Introduction
In recent years, academic institutions worldwide have been confronted with unprecedented challenges. Survival issues have become the centerpiece of discussions in faculty meetings and boardrooms. In what have been previously depicted as “ivory towers,” down-to-earth questions have emerged: How can we be profitable? How can we grow enrollment? How can we better raise funds? How can we remain relevant?
Evidence of these new challenges includes increasing number of universities whose bond ratings were downgraded, increase in the number of private 4-year colleges that were closed or acquired, incidence of mergers, aggressive tuition cuts, selling of real estate, changing educational models, and having smaller faculty (McDonald, 2014). Many academic institutions face the challenge of sustainability (Denneen & Dretler, 2012).
The corporate world has experienced rapid changes in the past 20 years. These changes have been brought about by the advent of new technologies, globalization, economic crisis, intense competition, and evolving market sophistication to name a few. With the changing operational landscape, companies needed to think in new ways and do business in nontraditional ways. The corporation 20 years ago is very different from the corporation today. In fact, even within a 5-year window, corporations can be very different. The same is true for the academic world though acceptance of this fact and adaptation have been slow to nonexistent.
Although rapid changes have been taking place in the corporate realm, a much slower pace of change has been taking place in academia. There are several reasons for this unresponsiveness: (1) History—many institutions remain grounded to their history and traditions; (2) Structure—the academic structure is one where key decisions are informed or made by committees or even the entire faculty; (3) Governance—there are matters of legality and oversight to consider; (4) Customer abundance—there is a large pool of students who are eager to earn a college degree to get a job; (5) Endowment—there are donors who are willing to share their wealth and offer financial gifts; (6) Accreditation—decisions have to be weighed in the context of its impact on institutional accreditation; (7) Lack of urgency—there are enrolled students in the pipeline and income stream is present; (8) Safety net—given the value academic institutions provide in the society and the numerous stakeholders involved, failure is oftentimes not an option. (9) A fundamental shift in the social contract, where the financial burden at all levels of post-secondary education has been transferred from the taxpayer to the individual and the family, which simultaneously narrows access based on means and often sends graduates into the work world with punishing debt.
The slow response is certainly understandable. However, what happens when: Enrollment is extremely low and budgets can’t be met? Financial gifts stop coming? Online institutions intensify the competitive landscape? How can institutions cope? We see already a stark contrast between the elite privates and the resource-squeezed publics as state governments across the United States continue to de-fund higher education. Internationally, though the specifics vary from country to country, resources necessary to support meaningful and quality higher education for the citizenry as a whole are topic and priority number one.
Numerous academic institutions worldwide are facing these issues and are struggling to survive. What should be the best path to survival or better yet to achieve success?
The authors grappled with these issues for several years. It soon became evident that there is a need for a “survive and thrive guide” or handbook for academic leaders to gain new perspectives on university management for the 21st century and beyond.
This quest for finding solutions to challenges in academic administration led the editors to a global journey to find the answers. The intent was to identify innovative thinking and the best practices in university management. Insights from university leaders and experts from all over the world were gathered and included in this book.
A key premise in this book is that change in academic institutions is both inevitable and urgent. A paradigm shift is necessary given the need for operational efficiency and economies of scale in order to minimize cost and increase output (Lomas, 2002; English et al., 2005; Rytmeister, 2009; Arambewela, 2010).
Academic institutions need to understand and meet stakeholder expectations, reach the right market to grow enrollment, decentralize structure, coordinate efficiently, and clarify modes of control (Willson et al., 2010). Today’s undergraduates—and even more so tomorrow’s—are “digital natives” who are hard-wired global citizens of a borderless virtual society of rapid change and unfettered access to contemporaries around the world. For the most part, the global professoriate does not neither understand them nor “speak their language”—yet it falls to them to prepare these young people for a whole new kind of society.
As in any industry, numerous changes take place—technology improves, consumer values shift, competition intensifies, market conditions fluctuate, globalization accelerates, and laws and policies are modified. These changes require a timely and effective response from educational institutions.
In response to change, new academic mindsets and business models are essential. These business models need to be anchored on five attributes: (1) Flexibility—to adapt and reinvent; (2) Speed—to be nimble to respond to crisis and capture opportunities in time; (3) Resourcefulness—to create exciting new value from limited resources; (4) Innovativeness—to continually find ways to improve; and (5) Connectedness—to build synergy with all its stakeholders.
In this book, the authors took the liberty of identifying a diverse set of strategic management options that are relevant to academic institutions. Specifically, attention is given to the management areas of Planning and Leading. During challenging times, the ability to plan and lead is critical. The editors are confident that the set of strategies can individually or collectively inform diverse readers and pave the way for institutional enhancement and transformation.
Strategy is defined as actions managers—which, in this context, include both senior managers and oversight governing boards—take to attain a firm’s objectives. Academic institutions have different objectives, and priorities differ according to market conditions, customer preferences, and competitive factors.
Strategies may be viewed in the context of its formation or execution (Kaplan & Neimhocker, 2003; Thorpe & Morgan, 2007). It is impacted by factors such as problem perception and rationalization, context, culture and process, structure, level of control, leadership, and communication (Drazin & Howard, 1984; Jaworski et al., 1993; Nutt, 1983; Simon, 1996; Wall & Wall, 1995; Workman, 1993).
In strategy development, planning is key. In fact, the cornerstone of many academic institutions is the Strategic Plan. The plan that the institution envisions and implements determines success. Planning entails the establishment of goals, as well as the identification of necessary resources in order that goals will be achieved. Planning generates positive organizational results and can lead to financial gains (Berman et al., 1997; Schwenk & Shrader, 1993).
Leadership is equally important since it determines how and when the plans are executed. It also involves collaborating with multiple stakeholders and is a social process (Day, 2001). Responsible leadership means involving others in the decision making process (Waldman & Siegel, 2008). Collaboration is a salient ingredient in strategic leadership (Mittal & Dorfman, 2012). It is anchored on results. Consequently, leadership approaches influence followers conduct relating to work, attitudes, and performance (Liden et al., 2014).
This book highlights the best practices in planning and leading academic institutions in a strategic context.
Book Organization
In this book, the authors offer a range of topics that are deemed relevant to contemporary university management. The management functions of Planning and Leading are emphasized. The intent is to provide tools for academic leaders to transform, reinvigorate, and even turn-around educational institutions.
Strategies in University Management (Volume 1) is organized into four sections. Section I is the Introduction. Section II is about Planning for Success and includes the following chapters: Raising academic quality: A playbook (Fr. Dennis Holtschneider), Using accreditation to create and sustain an institutional vision and effective planning (Ralph Wolff), Developing, managing, and measuring a fluid strategic action model for higher education (Gary Bonvillian), Effective communication to improve the quality of university instruction (Ernesto Schiefelbein and Noel McGinn), Going online: Pitfalls and best practices in distance education (Mac Powell), Leading comprehensive internationalization on campus (Thimios Zaharopoulos), Global higher education: A perspective from Spain (Fernando Galvan). Section III pertains to Leading the Way with chapters such as Never alone: Building an effective management team (Gary Dill), Creating and sustaining the university leadership pipeline (Don Betz), Managing diversity as a university strategy (Geetha Garib), and Managing duty of care obligations in a university setting (Lisbeth Claus). Section IV is the Conclusion.
A second volume of this book series in University Management covers the equally important management topics of Organizing and Controlling. It covers the subject of Effective Organization and includes the following chapters: Developing and maintaining meaningful relationships with faculty, staff, and students (Arthur Kirk); Optimizing the Board–President relationship: Best practices that make a difference (Gene Habecker); Pathways to entrepreneurship in the academe (J. Mark Munoz); Evaluating the impact of social networks on the university’s public engagement (Letizia Lo Presti and Vittoria Marino);Business and academic linkages: The case of Georgia (Kakha Shengalia and Shalva Machavariani); and Quad-helix engagement for city and regional development: The role of universities in governance, leadership, and management (Thandwa Mthembu). There are also discussions on Controlling for Success with chapters such as: An empirical basis for strategic management of price and aid (Richard Hesel and Craig Goebel), Enrollment management (Halia Valladares and David Docherty), Assessment is everyone’s business (Wendy Weiner), and Financial management in higher education (Neal King and J. Mark Munoz). Together, the two volumes provide a comprehensive perspective on the management of academic institutions and cover the four functions of management: Planning, Leading, Organizing, and Controlling.
Value Provided by Strategies
The authors and editors hope that through the essays provided, many educational institutions worldwide can be helped and revived. For those fortunate to be in a growth path, some of the innovative ideas featured in the book can provide a roadmap to sustainability and greater success.
This book is valuable to a diverse audience. The offered strategies are useful for: (1) University leaders and stakeholders—as they seek ways to revive their organizations and enhance its performance, (2) Management consultants—when they endeavor to help their clients find solutions to problems, (3) Administrators in government and international organizations—in their efforts to strengthen policies in education, (4) Private corporations—in their collaboration and partnership with colleges and universities, and (5) Educators and students—as they expand their knowledge on education in the 21st century.
A New Frontier for Academia
This book is a pioneering effort to converge the viewpoints of academic administrators and experts from around the world in order to identify the best potential strategies in university management. The book furthers the notion that strategic shift and innovative thinking is needed in contemporary academia. As a groundbreaking initiative in identifying strategies for success in university management, the editors, authors, and contributors of this book were confronted with the challenges and opportunities of embarking into a new frontier of knowledge. There were limited sources upon which to build this body of expertise, but there is an abundance of creative thinking to shape a new paradigm. It is our hope that this effort stimulates interest on the subject and paves the way for dynamic ideas for university management in the future.
Arambewela, R. (2010). Student experience in the globalized higher education market: Challenges and research imperatives. In F. Maringe and N. Foskett (Eds.) Globalization and Internationalization in Higher Education: Theoretical, Strategic and Management Perspectives (pp. 155–173). London: Continuum International.
Berman, J.A., Gordon, D.D., & Sussman, G. (1997). A study to determine the benefits small business firms derive from sophisticated planning versus less sophisticated types of planning. The Journal of Business and Economic Studies, 3(3), 1–11.
Day, D.V. (2001). Leadership development: A review in context. Leadership Quarterly, 11, 581–613.
Denneen, J., & Dretler, T. (2012). The financially sustainable university. Accessed March 16, 2015. Viewable at: http://www.bain.com/publications/articles/financially-sustainable-university.aspx
Drazin, R., & Howard, P. (1984). Strategy implementation: A technique for organizational design. Columbia Journal of World Business, 19(Summer), 40–46.
English, L.M., Guthrie, J., & Parker, L.D. (2005). Recent public sector financial management change in Australia: Implementing the market model. In J. Guthrie, C. Humphrey, L.R. Jones, and O. Olson (Eds.) International Public Financial Management Reform: Progress, Contradictions, and Challenges (pp. 23–54). Connecticut: Information Age.
Jaworski, B.J., Stathakopoulos, V., & Krishnan, H.S. (1993). Control combinations in marketing: conceptual framework and empirical evidence. Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 406–419.
Kaplan, S., & Neimhocker, E.D. (2003). The real value of strategic planning. Sloan Management Review, 44(2), 71–76.
Liden, R.C., Panaccio, A., Meuser, J.D., Hu, J., & Wayne, S.J. (2014). Servant leadership: Antecedents, processes, and outcomes. In D.V. Day (Ed.) The Oxford Handbook of Leadership and Organizations (pp. 357–379). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Lomas, L. (2002). Does the development of mass education necessarily mean the end of quality? Quality in Higher Education, 8(1), 71–79.
Mittal, R., & Dorfman, P.W. (2012). Servant leadership across cultures. Journal of World Business, 47, 555–570.
McDonald, M. (2014). Small US colleges battle death spiral as enrollment drops. Accessed on October 21, 2014. Viewable at: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-04-14/small-u-s-colleges-battle-death-spiral-as-enrollment-drops.html
Nutt, P.C. (1983). Implementation approaches for project planning. Academy of Management Review, 8(4), 600–611.
Rytmeister, C. (2009). Governing university strategy; perceptions and practice of governance and management roles. Tertiary Education & Management, 15(2), 137–156.
Schwenk, C.R., & Shrader, C.B. (1993). Effects of formal strategic planning on financial performance in small firms: A meta-analysis. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice Spring, 53–64.
Simon, H. (1996). The Sciences of the Artificial, 3rd ed. Boston, MA: MIT Press.
Thorpe, E.R., & Morgan, R.E. (2007). In pursuit of the ‘ideal approach’ to successful marketing strategy implementation. European Journal of Marketing, 41(5/6), 659–677.
Waldman, D.A., & Siegel, D. (2008). Defining the socially responsible leader. Leadership Quarterly, 19, 117–131.
Wall, S.J., & Wall, S.R. (1995). The evolution (not the death) of strategy. Organizational Dynamics, 24, 7–19.
Willson, C., Negoi, R., & Bhatnagar, A.S. (2010). University risk management. Internal Auditor, August, 65–68.
Workman, J.P. (1993). Marketing’s limited role in new product development in one computer systems firm. Journal of Marketing Research, 30, 405–421.