Guskiewicz’s change of heart creates trust issues with faculty at MSU

Michigan State University board members, donors and President Kevin Guskiewicz worked for the past month to ensure he stayed after his planned departure for Clemson University, but a faculty leader and experts say the reversal has created trust issues.

While the university hammered out the details — including a nearly $400,000 raise and annual private aircraft flight time — the faculty, students and the wider MSU community were kept in limbo. Faculty Senate Chair John Aerni-Flessner said he didn’t know Guskiewicz planned to stay at Michigan State until an hour before the announcement went out on Monday.

“While this is being celebrated on the donor and athletics side, on the academic side, we’re feeling left behind,” said Aerni-Flessner, an associate professor in the School of Residential Community-Engaged Arts and Humanities.

The university’s Academic Congress, which was scheduled to meet Tuesday, plans to take votes of “no confidence” in Guskiewicz and the board. The voting will happen through July 14, and the results will be announced afterward, Aerni-Flessner said.

“(Faculty) are really frustrated,” Aerni-Flessner said. “I’m not sure he can win back the trust of those on campus. … He’s going to really struggle.”

Aerni-Flessner said before Guskiewicz’s Monday announcement the faculty were frustrated with the lack of transparency surrounding when he would leave and who the interim president would be.

Revered MSU basketball coach Tom Izzo has called for a moment of unity following Guskiewicz’s decision to remain in East Lansing. Izzo added in a Monday statement that he was “amazed at the widespread support for Guskiewicz,” from Spartan alumni, community members and observers.

Guskiewicz told The Detroit News in a Tuesday interview that the “outpouring” of support from faculty was one of the reasons he said he wanted to stay at the university and that he would work to win back trust.

But Guskiewicz’s decision does raise questions, even just for the rarity of a move like this, said Judith Wilde, a research professor at the Schar School of Policy and Government at George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia, and an expert in university presidencies. Wilde and her George Mason colleague, Jim Finkelstein, said it created potential doubts about the governance and stability of a university that’s been reeling from turmoil for a decade.

Finkelstein and Wilde said it wasn’t surprising that faculty had serious issues with Guskiewicz’s decision and the way it played out.

“It’s not an accident that this happened in the middle of the summer when the faculty were gone,” Wilde said.

Guskiewicz was the sixth president in six years at Michigan State when he started in March 2024 and the second permanent president since Lou Anna Simon resigned after the sentencing of serial sexual abuser Larry Nassar in 2018. If he hadn’t changed course, the Michigan State board would have been forced to search for its seventh leader in eight years.

Both experts agreed that Guskiewicz would have to win back the trust of critics and doubters who now may question his loyalty and intentions.

Over the next few months, Guskiewicz and the university’s board will have to work on “team building,” said Nick Down, the associate director of external affairs at the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, an organization that promotes academic freedom and accountability in higher education.

“The president needs to accept that he answers to the board, not the other way around,” Down said. “If this whole episode is saying anything to me, it’s that the board and Guskiewicz need to come to a mutual understanding that maybe not everything needs to be agreed upon, but there may be some healthy disagreement.”

MSU president seeks to rebuild trust amid Faculty Senate action

Wariness from some faculty, students and the MSU community is something Guskiewicz seemed to acknowledge in a letter to the campus community sent Monday afternoon. He said he understood some might have concerns and apologized for his role in the instability.

“I recognize that some members of our community may have questions about my commitment,” Guskiewicz said in the letter. “That is understandable. Our university has experienced more than its share of change in recent years, and I regret that my decision-making over the past several weeks added to that uncertainty. For that, I am sincerely sorry.”

In his Tuesday interview, Guskiewicz argued that he has supporters as well among his “world-class faculty.” He contended in his Monday letter to campus that trust is earned “through consistency, transparency and action” as well as humility.

“I have a drawer full of faculty-led notes and emails and text messages,” Guskiewicz told The News. “I feel like we have so much opportunity. And it goes beyond the faculty, but legislators, business leaders across the state of Michigan, alumni that reached out.”

Guskiewicz gets ‘imperial powers’ to stay, expert says

The higher education experts said there could be concerns about the governance of Michigan State going forward because its situation is so rare.

The only comparable situation Wilde said she could think of was the University of Alaska’s president, James Johnsen, who was set to become president of the University of Wisconsin system, the Chronicle of Higher Education reported in June 2020. Johnsen withdrew his name following growing criticism of his record in Alaska and of Wisconsin’s search and stepped down from his role at the University of Alaska shortly afterward, Alaska Public Media reported.

“The difference between here and Alaska, the people from Alaska didn’t want (Johnsen),” Wilde said. “In this case, people at Michigan State must have been eager to have (Guskiewicz) back.”

In early June, a campaign called “We Heart Kevin” launched on social media and was boosted on social media by the Izzo Legacy Foundation, which is led by Izzo’s wife, Lupe. The campaign’s website offered downloadable signs and a space to post messages in support of Guskiewicz.

Although some posts on the campaign’s website called for Guskiewicz to change his plans and return to the university, Pat Gillespie, a prominent Lansing-area developer who organized the campaign with other Michigan business owners, said it wasn’t necessarily intended to woo the president back.

It’s clear Guskiewicz is now leading the board instead of the trustees overseeing his presidency, Finkelstein said.

“The board has given him essentially imperial powers to stay around,” he said.

But the board had a duty to ensure leadership continuity and to provide steady governance, especially during a period of uncertainty, the Association of Governing Boards and Universities and Colleges said in a statement.

A board needs a healthy and constructive relationship between itself and the president —one grounded in trust, clear roles, open communication and a shared commitment to the institution’s mission, the association said. When challenges arise, established governance processes and thoughtful decision-making help support institutional stability and maintain confidence among campus stakeholders and the broader community, the group said.

AGB conducted a review of the Michigan State board in April 2026, which found the board ranked low in leadership, shared governance and board experience. However, the organization found the board ranked high in commitment to MSU and its students, according to the review, which The News obtained through a public records request.

Down said the relationship of the board and the president was the most concerning thing for him over the next few months. The board, in his mind, is not in a strong enough position to oversee Guskiewicz and push back if needed.

“That’s the main concern for me, rather than if he’ll stay,” Down said. “Presidents come and go, board members come and go, but the board is responsible for the long-term governance of the institution.”

This piece was originally published by The Detroit News on July 8, 2026.