Leadership and Change strategies for institutionalizing assessment

Adrianna Kezar, USC

Overview1. Change paradigm and formula – 20 minutes minutes2. Case study Discussion – 1 hour3. Discussion of change strategies –Bolman and Deal, Ramaley– 45

hour4. Leadership Inventory Discussion and Implications – 30 minutes5. Assessment as Deep and Transformational change – 20 minutes6. What we know about institutionalizing assessment– 20 minutes7. 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; SpencerKey reflections about change over timeFormula and parts – vision, change phase, institutional culture, leadership skills, change strategies

Key reflectionsMany good ideas about change, but amount can be overwhelmingAs a result, leaders often rely on one simple approach for all situationsIf an approach works once, leaders tend to use it again and do not understand why it does not workKey – become familiar with many tools (Bolman and Deal, for example)

Key reflectionsResearch 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 contextCombine 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 formulaassessment 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 changeAgendas for change are political – some more so than othersAssessment encounters more power dynamics than other types of changesSome changes threaten people’s values and identityDeep change requires different strategies than tinkeringAssessment is usually a deep change

VisionKotter – Heart of change advice – distinctiveness, clarity, buy-in – efforts to assessment should not look exactly the same as mission and progress varyConnect to mission and strengths and valuesHow 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 processPhased leadership strategies – three stages of institutionalization – mobilization, implementation, and institutionalizationPhase 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 changePhase three strategies – conflict for learning, showcasing success, measuring progressSo need to chart and recognize where campus is at in change process

Assessment of cultureChange strategies work better when they match the cultural contextChanges themselves may challenge culture, but approach should keep context in mind – part of strategyHow do I learn to assess context? What is a cultural or climate audit? Discussion with Amy

Strategies in contextCollegial, managerial, developmental, negotiating culture (Berquist)Environment, mission, socialization, information, strategy, leadershipStrategies linked to culture more successful in studies of transformational changeKezar, 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 focusStrategies for changeLeadershipUnderstanding deep change and institutionalization as a phased approachVision (on your own, groups discussions, or with mentor) and Culture assessment (previous session and on-going)

Part 2: Olivet case studyDiscuss in groups at table – 20 minutesType 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 DealRamaley

Four framesTo understand organizations from a variety of perspectives – summary of major organizational theoriesTo consider different change strategiesTo analyze leadership styles and strategies of yourself and others (part of change formula)To enhance one’s own set of leadership tools

Four framesStructural frame – organization as factoryHuman resource – as extended familyPolitical – as arenas or contestsSymbolic – as tribes, theaters or carnivals

Structural frameRationality, formal roles and rulesKey concepts – roles, rules, goals, policies, technology, rationality, differentiation, integrationKey processes – division of labor and coordination of individual activities

Structural frameOrganizations exist primarily to accomplish established goalsA structural form can be designed and implemented to fit any particular set of circumstancesOrganizations work effectively when environmental turbulence and personal preferences are constrained by norms of rationality

Structural frameSpecialization permits higher levels of individual expertise and performanceCoordination and control are essential to effectivenessProblems 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 organizationKey concepts – needs, skills, relationships, interpersonal interactions, fit, satisfactionKey processes – tailoring the organization to meet individual needs

Human Relations frameOrganizations exist to serve human needs Organizations and people need each otherWhen the fit is poor, both will suffer, individuals will be exploited, or seek to exploit organizations, or bothHuman 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 groupsThere are enduring differences among coalition members in values, beliefs, information, interests, and perceptions of realityMost important decisions involve the allocation of scarce resources

Political or advocacy frame

Allocation of power and scarce resourcesKey concepts – power, conflict, competition, positive politics, power baseKey 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 resourceGoals and decisions emerge from bargaining and negotiation among different stakeholders

Symbolic frameOrganizations as tribe, theater and carnivalKey concepts – culture, symbols, ritual, ceremony, stories, heroes/heroines, myths, charismaKey processes – common vision, attending to meaning, devising rituals, ceremonies and symbols

Symbolic frameSymbols form a cultural tapestry or secular myths, rituals, ceremonies, and stories that help people find meaning, purpose and passionSymbols 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 peopleHow 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 – politicalUnderstand support or resistance – political and culturalCampus ready – human relationsStrategy – structuralRemain accessible – human relations

RamaleySystems thinking – structural Become a storyteller – symbolicDeal with campus reaction – politicsPutting people first and direction will follow- human relationsTheory of change – integration of various strategies that works for you and the institution

Part 4: Leadership skillsOverviewExerciseQuestions

Matching leadership to context and change strategy

Awareness of strengths and weaknesses keyImportant to think about building a leadership teamOnce again Bolman and Deal helpful way to examine

Bolman & DealIn terms of leadership -- it is an umbrella for skills that are either structural, human relations, political or symbolicKey for leaders is to integrate these various frames/practicesThese same approaches can be seen in many change models like Ramaley’s change principles

Our tendenciesGo to a corner based on your tendencyAsk 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?

QuestionsWhat 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 exampleStrategiesNot always necessary

Principles of Deep/Transformational change

Sensemaking Organizational self-discoveryFacilitated interactionFlesh out deeply held values, beliefs and fearsEckel, 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 knowHow this is limited but helpful

CultureCulture 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

LeadershipLongevity of leadership key and turnover impacts implementation Faculty ownership and involvementAdministrative 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 processesTeam characteristics and composition as keyPlanning 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 wellMany 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 activitiesBachelor’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 researchSingle case studies; DescriptiveOverlap between studies of culture, leadership and organizational structures and policiesBut a few key areas that might be helpful or resonateGeneral 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?

SummaryNo recipe (but there is a formula)Custom design strategies to fit culture and context; and where institution is at and moving towardCombined and complex approaches like Bolman and Deal and Ramaley work best

QuestionsAnd thanks!