Private colleges and universities – and the board members and presidents who lead them – must recognize that they operate within a new age of transparency and disclosure of executive compensation policies. The days of quiet side deals, of surreptitiously padding the paychecks of presidents through the creative use of footnotes or financial gymnastics, are over. The pay packages at institutions of higher learning, whether they represent base salaries, bonuses, deferred retirement compensation, or all of the above and more, eventually will see the light of day.

This scenario has played out with reputation-damaging results at Brandeis University. Last fall, Brandeis became a magnet for criticism from students, faculty and the public at large over the $1.2 million it paid its former president after he had left office in 2010. Only a few months later, after the pay scandal had receded from the front pages of daily newspapers and seemingly dissipated, Brandeis had the audacity to disclose a nearly $5 million lump sum payment to its ex-leader for sabbatical pay and deferred compensation.

Setting aside questions about whether this level of compensation package for a former president with a limited role on campus was deserved or excessive, Brandeis should actually be commended for revealing this seemingly growing golden parachute. The silver lining in the announcement that further clouded the issue was that the school actually became proactive and disclosed the deferred compensation years ahead of schedule. Brandeis opened its wallet – or, in this case, its checkbook – in an entirely new way.

By law Brandeis was not required to disclose the dollar amount until a 2016 tax return filing; but under its new compensation policy, put into place following the firestorm over its pay practices, the college decided to put it out in the open because it wants to “become a national leader in terms of best practices for executive compensation.” So in an ironic twist, Brandeis has emerged as a model of sorts from a situation that tarnished its reputation and irked critics of out-of-control executive compensation in the not-for-profit, higher-education arena.

The lesson from this one school’s run through the compensation wringer is that private colleges and universities need to understand that they are in a fish bowl. Once they accept and internalize this reality, then they can legitimately go about the exercise of disclosing, explaining and, in many cases, justifying the compensation packages of their presidents.

The truth is, we all have to get over the salary hang-up that inhibits the hiring and retention of the very best talent with the sharpest managerial skills. Yes, these are tax-exempt, non-profit institutions, but they are not the local community chest. They are multifaceted organizations with thousands of students, faculty and staff; substantial real estate holdings and developments; fragile relationships with local elected officials; and complex collective bargaining agreements. The largest private colleges operate multibillion-dollar budgets and even bigger endowments that are crucial to the financial health and long-term success of these academic institutions. And in these times when every organization depends upon the success of its marketing strategy – as opposed to decades past when good colleges, good lawyers, and good physicians never had a need to market themselves – college presidents have to be visionaries who can develop and deliver a strategy to grow and preserve their institutions.

Given the complexity of colleges and universities today, there is really no distinction between a college president’s job and a private CEO. They both work amazingly long hours, deal with similar challenges, and face the same rigorous evaluation from their boards. And the positions are alike in that there is a cost to leadership that often comes at a premium.

The boards of major colleges and universities have a responsibility to ensure that their executive compensation packages, including deferred compensation plans, are competitive enough to attract and retain the right leaders. The college market is highly competitive, with schools jockeying for the better-quality student, so boards must search for and keep hold of a leader who can make their institution stand out.

Take Elon University in North Carolina, which transformed itself from small-town college to nationally ranked institution by shifting to a strategy to appeal to out-of-state students, including many from Massachusetts, with high academic standards. Currently, Only 22 percent of its students hail from the Tar Heel State. Elon is a big draw for Bay State students and dollars; Massachusetts accounts for about 10 percent of enrollment, the highest percentage of any other state. Elon’s president, Leo Lambert, who has continued the transformational strategy that began under his predecessor, earned $542,051 in 2011 – more than 72 percent of other presidents in the latest executive compensation survey by The Chronicle of Higher Education.

These examples show that if you want leaders who can transform your campus, build the endowment, and position it for growth, you are going to need to pay them, and that includes providing for retirement. But college and university boards must also establish written compensation policies that emphasize standards, fairness and transparency. They must also be comfortable enough with their compensation policies and packages to see them splashed across front pages. Because now more than ever, they will.

Barry Koslow is president and CEO of MKA Executive Planners, a Woburn-based executive benefit and retirement planning firm. He can be reached at bkoslow@mkaplanners.com.