Advertisement

To Merge or Not to Merge: That Is the Question!

Chapter
  • 150 Downloads

Abstract

The transaction stage of the merger is described including the historical background regarding the University’s decision to merge. Deliberations regarding the strengths and limitations of merging the two departments are presented and analyzed. In these discussions, we highlight the politicking of organizational stakeholders who either supported or opposed the merger.

Keywords

Pre-merger stages Merger discussions and strategy Merger resistance and support 

References

  1. Associated Press. (1978, January). Minnesota under scrutiny by U.S for Title IX wrongs. Fairmont Daily Sentinel. Google Scholar
  2. Blount, R., Weiner, J., & Nolan, Z. (1995, November 18). Voelz revels in the progress of women’s athletics. Star Tribune, p. 8C.Google Scholar
  3. Brown, C. (1991, November 28). Big ‘U’ changes suggested: Legislator wants Voelz to run combined program. The StarTribune, p. 9C.Google Scholar
  4. Dickison, C. (1976, July 30). New U women’s athletic director wants fair access to sports coffers. Minnesota Daily, p. 21.Google Scholar
  5. Giel, P. (1975, November 30). Letter to Dr. C. Peter Magrath, President University of Minnesota. University of Minnesota archives, (BOX 192, Folder, Women’s intercollegiate athletics 1972–1976). Minneapolis, MN.Google Scholar
  6. Harman, K., & Meek, V. L. (2002). Introduction to special issue “Merger revisited: international perspectives on mergers in higher education”. Higher Education, 44, 1–4.Google Scholar
  7. Hult, J. S. (1980). The philosophical conflicts between men’s and women’s college athletics. Quest, 32(11), 77–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Jaeger, E. (1974, December 3). Memorandum to C. Peter Magrath. University of Minnesota Archives, (Box 192, Folder, Women’s intercollegiate athletics 1972–1976). Minneapolis, MN.Google Scholar
  9. Kegler, S. B. (1974, October 28). Memorandum to C. Peter Magrath. University of Minnesota Archives, (Box 192, Folder, Women’s intercollegiate athletics 1972–1976).Google Scholar
  10. Minneapolis, MN.Minnesota State Legislature. (1995-1996). HF 1856, 3rd Engrossment, 79th Legislature. Retrieved from https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/text.php?number=HF1856&session_year=1995&session_number=0&version=latest
  11. Ng, E. S., & Wiesner, W. H. (2007). Are men always picked over women? The effects of employment equity directives on selection decisions. Journal of Business Ethics, 76, 177–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Schletzer, V. M, & University of Minnesota ad hoc committee on athletic department merger, 1980. (1980, May 2). Letter to University of Minnesota Vice President, Nils Hasselmo, Administration and Planning. University of Minnesota Archives, Athletics records, Box 66, Minneapolis, MN.Google Scholar
  13. Schweiger, D. M. (2002). M&A integration: A framework for executives and managers. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  14. Staurowsky, E. J. (1996). Blaming the victim: Resistance in the battle over gender equity in intercollegiate athletics. Journal of Sport & Social Issues, 20, 194–210.Google Scholar
  15. Tomlinson, D. (1997, June 17). The big lie. The Denver Post, p. D 10.Google Scholar
  16. Uhlir, G. A. (1987). Athletics and the university: The post-woman’s era. Academe, 73, 25–29.Google Scholar
  17. University of Minnesota, ad hoc committee on athletic department merger. (1980, May 2). Ad hoc committee on athletic department report. University of Minnesota Athletics records, Box 25, Minneapolis, MN.Google Scholar
  18. University of Minnesota. Task Force on Intercollegiate Athletics. (1978). Athletics, 1978 Task Force Report. Retrieved from the University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy, http://purl.umn.edu/116504
  19. University of Minnesota, The Office of the Vice President and Chief of Staff. (2001, December 7). University of Minnesota: Current and future financial challenges in intercollegiate athletics. Minneapolis, MN.Google Scholar
  20. University of Minnesota, The Office of the Vice President and Chief of Staff. (2002, April 12). University of Minnesota: The president’s athletics financial plan. Minneapolis, MN.Google Scholar
  21. University of Minnesota: University Relations. (1979). Brief, 1979. University of Minnesota. Retrieved from the University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy, http://purl.umn.edu/98655
  22. University of Minnesota, Women’s Intercollegiate Athletics. (1990, Fall). Winner’s Circle: 1988–1992. University of Minnesota. Retrieved from the University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy, http://purl.umn.edu/133070
  23. University of Minnesota, Women’s Intercollegiate Athletics. (2002, Winter). Women’s athletics proponents urge for continued support. Winners Circle: 1998–2002. University of Minnesota. Retrieved from the University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy, http://purl.umn.edu/123692
  24. Zgoda, J. (1995, November 19). Bigger gains will come in next 20 years: The last 20 years have brought a change in attitudes, funding and facilities. Now, athletic directors hope to fill those facilities. The Star Tribune, p. 1C.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA
  2. 2.Minnesota State UniversityMankatoUSA
  3. 3.University of OtagoDunedinNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations