Though the university had high aspirations and goals for the future – it quickly understood that aspirations take money and that money has to come from somewhere. By the mid-eighties the university’s salary scale was the lowest among its peers (Knoll 1995, p. 181). The university struggled to be competitive in its salary scale, which threatened to downgrade the university in status, to decrease the number of top notch faculty members and increase an incompetent staff, and overall lower the quality of education (Knoll 1995, p. 181). The university didn’t want to have limited goals; it wanted to be a comprehensive research university with high national ranking, not just a little, regional institution (Knoll 1995, p. 182). The question was how to keep on this path of excellence if the faculty’s pay couldn’t stay competitive? In 1987 the faculty took action on the university budget to improve their salaries (Knoll 1995, p. 182). In 1988 a new plan was put in place for a salary increase which acknowledged that there could not be major research initiatives without a strong, committed faculty; this new improved budget helped the University’s future look brighter (Knoll 1995, p. 183).