Leading in Tough Times Workbook: Case Studies for - NACUBO

Leading in Tough Times Workbook Case Studies for Higher Education Leaders

By Brent D. Ruben and Susan Jurow

2 Leading in Tough Times: Case Studies for Higher Education Leaders Copyright 2012, NACUBO

About the Authors

Brent D. Ruben is executive director of the University Center for Organizational Development and Leadership and distinguished professor of communications at Rutgers University. Susan Jurow is leadership consultant for the National Association of College and University Business Officers.

NACUBO would like to thank Lumina Foundation, an Indianapolis‐based private foundation dedicated to expanding access to and success in education beyond high school, for supporting this project, and in particular Kevin Corcoran, Lumina program director. The authors would like to acknowledge and thank Donna Klinger for her editorial assistance. © 2012 by NACUBO All rights reserved. No portion of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.

National Association of College and University Business Officers

Washington, DC www.nacubo.org

Leading in Tough Times: Case Studies for Higher Education LeadersCopyright 2012, NACUBO

3

Table of Contents

Using This Workbook…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………4

South Ridge State College: Role of the Chief Business Officer……………..…………….……………………..7

Abbreviated Version of Case Study………………….………………………………………….………………………7

Case Study…………………………………….…………………………………………….………………………………………8

Recorder’s Form………………..……………………………………………..……………………………………………….14

Skyline State University: Travel Policy Procedures and Practices Task Force………………….………..15

Abbreviated Version of Case Study………………………………….………………………..………..…………….15

Case Study………………………………………………………..…..…………………………………..………………………16

Recorder’s Form………………………………………………………………………………..………………………………24

Samuel Waters College: Budget Futures Summit Retreat………………………………………………………..25

Abbreviated Version of Case Study…………….…………………………………..…………………………………25

Case Study………………………………….……………….…………………………………………………………………….26

Recorder’s Form……………….…………………………….…………………………………………………………………32

Reginald Murphy College: Gender Equity Issues………………………….………………………………………….33

Abbreviated Version of Case Study……………………………….…………….……………………………………33

Case Study…………………………………………..………………………………………..………………………………….34

Recorder’s Form………………………………………………………………………..……………………………………..40

Timberline University: Art Gallery Faculty Exhibits Program Controversy…………….…….…………..41

Abbreviated Version of Case Study……………………………………………………….………………………..41

Case Study………………………………….……………………………………………………………………………………42

Recorder’s Form………………………………….…………………………………….…………………………………….49

San Pedro College: Staff Productivity and Morale………………………….….……………………………………50

Abbreviated Version of Case Study………………………………………………….………………………………50

Case Study……………………………………………………………….………………………..…………………………….51

Recorder’s Form…………………………………………………….………………………………..………………………56


Using This Workbook

In these uncertain times, campus stakeholders must learn to make the best decision possible in ambiguous situations where there is less than optimal information available and the outcome cannot be predicted.

The case studies in this workbook focus on financial, cultural, and ethical issues that have occurred on many campuses. They raise issues that are not easily addressed or that are resistant to easy consensus. They provide opportunities to practice nimble decision making and engender a sense of shared responsibility. The higher education community can use these case studies in a variety of ways to focus attention and foster discussion on operational and strategic concerns.

Campus leaders can engage their constituents in substantive discussions about the impact of the issues raised by these case studies on their campus, helping faculty, trustees, and administration develop consensus about priorities for engagement, levels of resources required, and/or the need for reallocation of resources. The cases also can be used in a teaching or training environment. Because these cases outline contemporary campus issues, they are useful in either a higher education administration degree program or a leadership training program managed by a campus or higher education association.

Case Study Defined

A case study is a realistic scenario that outlines management and/or technical problems and challenges in a way that provides practical experience with how best to approach and solve them. It describes a situation, and then raises questions to enhance a participant’s understanding of the range of issues that need to be addressed. It permits the participant to propose and test solutions and strategies in a “safe” environment, one that does not have immediate and practical consequences.

Case studies improve a learning experience because they get the participants involved and encourage immediate use of newly acquired skills. They help participants develop skills that they can use in the workplace. The skill set may include:

• Problem identification and definition • Analyzing, understanding, and

interpreting data • Analytical and critical thinking

o Recognition of assumptions and inferences

• Exercising judgment o Making and defending

decisions • Understanding interpersonal

relationships • Communicating ideas and opinions


5

A case study may include some or all of the following:

• Setting the scene o Details of the organization o Description of the players or stakeholders o Outline of the particular challenge or problem

• Available resources, if any • Issues in the work environment that might affect the project

Case Study Components The case studies in this workbook have five parts:

1. Short and Long Versions: Each case study is provided in two forms, so that their use can be tailored to the time available for discussion.

2. Recorder’s Form: A form is provided for each case study to help guide discussion, to track group consensus for reporting to a larger group, and to collect group discussion for further analysis if desired.

3. Discussion and Interactive Options: These sections within the case studies suggest thought provoking questions and provide guidance for managing a dialogue on the topic.

4. Debriefing (Themes and Leadership Competencies): The situations in these case studies reflect issues, strengths, and flaws found in most, if not all, organizations. The case studies are designed to focus on leadership competencies that can and should be exhibited at all levels of the organization to mitigate weaknesses and support organizational effectiveness and achievement. The competencies suggested in these case studies are tied to What Leaders Need to Know and Do by Dr. Brent Ruben, published by NACUBO, 2006.

5. Readings: Additional readings are suggested for those who are interested in developing a greater understanding of the topic under discussion.

Examples of Uses These case studies can be used in several ways. The most appropriate approach will depend on the subject matter, the time available, and the desired outcome. The more time expended, the greater the depth of comprehension, skill utilization, and personal investment in the goals of the organization are likely to occur.


One Hour. With a short amount of time, a presentation or individual reading of the case can be followed by a session of questions and answers to give a group the opportunity to clarify and enhance their understanding of the topic under discussion. This might be open‐ended or more carefully structured with specific questions designed to focus participants on particular aspects of the problem or challenges in the case.

Two Hours. With more time, case studies can be used effectively in small groups to deepen the discussion and insights. In this situation, the case studies are first read and discussed by small groups, using worksheets to direct the dialogue. The responses of each group are reported to the larger group in a plenary setting, and similarities and differences in problem definition and approach can enhance the participants’ appreciation of the challenges inherent in the scenario and their ability to think through the various ways of meeting them.

Four Hours. With additional time and preparation, role playing can be introduced into the case studies. Participants can be asked to consider the situation from the perspective of different stakeholders and to present that individual’s concerns and point of view.


7

South Ridge State University Case Study: Role of the Chief Business Officer

(Abbreviated Version)

The Setting South Ridge State College (SRSC) is a comprehensive state institution with an enrollment of 22,000 primarily undergraduate students. As with many colleges and

universities, SRSC is experiencing difficult years financially. State support has been declining for higher education and other state‐funded agencies and activities. To address the state funding situation, SRSC has increased tuition and student fees substantially in recent years – to the point where this has become a topic in the local media. Because of the budget situation, the university has imposed a temporary hiring freeze for the current academic year, which will likely continue for at least another year. There will be no salary increases this year, and last year faculty and staff increases were limited to contractual payments due for faculty promotions. Campus leaders remain optimistic about the long‐term, but they do not expect the situation to improve in the next several years. Student tuition and fees will have to increase considerably to help address the situation. Your Challenge In your capacity as CBO, a colleague in the budget office mentions to you that she has heard from her son—who attends SRSC and is a member of the Student Life, Campus Programming Committee—that the committee is planning to use student fees to hire a controversial television reality show star as an evening entertainer for the annual new student orientation. You understand that the proposed fee is $30,000. Discussion

1. What, if any, issues are of concern for you? 2. What constituencies might be concerned? What might their concerns be? 3. What, if anything, do you do or say, and to whom? What’s your rationale? 4. What, if anything, do you think should be done? Why?


South Ridge State University Case Study: Role of the Chief Business Officer

Background South Ridge State University (SRSU) is a comprehensive state institution with an enrollment of 22, 000 primarily undergraduate

students. A majority of students major in liberal arts, although there is growing enrollment in business, communication, and education degree programs. SRSU attracts a majority of its students from within the state, drawing most heavily from the six counties surrounding Ridge, a town of 45,000, which is the county seat and location of SRSU. Middletown, population 155,000, is located 33 miles to the northeast. State support to SRSU has been declining in recent years, and it appears this pattern is likely to continue. These problems are not unique to South Ridge, or to higher education in the state, for that matter. In fact, all state‐funded agencies are going through difficult times. The challenges to SRSU are compounded by difficult housing and job markets in the Ridge‐Middletown area that show few signs of improvement. Exacerbating the gloomy financial outlook is the flood of articles and stories in local media reminding the community of their difficulties, pointing to the need for spending cutbacks on public sector activities, and contributing to a lack of confidence in local and state leaders. SRSU has offset cuts in state funding with rather substantial increases in tuition and student fees in recent years, and that, too, has received local media attention. One recent editorial page article in the Middletown Messenger, titled, “Is SRSU Tone Deaf?” recounts the trend of tuition increases, noting that in most years increases at South Ridge surpassed state cuts to the institution, and arguing that the university must begin a more fundamental reexamination of its mission and operations and rethink its approach to fiscal management. The article calls upon the SRSU administration to respond to their challenges as a business would, by refocusing and reprioritizing rather than continually raising the cost of products and services – tuition. The editorial severely criticizes SRSU’s commitment to revenue‐generating varsity sports, and questions whether what were called “the excessive expenditures on athletics” make sense in the current climate. “A business would ask how athletics contributes to the core mission of the enterprise, and if the answer is that the contribution is peripheral, then the activity would be eliminated or downsized. Why should the approach be any different in higher education?” The article also criticizes the use of “allegedly scarce resources to offer courses and sponsor events that have no demonstrable educational value.”


9

Viewed from the perspective of the leaders of SRSU, changes are being made to increase efficiency and effectiveness and to be responsive to fiscal and public pressures. In this regard, South Ridge leadership has decided to implement a temporary hiring freeze for the current academic year, and it will likely be continued for at least another year. There have been no salary increases this year, and last year faculty and staff increases were limited to contractual payments due for faculty promotions. Campus leaders remain optimistic about the long term, but they acknowledge that there is no reason to expect the situation to improve in the next several years. Clearly, salaries and vacated positions can’t be frozen indefinitely, and overhead and administrative costs continue to rise. SRSU’s leaders clearly see that student tuition and fees will have to be increased considerably in the years ahead to help address the shortfall. Your Challenge As the senior financial and administrative officer, you have a number of thoughts on the challenges facing SRSU. You understand that the fiscal pressures are real and are unlikely to dissipate soon. You also understand the basis of the critique that the institution is not necessarily being run as a business would be, and you can appreciate the view of those who point to the need to streamline and focus on the mission‐critical activities necessary to educate tomorrow’s workforce. However, you also understand and can appreciate the “academic” view that public higher education was never envisioned to be a business in the usual sense of the term and that it has a special mission within society. It should serve not only the employment needs of students and parents, but also should advance knowledge, promote general education and critical thinking, and should thereby further the values of a democratic society. It also should serve the community at large. The essential challenge you face as chief business officer is determining how to reconcile the various economic and marketplace cross‐pressures that confront the institution and deciding how to act most appropriately on your insights. So, for example, what responsibility—if any—do you have in promoting a leadership team discussion of and/or response to the critique that the university is not being run using sound business practices or the attack on athletics? When you hear about decisions being made that seem to reinforce the idea that higher education is “tone deaf” to the fiscal realities and marketplace perceptions, what responsibility, if any, do you have to address these issues? Here’s one recent example: A colleague in the budgeting office mentions to you that she has heard from her son—who attends SRSU and is a member of the Student Life, Campus Programming Committee—that the committee is planning to use student fees to hire a controversial television reality personality as evening entertainment for the annual new student orientation. You understand that the proposed fee is $30,000, all of which will come from a student fees set‐aside account.


You are aware that the show and the celebrity in question have received a fair amount of public criticism, particularly from conservative organizations, for the “excessively liberal” approach to sexual activity and drug use portrayed on the program. Discussion Take 20 minutes to prepare a plan for how best to address the potential hiring of a controversial television celebrity. As a group, consider what principles would guide your thinking—as an individual, as a member of the senior administration of the institution, and as the chief financial officer. As chief financial officer, what responsibility, if any, do you have to raise concerns relative to this pending decision? What factors would you consider in arriving at a decision in the matter? If you decided it was appropriate to “raise concerns,” what process would be most appropriate? Interactive Options

1. The facilitator can provide reactions to the draft plan submitted, raise questions, raise concerns, describe possible consequences, and/or add additional information for consideration.

2. Depending on goals of the session, the time available, and the size of the group, the

process can be structured, so that participants share responses across multiple tables and analyze common themes, differences, and similarities.

3. Additional information or time pressures can be introduced, and the group can be asked

to develop a plan to address them. 4. The facilitator can introduce an additional context or higher level issue for

consideration. These issues might include feedback that indicates a significant concern on the part of the faculty or threats from the state legislature regarding potential consequences if the celebrity is hired.

Debriefing Themes

• Chief Business Officer Role: What is the CBO’s role? To what extent do the responsibilities of the role extend to matters that occur outside of the scope of activities of the individuals who report directly to you?

• Leadership Principles and Values: What principles and/or values should guide day‐to‐day decision‐making by senior leaders in general and CBOs more specifically? In situations


11

where one’s principles and values don’t necessarily point in the same direction or action, how should one prioritize?

• Role Expectations: In a situation such as the one described, what are the risks and negative consequences of enacting your role in a manner that doesn’t align with other’s ideas about what your role should be? What possible benefits and positive consequences may result? Are the strategies available that may help to mitigate the risks?

• Culture: In what ways is the culture of an institution and of higher education in general,

an important consideration in making a decision about how to handle a situation like this? What differences, if any, between the academic and administrative cultures are likely to come into play with this type of issue? How can these differences be best addressed?

• Communication and Language: If you decided to address the issue, what process would

be most appropriate? With whom would you communicate and in what sequence, and what channels would you think most appropriate in this instance? In what ways are communication style, word choice, message content, and tone important considerations for a leader who chooses to address an issue such as this one?

In this case, what are some words and phrases that might be emphasized, such as “potential benefits for all,” “avoid reinforcing a view of ‘institutional tone‐deafness’”, “potential teaching and learning moment for student leaders if they are involved in a discussion of risks and benefits of the decision” and others that should probably be used with caution, such as “PR consequences of moving forward” and “political sensitivities” in talking about this project because they may be red flags for particular groups on campus such as the faculty.

Leadership Competencies of Particular Importance

• Self‐assessment: In this instance, as more generally, it is important to begin a task with

some critical self‐reflection to identify one’s leadership principles, values, and responsibilities associated with a particular role. Also important to consider are one’s comfort level in addressing the situation and possible institutional and personal consequences, as well as strategies for preparing and presenting one’s ideas if a decision is made to address the issue in some way.

• Problem Definition: In what ways is problem definition and problem clarity particularly critical for situations like this one? Is action required? From what perspectives is this a “problem” that requires CBO action? Are there perspectives of this situation that lead to a conclusion that it is not a problem, or at least, not a CBOs problem? How can reflecting on the issue of problem definition be helpful?


• Credibility and Influence: What credibility issues may be influences in a situation such as

this one? What might be done to enhance both credibility and influence should a decision be made to address the issue?

• Stakeholder Analysis: In situations such as this, there are a number of stakeholders to be aware of and to be concerned about—stakeholders who will hear and react to your words and actions (if you decide to address the issue) What are some of the most critical constituency groups, what issues will likely be of particular importance to each group, and how might these concerns be addressed?

• Communication, Problem‐Solving, and Engagement: If you decide to address the issue,

how do you proceed? How do you decide who to communicate with, in what sequence, and using what channels? Giving particular attention to identifying the most appropriate sequence and messages for each stakeholder group would be quite important to the success of your efforts, and to minimizing negative consequences.

• Tolerance for Uncertainty and Risk Taking: Voicing your concerns in an instance such as this may represent a departure from present practice—yours or the institution’s. If that is the case, in what ways and for whom will issues of uncertainty tolerance and change management come into play, and what strategies may be helpful in diminishing negative consequences, and in fact, reinforcing the likelihood of future actions of a similar type by you and others in leadership positions.

• Teamwork and Collaboration: How might the handling of this situation contribute to, or detract from, a sense of community and teamwork within the institution’s leadership? What approaches might contribute to positive outcomes in this regard?

• Crisis Management: In a case such as this one, what are the potential crisis management challenges that could result if the scenario proceeds as planned? How might an understanding of the dynamics of crisis management help lead to the adoption of preventative strategies?


13

Readings

Becker, E., and Wortmann, J. Mastering Communication at Work. New York: McGraw‐Hill, 2009. The Chronicle of Higher Education. “What the Hell Happened to College Sports? And What Should We Do About It?” December 11, 2011. http://chronicle.com/article/What‐the‐Hell‐Has‐Happened‐to/130071/ Hignite, Karla. “Stewards by Nature,” Business Officer Magazine, December 2011, pp. 19‐25.

Kotter, J. P. What Leaders Really Do. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 1999. Kotter, J. P. Urgency, Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 2008. Ruben, B. D. What Leaders Need to Know and Do: A Leadership Competencies Scorecard. Washington, DC: National Association of College and University Business Officers, 2006. Ruben, B. D. Understanding, Planning, and Leading Organizational Change. Washington, DC: National Association of College and University Business Officers, 2009. Stone, D., Patton, B., and Hen, S. Difficult Conversations. How to Discuss What Matters Most. New York: Penguin, 1999. Walaski, P. Risk and Crisis Communication: Methods and Messages. New York: John Wiley, 2011. Zdziarski, E. L., Dunkel, N. W., Rollo, J. M. Campus Crisis Management A Comprehensive Guide to Planning, Prevention, Response and Recovery. San Francisco: Jossey‐Bass, 2007.


Recorder’s Form South Ridge State University

1. What, if any, issues are of concern for you? 2. What constituencies might be concerned? What might their concerns be? 3. What, if anything, do you do or say, and to whom? What’s your rationale? 4. What, if anything, do you think should be done? Why? 5. Are there issues or principles you can generalize from this case?

For the reporter • Briefly summarize your case. • List any major problems or issues. • Document any strategies for addressing the problems or issues. • Generalize issues or principles from the case.


15

Skyline State University Case Study: Travel Policy Procedures and Practices Task Force


The Setting Skyline State University (SSU) is a comprehensive public institution founded in 1922. With an enrollment of 26,000 students and its 4,300 faculty and staff, SSU plays a very significant educational role in its city and region. Skyline meets a broad array of educational needs

through its undergraduate, graduate, and continuing professional education schools. Like many other institutions, the university faces significant budget challenges in the period ahead, and the situation is unlikely to improve in the foreseeable future. Organizationally, SSU has two major divisions: 1) the Office of the Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs to which all academic deans and directors report as well as the leaders of other academic, student, and academic support functions, and 2) the Office of the Senior Vice President for Administration and Finance to which budgeting, procurement, facilities, human resources, public safety, auxiliary services, and all other administrative areas report. The Challenge SSU’s president has decided to form an Administrative Efficiencies Advisory Group, to be headed by the senior vice president for business and finance. Its mandate is to conduct a university‐wide review of administrative operations and to identify areas where potential savings—time, human resource, and dollar—can be realized. The senior vice president of business and finance has identified travel as an area with many potential opportunities for efficiency and cost savings. He has appointed you, the new director of purchasing, who has just arrived at the institution from a corporate setting, to head the Travel Policy Task Force, charged with “reviewing current travel policies and practices and procedures, and recommending change to enhance efficiency and effectiveness.” In informal conversations with colleagues, you learn that travel policies and practices have always been handled in a decentralized manner, which is consistent with the university’s culture. Faculty and staff make their own travel arrangements, pay for travel themselves, and then submit requests for reimbursement. Based on your experience, you know that SSU could cut expenses by standardizing and centralizing travel policies and procedures. Discussion

1. What are the key issues as you see it?

2. What do you propose? Why?


Skyline State University Case Study: Travel Policy Procedures and Practices Task Force

Background Skyline State University, like many other institutions, faces significant budget challenges, and there are few signs that the situation will improve in the foreseeable future.

SSU’s president has decided that she will soon form an Administrative Efficiencies Advisory Group (AEAG) to be headed by the senior vice president for business and finance. The mandate to the AEAG is to conduct a university‐wide review of administrative operations and to identify areas where potential savings—time, human resource, and dollar‐‐can be realized. Once potential targets for savings are identified, the AEAG will develop a list of high‐priority, high‐return improvement projects. The senior vice president of business and finance will then form broadly inclusive project task force groups, which will be charged with conducting an analysis, identifying options, and making recommendations on a plan of action for each targeted area for improvement. The details of the structure and process are still being worked out. You are the newly hired assistant vice president for purchasing and procurement. You come to SSU with private sector experience and have a number of ideas about areas where more efficiency, better operations, and reduced costs are possible. Travel is one area in which you see many possible cost and time savings. Talking informally to colleagues in preparation for this effort, you learn that faculty and staff work‐related travel policies and practices have always been handled in a decentralized manner, which is consistent with the general administrative traditions of the institution. This means that faculty and staff throughout the institution make their own travel arrangements, pay for travel themselves, and then submit requests for reimbursement. Based on your experience in the travel area, it is clear to you that SSU could save considerable money if the travel policies, procedures, and practices were standardized and centralized. You schedule a meeting with the senior vice president, to whom your report, to share your thinking. The senior vice president is excited by your ideas and sees this as a perfect pilot project given the upcoming AEAG effort that will soon be implemented. He decides to form a Travel Policy Task Force Committee (TPTF) charged with “reviewing current travel policies and practices and procedures and recommending change to enhance efficiency and effectiveness.” Cognizant of your experience and appreciative that you have taken the


17

initiative to bring the idea forward, he has decided to name you to head this important pilot initiative. You are flattered by the confidence implied by the appointment, and you begin thinking about the task ahead. Your Challenge The senior vice president asks you to develop a draft plan for the task force and to share it with him before work begins. The draft is to include an agenda for the first three meetings, outlines of initial memos or communication that might be needed, a list of materials that might be distributed to the campus, and a list of major deliverables and milestones in the work of the group with target dates for each. Your task force will be a campuswide group including the following tentative list of members, none of whom you know:

• University auditor • Assistant director, budgeting • Administrative assistant, facilities • Assistant director, athletics • Distinguished professor, biology • Dean, School of Communication • Academic department chair, public policy • Assistant professor, School of Business • Associate vice president for academic affairs • Associate director, university media relations • Assistant director, information technology


Skyline State University Profile Skyline State University (SSU) is a comprehensive public institution founded in 1922. With an enrollment of 26,000 students and its 4,300 faculty and staff, SSU plays a very significant educational role in the Capital City and the region. Skyline meets a broad array of educational needs through its undergraduate, graduate, and continuing professional development schools and major programs in arts and sciences, business, communication, public and community administration, health and allied health sciences, education, and performing arts. The institution’s mission emphasizes teaching and learning, research and scholarship, and service and outreach. Growing emphasis is being placed on research/scholarship grants, and training contracts are becoming an increasingly important source of funding for the work of the institution. Organizationally, SSU has two major divisions: 1) the Office of the Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs to which all academic deans and directors as well as leaders of other academic, student, and academic support functions report, and 2) the Office of the Senior Vice President for Administration and Finance to which budgeting, procurement, facilities, human resources, risk management, public safety, auxiliary services, and all other administrative areas report.


19

Discussion Take 40 minutes to prepare a draft plan. As a group, consider what advice you might give to the assistant vice president about how best to proceed with this project. Consider both the perspectives of the people who will serve on the task force and the campus community who will be asked to make significant changes to the manner in which they undertake a basic function. Interactive Options 1. The senior vice president (the facilitator) can provide reactions to the draft plan submitted,

raise questions and concerns, describe possible consequences, and/or add additional information for consideration.

2. Depending on goals of the session, the time available, and the size of the group, the process can be structured, so that participants share responses across multiple tables and analyze common themes, differences, and similarities.

3. Additional information or time pressures can be introduced, and the assistant vice president for purchasing and procurement can be asked to develop a plan to address them.

4. The senior vice president (the facilitator) can introduce an additional context or higher level issue for consideration. These issues might include feedback to the senior vice president from his academic counterpart that indicates faculty concern that the new approach is being too aggressively pushed without sufficient campuswide consultation or cost‐benefit analysis. Alternatively, questions of the AVPP’s credibility due to his lack of higher education experience could be raised.

Debriefing Themes

• Planning: What are the critical elements in planning for an initiative like this one? Why?

• Preparation: What kind of preparation is helpful for task force members? What, if any, background materials, information, and/or assignments should be shared with task force members, and when is it most appropriate to do so?

• Stages: What are the critical and predictable stages a task force will go through?

• Leadership Style: What leadership style or approach is most appropriate for this kind of project? Does the value or impact of a particular style or approach vary with the stage


of the effort? How so? What leadership competencies are particularly helpful in this kind of scenario?

• Sponsorship: What role does ownership, sponsorship, and/or endorsement by senior administrators play in the success of a project such as this? At what stages, with whom, and in what ways should this level of engagement be communicated? What should be the content and frequency of ongoing communication between the leader of the task force and the project sponsor?

• Culture: What are differences between the academic and administrative culture? How might these differences come into play in a project like this one? What leadership strategies are helpful in addressing these differences?

• Vision: In what ways is it helpful or detrimental for the task force leader to begin the initiative with a clear vision that she shares at the outset with colleagues on the task force? What elements of a vision are likely to be helpful?

• Meeting Climate: What should be the ideal climate for the first meeting? What can be done by the task force leader, with the room setup, in pre‐meeting communication, etc. to increase the likelihood that this climate will emerge?

• Delegation and Roles: How might roles and responsibilities be structured within this task force?

• Timeline: Should a timeline of milestones or deliverables be established, and if so, when and how?


• Experience, Expertise, Familiarity with Task, Language and Vocabulary: Experience, expertise, and familiarity with travel policy, procedures, and efficiencies are all significant assets for this project.

• Knowledge of Sector: Lack of extensive knowledge of higher education may be a detractor, either in fact or in the perceptions of others. Being attentive to potential barriers this lack of knowledge and experience may create will be important in leadership of each phase of the project.

• Self‐assessment: As assistant vice president of purchasing and procurement, it is important to recognize strengths and vulnerabilities. You can easily recognize experience and expertise that is relevant to the problem. Others may question the


21

applicability of that experience because it derives from the corporate sector. For some, this background could be seen as a liability.

• Problem Definition: One’s first impression may be that the primary problem in this case relates to developing a new set of procedures and policies. In fact, overcoming cultural traditions such as decentralization is the more critical challenge. Unless the traditions of centralization and faculty autonomy are considered, it is unlikely that any solution, no matter how efficient and effective, will be embraced.

• Stakeholder Analysis: This case features many key stakeholders: the senior vice president, members of task force, the senior administration, departmental administrators, staff members, faculty members, travel providers, IT support personnel, and others. Each of these groups will be affected by potential changes; each will have a stake in the new approach. Identifying the needs and concerns of each group and addressing them as a part of the process will help to assure the eventual acceptance of the plan.

• Analysis of Technology: Communication and information technology will be important considerations as they relate to gathering and disseminating information as a part of the planning process and in the implementation process.

• Enthusiasm, Personal Conviction, and Persistence: Maintaining and displaying enthusiasm, personal conviction, and persistence will be helpful as a team leader, particularly since the new policies and procedures will likely move in directions new to team members and the university community. Persistence and patience will be critical because the pace of change in higher education is predictably slower with more consultation than in comparable problem‐solving situations in corporate settings.

• Tolerance for Uncertainty and Risk Taking: Because new policies and procedures are likely to differ from tradition, it will be important to convey and encourage a high comfort level with the exploration of new paths and approaches.

• Credibility and Influence: Establishing credibility will be a key success factor. Being named the task force leader by the senior vice president is likely to be helpful; perceptions of the Administrative Efficiencies Advisory Group (AEAG) initiative are, as yet, unclear. Credibility can be enhanced by sharing personal background with the task force in a low‐key way and conveying the belief that working closely with colleagues can be helpful in enhancing the utility of this knowledge. To address the concerns of those who question the relevance of corporate experience, the key will be to establish credibility and influence through insights and good work rather than through asserting credentials.


• Interpersonal and Group Orientation; Listening, Question‐Asking, and Learning: These competencies are always vital in group problem solving situations. Listening to and learning from task force members and others in the community will help to identify needs, questions, concerns, impediments, and opportunities to be leveraged. It also will help to identify which individuals are potential sources of support or resistance.

• Vision Setting: Vital to the successful leadership of this task will be helping to keep the team and the campus focused on a vision of what is possible and how the outcome will be beneficial to the institution, faculty, and staff.

• Management and Facilitation: Competencies in this area are important in the planning, preparation, coordination, and guidance of the work of the task force and its interaction with various campus constituencies. Effective planning and implementation of pilot projects are critical to the success of the overall project, in this case, the Administrative Efficiencies Advisory Group (AEAG) initiative. They help to identify attributes and problems with the identification and implementation of useful new policies and procedures, and to build grass roots support for the larger effort.

• Information and Knowledge Management: An important facet of project leadership is to determine what information to share with whom and when. Many critical decisions will need to be made relative to sharing technical, best practices, and process information with task force members and also with the campus community.


23

Readings HigherEdUtah.org. 2011 Efficiency Report. July 14, 2011 http://www.higheredutah.org/2011‐efficiency‐report/ Kotter, J. P. Urgency, Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 2008. Lederman, Doug. Maintenance Over Management: A Survey of Business Officers. Inside Higher Ed, July 6, 2011. http://www.insidehighered.com/news/survey/maintenance‐over‐management‐survey‐business‐officers “New Ways to Create Savings.” Business Officer Magazine. September 2011. http://www.nacubo.org/Business_Officer_Magazine/Magazine_Archives/September_2011/Southern_Disclosure/New_Ways_to_Create_Savings.html OhioHigherEd. Efficiencies, 2010. http://www.ohiohighered.org/efficiencies Ruben, B. D. What Leaders Need to Know and Do: A Leadership Competencies Scorecard. Washington, DC: National Association of College and University Business Officers, 2006. Ruben, B. D. Understanding, Planning, and Leading Organizational Change. Washington, DC: National Association of College and University Business Officers, 2009. Strober, M. H. Communicating Across the Academic Divide. The Chronicle of Higher Education, January 2, 2011. Tromp, S. A., and Ruben, B. D. Strategic Planning Higher Education. Washington, DC: National Association of College and University Business Officers, 2010. University of California‐Berkeley. Operational Excellence 2012, http://oe.berkeley.edu/process/index.shtml


Recorder’s Form Skyline State University


2. What do you propose? Why? 3. What issues or principles can you generalize from the case?



25

Samuel Waters College Case Study: Budget Futures Summit Retreat


The Setting Tight budgets are the reality at Samuel Waters College (SWC) again this year as they are at so many colleges and universities. With endowment balances showing only modest gains, and other sources of support flat

or trending downward, even moderately aggressive tuition increases have not allowed SWC to maintain level funding.

For the past several years, when funding shortfalls were more modest, SWC’s approach was to ask faculty and staff to minimize waste and improve efficiency within their own departments. SWC’s budgeting approach constituted minor savings from these requests coupled with across‐the‐board cuts in operating budgets, largely in administrative areas, and annual tuition increases. Unfortunately, cuts in operational areas and peripheral academic services have resulted in work overloads and poor morale. Many units are barely able to fulfill their missions.

In light of this history, news that SWC is heading into a two‐ to five‐year period of intensifying economic difficulty is particularly troubling. The customary budget‐cutting strategies of across‐the‐board cuts (larger on the administrative side, smaller and more targeted on the academic side) and substantial annual increases in tuition will no longer be satisfactory to carry the institution through the challenges of the next several years and beyond.

Your Challenge

To address daunting circumstances, President Swanson has announced that he will host a two‐day College Budget Futures Summit Retreat at his home in three weeks. He has asked members of his cabinet to come prepared to present their views of how SWC should consider and address the next three year period, given that across‐the‐board cuts and generic calls for “belt‐tightening” will no longer be adequate.

Discussion

1. What options do you propose for consideration? 2. What are the benefits and downsides associated with each? 3. What option would you recommend? Why?


Samuel Waters College Case Study: Budget Futures Summit Retreat Background Tight budgets are the reality at Samuel Waters College (SWC) again this year as they are at many colleges and universities. With endowment balances showing only modest gains, and other sources of support flat

or trending downward, even moderately aggressive tuition increases have not allowed SWC to maintain level funding. For the past several years, when funding shortfalls were more modest, SWC’s approach was to ask faculty and staff to look for ways to minimize waste and to improve efficiency within their own departments. SWC’s budgeting approach constituted minor savings from these requests coupled with across‐the‐board cuts in operating budgets, largely in administrative areas, and annual tuition increases. Unfortunately, cuts in operational areas and peripheral academic services have resulted in work overloads and poor morale. Many units are barely able to fulfill their missions. Tuition increases don’t seem to be the answer. With recent increases, SWC is now near the upper level of tuition compared to its peers. Even with the current tuition levels, the perception—and reality—of the institution’s commitment to broad access are increasingly at risk. In light of this history, news that SWC is heading into a two‐ to five‐year period of intensifying economic difficulty is particularly troubling. The customary budget‐cutting strategies such as across‐the‐board cuts (larger on the administrative side, smaller and more targeted on the academic side) and substantial annual increases in tuition will no longer be satisfactory to carry the institution through the challenges of the next several years and beyond. Your Challenge To address daunting circumstances, President Swanson has announced that he will host a two‐day College Budget Futures Summit Retreat at his home in three weeks. He has asked members of his cabinet to come prepared to present their views of how SWC should consider and address the next three‐year period, given that across‐the‐board cuts and generic calls for “belt‐tightening” will no longer be adequate. Each member of the cabinet has been asked to identify and briefly describe possible options that the institution might consider to address this mounting crisis and to provide a high‐level cost‐benefit analysis for each. In developing options, each cabinet member is urged to be


27

creative and to think broadly about possibilities related to structure, programs, revenues, and costs. Members of the EC include the provost, vice president for administration and chief financial officer, vice president for student affairs, general counsel, vice president for advancement, and vice president for communication and public affairs. Discussion At each table, one person should represent the perspective of each of the cabinet members. Take 15 minutes to prepare a response to the questions below.

1. What options do you propose for consideration?

2. What are the benefits and downsides associated with each?

3. What option would you recommend?

4. Why?


Samuel Walters College Profile

Samuel Walters College is an independent comprehensive liberal arts college, recognized for excellence in a variety of fields, and listed among the leading regional colleges by U.S. News & World Report and Barron's Best Buys in College Education.

Founded in 1914, SWC’s 165-acre campus overlooks Greenway Valley Reservoir, and is located 50 miles east of Ellis City, with its population of 275,000.

SWC offers 52 B.A. programs, 15 M.A. programs, and various professional certificate programs taught by 250 full-time faculty and 400 adjuncts. Full-time undergraduate tuition is $31,000 and room and board costs are approximately $14,000 annually. The student body consists of 6,250 students, 4,500 of whom are undergraduates. Nearly 3,000 live on campus. SWC employs 475 faculty members and 460 administrative staff.

SWC facilities include 65 buildings, including 40 student housing facilities. In addition to the main campus, SWC has three satellite facilities and four overseas study and research sites operated in partnership with local higher education institutions.

Centralized administrative areas include: student affairs, budgeting and finance, legal affairs, human resources, payroll, alumni affairs, office of development and advancement, the library and information, planning and assessment services, university public affairs and media relations, IT, grants and contracts, and distance learning center.

Centralized services for students include: dining services (two full-service and two satellite locations); student life and services, housing (15 residence halls) and residence life, clubs and activities, college activities, health services, computer support, the computer store, religious and spiritual, and public safety.

The major academic units include: the School of Business (with three departments), College of Liberal Arts (with 14 departments), School of Computer Science (3 departments), College of Communication (5 departments), College of Fine Arts (4 departments), College of Labor Studies (2 departments), College of Social and Behavioral Sciences (5 departments), College of Natural and Life Sciences (6 departments), and the College of Law.

Each school and college also provides unit-based advising and career placement services, budgeting, human resources, IT services, student services, communication and public relations, and online courses and services.


29

Each individual will report their responses to the group. The group will take 15 minutes to decide which three options they will recommend in priority order to the president and the rationale for their choices. Be prepared to discuss the process used to make the decisions. Interactive Options

1. After reviewing suggested options, the SWC president (the facilitator) can provide reactions to the draft plan submitted, raise questions, introduce concerns, describe possible consequences, and/or provide further information for consideration such as an additional context or higher level issue.


process can be structured, so that participants share responses across multiple tables and analyze common themes, differences, and similarities.

3. One or several of the proposed options may be selected and participants asked to go to

the next stage of planning—who should be involved with leading the change planning and implementation effort, what communication plans should be developed, how the new approach will be assessed, and other details.

Debriefing Themes

• Planning: What are the critical elements to be considered in the description and analysis of options in this case?

• Preparation: What kinds of preparation (personal, informational, materials) should be used for a task and meeting such as this one scheduled by the president?

• Goals: What personal, professional, and institutional goals would guide your thinking about and preparation for the event?

• Culture: In what ways is the culture of an institution and of higher education in general, an important consideration in undertaking this kind of assignment? What differences between the academic and administrative culture are likely to come into play in a project such as this one? How can these differences be best addressed?

• Vision: In developing and advocating options for major change, what role does vision play? How should this perspective be taken into account in preparing for and presenting options to colleagues in a case like this one?


• Communication and Language: In what ways are communication style, word choice, message content, and tone important considerations for the leader? In this case, what are some words and phrases that might be emphasized (e.g., “potential benefits for all” and “greater efficiency”) and others that should probably be used with caution (e.g., “centralization” and “standardization”) in talking about this project because they may be red flags for particular groups on campus (in these examples, the faculty).


• Self‐assessment: In this instance, as more generally, tone should begin a leadership task

with some critical self‐reflection to identify strengths, vulnerabilities, and personal goals, and to consider strategies for preparing and presenting one’s ideas. What might be some of the benefits of this kind of reflective process?

• Experience, Expertise, and Familiarity with Task: In this case, each member of the cabinet will have extensive experience and intimate knowledge of his or her own areas, but more limited experience and knowledge of other units. How can this reality be addressed in the planning and presentation of options?

• Knowledge of Sector, Information, and Knowledge Management: The challenges confronting the institution in the case study are not unique, and a wealth of information describes how other institutions have dealt with these issues. Some of the information has been generated by higher education media, such as The Chronicle of Higher Education, Business Officer Magazine, and Inside Higher Education. Consulting companies, colleges and universities, and regional and national associations have generated other information. Having a familiarity with national developments and being able to consider strategies adopted by other institutions can be helpful in identifying and implementing various options.

• Credibility and Influence: What credibility issues may be relevant in an assignment such as this one?

• Problem Definition: In what ways is problem definition and problem clarity particularly critical for situations like this one?

• Problem‐Solving and Engagement: How do you involve other leaders and the campus in general in a major change initiative? How do you decide who to involve at what level?

• Stakeholder Analysis: There are a number of different stakeholders to be aware of and to be concerned about in this case—stakeholders who will hear and react to your options and stakeholders who will ultimately be affected by the proposals that will be adopted. Who are some of the most critical constituency groups, what issues will likely


31

be of particular importance to each group, and how might these concerns be addressed?

• Tolerance for Uncertainty, Risk Taking, and Change Management: Because some of the proposed options may suggest approaches that differ dramatically from present practice, in what ways and for whom will issues of uncertainty tolerance and change management come into play?

Readings Becker, E., and Wortmann, J. Mastering Communication at Work. New York: McGraw‐Hill, 2009. Kotter, J. P. What Leaders Really Do. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 1999. Kotter, J. P. Urgency. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 2008. Ruben, B. D. What Leaders Need to Know and Do: A Leadership Competencies Scorecard. Washington, DC: National Association of College and University Business Officers, 2006. Ruben, B. D. Understanding, Planning, and Leading Organizational Change. Washington, DC: National Association of College and University Business Officers, 2009. Tromp, S. A. and Ruben, B. D. Strategic Planning in Higher Education: A Leader’s Guide. Washington, DC: National Association of College and University Business Officers, 2010.


Recorder’s Form Samuel Waters College

1. What are the key issues as you see it? 2. What constituencies might be concerned? What might their concerns be?


For the reporter

• Briefly summarize your case. • List any major problems or issues. • Document any strategies for addressing the problems or issues. • Generalize issues or principles from the case.


33

Reginald Murphy College Case Study: Gender Equity Issues (Abbreviated Version)

The Setting Reginald Murphy College, located in the foothills of the Rocky Mountains, enrolls 16,000 undergraduate and graduate students and employs just over 4,000 faculty and staff. At this competitive institution, renowned for a beautiful campus and exceptional facilities, the curriculum emphasizes liberal arts.

The college takes particular pride in its congenial and welcoming culture, and its many programs that emphasize collaboration, collegiality, and good will among faculty, staff, and students. Your Challenge Creating a welcoming and equitable environment for all staff has always been both a personal and professional goal for you, and you take pride in having achieved that climate in your administrative area. Last week, one of the senior administrators in your unit, Gerry Watson, came to you to share a recent conversation she had with Jane Martinez. Jane approached Gerry to discuss her concerns about diversity issues and especially the treatment of women. Her perception is that women are not treated equally in hiring, promotion, and professional development. She also feels that women are marginalized by golf outings, workplace conversations about sports, and “working” lunches organized and attended primarily by the men in the office. She also observed that men talk considerably more than women in meetings, and she believes this is because men are more likely to have their comments and suggestions taken seriously. At the conclusion of the meeting with Gerry, you expressed appreciation for the conversation and indicate that you need to give the matter some thought. Because of your commitment to a cordial and equitable workplace and your assessment that things are functioning well in this regard, these comments surprise and trouble you.

Discussion

1. What are the key issues and/or problems? 2. What strategies would you employ to address them? 3. Who would you include in your process? Why? 4. What process would be appropriate? What is your rationale? 5. Are there principles that you can generalize from this case?


Reginald Murphy College Case Study: Gender Equity Issues

Background Reginald Murphy College (RMC), located in the foothills of the Rocky Mountains, enrolls 16, 000 undergraduate and graduate students and employs just over 4,000 faculty and staff. At this competitive institution, renowned for a beautiful campus and exceptional facilities, the curriculum emphasizes the liberal arts.

The college also offers a number of professional programs. Among the distinctive features of RMC is the particular emphasis on creating a congenial and collaborative learning environment. The college explicitly recognizes the institution’s commitment to collaboration, collegiality and respect in its slogan “Reginald Murphy College… Where collaboration, collegiality and respect for others are core values.” The slogan is posted on the RMC website and in prominent locations in many buildings. Consistent with these values, welcoming activities for students—and for faculty and staff—are extensive. The college has a number of residential learning communities where collaborative learning is emphasized. Within student affairs and campus life, the RMC ideals are also a conscious focus of attention. Faculty “collegiality” is a familiar concept in describing ideals of faculty life, and “collaboration” is often mentioned in position descriptions for staff. Moreover, service to the RMC college community is a highly valued and recognized component of appointment and promotion reviews for all employees. Your Challenge You serve as vice president of administration and finance. Five associate vice presidents report directly to you and serve as members of your senior leadership team—Rich Jerow, Toni Brown, Jane Martinez, Marvin Rice, and Gerry Watson. Each associate vice president has from two to four directors reporting to them. You’ve worked at RMC for 26 years, and you’ve never seriously considered leaving. You enjoy your job and the people you work with. Your leadership team, particularly, is a source of great pride and pleasure for you. You’ve worked to build a strong and collaborative team and have tried to encourage social bonding as well as collaborative work relationships among members of the group.


35

Creating a welcoming and respectful environment for all staff has always been a personal and professional goal for you, and you take pride in having achieved that climate in your administrative area. You make an effort to be explicit about your commitment to the institution’s core values, are confident that your views on this topic are well known to the five associate vice presidents and others in the division, and have a personal commitment to “walking the talk.” Last week, one of the direct reports and a long‐time friend, Gerry Watson, came to you to share parts of a conversation he had had over coffee with a highly regarded senior director who reports to a member the leadership team. Gerry tells you that the individual is a female and has worked in the division for less than five years, a profile which could describe a number of employees. He says he’ll refer to her by the fictitious name, “Jane” to honor her request for confidentiality. Gerry explains that during the course of the conversation, Jane asked about the seriousness of the commitment to diversity issues especially as it relates to women within the Administration and Finance area. Jane’s perception is that women in the Administration and Finance division are generally not treated in the same way as men in hiring and promotion decisions, or with regard to professional development, and she made reference to the departure of several women with great potential for more advanced positions elsewhere. She explained that she also saw numerous gender inequities and insensitivities in day‐to‐day work practices such as a preoccupation with sports in the workplace. She referred to frequent conversations about the outcomes of sporting events, common use of sports analogies in meetings, the annual divisional softball game, and occasional afternoon golf outings, all of which are primarily “men’s events.” She also noted the fact that informal meetings are often scheduled before the beginning of the work day at times when women with families typically find it difficult to attend. Jane also thinks that men speak considerably more and for longer periods of time in meetings than women, and she believes this is because men are more likely to be asked for their opinions and more likely to have their perspectives and suggestions taken seriously by senior leaders. Additionally, she commented on the nonverbal communication during meetings, sharing her observation that men, regardless of their roles, are far more likely to position themselves at the head of conference tables or in other positions of prominence in meetings. The director’s view is that the marginalization of women she described is probably not intentional or conscious, but it’s troublesome nonetheless. She concluded her comments by noting how ironic it is that these problems would be prevalent at RMC and in this division given the ideals and philosophies of the institution and its leaders. For women, she said, “the rhetoric and reality simply don’t seem to match.”


Knowing your feelings about the importance of these topics, Gerry felt you would want him to share Jane’s concerns with you. You are stunned by what you hear. You ask Gerry for his take on the situation. He indicated that he hadn’t really thought previously about the issues the director had shared with him, but that she seemed very genuine and thoughtful in her comments. She obviously was frustrated, but seemed to be sharing her views more as observations on the contradictions she observed in the division than out of anger or personal resentment. You thank him for the bringing these issues to your attention, and indicate that you need to give these concerns some thought. Discussion Take 30 minutes to prepare a plan for how best to address the issues that have been raised. As a group, consider what principles would guide your thinking ‐ as an individual, as a member of the senior administration of the institution, and as the vice president of administration and finance. What do you see as the problem, or problems, here? What process should you follow in moving forward? Assessment Should you begin by gathering information to assess the accuracy of the perceptions, or take their accuracy as a given? If you decide to gather information for clarification or validation, how do proceed? Here are several options. Which seem most appropriate? What are the benefits and possible risks of this approach?

1. Do you have a follow‐up discussion with Gerry after you’ve collected your thoughts? 2. Do you ask Gerry to urge the director to talk to you personally? 3. Do you talk with members of your leadership team about the allegations and core issues

and values involved? If so, do you discuss the matter with the members individually or as a group, and how would you frame the discussion?

Thinking broadly about information gathering strategies, what are the benefits and risks of talking about this issue with either the director or others in the division? Are there other options for clarifying or validating the issues? For instance, might you develop a strategy of consistent, carefully observation and analysis of conversations, meetings, and planning activities within the leadership team for a fixed period of time? Action After you assess the situation, how do you proceed? If you were to conclude that Jane’s perceptions are inaccurate or exaggerated, what strategy would you adopt? If you were to conclude the many of the issues were, in fact, valid, how would you proceed? What would be your short‐term strategy and your longer‐term approach?


37

Interactive Options 1. The facilitator can provide reactions to the draft plan submitted, raise questions and

concerns, describe possible consequences, and/or add additional information for consideration.

2. Depending on goals of the session, the time available, and the size of the group, the process can be structured, so that participants share responses across multiple tables and analyze common themes, differences, and similarities.

3. Additional information or time pressures can be introduced, and the group can be asked to develop a plan to address them.

4. The facilitator can introduce an additional context or higher level issue for consideration. For example, one of the issues in this case may be that the administrator has chosen an implicit rather than explicit approach to supporting equity in the workplace. The group could discuss how best to demonstrate a commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion. Is a policy appropriate or needed? What might it include?


• Problem Naming and Problem Solving: This case highlights the importance of problem naming (and analysis) as a precursor to problem solving. In situations such as this, determining whether there is, in fact, a problem, and more basically deciding how to gather the information to make such a determination may be as much a challenge as figuring out how to address the problem once its existence is confirmed.

• Crisis and Conflict Management: The act of gathering information to clarify, prevent, or address a pending crisis could inadvertently create or exacerbate one. The challenge is to adopt a strategy that helps to clarify the situation and any problem(s) that exist, without creating or intensifying the situation.

• Sensitivity to and Appreciation of Diversity and Workplace Equity: To the extent that equity or marginalization exist in any organization, there is a potential to undermining morale, and also having an adverse affect on productivity, the quality of work, and retention of valued employees. Skill in prevention, early detection, and skillful intervention to address these issues is an increasingly important leadership competency. Often, issues of equity are subtle and apt to be missed. Reactions may be triggered cultural nuances or symbols. Adverse responses can be triggered by certain types of events, language, analogies, or stories that are common within an organization, or by


verbal and nonverbal communication patterns such as talk‐time and conversational turn‐taking, eye contact and its absence, or seating patterns at meetings. Because organizational cultures and practices come to be taken for granted over time, those with longer tenure may be less likely to recognize circumstances that are quite apparent and troublesome to newer employees. How leaders can learn from the perceptions and insights of newer employees without sacrificing the continuity provided by ongoing traditions and the experiences of longer‐tenured employees can be a significant challenge.

• Leadership Values in Principle and Practice: Across a variety of situations, the rhetoric of equity and core values is far less powerful than the realities people experience. Given this, the congruence between values‐advocated and values‐practiced is vital to effective leadership.

• Communication Strategy: Open, direct, and immediate communication are not always the most effective strategy when it comes to addressing organizational problems, particularly when the issues of concern are subtle and/or deeply embedded in the traditions and culture of the organization. The use of indirect and subtle communication can be very effective in introducing and promoting fundamental change. In some instances, a “time‐release” communication strategy is required. In the case at hand, for example, if RMC leaders determine that the current emphasis on sports is, in fact, a potential problem, initiating additional, alternative events that are more likely to be seen as “gender‐neutral” may be a far superior strategy than talking directly about the problem, or summarily ending events with a long tradition within the organization. Similarly, changes in eye contact, seating, and language use can become conscious communication strategies of a senior leader. Modeling a change, rather than talking about it, an indirect communication strategy, may be less disruptive and more effective in the long run.


39

Readings Central Michigan University, Office for Institutional Diversity, Strategic Plan for Advancing Diversity: Blueprint for the 21st Century and Beyond, August 2008. DiTomaso, N., & Hooijberg, R. “Diversity and the Demands of Leadership,” Leadership Quarterly. 7(2): 163‐187, 1996. Kossek, E. E. & Lobel, S. (Eds.), Managing Diversity: Human Resource Strategies for Transforming the Workplace. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 1996. Ross, Howard. Reinventing Diversity: Transforming Organizational Community to Strengthen People, Purpose and Performance. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2011. Ruben, B. D. What Leaders Need to Know and Do: A Leadership Competencies Scorecard. Washington, DC: National Association of College and University Business Officers, 2006. Ruben, B. D. Understanding, Planning, and Leading Organizational Change. Washington, DC: National Association of College and University Business Officers, 2009. Stone, D., Patton, B., and Hen, S. Difficult Conversations. How to Discuss What Matters Most. New York: Penguin, 1999.


Recorder’s Form Reginald Murphy College

1. What are the key issues and/or problems?

2. What strategies would you employ to address them?

3. Who would you include in your process? Why?

4. What process would be appropriate? What is your rationale?

5. What principles can you generalize from this case?



41

Timberline University Case Study: Art Gallery Faculty Exhibits Program Controversy

(Abbreviated Version) The Setting

The current exhibit at the Timberline University (TU) Art Gallery and Museum, an on‐campus facility that also serves the campus and the local community, opened two days ago. It features the work of two faculty members, Marisa

Johannson and Raul Mendoza, both recently‐hired tenure track faculty in the TU School of Performing Arts undergraduate and graduate programs. Both are noted artisans—Marisa as a photographer and Raul as a watercolorist.

William Jefferson, the Gallery and Museum director, has just received a copy of an email to his boss, Ray Argery, the vice president for external and community affairs, sent by Mary Reba, an active TU alumna, local business owner, generous TU donor, and a former member of the TU Board of Trustees. A copy of the email was also sent to Jill Highstein, TU vice president for finance and administration, with whom Mary worked closely on several committee assignments while she was a member of the board; Maria Bossa, provost; Jeff Germane, director of development; and Jennifer Smithers, university chief counsel.

The purpose of her email is to express her grave concerns about the exhibit that just opened. Her distress focuses on two photographs that depict what she refers to as “inappropriate touching between two nude females, one of the individuals appears to be no older than 12 or 13.”

Your Challenge

Because of her active role with the institution, Mary Reba’s concerns must be addressed. The individuals who make up the president’s cabinet as well as others involved in the situation will have their own perspectives based on their role and personal values. As leaders and/or key stakeholders, they ultimately will play a part in the situation’s final resolution

Discussion

1. What are the issues of concern? 2. What, if anything, should be done in response to the email…by and to whom? Why?


Timberline University Case Study: Art Gallery Faculty Exhibits Program Controversy

Background

Part One

William B. Jefferson is director of the Timberline University (TU) Art Gallery and Museum, an on‐campus facility that also serves the campus and the local

community. Jefferson reports to Ray Argery, vice president for external and community affairs. Prior to assuming his present position five years ago, Jefferson was curator of the Boise Civic Art Museum, where he developed an impressive record for cultivating community involvement and fund raising.

In his TU post, Jefferson has begun a number of programs to more actively engage the faculty, students, and the local community. One such program which has drawn particular praise is the Faculty Showcase. Twice a year, the Gallery and Museum hosts a month‐long show featuring the work of two faculty members from the School of Performing Arts. Before and during this show, a number of activities are introduced to attract students, local schools, and local residents.

The current exhibit, which opened two days ago, features the work of two faculty members, Marisa Johannson and Raul Mendoza, both recently‐hired tenure track faculty in the TU School of Performing Arts undergraduate and graduate programs. Both are noted artisans—Marisa as a photographer and Raul as a watercolorist.

Jefferson has just received a copy of an email to his boss, Vice President Argery, sent by Mary Reba, an active TU alumna, local business owner, generous TU donor, and a former member of the TU Board of Trustees. A copy of the email was also sent to Jill Highstein, TU vice president for finance and administration, with whom Mary Reba worked closely on several committee assignments while she was a member of the board; Maria Bossa, provost; Jeff Germane, director of development; and Jennifer Smithers, university chief counsel.

The purpose of Reba’s email is to express her grave concerns about the exhibit that just opened. Her distress focuses on two photographs that depict what she refers to as “inappropriate touching between two nude females, one of the individuals appears to be no older than 12 or 13.” She also is deeply troubled by a painting depicting Jesus dressed in work clothes and a shirt that appears to be fashioned from an American flag. Her email states that she regards all three pictures as wholly inappropriate for a community show. The photographs are the work of Johannson; the painting was done by Mendoza.

A copy of the email has also been sent to the provost, Maria Bossa, the director of development, Jeff Germane, and university chief counsel, Jennifer Smithers.


43

Your Challenge

Because of her active role with the institution, Reba’s concerns must be addressed. The individuals who make up the president’s cabinet as well as others involved in the situation will have their own perspectives based on their role and personal values. As leaders and/or key stakeholders, they ultimately will play a part in the problem’s final resolution. These people include:

• Ray Argery, vice president for external and community affairs • William Jefferson, gallery and museum director • Jill Highstein, vice president for finance and administration • Maria Bossa, provost • Jeff Germane, development director • Jennifer Smithers, university chief counsel • Professors Marisa Johannson and Raul Mendoza • Mary Reba, alumna, local business owner, donor, former TU Board member

Part One: Discussion

At each table, one person should represent the perspective of each of the key players. Take 10 minutes to prepare a response to the questions below from this individual’s point of view.

1. What are your issues of concern? 2. What, if anything, should you do or say in response to the email…and to whom? 3. What actions are you likely to recommend and/or undertake? Why?

Additionally:

For Mary Reba

• What was your intent in sending the email? What are you expecting will be done in response to your letter… and by whom?

For professors Johannson and Mendoza

• What actions would these two individuals likely think should be taken by director Jefferson, provost Bossa, and vice president for external and community affairs Argery? Why?


Background

Part Two: New Information

Vice President Argery called Director Jefferson to indicate that he and the provost had been determined that this situation demanded an active response. Two options were presented: 1) remove the controversial works from the exhibit or 2) close the show.

William Jefferson was deeply troubled by this decision and the options presented, and he communicated his concerns to Vice President Argery as a part of the phone conversation. Argery’s response was “I understand what you’re saying, but I have to tell you that a decision has been made, and now we need to move forward with one of the two options.”

Jefferson called the professors, explained the situation, and asked them to give the matter some thought and let him know within 24 hours which option they preferred. The faculty members were outraged and went immediately to the dean of the School of Performing Arts, Art Fahn, to discuss the situation and their contention that their academic rights – and indeed academic freedom more generally – had been violated. This was the first the dean had heard of the situation, and he said he wanted to talk with members of the administration to discuss the matter. He called, but was told the provost was at meetings off campus until noon the next day. Dean Fahn left a message for the provost.

In the meantime, Dr. Mendoza was so angered by the situation that he called the editor of the local newspaper and gave a full account of the situation and the censorship that he believed was being imposed by the University. Reporters called the provost’s office requesting an interview about the “censorship issue,” and left a message for the provost to call immediately upon her return. The reporters also tried to contact the president’s office for a statement.

When the provost checked her email that evening, she had a flood of messages from community and school newspapers and a message to contact the president at his home that evening.

Two days later, the newspapers were filled with stories about the show, the controversial art works and the “censorship issue,” including interviews and incendiary comments from the faculty members. The articles noted that when contacted, the president’s and provost’s offices had failed to return calls. William Jefferson also had made several calls to the administration asking for guidance—should the exhibit be closed or should the pieces in question be removed? His calls also had yet to be answered.

The media coverage included two newspaper editorials, one arguing the works were in poor taste and not appropriate for display in a community facility. The other opined that this was clearly a freedom of speech issue and was critical of the administration for failing to take a strong stand on behalf of the faculty and their rights. Meanwhile, attendance at the Showcase had exceeded all estimates with particular attention being paid to the controversial pieces.


45

Part Two: Discussion

1. What should be done now? And, by whom? 2. What is your rationale?

Interactive Options – Additional Discussion Questions

1. How might you “debrief” this case with the parties involved to draw out lessons to be learned?

2. Are the issues raised by this case unique to this circumstance or can they be generalized?

3. Were there strategies available to the provost and administration that might have prevented these problems? What were some options?

4. What other individuals or groups might have been helpful in dealing with this situation? 5. If you had been a coach or consultant to the administrators involved, what advice would

you have given as to how best to approach this situation when you learned the email had been received and had reviewed its contents? Had you been a friend or colleague of the faculty members, what counsel would you have given them?

Debriefing

Themes

• Short‐ and Long‐Term Impact of Leadership Decision‐making: What is the short‐term impact of this case? Are there longer‐term consequences? (For the provost? The faculty members? The School of Performing Arts? The dean? William Jefferson? The Faculty Showcase? Relations among these various parties?)

• Identifying Core Issues and Critical Success Factors: What were the root causes of the problems in this case? What needed to happen for the situation to be successfully addressed and resolved?

• Communication: What communication problems and principles are exemplified by this case? Were the most appropriate and effective communication channels used?

• Culture: What is the role of culture (academic versus administrative versus community) in this scenario?

• Crisis (“Issues") Management: As viewed from the perspective of the individuals involved, was the situation described in this case study a “crisis?” Would the answer to the question influence the way one would think about and deal with this type of situation?


• Crisis (“Issues”) Management Planning: What might be done to plan for situations such as this one?

• Leadership and Leadership Development: Are there implications in this case for leadership development and leadership training?

• Decision Making: Were there alternative approaches to decision‐making that might have proved more useful? Discuss.


• Problem Definition and Solving: The way one thinks about the nature of a problem is often vital for the strategies that follow. In this case, as in others, there are alternative ways to define “the problem.” The first instinct was to devise a plan to remove the art that Mary Reba had referred to as “inappropriate.” That may not have been the only way to address Reba’s concerns. Depending on the factors motivating her communiqué, a phone call or meeting with Jill Highstein and a follow‐up meeting with William Jefferson as a first step could have clarified the nature and intensity of her concerns. This approach might have pointed toward a variety of strategies to pursue before the situation escalated.

• Systems/Organizational Analysis; Stakeholder Analysis: Thinking not only about the specifics that need to be attended to, but also the “big picture” issues that could be triggered as this scenario unfolds is essential to early planning and strategy development. There are a number of stakeholders to be aware of and concerned about in this case—alumni, donors, community members, administrative and academic leaders, faculty, the media, and the general public. Anticipating the needs and perspectives of each would be vital to the successful handling of this and similar cases.

• Analysis of Technology: In this case, communication and information technology became important considerations. It appears that appropriate communication channels (face‐to‐face, phone, email) were either unavailable or not well utilized. As a consequence, the difficulties arising from the multiple individuals and perspectives involved were substantially intensified.

• Listening, Question‐Asking, and Learning: Greater attention to listening to and learning about the sources of concern expressed initially by Mary Reba, and then later by others involved—the director, faculty members, and media—would have been helpful ingredients for developing and implementing a more effective strategy for dealing with the situation before it intensified.


47

• Vision Setting, Values, and Goals: Having a clear vision and value set is helpful when it comes to dealing with a situation such as this one. These philosophies should guide decisions about community functions, exhibits, and other events. If perceived problems crop up, they provide a helpful rationale for explaining the institution’s philosophy, values and goals. These will not satisfy all critiques, but they provide a solid grounding for communication.

• Management and Facilitation: Competencies in this area are important in the planning, preparations, coordination and guidance of the work of the administrative team in its interaction with various campus constituencies.

• Information and Knowledge Management: Information and message management was a critical issue in this case. While the situation might have been comfortably and cordially dealt with at the outset, the choices about information sharing, and the lack thereof, as well as the content of specific messages contributed to an escalation of conflict that ultimately led to media and public involvement.

• Diversity and Intercultural Relations: While not an explicit theme of this case, diversity and intercultural issues, campus or departmental histories, and personal sensitivities should be a leadership concern in all decision‐making. This is particularly true where there is potential for misinterpretations of the motives underlying decisions or actions. Such concerns point to the general importance of thoughtful attention to interpersonal, group, and organizational communication, and attention to information sharing and inclusion.

• Facilitation, Negotiation, Conflict Resolution, and Crisis Management: Skills in facilitation and negotiation were sorely needed in the early phases of this case, and conflict resolution competencies became important later. Due to these and other leadership shortcomings, a crisis of sorts evolved, and it’s quite possible that there will be a number of longer‐term consequences of the situation.


Readings:

Becker, E., and Wortmann, J. Mastering Communication at Work. New York: McGraw‐Hill, 2009.

Bennis, W. Managing People Is Like Herding Cats. Provo, UT: Executive Excellence Publishing, 1997.

Harvard Business Review on Effective Communication. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 1999.

Fortunato, J.A. “Restoring a Reputation: The Duke University Lacrosse Scandal,” Public Relations Review, 34, 116‐123, 2008.

Ledingham, J. A. “Relationship Management: A General Public Relations Theory.” In C. H. Botan & V. Hazleton (Eds.), Public Relations Theory II (pp. 465–483). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2006.

Ledingham, J. A., & Bruning, S. D. Public Relations as Relationship Management: A Relational Approach to the Study and Practice of Public Relations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2000.

Pearce, C. L., and Conger, J. A. Shared Leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2003.

Ruben, B. D. What Leaders Need to Know and Do: A Leadership Competencies Scorecard. Washington, DC: National Association of College and University Business Officers, 2006.


49

Recorder’s Form Timberline University

1. What issues are of concern for you? 2. What constituencies might be concerned? What might their concerns be? 3. What, if anything, do you do or say, and to whom? What’s your rationale? 4. What, if anything, do you think should be done? Why? 5. What issues or principles can you generalize from this case?



San Pedro College Case Study: Staff Productivity and Morale


The Setting San Pedro College (SPC) is a comprehensive teaching institution with 13,200 undergraduate and 3,000 graduate students, and 340 FTE faculty and staff. SPC is located in a scenic and relatively isolated setting in Mission Ridge, CA. SPC has confronted multiple challenges in recent years. Despite annual tuition increases, resources for new initiatives have been limited. Few resources are

available for capital improvements, or the initiation of new programs or services. Other than 1.5 percent across‐the‐board faculty and staff salary cost‐of‐living and standard promotion adjustments, there have been no significant faculty or staff raises in several years. A Faculty Distinction Program (FDP) and the Staff Performance Excellence Program (SPEP), initiated in 2002 and 2003 respectively, were designed to recognize and motivate outstanding performance, but neither program has been funded since 2006. The performance documentation and employee‐supervisor discussion component of the SPEP—which once played a central role in determining eligibility and levels of merit‐based salary increases—have been continued, but it is not tied in any way to compensation and is not taken all that seriously by most staff. The Faculty Distinction Program has been deferred for the past two years. Your Challenge Morale is quite low, and a number of the most motivated and talented faculty and staff are exploring alternative employment opportunities. These actions—and the conversations which precede and follow them—are contributing further to a negative campus climate and a contagious downward spiral of morale with a good deal of time spent in “water cooler” and lunch discussions of the depressing future that many envision for SPC. All these dynamics combine to have an adverse effect not only on organizational morale, but also on personal initiative and productivity. President Jamison and Provost Iberia have asked you, as CBO, to propose some options for dealing with the staff productivity, initiative and morale problems, which they see as undermining the core mission of SPC. No constraints have been placed on you in your thinking, other than the stipulation that there is little or no money available for raises.

Discussion




51

San Pedro College Case Study: Staff Productivity and Morale

Background Founded in 1897, San Pedro College (SPC) is a comprehensive teaching institution with 13,200 undergraduate and 3,000 graduate students, and 340 FTE faculty and staff. SPC is located in a scenic and relatively isolated setting in Mission Ridge, CA. Like many other institutions, SPC has confronted multiple challenges in recent

years. Despite annual tuition increases, resources for new initiatives have been limited, and there have been few resources available for capital improvements, or the initiation of new programs or services. Other than 1.5% across‐the‐board faculty and staff salary cost‐of‐living and standard promotion adjustments, there have been no significant faculty or staff raises in several years. The hope voiced by many within the institution, that “this too will pass,” seems unrealistic. Discussions in the media and on campus indicate that the institution’s financial challenges are likely to continue into the future. Increasingly, one hears comments on campus expressing concern that there seems to be no clear plan to address the realities the institution faces. Underscoring this sentiment was the following headline of a faculty editorial in the campus newspaper: “Hope Is Not a Strategy.” The college’s pressures are apparent in many spheres of institutional functioning. One area of particular concern is faculty and staff morale. Much of the conversation about morale problems seem to center on compensation. A Faculty Distinction Program (FDP) and the Staff Performance Excellence Program (SPEP), initiated in 2002 and 2003 respectively, were designed to recognize and motivate outstanding performance, but neither program has been funded since 2006. The performance documentation and employee‐supervisor discussion component of the SPEP, which once played a central role in determining eligibility and levels of merit‐based salary increases, has been continued, but it is essentially an academic exercise. It is not tied in any way to compensation, and it is not taken all that seriously by most staff. The Faculty Distinction Program has been deferred for the past two years. While the compensation situation is the most frequent topic in discussions of morale, it may well be but one aspect of the problem. Other less obvious factors related to morale have not


been addressed. The lack of meaningful communication regarding the compensation situation other than official emails informing faculty and staff of policy decisions relative to their deferral could well be part of the problem. Noticeably absent have been efforts to improve communication and create a shared sense of the challenge the institution faces, recognition of the dedication of faculty and staff in the face of difficult times, celebration of the numerous innovations and efficiency measures faculty and staff have initiated, and information about institutional plans and strategies for addressing these challenges in the longer term. Your Challenge A number of the most motivated and talented faculty and staff are exploring alternative employment opportunities. These actions and the conversations which precede and follow them are contributing further to a negative campus climate and a contagious downward spiral in confidence. A good deal of time is spent in “water cooler” and lunch discussions of the depressing future that many envision for SPC. All these dynamics combine to have an adverse effect not only on institutional drive, but also on personal initiative and productivity. President Jamison and Provost Iberia ask you to propose some options for dealing with the staff productivity, initiative and morale problems, which all parties see as beginning to seriously undermine the core mission of SPC and the quality of the institution’s programs and services. No constraints have been placed on you in your thinking, other than the stipulation that there is little or no money available for raises. Discussion Take 30 minutes to prepare a plan for how best to address the issues that have been raised. As a group consider what principles would guide your thinking. What do you see as the problem, or problems, here? What process should you follow in moving forward? Assessment Should you begin by gathering information to assess the accuracy of the perceptions, or take their accuracy as a given? If you decide to gather information for clarification or validation, how should you best proceed? Here are several options. Which seem most appropriate? What are the benefits and possible risks of each approach?

1. Do you talk with members of your leadership team? If so, do you discuss the matter with the members individually or as a group, and how would you frame the discussion?

2. Do you have a discussion with particular individuals and unit heads? 3. Do you organize interviews or focus groups with representative members of the faculty

and staff? Action


53

After you assess the situation, how do you proceed?

• What would be the primary elements of your plan? • What goals and strategies might you consider to address the morale problems? • How would you decide if these particular plans, goals and strategies were appropriate

and likely to be effective? • Would focus groups, an advisory group, or pilot projects be helpful? • What offices within the university would you likely want to involve in helping to plan

and implement your plan? • To what extent might your efforts encounter cynicism? How might this be anticipated

and mitigated to some degree? Interactive Options

1. After reviewing suggested options, the SPC president (the facilitator) can provide reactions to the draft plan submitted, raise questions, introduce concerns, describe possible consequences, and/or provide additional information for consideration such as an additional context or higher level issue.


process can be structured so that participants share responses across multiple tables and analyze common themes, differences, and similarities.

3. One or several of the proposed options may be selected and participants asked to go to

the next stage of planning—who should be involved with leading the change planning and implementation effort, what communication plans should be developed, how should the new approach will be assessed.

Debriefing Themes

• Problem Naming and Problem Solving: This case highlights the importance of problem naming (and analysis). In situations such as this, determining whether there is, in fact, a problem, and more basically deciding how to gather the information to make such a determination may be as much a challenge as figuring out how to address the problem once its existence is confirmed. If the problem is solely one of compensation, there’s not much that can be done. But, it seems likely that there are other factors contributing to the morale problem that can be addressed.

• Leadership Values in Principle and Practice: Particularly in difficult situations, leadership communication becomes extremely important. Faculty and staff look to leaders for reassurance, direction, and recognition of the realities of a situation.


• Communication Strategy: In addressing organizational challenges open, direct, and

immediate communication is not always the most effective strategy. Communication implies a two‐way (actually, a multi‐directional) interactive process, where listening receives as much emphasis as talking or explaining.


• Listening, Attention, Question‐Asking, and Learning: A climate of malaise and low energy has set in to the organization. While there may appear to be some obvious sources of dissatisfaction, it is important not to make assumptions. Attending verbally and visually to the thoughts, behaviors and actions of others may uncover less apparent reasons for the continued erosion of vigor and optimism.

• Vision, Strategy Development, and Goal Attainment: A key part of motivation is providing a sense of purpose and direction for those who work in the organization. In a situation where the future appears bleak, how can leaders focus energy and establish goals that support a feeling of accomplishment?

• Stakeholder Analysis: Who are some of the most critical constituency groups, what issues will likely be of particular importance to each group, and how might these concerns be addressed?

• Enthusiasm: There is no greater challenge in higher education today than to support the fervor and passion that most people employed in colleges and universities feel about their work.


55

Readings Stone, D., Patton, B., and Hen, S. Difficult Conversations. How to Discuss What Matters Most. New York: Penguin, 1999. Strober, M. H. “Communicating Across the Academic Divide.” The Chronicle of Higher Education, January 2, 2011. Becker, E., and Wortmann, J. Mastering Communication at Work. New York: McGraw‐Hill, 2009.

Bennis, W., Managing People is Like Herding Cats, Provo, UT, Executive Excellence Publishing, 1997.

Harvard Business Review on Effective Communication. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 1999.

Ledingham, J. A. “Relationship Management: A General Public Relations Theory.” In C. H. Botan & V. Hazleton (Eds.), Public Relations Theory II (pp. 465–483). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2006.

Pearce, C. L., and Conger, J. A. Shared Leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2003.

Ruben, B. D. What Leaders Need to Know and Do: A Leadership Competencies Scorecard. Washington, DC: National Association of College and University Business Officers, 2006.


Recorder’s Form San Pedro College

1. What are the key issues as you see it? 2. What do you propose? Why? 3. Are there issues or principles you can generalize from the case?


Documents

Leading in Tough Times Workbook: Case Studies for - NACUBO