting” plight—after all, most presidencies today are directly tied to courting key donors, and these benefactors are fully aware of the courtship. It seems inconceivable that he would have been uniformed of Summer’s struggles. I also realized that personal issues within a family estate can at times overshadow any one potential or promised gift—and the complexity and possibility of such distractions are beyond outside observation and informed comment. At some level this plays out in any of our family situations. Also, when my boss felt insulted or denigrated, his heart would turn—and this seemed to play out among peers as well. After all, they are the ones giving. The last observation perhaps germane to this conversation is that my former patron, perhaps not unlike Mr. Ellison, would give millions privately. Once on the Forbes list it’s difficult to screen suitors—and each gift seemed to increase the number of unfamiliar cars at the gate. While Ellison’s gift to Harvard is in question he may have supported other causes and not wanted attention. You mention a “boast” of a planned gift—which might very well have been the case. However, I assume that any hint or statement of a gift of this size could be misconstrued as a boast? Perhaps I’m playing the Wormwood in this discussion, but too often it seems that the lens of the academy is peeking through an opaque glass that blurs real intentions. True character stands the test of time, and in time Mr. Ellison’s intentions will manifest themselves. The difficulty for hopeful recipients is that the donors mark the calendar. All said, I appreciate your continued look into important issues. Sincerely. JP
Jerry Pattengale, AVP for Scholarship and Grants at Indiana Wesleyan University, at 8:05 am EDT on June 29, 2006
While the style of Ellison’s decision may be untasteful, it should not be surprising. Ellison is at heart an entrepreneur and venture investor. He takes calculated risks, and part of calculus includes confidence in the management team that is charged with stewarding the investment. It makes little difference if the investment is philanthropic or profit-motivated. Ellison has accomplished enough in his lifetime that his decision should be respected.
Bela Barner, Business Storyteller, at 9:40 am EDT on June 29, 2006
Advertisement
or search for jobs directly.
Sinclair is a comprehensive community college with an enrollment of over 24,000 students that offers career and transfer ... see job
A leader in academe, the University of South Carolina holds the Carnegie Foundation’s highest research designation and is ... see job
Howard Community College is building a pool of applicants for adjunct faculty positions in Continuing Education in the areas ... see job
DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES Candidate should have a Ph.D. or Ed.D. in Science Education with a minimum of 3 years of teaching ... see job
East Carolina University, a constituent institution of the University of North Carolina, is a doctoral institution with an ... see job
Our curriculum is innovative and global in its perspective, and our faculty are some of the finest in the nation. They love ... see job
Founded in 1898, and affiliated with what is now New York-Presbyterian Hospital since 1927, Weill Cornell Medical College ... see job
Join the Pack! A community with nearly 8,000 faculty and staff, and 30,000 students. NC State is one of the largest employers ... see job
SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING AND APPLIED SCIENCE POSITION: The Department of Paper and Chemical Engineering (PCE) at Miami ... see job
Reasonable and legal
““I lost confidence that that money would be well spent.”
This is a reasonable concern. Further, if the gift was not delivered, he is perfectly within his rights.
JBM, at 6:30 am EDT on June 29, 2006