Legal Literacy Beyond the General Counsel’s Office

Many Christian colleges approach legal issues in one of two unhealthy ways. Some avoid attorneys until a situation becomes serious enough that leadership has no choice but to make the call. Others involve legal counsel in nearly every operational decision, creating a culture where employees become hesitant to act without formal approval.

According to Andrew Smith, attorney and Title IX coordinator at Moody Bible Institute, both approaches create problems. The first creates unnecessary institutional risk. The second creates organizational paralysis.

For Christian colleges navigating increasing regulatory complexity, tighter budgets, and growing public scrutiny, the larger issue may not simply be legal compliance. It may be whether institutions are developing enough legal awareness throughout the organization to make wise operational decisions before problems escalate. That distinction matters because many institutional problems are not caused by bad intent. They are caused by leaders and employees who do not recognize legal implications until the institution is already under pressure.

Many Institutions Bring Legal in Too Late

One of the strongest insights from Smith’s conversation is his observation that institutions often treat legal counsel as the final stop in a process rather than part of the process itself.

He describes large institutional projects like a moving train. Finance, operations, IT, facilities, and outside vendors are all connected to the project as it gains momentum. But many institutions leave legal disconnected until the very end. By that point, contracts are nearly finalized, timelines are established, vendors are waiting, and money has already been committed. Then legal raises concerns that should have been identified months earlier.

At that stage, even relatively minor issues become expensive. Projects stall. Timelines shift. Momentum disappears. Institutions are forced to revisit decisions under pressure rather than thoughtfully evaluating risk from the beginning.

Smith’s point is not that legal counsel should control institutional strategy. It is that legal awareness should be integrated earlier into operational planning. Institutions function more effectively when legal is treated as part of the leadership process rather than an emergency response mechanism.

That observation is particularly relevant for Christian colleges operating with lean administrative teams. Smaller institutions often rely on outside counsel only when necessary because of financial limitations. While understandable, that model can unintentionally increase costs later when avoidable issues surface too late in the process.

Over-Reliance on Legal Can Be Just as Harmful

At the other end of the spectrum, Smith warns about institutions that become overly dependent on attorneys for routine operational decisions.

In those environments, leaders stop exercising judgment because every decision feels risky. Employees become hesitant to move forward without legal review. Basic operational decisions slow down unnecessarily, and institutions drift toward what Smith describes as “analysis paralysis.”

This is especially common when institutions create compliance cultures driven primarily by fear of liability rather than by organizational clarity and trust. The result is often a leadership culture where employees feel incapable of making decisions independently. Legal counsel becomes responsible not only for managing risk, but for driving institutional decision-making itself.

Smith argues that this is neither healthy nor sustainable. Attorneys serve an important role, but they should remain adjacent to institutional leadership rather than replacing it. Presidents, cabinet leaders, deans, and department heads still need the confidence and awareness to make informed decisions within their own areas of responsibility.

That requires a different institutional mindset. Instead of asking legal to solve every problem, institutions should focus on helping employees recognize issues earlier and understand basic areas of risk before decisions are finalized.

Legal Literacy Is Becoming a Leadership Competency

One of the more practical ideas Smith introduces is the concept of “law-related training” for employees. Importantly, he does not mean turning staff members into attorneys. He means helping institutional leaders become more legally aware in their day-to-day responsibilities.

Most colleges already invest heavily in leadership training, cybersecurity awareness, ethics training, and student conduct education. Smith’s argument is that legal literacy increasingly belongs in that category as well.

Employees across campus regularly make decisions involving contracts, student safety, vendor agreements, events, transportation, housing, technology platforms, and external partnerships. Yet many have little understanding of the legal implications connected to those decisions.

Smith points to simple examples that institutions often overlook. An employee agrees to software terms of service without realizing the contract automatically renews. A department organizes off-campus transportation without considering liability concerns. An event is approved without evaluating avoidable safety risks.

None of these situations necessarily involve negligence. More often, they reflect limited awareness. For Christian colleges with constrained budgets and limited legal staffing, this becomes especially important. Institutions cannot realistically send every operational decision through outside counsel. But they can develop leaders who know when to pause, ask better questions, and identify issues early enough to prevent larger problems later.

Policies Matter Less Than Institutional Practice

Smith also highlights another leadership problem that extends well beyond Title IX: institutions often confuse having policies with being operationally prepared.

Many colleges have extensive policy manuals that few employees consistently understand or follow in practice. Procedures may satisfy accreditation or compliance requirements on paper while remaining disconnected from how the institution actually functions day to day. That disconnect becomes dangerous during moments of crisis.

Courts, regulators, and investigators rarely evaluate institutions based solely on whether policies exist. They examine whether policies were followed consistently and whether institutional practices aligned with what leadership claimed publicly.

This creates a significant challenge for Christian higher education because institutions often emphasize mission and values language without regularly testing whether operational behavior reflects those commitments consistently across campus life.

Smith repeatedly emphasizes consistency. Institutions cannot selectively apply theological convictions, safety standards, or accountability structures only when pressure emerges. Policies, procedures, employee practices, and institutional culture must reinforce one another over time. That work is less visible than drafting a new policy, but ultimately much more important.

A More Mature Approach to Institutional Risk

The most valuable insight from Smith’s perspective may be that institutional risk is not primarily a legal problem. It is a leadership and organizational awareness problem.

Christian colleges do not need leaders who panic at every legal concern or leaders who ignore risk until a crisis occurs. They need leaders capable of integrating mission, operational wisdom, student care, and legal awareness together in everyday institutional life.

That requires institutions to move beyond reactive compliance cultures and toward proactive organizational maturity. It requires stronger communication across departments, clearer operational processes, better training, and leadership willing to evaluate whether institutional practices actually match institutional values.

For Christian higher education, that work is not separate from mission. It is part of stewarding institutions faithfully and responsibly in a complex environment.

This blog came from an interview with Andrew Smith, attorney and Title IX coordinator at Moody Bible Institute, hosted by Philip Dearborn, president of ABHE on the podcast Biblical Higher Ed Talk. Click below to watch the full interview.