|
|
|
Introduction
Throughout the United States, universities struggle
to understand and adjust to competition, variable public support,
resistance to tuition, dissatisfaction with various aspects of
university life, endless demands for accountability, financial constraints, and a wide range of bureaucratic and
organizational challenges. At the same time,
universities find themselves ever more essential to the achievement of what most Americans
consider a good life. Study after study demonstrates that
a college education is a minimal prerequisite for access to
reasonable middleclass standing in America. Parents seek
educational advantages for their children at birth, and
competition for places at prestigious institutions remains intense.
Some states in the South, Southwest, and West struggle
with problems of meeting the demand for access and face increased pressure from growing
populations while others adjust to stable or even declining
numbers of traditional college-age students.
The nation expects the continued production of
university research to drive global economic competitiveness and each
region and state looks to its universities to drive the local economic development
that determines prosperity and higher paying jobs for its
residents.
In this context, the management of
universities, always more of an art than a science, challenges
creativity and commitment. Faculty guilds seek higher pay, greater
security, and more autonomy; student clients and customers demand
higher quality, lower cost, and greater attention to their needs;
supporters in legislatures and the public seek better education for
lower cost and with a higher yield; and alumni and donors expect
high achievement and nationally distinguished programs in all areas. These
expectations produce countervailing pressures on the institution, its people, and
its management tools. Universities must become
more effective and efficient even as their traditional sources of funds contract;
they must become more conscious of quality even as the pressure for
lower costs grows stronger; they must seek greater support even as the
public asks for ever better proof of their value. Most importantly, they
must compete with each other for the scarce talent of faculty and students, and
for the money that supports that competition.
Institutions meet these challenges in different ways. Some universities
disappear behind a facade of complex and confusing discussions about
institutional management, expecting the public to tire of the constant confusion
of purpose that often characterizes university rhetoric. They hope that the public
clamor for reform will pass. Many academic administrators develop this technique to a fine art.
They create complex measures that measure nothing. They divide,
sub-divide, and regress their programs and activities into such a
proliferation of differentiated products that no external observer
can measure the comparative effectiveness of their work. Above all, they
articulate high-sounding goals focused on values and philosophy without offering
a clear method for measuring results.
Other universities recognize the pressure for change as natural and inevitable consequences of the growing global
competitiveness that has challenged all of America's great
international industries and now challenges universities.
These institutions know that academics must confront these changes and respond to them directly
and clearly or the outcome, sooner or later, will produce stagnation and
decline.
We focus on meeting the challenge of competitiveness
from the perspective of the research university.
We explore a variety of subjects related to the
effective operation of universities on the premise that effective management is
essential. We start from the premise that competitive universities
provide high quality and high productivity. We know that successful institutions
drive both quality and productivity. We also know that universities in
search of improvement must measure their quality and productivity. We describe the organizational and
structural characteristics of universities with special emphasis on their impact
on management and improvement.
We follow the money. Universities articulate their values most clearly as
they manage revenue and expenses. When universities follow the
money, they must measure quality and productivity to
invest in improved performance. We
explore these topics less to offer a single successful strategy
and more to develop the tools for
analysis and action. Universities have different histories and find
themselves located in widely different economic, political, and organizational
space. Every university, however, must confront the same issues
and problems, and the tools we discuss serve the interests
of every kind of institution.
This course builds on a long-term discussion
of these topics. To begin your participation in this conversation
read:
These items provide some background to inform your reading in the other materials
provided in this syllabus.
In addition, the instructor publishes an occasional commentary under the general
heading Reality Check at Inside Higher Ed an online journal.
The following list is current as of the most recent posting, additional items
will appear when published. Students should read
Inside Higher Ed and
The Chronicle of Higher Education on a regular
basis to track the controversies, news, and fads of American higher education.
Note that the instructor has other university
responsibilities that may require him to miss a class or re-schedule some of the
assignments. If adapting to such changes in the course schedule during the
semester is a problem, please do not take this class.
|