STRATEGIC LEADERSHIP

Transcription

1 Richard L. Morrill July 2017 ACCCA Presentations STRATEGIC LEADERSHIP The Worth of Education "We are born into the world, but we are educated into the possession of our human powers our powers for the exercise of intellect, emotion, imagination, judgment, memory, observation, and action in a coherent way... Coming into possession of the powers that we have as human beings that is the good, the value if you wish, that is the defining presence of educational worth," T. Green (Liberal Education, Summer 1982, ) Leadership has various common meanings: 1. the (a) personal characteristics (b) the practices, processes, styles and behavior (c) and the capabilities and expertise of leaders; 2. the exercise of the authority and the responsibilities of positions of leadership; 3. the processes of interactive and reciprocal leadership as social influence between and among individuals and groups Reciprocal/Relational Leadership No one is leading unless others are following:... (integral) leadership is an interactive relationship of sense-making and sensegiving in which certain individuals and groups influence and motivate others to enact values and purposes that they come to hold in common, and to pursue shared directions and goals in responding to change and conflict. (p.14) Integrative Strategy... strategy is an integrative and collaborative process of sense-making and direction-setting that designs and implements strategies and goals in terms of organizational strengths and weaknesses, existing and attainable resources and the challenges and opportunities of the wider environment. It creates a vision of 1

2 Strategic Leadership the best possibilities to create educational value and institutional advantage for the future. (p.69)... strategic leadership is a collaborative and integrative process and discipline of decision-making and influence.(p. 258) In a few institutions strategic leadership appears to be embedded in parts or all of the organization as a cultural and organizational disposition, and not only as a set of formal procedures of deliberation. When this occurs a position has been reached that shows itself in the distribution of leadership throughout the organization. New ideas surface in many places, initiatives are taken by a large range of groups and individuals, and the differences between leaders and followers becomes hard to define since they are always changing places. Those with authority follow those with the most compelling ideas, and lead by mobilizing people and resources around the best possibilities. The story and the vision have been widely internalized and leadership is a transparent process and presence in the ways decisions are made and executed. (p.74) Strategic leadership is: Integral: it begins at the level of human agency, values and paradigms; Sense-Making and Sense-Giving: it relies on narrative forms and vision to make sense of experience and give meaning to the future; Motivational: it mobilizes energy and commitment; Direction-Setting: it sets determinable goals for the future Applied: it takes form in decisions and choices; Collaborative: it uses collegial deliberative methods; Systemic: it connects separate decision-making systems within the organization; Data-Driven: it depends on good metrics and strategic indicators; Integrative: it integrates different forms of data and knowledge into insights and decisions; Embedded: it depends on distributed leadership throughout the organization; AN INTEGRATIVE STRATEGY PROCESS 2

3 I. SITUATING THE STRATEGY PROCESS The Academic Culture of Decision Making Mission vs. Market Shared Governance and its Discontents Collaboration and Legitimacy Aligning strategic governance, strategic planning, strategic management and strategic leadership Strategic Diagnostics: Prior strategies and their effectiveness II. DESIGNING THE MECHANISMS AND TOOLS OF STRATEGY Role and Responsibilities of a Strategic Planning Council (SPC) Setting the agenda not enacting priorities and decisions Responsibilities of the President Variable but critical Responsibilities of the Governing Board Assuring, participating and approving, not creating the strategy Strategic Indicators: The Metrics of Identity, Performance and Aspiration How does the SPC relate to the work of existing faculty bodies and administrative committee s and officers? Is it clear that the SPC sets an agenda for consideration, but does not in itself legislate for the faculty or make decisions delegated to the administration? Is a strategy process a familiar method of campus decision-making? Will the role of the SPC be consistent with the formal policies, rules and documents that define the system of shared governance? Will the SPC create another layer of authority in a system that may already be too complex? Does the proposed SPC help to integrate the institution s fragmented systems of decision-making and serve as a vehicle for collaborative leadership? Have or will the appropriate groups have a chance to express their views and influence the provisions of the report before it is acted on the governing board? Are its membership and other operating assumptions and responsibilities appropriate? Can the SPC effectively guide a complex process to completion in a reasonable period of time? Will the institution be able to implement the goals that the strategy process establishes? Will the organization be able to create a continuous loop of quality improvement by linking assessment to the development and implementation of strategy? (pp revised) 3

4 Examples of Dashboard and Comparative Benchmarking Indicators: Enrollment and Admissions 5 Year Enrollment Trends (FTE) Credit Non-credit Demographics Admissions Completed Applications Metrics for terminal degree and transfer applicants 5 year trends Accepted Enrolled Yield% Demographics Scores Retention and Graduation Rates 5 year Trends 1 st to 2 nd year retention Graduation Rates Differentiation by programs and student preparation 5 Year Trends After 2 years After 3 years Assessment Data Quantitative indicators: surveys of students and alumni: job and transfer metrics, starting salaries by comparable positions, national performance inventories and instruments: CLA, NSSE, etc. Rubrics Electronic Portfolios Faculty Salaries Average salaries by rank Finances 10 Year Trends Market value of Foundation Endowment Value per FTE students Tuition and total charges 5 year charges 4

5 Net Tuition Revenue 5 year trend Discount rate % Annual Financial Results 5 year trends Balances/Deficits Liquidity Measures Expendable Fund Balances Expendable Foundation endowment and quasi endowment Fund-Raising 5 year trends Gift receipts from all sources Foundation gift receipts from all sources Gift receipts per FTE students Alumni and board participation (definition) Annual Fund (definition) Deferred Gift Register III. IDENTITY, MISSION AND VISION Narratives of Identity: Story and Values Mission Envisioning Vision Being vs. doing the best Combining Being and Doing the Best in a Strategic Vision One of the most effective ways to assure that superlatives have strategic force is to combine reflections about being the best, with disciplined explorations of doing the best. A critical weakness of ambitions that are not specifiable is that they block the processes of precise knowledge, focused reflection, linguistic richness and integrative judgment that are required to create a sustained and powerful vision. Strategic creativity often has humble beginnings as people with detailed contextual knowledge interact with peers daily to explore organizational problems and opportunities. They start with a sense of what they do best, not of how they can be the best. The former issues lead to specific and determinable areas of competence and achievement, the latter into a whole series of complex assumptions that, as we have seen, may be hard to define and measure. Finally, of course, the two forms of best should merge, but the order in which the issues are pursued is a critical part of a vision and of leadership. (p.148) To serve the purposes of leadership, a vision statement should be: (Cf. Kotter, 1996; Sevier, 2000; and Tierney, 2002) p. 152: 5

6 Clear Concise Focused Differentiated Aspirational Plausible Motivational Shared Authentic Worthwhile Measurable Identity and Vision Exercise (p ) Key Events a. Describe the three most pivotal events that have occurred since the founding of the institution. (1) (2) (3) b. What is the best thing that has occurred here during the past two years? Why? c. What is the worst thing that has occurred here during the past two years? 6

7 Why? 2. Competencies a. What distinctive competencies does this institution possess? b. What competencies does it need to develop? Why? 3. Characteristics a. What five short, descriptive phrases or adjectives best describe the institution? b. Circle the phrase/word you would most like to change. c. Underscore the phrase/word you would most like to preserve. d. What is the typical image that outsiders have of the institution (in higher education) and in the community? 7

8 e. What do you think the institution should be 10 years from now? IV. EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENTAL SCAN Driving Forces and Trends: PEEST (Political, Economic, Educational, Social and Technological Change) Scenarios V. INTERNAL SCAN AND STRATEGIC POSITION Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats (SWOT) Financial Position Core Competencies Organizational Problems and Opportunities Governance and Decision-Making Systems Threats Confront Avoid Opportunities Develop Consider 8

9 Strengths Weaknesses (p. 172, Lancashire Training Council) VI. STRATEGIC INIATIVES/IMPERATIVES VII. GOALS Selecting Strategies: Key Strategic Initiatives, Programs and Projects From academic programs, to diversity and inclusion, to communications and marketing Key Strategic Indicators Content Measurement Accountability Timelines and Deadlines VIII. ACTIONS Establishing and Communicating Agendas for Implementation IX. FINANCIAL MODEL AND RESOURCES Using a Financial Model: Costing the Goals and Actions Setting Strategic priorities Connecting Planning and Budgeting Capital Funds and other Sources State, Local, Federal and Private Sources Day 2 X. IMPLEMENTATION: SYSTEMIC STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT Execution Accountability Deadlines 9

10 Measurement and Metrics Transforming routines: annual reports and reviews Control Systems Board Agendas and Retreats Communication Transparency Repetition Urgency Validation Affirmation Ceremonies Special reports: market segmentation Online features and updates Social Media Assessment The gold standard: measuring educational value-added Surveys and instruments Rubrics Electronic portfolios Momentum and Credibility Success breeds success Synergy Trust Motivation Strategic leadership is: Integral: it begins at the level of human agency, values and paradigms; Sense-Making and Sense-Giving: it relies on narrative forms and vision to make sense of experience and give meaning to the future; Motivational: it mobilizes energy and commitment; Direction-Setting: it sets determinable goals for the future Applied: it takes form in decisions and choices; Collaborative: it uses collegial deliberative methods; Systemic: it connects separate decision-making systems within the organization; Data-Driven: it depends on good metrics and strategic indicators; Integrative: it integrates different forms of data and knowledge into insights and decisions; 10

11 Embedded: it depends on distributed leadership throughout the organization; The Integration of Leadership Strategic leadership... seeks a genuine synthesis of the different frames of leadership. It draws together all the hard realities of an institution s choices and circumstances around a sense-making narrative and sense-giving vision of the purposes that it serves, with the organization as the agent of that vision. The various frames (political, administrative, collegial, symbolic) then function as sub-systems within a systematic method that uses, modifies and transforms them to implement an integrative strategy. As we have seen throughout the course of our inquiry, strategic leadership creates the mechanisms of governance, forms of authority and administrative systems it requires to do its work. It systematically unites power with purpose, vision with action, shared values with shared governance, and narratives of identity with administrative systems. As an integrative frame of meaning, strategic leadership allows us to see what is there in varying degrees, but is often hidden a complex but real integration and interpenetration of an institution s systems of decision-making. (p. 264) Ultimately, the leadership of organizations, including of colleges and universities, is about sustaining the values through which humans define themselves and find meaning in social forms. From this perspective it becomes especially clear why both leadership and responsibility have to be effectively and widely shared in organizations of higher learning. As integral strategic leadership takes hold in a college or university, the values that it serves and the vision that it offers move to center stage. Conflicts and distractions over protocols and position are relegated to the wings. So engaging is the educational task of transforming human possibilities, so absorbing is the quest for learning, so compelling is the errand of meeting human needs, that people experience the powerful norms of a community that serves a magnificent common cause. In such a community it becomes nearly impossible to draw sharp lines between those who lead and those who follow. There is more than enough work to go around, and more than enough responsibility to be shared by different individuals and groups in different ways at different times. To know the ultimate contribution of strategic leadership as a transforming narrative process, we can do no better than to turn to the words of the poet (T.S. Eliot, Little Giddings, quoted in Keller, 1983, p. 62; p.267): We shall not cease from exploration, And the end of all our exploring, Will be to arrive where we started, And know the place for the first time. 11

12 Document Richard L. Morrill Association of Governing Boards Chancellor, University of Richmond PROSPECTUS Presidential 360 Review On the initiative of the president and the chair of the Board, the Board of Trustees will sponsor a comprehensive multi-source or 360 review of the president during The process will complement the annual process of presidential assessment currently conducted by the president and the Board. It will rely on goals and best practices that have been developed by the Association of Governing Boards (AGB) and used by many different types of colleges and universities around the country. The evaluation is intended to contribute to the continuing improvement of the work of the president, and to the effectiveness of the institutions methods of governance and decision-making. The presidential assessment will be based on a review of prior evaluations and of a variety of materials and indicators, and will be focused on fully confidential individual and small-group interviews with members of the institution s community and other key stakeholders. The interviews will be conducted by Richard L. Morrill, former president and now Chancellor of the University of Richmond. The consultant will assist the president and the board by gathering and analyzing the perspectives of board members, and a cross-section of faculty, staff, alumni, students, alumni representatives and community and church leaders. The process will be based on conversations about the effectiveness of the work of the president and the institution as suggested in the questions that are included below. They are intended to provide a broad framework for a flexible conversation that allows participants to clarify and explore issues. They will serve as prompts for a conversation, and not as a list to which everyone is expected to give a precise answer. The topics and questions have been derived from materials, studies, and research on leadership and presidential and board effectiveness in higher education and other organizations. 12

13 PRESIDENTIAL LEADERSHIP As experience suggests and the literature on the topic confirms, the evaluation of leadership is always complex, for the term conveys a number of different meanings. As it is exercised in academic organizations, presidential leadership involves the integration of a series of different dimensions of both leadership and management in different contexts, some of which are inherently in tension with one another. While academic decision-making is collegial, administrative authority is more structured by lines of authority, and stakeholder relationships are often ambiguous and complex. Some of the central strands of presidential leadership relate to the effective and responsible exercise of the formal authority of a position, others to administrative and academic skills and expertise, and yet others to personal characteristics, competencies and qualities. As contemporary leadership studies suggest, one of the central motifs implied in all of these forms of leadership is its relational or interactive dimension as a mutual process of sense-making, direction-setting and action that occurs between and among the leaders and the members of the organization. Especially in academic communities, leadership takes many forms at different times and in various contexts. The questions and responses are ultimately intended to contribute to the leadership development and effectiveness of the president and of the organization itself, not to create a check list of successes and failures. Thus, the board will use the findings of the process to provide feedback to the president, to enlarge awareness, and to develop opportunities for the president, the board and the campus community to strengthen capabilities and to re-organize priorities and responsibilities as appropriate. Participants are invited to consider these larger goals of the evaluation, as well as the suggestions concerning the interview process that follow: Participants are asked to keep in mind that they can be most helpful by providing as much specific evidence and information as possible about the views that they hold. So, the facilitator will often ask questions about the source or basis for a particular judgment. Participants will sometimes be asked to suggest the level or degree of their confidence in a point of view, as, for example whether their view is strongly held, moderately so, or uncertain. The facilitator will also ask questions about how the president and others might fulfill their responsibilities more effectively, and how things might be done differently by the organization to improve its performance. Depending on the individual or the group, some sets of questions will be more relevant than others to the experience of the interviewees, and the focus of the various conversations with different groups and individuals will reflect those factors. 13

14 The facilitator will not reveal the names or responsibilities of individuals who offer opinions, and will assure that views or ideas are presented in oral or written reports in ways that do not indirectly or inadvertently reveal anyone s identity. Individuals in group conversations are expected to be honor bound as well to keep the views that others offer a private matter, and not to quote or refer to the views of others outside of the interview. Several of the institution s indicators and results, and its strategic plans and goals for the future, can be found on these links and participants are asked to review them prior to their interviews. LEADERSHIP CONTEXTS AND QUESTIONS How effectively does the president: STRATEGIC LEADERSHIP Demonstrate an understanding of the history and culture of the institution and convincingly tell its story? Use a credible and collaborative strategy process to renew the mission and create a compelling vision? Enact the strategy and make things happen to create competitive advantage in responding to and anticipating the driving forces of change and competition? How effectively does the president: EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP Assure academic quality by mobilizing resources and using evaluation, evidence, metrics and benchmarking to improve performance continuously in teaching, student learning, research and service? Encourage and enable educational and curricular change and innovation? Understand and participate in shared academic governance and collaborative decision-making? How effectively does the president: ORGANIZATIONAL MANAGEMENT 14

15 Manage analyze, organize, plan, direct, evaluate, improve, renew basic institutional processes and resources (finances, technology, human resources, facilities, services, etc.)? Create a sense of urgency, hold others accountable and drive results in key performance areas such as admissions, retention, enrollment, student learning, fund raising, research, service, finances and facilities? Make clear, timely and tough decisions? Build a talented leadership team and empower and motivate the members to achieve beyond their expectations? How effectively does the president: FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT Understand and manage the organization s finances, and financial metrics and processes (budgeting, costs, revenues, overhead, balances, and investments) and communicate financial realities to stakeholders? Manage resources efficiently and build long-term financial equilibrium (create operating balances, add revenues at a faster rate than expenses, provide for depreciation, and increase the purchasing power of the endowment)? How effectively does the president: FUND-RAISING Nurture relationships and obtain gifts and grants at full potential from the board, individuals, alumni, parents, corporations and foundations? Engage the board and other volunteers in fund raising in various forms, including capital gifts, program support, annual gifts, and campaigns? How effectively does the president: EXTERNAL RELATIONS Establish credibility and influence with external constituencies, such as alumni, church leaders, local leaders, parents, and educational associations? Gain influence and credibility with general and specialized media and increase the visibility and reputation of the institution? 15

16 How effectively does the president: INTERNAL RELATIONS Develop a climate and programs that enhance diversity and inclusiveness? Demonstrate interpersonal skills and abilities in relating to individual faculty and staff members and students and a commitment to their welfare and development? How effectively does the president: BOARD AND GOVERNANCE RELATIONS Build a relationship of mutual trust, confidence and open communication with the governing board? Develop a good working understanding of the board s, the faculty s and the administration s respective roles in decision-making? Focus the board on mission and vision, strategic thinking, resource use and acquisition, and on governance issues that need attention? How effectively does the president: PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS AND VALUES Demonstrate persistence in reaching goals? Communicate clearly and convincingly in various forms and contexts? Listen? Show respect for others? Examine and challenge his or her assumptions and show a willingness to explore other viewpoints? Build consensus and reconcile conflict between self and others, and among groups and individuals? Demonstrate honesty and integrity? Inspire trust and confidence? 16

17 SUMMARY Overall, how effective has been the president s leadership? What have been the president s major accomplishments in the leadership of the institution during the past several years? What would you suggest to improve the president s effectiveness? What other points need to be covered? 17