Results of a 1979 survey of 46 states on patterns of program reduction are presented, and the institutional shrinkage process currently being implemented at the University of Michigan is examined. Additionally, several hierarchical and sequential reduction strategies, including Balderston's budgetary strategies, are reviewed. At the University of Michigan four specific strategies are being considered: across-the-board cuts, reduction of nonacademic programs, long-range faculty reduction procedures, and program discontinuance. At the University of Michigan it became obvious at various points that there are definite limits to faculty and student participation in this institutional process. It is suggested that the pros and cons of discontinuing a department cannot be resolved by the collective faculty or students. The size of the institution and the complexity of its various budgets and existing commitments limit insight and thus the utility of input. It is recommended that rather than have the administration gathering initial information and the affected department gathering counter information, the entire function might be delegated to the institutional research office. Disagreement concerning the rationale for or against program/department discontinuance seems to be over the relative importance of quality versus centrality of the discipline. Additional problems regarding the elimination of academic programs are described. (SW)