The chancellor should also have made sure to keep the entire process transparent in order to prove to the donors that the funds are being used for the university and this could have been done by involving some staff on how to spend the money to improve the research profile of the university. This way the donors would have been satisfied and motivated.
It is important to keep the donors satisfied after all these are not external donors, they are the staff of the university and it is important for the university to involve them, give them their rightful importance and motivate them to do more for the university. The donors were generous to give for the university so it is the duty of the chancellor to respect the donor’s clean intentions by rewarding them through involvement in the process and also considering their opinions (McKendrick, 2005).
It is true that matching funds have a condition and in this case it was the funds that were supposed to come from UGC but they backed out and the condition could not be fulfilled. The case can be seen in another light as well. Although there was no written contract for refund of money but since the condition could no more be fulfilled then it was the duty of the Chancellor to discuss the situation with the staff and benefactor before coming to a decision of using the money for the university assuming that the staff would still be satisfied with his decision.
These are excerpts of essays please place order for custom essay paper, term papers, research papers, thesis, dissertation, book reports and case studies.