The Chronicle of Higher Education July 2, 2010 article titled ‘Attrition Among Chief Academic Officers Threatens Strategic Plans’ should be of concern to Higher Education administration today. According to the author, Tim Mann, statistics show that more Chief Academic Officers (CAO), in other words provosts, hold their positions for shorter periods- an average of 4.7 years- than in the last five years. A recent study of 323 CAOs by the Eduventures Academic Leadership Learning Collaborative cited the top three reasons for this attrition rate as “…expanded responsibilities without sufficient resources (57 percent), economic issues at the college (50 percent), and faculty discontent (30 percent). Perhaps as a consequence, 40 percent also said that the job had become less desirable.” (Mann, 2010).
This should be of great concern to institutions considering the fact that provosts play a vital role in the day to day operations, are central to the institution’s strategic plans, and are in charge of the design and refinement of academic programs. The 4.7 year average enervates such initiatives that take a long time to plan, implement and modify while focusing on the institution’s long-term prospects. Granted, every institutional department is directly run by a vice president, director or dean. However, is not only charged with curriculum and faculty issues, but it is also increasingly becoming the case that he or she is also directly engaged in the operations of administrative departments such as safety, facilities, health, public relations, admissions and retaining, institutional effectiveness, strategic planning, and a multitude more.
With so many issues to deal with, and most likely some feeling of abandonment from faculty, no wonder we see such a high attrition rate. In a previous Chronicle of Education edition of July 2008, James J. O’Donell, Georgetown University provost, puts it, “Those of us who choose to accept leadership roles soon wake up to the fact that a thousand incremental changes have made our institution something very different from what it was before – something bigger and far more demanding. The professor-turned-provost, however engaged an academic she or he may remain, is now a different kind of creature, and improved posture is only an outward sign of it.” A high turn over of one of the top positions in a university paints not so good a picture and it means that chairs or department heads and faculty would have to make do or improvise to keep whatever plans in place going. Secondly, it takes time and money for an institution to search for, interview, and hire a replacement that is qualified enough to continue the institution’s traditions, has a lucid understanding of all operations and capable of effectively continuing its strategic plans. There are always exigent issues that always need the provost’s attention such as the “…shifting demographics of high-school graduates, the growing presence of online education, the challenging financial environment, and the need to innovate.” (Mann, 2010).
The provost’s absence is therefore most likely to create uncomfortable uncertainties in all sectors of operation and this may affect the institution’s image externally. “Productivity suffers during a transition period because of lost momentum. It takes time for a new provost to build relationships and assess the political and cultural landscape, along with institutional strengths and weaknesses.” Mann, 2010).
It seems financial demands, public relations and legalities are slowly taking over what the provost of earlier day collegiality used to focus on. Engaging professors and students in an enriching academic environment seems to be taking back stage- something most faculty resent. One has to feel empathetic to the provost for, they are caught in a situation where they are tasked with maintaining and protecting the institution’s name while also serving it’s most important employees who provide the core service. “That's the burden of the job: knowing all the things that others don't know or would rather not know. Much that I know I can't talk about, and I have had to get used to being the object of (usually) undeserved suspicion. Because I know so much, my actions are not fully intelligible to those who observe them. (O’Donell, 2008)
In the stressful environment that would eventually lead to the provost resignation, his or her “…role as chief academic officer is being marginalized as the new role of juggler of many new external forces takes center stage. This proliferation of added roles is further compounded by new accountability demands related to spiraling tuition increases, graduation rates, entrance requirements, exit requirements, outcomes assessment, and student athletes’ academic performance.” (Paradise & Dawson, 2007).
This marginalization seems to mirror institutional spending trends where less money is being allocated to direct academic operations and more on public relations, legal services, intercollegiate sports, remediation, security, to name a few, and the provost is directly involved with them.
These responsibilities are by no means arduous and no wonder the high turn over rate. The question therefore should centered on what should be done to keep provosts longer in their positions. In the Eduventures study the surveyed provosts offered some input on the characteristics of the next generation CAO. Most of them cited leadership, change management, and financial management as the top skills a provost should have in today’s higher education institutions while academic program development ranked bottom. The changing times warrant a new look at how many hats provost should wear and effectively manage the most important product in higher education. Or may be the provost’s paramount responsibility should be revised. One of the CAO’s who took part in the survey put it this way: “The traditional concept of a provost's preparation (department head to dean, dean to associate provost, associate provost to provost) is coming to an end. Within the next 10-15 years, I project that provosts will not follow this traditional path, a development as much a product of supply and demand as it will be changes in the expectations of provosts within a market-driven, accountability-focused institution.”
References:
Mann, T. (July 2010). Attrition Among Chief Academic Officers Threatens Strategic Plans. Chronicle of Higher Education, 56, 39.
O’Donell, J. (July 2008) What a Provost Knows and Can’t Tell. Chronicle of Higher Education, http://chrolincle.com
Paradise, L., V. & Dawson, K., M. (April 2007). New Peril for the Provost: Marginalization of the Academic Mission. About Campus, v12 p30-32
No comments:
Post a Comment