Change Management

Perspectives on Leading in an Academic Environment

The UK Experience

The following quotes were mainly collected by the Effecting Change in HE project team.

The US Experience

The following quotes are from the work of Lucas (1999) in the US but they correlate with experience in the UK.

The belief in an inability to do anything as Head of Department because a person is simply a peer among equals conveys an aura of humility and democracy in action; yet it can effectively leave a department without a leader. When a Head is elected by peers for a limited term, being a team leader is a valid choice of leadership style. As team leader, a Head can take an active role in seeking meaningful input and full participation from everyone in the department so that staff can plan and organise themselves to function most effectively. This requires setting shared goals with the department and individual goals with staff so that everyone is focused on how they can achieve departmental goals while realising their own. Goal setting with individuals and providing feedback on performance in a supportive climate are the strongest forces a Head can use for motivating staff. When Heads are passive because they feel there is nothing they can do, departments, and often staff, stagnate.

Given academic norms that administration of any sort is a necessary evil such statements by an incoming department Head do not usually raise concern among their peers. On the contrary, academics may be relieved that the Head is not seeking power. However, when someone doesn't want to be Head, neither the department nor its staff will benefit by having somebody in the role simply because it is their 'turn'. It is likely that such an individual will behave in a passive-resistive fashion and accomplish nothing for the department. Whenever he or she is chided for not taking responsibility, the response can always be, 'But I didn't ask to be Head.'

This is a good example of generating only two options. 'I am either a peer or a manager. There is nothing in between.' As Head, an individual is no longer just a peer among equals. Heads have responsibilities that are different from those of other staff. Although all Heads have to perform some management functions, they don't have to become managers; they can become leaders.

It is simplistic to think that rewards include only economic benefits, and that punishment means only the firing of a member of staff. There are many more meaningful ways to reward people; and punishment has so many negative side effects, it is rarely an alternative of choice in motivating others. Being taken seriously by a colleague who appreciates the quality of what an individual is doing is both rewarding and motivating. Moreover, Heads usually have major input into personnel decision making, scheduling of courses, release time, and allocation of resources. The perception that Heads have 'neither carrot nor stick' certainly contributes to their feelings of powerlessness but this is simply not the case.

Granted that role conflict is stressful, a Head must be the conduit between academics and administration, representing the needs of each to the other. This requires that a Head be an articulate spokesperson for department members to administration. It is also necessary for a Head to be a public relations person for their department so that their accomplishments, their impact on the discipline at national or international level, and their outreach to the community can be appreciated by the rest of the university.

In addition, because they represent administration to academics, Heads must at times advance points of view that represent what is deemed to be good for the college or university over what is perceived as good for individual academics. For example, staff often strongly resist a Head's request that they teach an 8 am. class, a late evening course, or a course that meets three times a week. In each of these cases, academics may feel that the Head has lost the ability to identify with colleagues and is behaving like an administrator. Heads must handle such conflict with tact, fairness, and good humour.

Many Heads feel they have no power, though this perception is not usually accurate. In the context of the work of the Head, power is the ability to influence staff to achieve their own goals as they accomplish the work of the department. Heads have enough power to motivate staff to increase student learning by teaching effectively, to increase scholarly productivity, and to increase service or outreach activities. All they need is to know how to go about it.

The kinds of power that Heads have to motivate others include position power, personal power, and expert power. Follow this link to find out more about Types of Power. Position power, often referred to as legitimate power, is related to the authority individuals have simply because of their positions. The extent to which Heads control rewards and punishments varies markedly from one institution to another, but when their input on administrative matters is weighted heavily by a college or university, their position power is increased. Thus, Heads have strong position power when their judgment is given serious consideration in personnel decision making.

Position power is by and large a given. Personal power, however, varies considerably and can be increased in legitimate ways. If Heads treat everyone with respect, if they are perceived as working for and fighting for the well-being of their staff when the cause is just, if Heads create a supportive climate in the department, and if they give people recognition and visibility for their achievements, their personal power becomes greater.

A third kind of power is expert power, which is based on knowledge and control of resources. Heads usually know better than other academics how to get things accomplished in a college or university, particularly how to do things that are not described in handbooks and other formal documents.