I did not have an hours this week with my mentor. However, I did gain some significant insights from my reading this week.
Turnaround Leadership for Higher
Education by Michael Fullan and Geoff Scott
Chapter 3 – The new agenda
In chapter three
of Turnaround Leadership, Fullan and
Scott (2009) provide a four focus areas for best addressing the challenges
facing today’s colleges and universities. The authors believe that is necessary
to redefine the university in order to develop within its policies and
personnel the capacity for innovative thinking, change implementation with
sustainable outcomes, and change leadership at all levels. These four focus
areas are: practical reasoning that combines analysis with application; teaching
and learning at the center of the traditional trio research, teaching, and engagement
and service; inquiry, quality reviews, and implementation, and change theory
and leadership.
Practical
Reasoning: Combining Analysis and Application
The authors
assert that the key to universities achievement of their missions is to reconceive
how knowledge is produced. First, it essential that critical analysis be conducted
in action. These actions must be examined based upon their theoretical cause
and the associated effect. In doing so, there will be improved knowledge and
theory building, improved student preparation, better teaching, and a more substantial
contribution to the community (Fullan & Scott, 2009).
Teaching and Learning
at the Center
The success of
this new agenda centers around knowledge generation and cultivation. Therefore,
it is more appropriate to have teaching and learning at the center. If the trio
of research, learning, and service and engagement are approached independently,
research will almost certainly have a natural advantage. It is only when these
elements are viewed together that leaders are able to achieve a aims of a
knowledge-based integration framework. Focusing of teaching and learning will
provide better support to more productive learning environments and student commitment,
retention, and completion (Fullan & Scott, 2009).
Inquiry, Quality
Reviews, and Implementation
Institutions
must learn to behave like a learning organizations. This is a common practice
in many revenue-generating businesses. Ironically, this is not a concept that is
appreciated by many institutions of learning. Institutions must be able to collect
data that articulate the practices and results of their operations. Next, they
must be able to assess their current position objectively and determine mechanisms
to for improvements. Finally, this work must be cyclical and not a one-time or
short-term event (Fullan & Scott, 2009).
Change Theory
and Leadership
The authors
entreat change agents to first appreciate the current culture within the
organization. Failure to do so may lead create opportunity for initiative
overload, change-related chaos, and employee burnout and cynicism. Rather,
change leaders should consider “change recombination”. This refers to
identifying the multiple bright spots within the organization and redefining
them or combining them as a start to a change innovation. Two key features of
leading change within an organization are coherence and motivation. To achieve
this, the authors illustrate six essential elements:
direction and
engagement
capacity
building with a focus on results
supportive
infrastructure
leadership
managing distracters
continuous
evaluation and inquiry
two-way
communication
To achieve the
ambitions of this approach, universities and colleges will need to engage in a
substantial shift in their thinking with regard to leadership. In order to achieve
the intended growth, there must be systematic leadership at each level. Rather
than appointing the smartest people to leadership roles or earmarking the
person available, universities and colleges will need to engage in intentional develop
its leaders from within, a practice very similar to top preforming business organizations
(Fullan & Scott, 2009).
Application to
my practice
This applies to
my practice with respect to our lack of professional development. Recently, my
director emailed me with concerned over our district-wide need for onboarding,
initial training, and professional development. I am in the early stages of
creating such a program within my team. It is difficult to rein in all of the
materials needed for successful onboarding but it is clear that it is a needed element.
Everything that I have read throughout this term has revealed a need for a
homegrown professional development program within my practice. This is also reinforced
by the survey and interview I conducted during spring semester. Our folks are asking for some professional
development. I am planning to rethink my entire innovation following the term.
Initially, I was unsure of what the professional development program would
look. Therefore, I steered away from it. However, I continued to assess my
practice. Resultantly, formal and informal feedback form the practice has told
me what is needed. I am looking forward to the challenge and the opportunity.
Chapter 4 – Make it happen: building quality
and capacity
In chapter 4,
Fullan and Scott (2009) discuss the “how” of effective change management. The
discussion centers around the deployment of change strategy according the new
agenda outlined in the previous chapter. They look at empirical research to
outline how institutions may build change capacity, thereby, leading to the implementation
of the aforementioned strategy. The three key concepts that I would like to
discuss here are: development of an agile and efficient operation, operating on
evidence, not anecdote, and shifting from strategic planning to strategic
thinking and doing (Fullan & Scott, 2009).
An agile and
efficient operation
A key necessity
of a change-capable culture is the management of “distractors” (Fullan &
Scott, 2009, p. 79). Some distractors are meetings with scant purpose and no
outcomes; needless travel to these meetings; poorly administered meetings;
signoff systems that are more ritualistic than operationally required; fruitless
micropolitics that do not contribute
to improving the institutional experience of students (Fullan & Scott,
2009). The authors highlight universities who have taken an alternative
approach to many of the aforementioned unproductive activities. First, they
employ teleconferences were appropriate rather than having people to drive to in-person
meetings. Chairs are trained to conduct successful meetings with coherent
agendas and have been arranged with carefully consideration of its cost and
outcomes. Finally, the meeting participants are productively engaged.
Operating on
evidence, not anecdote
Turnaround
institutions appreciate consensus culture. However, rather than forming
consensus around within the group, their focus is coming to a consensus around
the data. An institutional culture where participants are focused on continuous
assessment, investigation, and quality enhancement use evidence to ascertain
the key features of the current measures that are working. They also identify
the areas that need improvement. Here the institution has the eye on the
future. Change leaders use data to determine the most advantageous and sustainable
path into the future.
Shifting the
focus from strategic planning to strategic thinking and doing
To develop
strategic thinking, the change leader must use available performance evaluations
and data trends along with strategic data gathered from other targeted sources.
The sources of feedback include organization professionals, policy advisers,
students, and close analysis of national data. Additionally, leaders may review
key local, social, economic, environmental, and technological data in order to
gain additional evidence. Strategic thinking is about determining the best path
to the predetermined goal without developing a comprehensive plan (Fullan &
Scott, 2009).
Application to
my practice
Developing good
meetings is key with me. I have that traveling to multiple meetings to only
give minimal participation is not the most efficient use of resources. When our
new director came on board, I asked that we have an agenda to our meetings and
some outcomes. I got the agenda, but no outcomes. I am working to build this
into my meetings. Typically, I arrange the meetings to be more of a discussion
than a dictatorial exchange. I often find that many times my staff members will
address some agenda items in these conversations and work the problems out for
themselves. I attempt to guide the conversation with key talking points and I
attempt to minimize the news bulletins as much as possible.
Shifting to
strategic thinking is something that I have been toying with for some time. It
is quite an interesting way to approach problems of practice. Leaders use
varied forms of evidence, both qualitative and quantitative, to develop a way
of thinking. The various pieces of data help shape the problem and it helps you
develop a path. It also protects leaders and other team members from the propensity
to spin their wheels when strategic plans are altered by environmental necessity.
Using thoughtful and logical, people will be able to make the necessary
adjustments and continue toward the established goal.
Fullan, M., & Scott, G. (2009). Turnaround leadership for
higher education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
No comments:
Post a Comment