Picture of Arthur J. Lidsky

Arthur J. Lidsky


Dober Lidsky Mathey

Arthur Lidsky became president of DLC+A in 1988, and has served as a planning consultant for colleges and universities since 1971. In this time he has participated in several hundred assignments. For the three years prior to his consulting work, he was Assistant Director of Long-range Planning for the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Recent campus planning includes work for College of Saint Benedict/Saint John’s University, Clemson University, Cyprus International University, Middle Tennessee State University, St. Lawrence University, The College of Wooster, Spelman College and Holy Cross. Programs for new campuses include The American University in Cairo, the Aga Khan University in Pakistan, and the Asian University for Women. Space needs assessment include Cornell University and Ohio State.

Mr. Lidsky has served on facility review panels for the National Science Foundation (NSF); and has been a Principal Investigator for a NSF study that identified an ideal planning process and developed facility standards for secondary school science, math, and technology education programs. He has given lectures, presentations, and invited papers on campus and facility planning at such organizations as SCUP, the Council for Undergraduate Research (CUR), the International Association for College Unions, No Name Facility Conference, Quality Education for Minorities Network (QEM), and the Municipal Art Society of New York. He has been an active participant with Project Kaleidoscope and a member of the PKAL National Steering Committee.

Through his writing and lectures, Mr. Lidsky teaches other professionals, college and university administrators, and faculty about planning and the campus planning process. He teaches campus planning as a faculty member of SCUP’s Integrated Planning Institute—the four-day workshop is Step 2 of a three-step certificate program. Mr. Lidsky was a leader in creating the Institute and its curriculum. Six of his most recent articles are:

“FORM follows FUNCTION? Innovations in Education Mean Flexible Building Design,” Connection: The Journal of the New England Board of Higher Education, New England Board of Higher Education, Summer 2002

“A Perspective on Campus Planning,” New Directions for Higher Education, Building Robust Learning Environments, Jossey-Bass, Fall 2002.

“The Ever Changing Campus,” Facilities Manager, APPA, March 2004.

“Campus Planning without an Academic Plan is not Planning,” Dean & Provost, April 2005.

“The Star Architect Experience is Not Always Stellar,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, April 2005.

“Master Planning Campuses for Today’s Students,” College Planning and Management, January 2006.

Budgeting: STEM facilities in an integrated planning context
Many institutions segregate their planning into three spheres: budgetary, academic, and campus and facility planning. Arthur Lidsky explains that it is necessary to integrate these three plans and communicate ideas and vision with all those involved with the project. Including two exhibits outlining revenues and expenses of the institution and the costs of a project, this essay guides STEM facility planners towards a collaborative and comprehensive new facility plan. # The architect's perspective: Budgeting and financing for STEM facilities
An Overview of the Planning Process
How should a campus think about technology in the broader context of the institutional mission and academic plan? This session will summarize various approaches to facilities planning and the importance of creating an institutional framework for decision-making. Within that context, the session will discuss how to structure a successful planning process and define what should be expected in the outcome; how to do a classroom planning and utilization study; how to set guidelines for creating information commons and related collaborative learning spaces; how to deal with unanticipated setbacks and opportunities; and how to build consensus. As teaching, learning, and communication technologies continuously evolve, this session will also describe strategies for anticipating change.
Case study: What Works: Asking the Right Questions
The Planning Process: Campus & Facility Planning
Essay: Arthur J. Lidsky
Plenary Session V: Progamming and Planning - An Overview
Breakout Session IIIA: Connecting to Institutional Academic Facility Planning
Plenary Session VII
What Questions Should Be on the Table? Elizabeth S. Ericson, Charles J. Kirby, Arthur J. Lidsky, Susan Whitmer
Principles of Strategic Planning for Leadership Teams
Focusing on Leadership, Student Learning & Institutional Transformation