Articles

Why University Administration Is So Difficult & What to do About it. - Thursday, December 04 2008

Submitted by EntecCorp on Fri, 2004-11-05 13:39. Administration

Universities are complex, ambiguous, paradoxical and at times infuriating places. They also have a nobility of purpose and offer a richness of experience – intellectual, cultural and social – that are found in few organizations. In this environment the university administrator, especially one not from the academic ranks, is constantly struggling with a difficult, dynamic balance. The academic community is a primary source of the very richness we value, but many of its members tend not to embrace "corporate" priorities and perspectives. The administrator is expected to protect the particular interests of the members of this community, and at the same time serve the goals of the institution as a whole. This requires the achievement of a complex equilibrium in the face of unrelenting budget pressures, the uncertainties and upheavals associated with a much more competitive world, and the ever sharpening focus of public accountability. Self-fulfillment also demands a balance in personal life if one is to avoid succumbing to the enormous pressures that arise. Consequently today’s university administrator faces unprecedented personal and organizational challenges. 

There is a significant body of research indicating that many workplaces are exhibiting alarming levels of unhealthy stress. Although very little research has been specifically directed at the circumstances of the "non-academic" university administrator, there is nevertheless growing concern in our institutions that excessive workloads and unhealthy levels of stress are taking unacceptable tolls on both personal and organizational health. Failure to give this issue appropriate attention threatens our universities and its individual administrators.

On behalf of its members CAUBO has been active in a variety of ways. It has directed considerable attention to the indirect costs of research and the deferred maintenance crisis, leading to the promise of some relief on the resource front. In addition CAUBO continues to look for ways to catalyze scholarly research into the health of the university administrator’s workplace. By documenting the conditions that exist and providing quantitative evidence to supplement existing anecdotal material, it is hoped that the issue can enjoy higher priority within our institutions.

With little reason, however, to be sanguine about the health of many university workplaces, this document is designed to contribute to our understanding of the organizational issues that make the administrator’s job such a challenging one. Treating the manifestations of stress while ignoring its underlying causes will do little to address the strategic nature of the organizational threats faced, nor the deeply rooted, anxiety-inducing fear of being unable to cope. The author draws on his long experience as one such administrator – often finding himself in states of high anxiety – to offer a broad framework for enhancing organizational and individual performance.

The document is structured as two papers, the first being a situation assessment, and the second a conceptual framework for action. An annex is also provided which illustrates an application of the framework.

The first paper – Identifying Underlying Causes – reviews the sources of stress in the complex world of the university administrator. It should be of interest to anyone who wants to have a better understanding of the range of issues that conspire to make the workplace so challenging. It explores the implications of (1) recent trends in university resourcing, (2) differences between academic and non-academic systems of operation, (3) an increasingly competitive, technology intensive environment, and (4) the profound consequences of the different mental models held within the university community.

The second paper – A Comprehensive Framework for Action – has been written for those in leadership positions interested in exploring an integrated approach to dealing with these "underlying causes". It draws on the metaphor of the natural world to introduce a two pronged approach to the issues raised in the first paper. One addresses the need for improved self-organizing capacity, and for integrating processes and "workflow" tools that are better suited to the cross-functional, project related nature of the contemporary university’s administrative work. The second presents features of an accountability system that breathe life into an organization’s core identity - its purpose, core beliefs, values and principles - and regulates its self-organizing activities.

The framework for action need not be applied at the enterprise level for benefits to be realized. While an institutional embrace is desirable, it can be applied to advantage in any part of the organization having operational relevance to the reader.

The annex – Applying the Framework to the Development of a Workplace Health Strategy – has been written for the reader who wants a more concrete illustration of the framework’s possible application to a major administrative initiative. The example chosen does not suggest that the framework only applies to workplace health strategies; indeed quite the opposite is true, since the approach applies to all administrative work.

Nor should the reader conclude that a comprehensive, fundamentally different approach is the only way to mitigate the damaging effects of unhealthy workplaces. However, the outline is intended to reinforce the need for a sustaining workplace health program to be anchored in the organization’s core accountability system and workflow processes. While the value of symptomatic treatment of workplace problems is not being dismissed, initiatives that only compensate for the limitations of traditional ways of operating can, ironically, contribute to stress. They are often interpreted as superficial, even cynical, attempts to paper over underlying problems. And where they are unable to demonstrate their contribution to the organization’s overall well being, there is little opportunity for them to survive the tenure of their champions.

***

While we will never eliminate unhealthy stress from our workplaces, I believe we can increase significantly the likelihood of achieving the type of dynamic tension that serves as a source of personal growth and organizational vibrancy, rather than inertia and frustration. These papers attempt to inform that effort within individual universities, as well as stimulate discussion and reflection throughout the CAUBO community.

Follow up:

1. Identifying Underlying Causes
2. A Comprehensive Framework for Action
3. Applying the Framework to the Development of a Workplace Health Strategy