Background:
It was spring 2001, and I had successfully defended my dissertation on “Responsibility Center Management.” After 42 months of doctoral studies in the Benerd School of Education at the University of the Pacific, I had mixed feelings of both relief and personal achievement. To paraphrase my Department Chair, Dr. Dennis Brennan, my only thoughts were: “Is that all there is?” However, I felt ready to observe first hand the research findings resultant from my newly minted Ed.D. in educational administration and leadership. I, therefore, accepted the position of Associate Professor of International Management at Franklin College Switzerland with unbounded enthusiasm.
Upon my arrival at Franklin , I attended the “Orientation of New Faculty” and I promised myself that I would adopt a “low key” profile…something totally out of character for me…and assess the “political” landscape before I voiced an opinion. I did not anticipate that I would not be afforded the requisite time to adjust as a junior faculty member because, I was elected by my colleagues as Chair of the Faculty Assembly or, Faculty Senate as it is more commonly referred to in larger colleges and universities.
I realized that the elected position of Chair of the Faculty Assembly is not a coveted post at Franklin . There is no extra remuneration or perks and no one among the faculty aspire to the position. To be more precise, a faculty member is usually elected to the position out of default and not because of any inherent ability to act as a catalyst and change the status quo. The Chair of the Faculty Assembly is only responsible to convene monthly meetings of the faculty and interact with both the dean and president of the College. Governance was elusive at best despite claims by the administration to the contrary. One could even characterize the system of governance as “micro-management despite Franklin 's student enrollment of over 300 and a full time faculty complement of 20. Like my other colleagues, I soon discovered that it was easier to talk about “governance” at the College than to put it into practice.
Committee Structure:
The structure of college-wide committees at Franklin is similar to what you would find at other U.S. colleges and universities. However, the small number of faculty at Franklin results in faculty serving on more than one committee. Further, the institutional service commitment to serve on committees coupled with a contractual obligation to teach seven courses and be available to lead two academic travel trips per academic year is both time-consuming and exhaustive. Unfortunately, there is very little time left for professional development and independent research.
Rationale:
Franklin College in the next five years will undergo major reforms as most private institutions in higher education in Europe and the U.S. , strive to deal with significant reductions in financial resources and increases in costs, demands for accountable student learning outcomes, and stable -or increased- student enrollment.
Decreases in financial resources convert directly into budget reductions and personnel cuts; stated bluntly, more students must be taught with fewer faculty and fewer support personnel. In traditional higher education settings, this would mean sharp increases in faculty workload and, most probably decreases in student learning outcomes.
The higher education setting of the next five years will be marked by a host of new instructional roles in many new educational settings. A paradigm shift in thinking to student learning focused environments creates the foundation for the reform of undergraduate education even its transformation.
Direction:
These guiding principles apply to each person of the College and a new administrative Operations Management Officer would assume leadership as a natural part of contributing within a Franklin College team; to question current practices through suggesting alternative practices; and to encourage one another's individual and collective citizenship. These principles are collaboratively generated and are individually and collaboratively enacted.
Learning:
Generating and using knowledge and skills to continually adapt, develop, and improve as individuals and as an organization.
Boldness:
Embracing change by taking risks and stepping out of traditional roles and practices to extend and vitalize the work environment.
Collegiality:
Fostering a professional community in which the ideas, expertise, and perspectives of each individual are valued, respected, appreciated, and affirmed by their peers.
Collaboration
Working together on behalf of Franklin College both internally and externally for targeted constituencies.
Diversity
Developing a community of people with different ideas, backgrounds, and experiences.
Innovation
Exploring and actively using all internal, external, physical, intellectual, financial, and technical resources to efficiently and effectively fulfill the vision and mission of Franklin College.
Service
Sharing Franklin College's skills and knowledge for the benefit of the institution's administration, faculty, students and staff.
Reality
Balance sheets are under pressure as private colleges and universities in Europe and the U.S. try to make ends meet. Consequently, Franklin College is increasingly acting in a business rather than educational manner as it seeks revenue sources to plug gaps in operational funding, and meet the projected demand of funds for large-scale capital investment.
Strategy
Franklin College administration should examine the full array of options and select the operating and management approach best for the institution. Focusing first on understanding how the functional area in question is currently operated and examining all its strengths and weaknesses enables the institution to make a fully informed choice. (Goldstein, Kempner, Rush and Bookman, 1993). A core set of issues and questions must be explored when institutional management is deciding whether to outsource any function. Rush, Kempner and Goldstein (1995) group these core “decision factors” into six categories:
• Human Resources- How employees will be affected.
• Financial- The direct and indirect cost to the institution.
• Service Quality- How each alternative will meet campus needs.
• Legal and Ethical Considerations- The level of risk and potential liability posed by each option, any tax ramifications, any potential conflicts of interest.
• Mission and Culture- The effects of choosing an option inconsistent with the institution's culture and historical mission.
• Management Control and Efficiency- The likely effect of each option being considered on the institution's ability to control the direction and priorities of the functional area.
The growing use of outsourcing in higher education reflects a general acceptance by campus administrators that it will reduce costs while continuing to provide essential university services (Jefferies, 1996).
Successfully outsourcing a function requires careful, comprehensive evaluation and planning by management. The answer to whether or not to outsource is what best serves the institution—not only what is most cost efficient, but also what will provide the most consistency, timeliness and overall quality in meeting the college's or university's goals (Schreiber, 1994).
Action-Plan:
A number of “actions” are required to meet new challenges.
Among them, the administration should increase and diversify sources of Franklin College income: sale of services; university partnerships; management of intellectual property; rents from wider, year-long use of facilities, more accountability for financial aid; and a wide range of entrepreneurial activities. Included are selling academic and professional services on the international market, closer links with industry, the extension of fee-paying courses and making part-time courses available to external publics.
Opportunity :
A key to the financial success of any emerging higher education model will be the capability to use new information technologies and software in sophisticated ways, and to integrate, as partners, individuals and groups that have only rarely been so involved. An example of this might mean librarians and the library would be key educators and key learning centers. Another example may be the integration of student service personnel into the educational process. External to Franklin College , this will mean that community members and work site supervisors become partners in the student learning process.
Role:
The Operations Management Officer perceives himself as institutional change agent. Rather than directing support activities to individual faculty, the Operations Management Officer will also need to take responsibility for supporting administrators and faculty leaders, who have some sense that significant change is needed, by providing access to new conceptions of educating students, new institutional forms to enable them to occur and the change process needed to accomplish both.
The Operations Management Officer's knowledge of donors' behavior and motivation is also critical to institutional fundraising. As input to the design of a marketing strategy, motivation is key in the choice of timing for solicitation and campaign (economic considerations), the particular pitch (emotional versus collaborative ties), and the size of the request (groups and organizational motivation and elasticity)-variables highlighted by Brittingham and Pezzullo (1990). These researchers looked at the American tradition of private philanthropy by considering annual alumni funds, and indicated that determining who is psychologically or emotionally connected to the institution and what is essential to the successful marketing of fundraising efforts.
Project Mgr:
The relative importance of the Project Management function will vary at Franklin College and among functional areas. However, regardless of the scope of the capital project underway, and no matter what functional area is under consideration, the administration needs to use a structured methodology throughout the duration of the campus expansion.
A ten-phase approach would focus on the following actions:
(1) identify key participants;
(2) develop an analytical framework;
(3) assess the current environment;
(4) identify customer requirements;
(5) develop an operational design;
(6) identify possible alternatives;
(7) review legal, ethical, and community considerations;
(8) compare proposed operating alternatives;
(9) select the preferred alternative; and,
(10) establish a continuous improvement and assessment process.
Next Steps:
Driven by reducing financial resources, increasing expenses, increasing in the diversity and size of the student population as well as demands for accountability of student learning, alternatives to present teaching and learning structures and processes will be more acceptable and necessary. New models of undergraduate education that will deal with these pressures will lead to significant changes in how faculty teach and students learn. In these new settings, the role of Operations Management Officer will be critical.
The Operations Management Officer must anticipate these pressures and the future needs of Franklin College and lead both faculty and administrative leaders to deal with the demands of the future. As administrators, faculty and staff address how they expect to meet the realities of the future by creating new learning environments, it is important for the success of the College that the Operations Management Officer position himself as a key player and team member enabling administrators, faculty and staff to become effective in these new settings.
|
