Leadership and Change strategies for institutionalizing assessment

Adrianna Kezar, USC

Overview

1. Change paradigm and formula – 20 minutes minutes

2. Case study Discussion – 1 hour

3. Discussion of change strategies –Bolman and Deal, Ramaley– 45 hour

4. Leadership Inventory Discussion and Implications – 30 minutes

5. Assessment as Deep and Transformational change – 20 minutes

6. What we know about institutionalizing assessment– 20 minutes

7. Analyzing your own campus with change formula – homework

Part 1: Paradigm and Formula

My background – Kellogg; ACE President’s study; Equity scorecard; PKAL;NSF; ADVANCE; Spencer

Key reflections about change over time

Formula and parts – vision, change phase, institutional culture, leadership skills, change strategies

Key reflections

Many good ideas about change, but amount can be overwhelming

As a result, leaders often rely on one simple approach for all situations

If an approach works once, leaders tend to use it again and do not understand why it does not work

Key – become familiar with many tools (Bolman and Deal, for example)

Key reflections

Research provides a set of tools, but experience can also provide more tools (Ramaley Model presents this)

Use intentional reflection to gain lessons for your own context

Combine research and experience for best results (often they will overlap greatly)

Match type of change (vision), context/culture, strategy, with your own personal leadership style

Change formula

assessment of type of change, vision and phase in implementation+

assessment of culture/institutional type+

assessment of leadership team skills (Can use Bolman and Deal inventory) +

=strategy for change/institutionalization

Type of change

Agendas for change are political – some more so than others

Assessment encounters more power dynamics than other types of changes

Some changes threaten people’s values and identity

Deep change requires different strategies than tinkering

Assessment is usually a deep change

Vision

Kotter – Heart of change advice – distinctiveness, clarity, buy-in – efforts to assessment should not look exactly the same as mission and progress vary

Connect to mission and strengths and values

How are we different? What do students and stakeholders say about assessment? What do faculty and staff say about assessment?

Based on phase in institutionalization…where do we need to go?

Phased strategy for institutionalizing assessment

Typical assumption – strategies same throughout change process

Phased leadership strategies – three stages of institutionalization – mobilization, implementation, and institutionalization

Phase one strategies – listening, creating vision, strategic plan and budget/resources

Phased strategy for institutionalizing assessment

Phase two strategies – putting rewards and incentives in place, creating structures to support change

Phase three strategies – conflict for learning, showcasing success, measuring progress

So need to chart and recognize where campus is at in change process

Assessment of culture

Change strategies work better when they match the cultural context

Changes themselves may challenge culture, but approach should keep context in mind – part of strategy

How do I learn to assess context? What is a cultural or climate audit? Discussion with Amy

Strategies in context

Collegial, managerial, developmental, negotiating culture (Berquist)

Environment, mission, socialization, information, strategy, leadership

Strategies linked to culture more successful in studies of transformational change

Kezar, A., & Eckel, P. (2002). The effect of institutional culture on change strategies in higher education: Universal principles or culturally responsive concepts? The Journal of Higher Education, 73(4), 435-460.

Today’s focus

Strategies for change

Leadership

Understanding deep change and institutionalization as a phased approach

Vision (on your own, groups discussions, or with mentor) and Culture assessment (previous session and on-going)

Part 2: Olivet case study

Discuss in groups at table – 20 minutes

Type of change needed? Institutional culture? First two briefly. Strategies used (focus on this)? Where at in change process, next steps?

Full group discussion – 40 minutes

Part 3: Leadership assessment/strategies

Bolman and Deal

Ramaley

Four frames

To understand organizations from a variety of perspectives – summary of major organizational theories

To consider different change strategies

To analyze leadership styles and strategies of yourself and others (part of change formula)

To enhance one’s own set of leadership tools

Four frames

Structural frame – organization as factory

Human resource – as extended family

Political – as arenas or contests

Symbolic – as tribes, theaters or carnivals

Structural frame

Rationality, formal roles and rules

Key concepts – roles, rules, goals, policies, technology, rationality, differentiation, integration

Key processes – division of labor and coordination of individual activities

Structural frame

Organizations exist primarily to accomplish established goals

A structural form can be designed and implemented to fit any particular set of circumstances

Organizations work effectively when environmental turbulence and personal preferences are constrained by norms of rationality

Structural frame

Specialization permits higher levels of individual expertise and performance

Coordination and control are essential to effectiveness

Problems originate from inappropriate structures or inadequate systems and can be resolved through restructuring or developing new systems

Human Resource/Relations frame

Fit between people and the organization

Key concepts – needs, skills, relationships, interpersonal interactions, fit, satisfaction

Key processes – tailoring the organization to meet individual needs

Human Relations frame

Organizations exist to serve human needs

Organizations and people need each other

When the fit is poor, both will suffer, individuals will be exploited, or seek to exploit organizations, or both

Human beings find meaningful and satisfying work, and organizations get human talents and energy – a good fit between both!

Political or advocacy frame

Organizations are coalitions of various individuals and interest groups

There are enduring differences among coalition members in values, beliefs, information, interests, and perceptions of reality

Most important decisions involve the allocation of scarce resources

Political or advocacy frame

Allocation of power and scarce resources

Key concepts – power, conflict, competition, positive politics, power base

Key processes – bargaining, negotiation, collation building, agenda setting

Political or advocacy frame

Scarce resources and enduring differences give conflict a central role in organizational dynamics and make power the most important resource

Goals and decisions emerge from bargaining and negotiation among different stakeholders

Symbolic frame

Organizations as tribe, theater and carnival

Key concepts – culture, symbols, ritual, ceremony, stories, heroes/heroines, myths, charisma

Key processes – common vision, attending to meaning, devising rituals, ceremonies and symbols

Symbolic frame

Symbols form a cultural tapestry or secular myths, rituals, ceremonies, and stories that help people find meaning, purpose and passion

Symbols embody and express the organization's culture – the interwoven pattern of beliefs, values, practices and artifacts that define for members who they are and how they are to do things

Which frames to use to create change

In postsecondary research – political and symbolic proven most important, often least developed in people

How can the frames, particularly political and human relations, help you understand the difficulty of change?

How can frames be used to create change?

One model that uses frames– by Ramaley

Mandate for change – political

Understand support or resistance – political and cultural

Campus ready – human relations

Strategy – structural

Remain accessible – human relations

Ramaley

Systems thinking – structural

Become a storyteller – symbolic

Deal with campus reaction – politics

Putting people first and direction will follow- human relations

Theory of change – integration of various strategies that works for you and the institution

Part 4: Leadership skills

Overview

Exercise

Questions

Matching leadership to context and change strategy

Awareness of strengths and weaknesses key

Important to think about building a leadership team

Once again Bolman and Deal helpful way to examine

Bolman & Deal

In terms of leadership -- it is an umbrella for skills that are either structural, human relations, political or symbolic

Key for leaders is to integrate these various frames/practices

These same approaches can be seen in many change models like Ramaley’s change principles

Our tendencies

Go to a corner based on your tendency

Ask the following questions: 1) why are we here, do we have something in common; 2) look around the room, as a group, do we have a useful balance; 3) what are the implications of this team and its ability to make change and improvement?; and, 4) what might we do to improve our leadership skills?

Questions

What if I am very strong in one frame and not so strong in others?

What if I am pretty even through the 4 frames?

What is the desired profile? Which frames have been found important for leadership?

How might this differ if you think of a leadership team?

Others?

Part 5: Transformational change

Olivet case example

Strategies

Not always necessary

Principles of Deep/Transformational change

Sensemaking

Organizational self-discovery

Facilitated interaction

Flesh out deeply held values, beliefs and fears

Eckel, P. & Kezar, A. (2003). Key strategies for making new institutional sense. Higher Education Policy, 16(1), 39-53.

Part 6: Institutionalizing assessment - research

what we know

How this is limited but helpful

Culture

Culture appears more significant than technical issues (appropriate computer systems) or structures (having assessment office)

Key cultural elements: clarity and driving commitment of leadership, developing common vocabulary, fostering collegial, low-risk environment, modeling assessment, creating motivation and incentive for assessment, providing recognition, etc.

Culture of trust – repeated theme

Leadership

Longevity of leadership key and turnover impacts implementation

Faculty ownership and involvement

Administrative support for through rewards, support structures, funding, etc.

Some suggest leadership is much more complicated, changes over implementation, different cultures, etc.

Distributed leadership as new direction

Organizational structures and policies

Key structures need to broadly involve campus stakeholders – shared governance, teams, inclusive planning processes

Team characteristics and composition as key

Planning process that is incremental, on-going, examines peers, uses a pilot process first, etc.

Central or decentralized structure (e.g., administrative versus departmental level)– mixed results – perhaps related to institutional type

Organizational structures and policies

Where office located – student or academic affairs for example – mixed results as well

Many areas not studied enough so inconclusive including – resource allocation, rewards, incentives, professional development, computer systems, statewide or multi-campus systems

Power and politics also largely not examined

Institutional differences in implementation

Critical in higher education and impacts all aspects – type of leadership, culture needed to support, structures and polices needed, and politics and power encountered.

Research universities far fewer support for assessment activities

Bachelor’s institutions -- mission, values, professional development and faculty governance to support – much more part of culture as focused on undergraduate education

Reason to rely on more foundational change strategies

Minimal empirical research

Single case studies; Descriptive

Overlap between studies of culture, leadership and organizational structures and policies

But a few key areas that might be helpful or resonate

General trend follows factors found important for implementing other innovations

Part 7: Homework: case study

your vision for your campus and implementation phase;

your assessment of your context (hierarchical, entrepreneurial, etc.);

your leadership (and team) strengths and weaknesses;

your assessment of strategies needed to meet the vision given the vision, phase and context;

What team do you need to assemble?

Summary

No recipe (but there is a formula)

Custom design strategies to fit culture and context; and where institution is at and moving toward

Combined and complex approaches like Bolman and Deal and Ramaley work best

Questions

And thanks!