• I used to imagine that the adults around me had gone through some mid-life personality reboot that totally separated them from their younger selves (and caused them to drive more slowly, and care about money and housekeeping). I've never experienced such a reboot. I've learned a great deal, understand situations better and make different choices, but my college experience is still alive for me, and my younger self still sees through my eyes. College is real life, and you are experiencing a part of your forever self.

• What changes a lot after college is that situations and habits tend to become sticky, in the sense that they evolve more slowly. The pressure you feel right now about choosing a major or planning for a job or graduate school turns into a kind of gravitational pull, pinning you wherever you land. Nobody calls "time" at the end of every semester and moves you to a new schedule and new classes. The kind of self-motivation you can experience and develop in college student organizations becomes a crucial life skill if you want to continue growing and blazing your own trail.

• Maybe your experience in student government, or in some other community that matters to you, is like mine: You identify with the group almost as a living thing of which you are a part. Its history is your history. And maybe you know, in the back of your mind, that one day you too will pass into history. Your chance to make a difference is time-limited, and therefore poignant and powerful. Embrace this knowledge!  It is what makes you alive, makes you real. You will have many years, later, never to regret having been truly present and given your all while you could. 

• A related thought: For the gathering 25 years ago, we tracked RSVPs using Post-It notes on the glass in front of the presidents' photographs; blue for attending, pink for not, yellow for no response, white for deceased. By the time we were done, the Post-Its formed a clear pattern: nearly all blues and pinks in front of the photos from roughly the 1940s onward; then a mix of yellows and whites from the 1930s; and before that, back to first president in 1919, a sea of white notes. 25 years later, the RSVP list shows that the sea of white has surged ahead, and some of the presidents who attended that long-ago gathering have passed away. No president who served prior to 1944 is yet alive. While I hope it is many, many years distant, your own white note is on its way. So seize the day.

The newest of the display cases, showing the most recent presidents (My photo is in the top row, fourth from the left)

November 12, 1987

Kimberly Moffitt, assistant professor of American studies, served as an election expert for two radio program in the days leading up to and following the November 6 election.

On Monday, November 5, Moffitt appeared on the “Marc Steiner Show” to weigh in on the final day of a tight race.  Moffitt questioned whether the race was actually as tight as the media portrayed it to be.

“I see it as the media’s role to make sure we are engaged in this way and to believe that there is something to tune into, so that we make sure to either tube into their station, or show up at the polls tomorrow.  I’m not sure it’s as neck and neck as we are positioning it to be, but I believe it is good business for it to be neck and neck,” she said.

Following the election, Moffitt appeared on “Midday with Dan Rodricks” on Thursday, November 8 to discuss the results.

“We’re now at the place where I think the GOP has often acknowledged the 80s as its heyday.  And largely that’s linked to Reagan and his time representing and serving our country. But he himself always counted the 50s as America’s heyday.  And I think where we are now, the reality is that neither of those decades mean anything significant or monumental, especially to the under 40 crowd and certainly to ethnic minorities.  And based on that, the GOP seemed to be a political party that disconnected and removed from any sense of what those two populations in this country would be able to support and endorse,” she said.

Discover Goldman Sachs
Virtual Information Series and Recruiting Effort

We are pleased to introduce our Discover Goldman Sachs virtual information series and recruiting effort. Through this effort we aim to broaden our reach and provide you a better opportunity to learn about our internship opportunities. We will be offering:

• Video webcast sessions to learn about who we are, what we do and our divisional career opportunities
• Topical training sessions to enhance your resume writing, interview and self-promotion skills
• A formal interview process at the Goldman Sachs office location of your preference
• Networking opportunities with Goldman Sachs professionals across various divisions

Please join our webcast sessions the weeks of November 12, November 26, and December 3, 2012. Participants can register for multiple sessions.

Events Schedule and Registration Links is listed in the attached document at the bottom of this entry.

Process and How to Apply to the Internship

This process offers you the opportunity to be considered for a summer analyst interview to the extent that we do not already host interviews on your campus.

To apply, complete an application at goldmansachs.com/careers by 11:59pm EST by December 5, 2012 or January 6, 2013 depending on your division and location selections (see deadlines below)

• Use code GS13 in the advertised position ID drop-down field. You must apply using this code in order to be considered
• Express interest in up to three locations and divisions and enter up to two application codes if you are interested in other Goldman Sachs programs

Please note you may apply only once for the 2013 recruiting year and will not be able to make additional changes to your application once submitted.

*If you are interested in more than one division with different application deadlines, please apply by the earlier deadline.  

Additional Application Information:

• Unsure of Subdivision? – If you are unsure as to which group or subdivision that you prefer within one of our divisions, please leave this section blank and you will be considered for all groups hiring for that division.
• Studying Abroad in Spring 2013? – Use code ABROAD13 if you will be studying abroad during the Spring 2013 semester and will be unavailable to interview on campus at that time.
• Interested in the Scholarship for Excellence (SFE)? – The Goldman Sachs SFE recognizes outstanding achievement and community service of diverse sophomores and juniors. The award is an integral part of our diversity recruiting effort, helping to attract Black, Hispanic and Native American students to careers at Goldman Sachs. If you are interested in applying, please include the SFE code in your online application (GS13SFE). Additional instructions on how to apply for the scholarship are available via this link (required step).
• Interested in one of our other regions? – If you are interested in a division or region not participating in our accelerated process, see additional information on our regional recruiting processes. Please note in order to be considered, you must apply by the earlier deadline and your application will be considered by that division or region at the appropriate timeline.
   

For additional application tips, review our Application FAQs and Checklist.

(by Virginia Byrne)

Sustainable procurement work has never been more exciting. New data, science and processes are coming together with years of on-the-ground experience to create a new paradigm. A higher education pilot project is laying the groundwork for a sustainable procurement leadership recognition program, modeled on the U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED rating system. If that program comes to fruition, it could radically accelerate the adoption and effectiveness of sustainable procurement in sectors far beyond higher education.

This article originally appeared in the September Issue of College Planning & Management magazine. AASHE is currently soliciting institutions interesting in participating in the pilot project described in this article. Please contact purchasing@aashe.org for further details.

In the early days of the “green” purchasing movement, institutional procurement professionals only had to focus on a few product attributes, such as recycled content, or on a few eco-labels, such as FSC certified wood. In fact, of the more than 400 eco-labels tracked by Ecolabel Index today, only 25 pre-date 1996. Those simple days are long gone. In addition to navigating the explosion in eco-labels, buyers are now expected to take into account the impact of products throughout their whole life cycle. What are the waste, water and air pollution impacts during manufacture? What about during their use? And what happens at the end of their useful life? Taking all these impacts into account requires matching them up with credible eco-labels or standards that certify those impacts have been mitigated to a specified degree. It also requires having a plan for the reuse, recycling or safe disposal of the product at the time of purchase.

But environmental factors are no longer the only points of emphasis for the responsible purchasing movement. Thinking more holistically, “sustainable procurement” requires taking into account the economic and social impacts of products as well as environmental impacts throughout their lifecycle. Total Cost of Ownership accounting helps institutions avoid buying a product whose lower up-front cost is more than offset by inefficient power consumption that drives up utility bills during the product’s use or the inclusion of toxins that incur hefty disposal fees. Buying local strengthens the community in which an institution resides. Similarly, buying from historically under-utilized businesses, such as those owned by women and minorities, returns resources to the communities in ways that better reflect the demographics the institution serves. Ensuring that products are not manufactured in sweatshops supports employers that provide healthy working conditions while also reducing the institution’s risk for bad publicity.

When all of these factors are combined, the resulting synergy often produces elegant and unexpected solutions that are a win-win-win from a social, environmental and economic perspective. While implementing a green cleaning program, Rutgers University reduced its annual cleaning chemical costs more than 20% by simplifying the number of chemicals in use and by metering portions so there was less waste. Because workers were no longer being exposed to harsh chemicals, the institution reaped a further savings in lower worker compensation insurance premiums. “The janitorial staff liked the new products so much they wanted to take them home, so we set up a program for them to purchase them at a discount,” recalls Kevin Lyons, director of the Supply Chain Management program at Rutgers Business School and author of Buying for the Future: Contract Management and the Environmental Challenge.

Complexity Compounded

Until now, it has been the responsibility of each institution to pull all of these pieces together into a coherent sustainable procurement program. Typically, institutions interested in starting such a program are advised to form a stakeholder group, review the best practices and policies at peer institutions, draft a sustainable procurement policy that defines what purchases count as sustainable, design a program to implement the policy and determine metrics for measuring the program’s success. Most institutions could execute that process when there were only a handful of eco-labels and standards, but as the complexity of factors has increased, the cost of this process has become an increasingly high hurdle for nascent sustainable procurement programs.

Institutions pursuing this path today usually make the task manageable by borrowing from the policies of pre-existing sustainable procurement programs, many of which are not keeping their policies up to date with rapidly changing science and market conditions. The result is a patchwork of similar but different policies and programs, each with its own metrics for success. This discordance confuses vendors and makes it difficult for institutions to share the cost of training. And when it comes time to trumpet the accomplishments of the program, it’s difficult to do so in a way that is widely recognized.

Bottom Line Results

As the complexity of the marketplace and policy environment grows, so too do the pressures to deliver results. While stakeholders in the past might have been satisfied to see their institution bump up the recycled content in its copier paper, now they want to know more. How big was the impact of that change? Given that paper use continued to rise, did the switch actually produce a net benefit? What’s the total impact of the institution’s purchases? Is it going up or down? How can we cut it in half? In many cases the procurement staff don’t have the data or the scientific backgrounds to answer these questions, but these are the kinds of questions that have to be answered if an institution is serious about sustainability.

Institutional stakeholders aren’t the only ones asking questions. Procurement staff are increasingly being asked to report sustainability spend data to third parties. In 2011, thirty percent of the respondents to an annual Green Procurement Survey conducted by the National Association for Educational Procurement (NAEP) said they are now reporting their “green spend” to external parties, up from 19% just a year prior. Naturally, in the absence of a standardized sustainable procurement assessment tool, each third party is asking for the reporting of similar but different data.

A New Paradigm

The time appears to be ripe for a standardized assessment and leadership recognition program for sustainability in institutional procurement. The need is clear and the list of potential benefits is long (see info box). Just as LEED allowed building professionals without sustainability science degrees to create buildings that make sustainability scientists swoon, a similar program for institutional purchasing can empower procurement professionals to produce dramatic benefits for the planet, society and their institution’s bottom line - without their having to be experts in the science of Life Cycle Assessments.

A pilot project launched this summer by the Green Products Roundtable (GPR) and the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE) intends to explore exactly how such a program might work. The project will use the best available science and knowledge from the field to assess the effectiveness of the procurement credits in AASHE’s Sustainability Tracking, Assessment & Rating System (STARS), a transparent, self-reporting framework that more than 300 colleges and universities are now using to assess their sustainability performance. As Chris O’Brien, American University’s Director of Sustainability and STARS Steering Committee member, observes, “The STARS procurement credits are filling in the gap in the absence of a comprehensive procurement assessment tool, so we want to know that STARS is prioritizing the right things.“

The pilot project grew out of a public meeting GPR hosted this past January in Washington, D.C. The roundtable group, convened by The Keystone Center and made up of institutional purchasers, manufacturers, retailers, standards developers, environmental groups and government liaisons, was just wrapping up four years of intensive work tackling difficult and foundational questions such as “what is a green product?” and “how do you know if an eco-label is credible?” and “how should organizations prioritize product areas of concern?” The group’s dialogue and research had produced a powerful decision-making “framework” that it believed could answer those questions, and many more, by strategically combining the best available science, current knowledge from the field and real-world procurement data (see infographic). At the public meeting, GPR presented a draft business plan for a new nonprofit that would help institutional procurement professionals evaluate the environmental claims of products. But, as Jason Pearson of TRUTHstudio, a strategy consultancy that helped to develop the business plan and continues to coordinate the project, recalls, “We heard loud and clear from the institutional representatives present that they wanted more than just a method for evaluating products. They wanted a program that would guide and recognize institutional leadership in procurement.”

Looking Long Term

While the pilot project’s short-term goal is to evaluate the existing STARS procurement credits using the GPR framework and recommend how they could be improved in future versions of STARS, a secondary goal is to sketch out what a stand-alone assessment and leadership recognition program for sustainable institutional procurement might entail. Given that the lowest impact purchase is an avoided purchase, how would the assessment tool recognize and reward source-reduction and in-sourcing – in addition to buying preferable new products? End-user education also needs to be evaluated and rewarded because misuse of a preferable product can have a big negative impact while education can multiply positive benefits by influencing end users’ own purchasing decisions.

If this second part of the project goes well, the plan is to build a multi-stakeholder organization to develop and implement the stand-alone assessment tool and leadership recognition program. To be successful in that effort, the project will need the wisdom and participation of procurement trade associations, group purchasing organizations, vendors, government agencies, educational institutions, standards developers, manufacturers, service providers, software and ERP vendors and nonprofits focused on social and environmental issues. If you or your organization would be interested in participating in the pilot, or being kept in the loop as it proceeds, the project team would welcome your involvement (contact purchasing@aashe.org).

Accommodating Variation

Given the wide variation between institutions and what they buy, it’s reasonable to wonder if a standardized approach is possible. In LEED’s early days, many wondered the same thing about the wisdom of taking a standardized approach when assessing the sustainability of building projects that varied greatly in terms of scale and locale. In response, LEED was designed to accommodate variation while providing clear guidance on the highest priority impact areas, which are shared by the majority of building projects.

The variability in institutional procurement has a similar dynamic. As Duff Erholtz observed in CP&M last September, “Every school is different and has many unique needs. Yet, the vast majority of purchases one school makes are the same as those purchased by every other school. We all need flooring, furniture, office supplies, copiers and the like.” Similar to LEED, a standardized assessment tool for sustainable procurement will have to accommodate the various spend profiles of large, small, private, public, residential and non-residential institutions, prioritizing and providing clear guidance on the highest impact product categories that are shared by the majority of institutions while at the same time providing room for innovation. How that will work is the sort of thing the pilot project will be exploring with the help of the GPR framework.

Worth a Chance

Writing for the Institute for Supply Management’s eSides newsletter in 2009, Kady Srinivasan said, “A significant need exists for standardized, solid practices, metrics and frameworks to help you establish a business case for green products and methods to cost-efficiently implement those practices.” Filling that need for standards can be tricky business, given that there are few things that make people and organizations more uncomfortable than the prospect of someone else telling them what’s best. LEED has been incredibly successful as a voluntary standard that is driven by leadership recognition. Will the same model work for sustainable procurement? We can only find out by trying. Given the excellent groundwork that’s been laid, now is the time to give it a chance.

Alumni representing a multiple Greek organizations gathered last month during Homecoming to celebrate the 25th anniversary of UMBC’s chapter of Sigma Alpha Epsilon Fraternity. Nearly 100 SAE alumni and active members attended the event at the Sheraton in Columbia on October 13, said Jim Lotfi ’89, visual and performing arts, who advises the student fraternity.

In addition to recognizing some of the group’s founding brothers, Hugh Clifton Carr, III ’89 and Shawn Walker ’99 were presented with the “Order of the Lion” for outstanding Alumni service to the fraternity, Lotfi said.

“I was very happy to see so many Alumni attend the reunion,” he said. “Many attendees hadn’t seen each other since graduation but we had conversations as if we had seen each other yesterday. The bonds we developed in the fraternity have lasted all these years.”

SAE was granted its charter at UMBC on October 10, 1987. Currently there are 29 active members on campus. Its mission, Lotfi said, is to promote the highest standards of friendship, scholarship, and service for our members based upon the ideals set forth by our Founders and as specifically enunciated in our creed, “The True Gentleman.” Visit the SAE site.

Members of SAE pose at their chapter’s 25th anniversary celebration in October.

Alumni representing a multiple Greek organizations gathered last month during Homecoming to celebrate the 25th anniversary of UMBC’s chapter of Sigma Alpha Epsilon Fraternity. Nearly 100 SAE alumni and active members attended the event at the Sheraton in Columbia on October 13, said Jim Lotfi ’89, visual and performing arts, who advises the student fraternity.

In addition to recognizing some of the group’s founding brothers, Hugh Clifton Carr, III ’89 and Shawn Walker ’99 were presented with the “Order of the Lion” for outstanding Alumni service to the fraternity, Lotfi said.

“I was very happy to see so many Alumni attend the reunion,” he said. “Many attendees hadn’t seen each other since graduation but we had conversations as if we had seen each other yesterday. The bonds we developed in the fraternity have lasted all these years.”

SAE was granted its charter at UMBC on October 10, 1987. Currently there are 29 active members on campus. Its mission, Lotfi said, is to promote the highest standards of friendship, scholarship, and service for our members based upon the ideals set forth by our Founders and as specifically enunciated in our creed, “The True Gentleman.” Visit the SAE site.

Members of SAE pose at their chapter’s 25th anniversary celebration in October.

Claudio Galindo of UMBC’s Language, Literacy, and Culture Ph. D. program was recently recognized by Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake for her work within the Latino community of the city and state, according to a statement from the regional community organization CASA de Maryland.

The mayor’s statement came as part of the city’s celebration of Hispanic Heritage Month. Speaking on Dr. Galindo, Rawlings-Blake said that “when President Obama announced his program to allow immigrant students for deferred action and work authorization in the United States this past summer, Claudia was one of the first to volunteer to assist with the process. Since the first community DACA clinic at CASA de MD on August 16, Dr. Claudia Galindo has volunteered over 50 hours helping students fill out applications, and reviewing supporting documents”.

The UMBC community commends Dr. Galindo on her important work with the Latino community of Maryland, and wishes her well in her future endeavors with CASA de Maryland.