The University of Idaho Argonaut

Corporate responds
I find it interesting that the column “Keep dangerous recruiters away,” in Tuesday’s Argonaut was not the result of a complaint, but rather the writer’s experience (or lack of), perhaps in a class where a questionnaire was taking place. Clearly, the Southwestern representatives have the university’s permission and are following the very guidelines put in place for recruiters on campus. As a side note, the company name was identified in the classroom and on the questionnaire. If interested, the student can come to an information session and learn about the company and the summer selling program.

The writer asks more questions than she is able to provide answers for. Insinuating the school receives money to allow Southwestern to recruit is crossing the line — even guised as opinion. I venture to say the many successful people of Idaho who participated in the program and all other program alumni including the governors, lawyers, doctors, educators, congressmen and women and entrepreneurs nationwide know exactly why Southwestern is allowed on the University of Idaho campus. A program rich with history that builds character in young people and helps them achieve their goals in life is a good thing.

As a company, we strongly encourage the freedom to express opinions — just as we express the freedom of commercial free speech. When opinions are jaded or have an agenda is when they come dangerously close to libel and defamation. This methodology and action in the form of writing can become destructive when used without having facts or being written in an unbalanced fashion. It stifles a legitimate entrepreneurial experience for students and breeds other close-minded information based on opinion rather than fact. But, hey — that’s why there is an Opinion Page, right?

Holistic Leadership
We have a critical decision to make come Monday regarding the ASUI Senate and Presidential election, and I believe a critical distinction needs to be made regarding the essence of leadership and service. In Tuesday’s paper, the Gaffney/Huddleston presidential endorsement made the assumption that leadership was about coordination and committee work and that a candidate’s viability and experience rested on these matters. They are right that leadership must be active, but I think they went too far in their endorsement by implying that spearheading committees or projects is the means of assessing and demonstrating leadership.

This is but one facet of true leadership, and while it is by far the most visible, it is not the most important. What’s critically important is the means of leadership and how our leaders achieve these goals by utilizing compromise, student input and minority perspectives. It’s about how our leaders will treat us and the people they work with. It’s about closing down the distance in communication and making people feel necessary in order to achieve the goals proposed, as opposed to focusing only on select groups.

Leadership elevates the group rather than the leader, and derives it’s power not from the leader’s ability to pursue change, but from their ability to humble themselves and empower the others rather than themselves. The students are the change, and they will be the ones to begin the change if given the vision, empowerment, and opportunity. The essence is to serve, not entertain, to work and not expect recognition, and to lead by uniting both the Greek, res hall and off-campus students into one vision.

I’m in favor of holistic leadership, and I look forward to seeing you at the polls in voting for Lauren McConnell and Derek Arnold for ASUI President and Vice President.