Stetson Departure | Experts say honesty the best policy for Stetson

The University's handling of the departure of former Dean of Admissions Lee Stetson may be doing Penn more harm than good, crisis-management experts say.

Ever since Stetson announced his resignation at the beginning of the semester, both he and Penn officials have repeatedly refused to give an explanation of the departure.

Penn President Amy Gutmann has only said it was in the "best interests" of both Stetson and the University.

But several public-relations experts say that, in cases like this, the best defense against bad publicity is openness and honesty.

"The rule in any kind of issue that becomes a crisis is that you try to tell as much a you can as often as you can," said Anne Klein, president of Anne Klein Communications Group Inc.

Klein, who handles crisis management for her clients, said being open about negative news is usually the best way to defuse a situation because mystery tends to make things worse.

"The problem is that sometimes [refusal to comment] becomes the story," she said.

Scott Barkett, senior vice president of crisis management for public relations firm Dix & Eaton, agreed.

"When something has gone wrong, the quickest and simplest way to get it behind you is to disclose what you know, admit what went wrong and talk about what your next steps are," he said.

Barkett also cautioned that organizations that avoid this generally accepted crisis-management tactic "expose [themselves] to the possibility of creating a larger story."

The upshot of this open approach can be seen in the departure of Marilee Jones, former admissions dean for the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

When MIT discovered that Jones had falsified parts of her resume, both she and the school issued statements explaining why she was leaving.

Ben Jones, an MIT admissions spokesman, explained the reasoning behind it in a blog post on the MIT admissions Web site.

"Many are asking why MIT didn't accept Marilee's resignation quietly," he wrote. "The answer is simple: Transparency and openness . are the backbone of our culture. People needed to know the specifics to avoid the rampant speculation that would undoubtedly follow otherwise."

Contacted by e-mail yesterday, Ben Jones reiterated that rationale.

"It was in both MIT's and Marilee's best interest to simply tell it like it was," he said.

Marilee Jones' resignation became a national story, but as a result of MIT's openness, the school avoided major damage to its reputation.

But Klein and Norm Hartman of TMT Worldwide said an agreement might exist between Penn and Stetson that forbid either from giving reasons behind his departure.

University officials have not said any such agreement exists when asked why they refuse comment.

University spokeswoman Lori Doyle said that "the departure of a senior executive is not a crisis," and that it happens regularly at institutions like Penn, though she did not provide any examples of similar situations in which no explanation has been given for resignation.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.