Shared governance is lamented by many as an impediment to change. Administration and faculty have a contentious relationship at many institutions, and this friction can keep a college from enacting needed changes. However, shared governance is your only choice if you want the institution to survive.
Challenges
Today’s higher ed institution faces the following challenges, among others:
- A shrinking population of traditional college students;
- Employers becoming more willing to hire for jobs without requiring a college degree;
- Prospects increasingly looking outside of higher ed for needed education (edX, Coursera, Udemy, Lynda, etc.);
- General push-back from all sides on increasing the cost of attending college;
- Reasonable alternatives in the form of online, national mega-institutions that are particularly strong in the larger (generally profitable) majors;
- A financial environment in which getting a sufficient (or at least positive) return on an endowment is difficult.
Given the above list (that should be familiar to all), it is non-controversial to say that higher ed operates in a challenging environment today. The need for addressing these challenges and implementing change effectively is clear. Not all institutions are facing existential crises, but they know that they are getting more probable.
Responses
Institutions must respond with significant, thoughtful, and effective plans to change. In higher ed, this can only happen with shared governance. Speed cannot be the overriding reason for responding with plans that the administration comes up with — even with the best intentions.
Historically, faculty delegated administrative responsibilities to professionals so that the faculty members could focus on education. The faculty needs to continue to trust these professionals to do their jobs. On the other hand, the administration needs to trust that faculty members, with their long-term view, can make informed decisions that respond to a real need for change when presented with the appropriate data. Leaders should bring in consultants and other vendors. They can help keep the whole process on track and to handle the additional workload related to the analysis and planning. But the faculty and administration need to be the ones that share in the significant decisions that shape the institution’s future.
If either side thinks shared governance is not possible, then they should get everyone back to the table to talk and share data again. Giving up is condemning the institution to irrelevance. The challenges are real, and operating with a “this too shall pass” attitude is neither productive nor realistic.
Conclusion
This isn’t necessarily a quick process—think 18-36 months for a significant review and planning process. However, it is much more effective, and the implementation will be less contentious, since much of the organization will have been involved in the investigation and decision-making. Truly, if you want the organization to survive. shared governance is your only choice.
