AUA Conference and Exhibition 2012 University of Manchester Monday 2nd April 2012, 3.00-4.30pm Creating opportunities for staff development and progressionwithin administrative departments Tony Turjansky & Laura Chambers Academic Quality & Development Unit Edge Hill University
Aims of the sessionThrough the medium of group discussion this session will:• Consider the value of ‘devolution’ as a means of empowering and developing staff;• Identify some of the potential systemic and human obstacles to managing and achieving departmental change, and how these may be addressed;• Formulate ideas on how re-structuring and the re- definition of job roles may facilitate staff development and progression in delegates own workplaces.
Edge Hill University• Founded in 1885 in Liverpool as the first non- denominational teacher training college for women• Main campus in Ormskirk, west Lancashire• Accredited to deliver Lancaster University degrees since the 1980s• Granted University status and title in 2006• 3 Faculties: Arts & Sciences, Education and Health & Social Care• 24,000 students of whom 8,000 are full-time• Shortlisted for Times Higher Education ‘University of the Year’ Award in 2007, 2010 & 2011
Edge Hill University• 3,000 staff FTE (academic and administrative)• Rated a good/excellent employer by 90% of staff• Ranked No. 20 in Sunday Times ‘Best Places to Work in the Public Sector’ (2010)• Investors in People (IiP) Gold Award for Leadership and Management (2011)• EHU has adopted the Organisation Development (OD) management science approach to managing its staff
Organisation Development (OD)• “A long-term, holistic and multi-faceted approach to achieving systemic change by developing the potential, capacity and capability of an organisation, its culture, its systems and the people within it” (Stevens, R., 2008)• Key characteristics of OD: ‘empowerment’, ‘inclusion’, ‘participation’, ‘collaboratio n’• OD is linked closely with the concept of the Learning Company (Pedler et al, 1996) – a learning organisation is “one that is able to continuously transform itself through the connected learning of its people”
• A central service department which delivers EHU’s quality management strategy• Provides support for academic departments and Faculties in academic planning and preparing for programme approval (validation)• Manages the University’s annual monitoring and periodic review processes and co-manages (with the Academic Registry) its external examiner system• Leads the University’s preparations for external QAA audit (Institutional review)
Academic Quality Unit (2007)• Head of Academic Quality Unit (head of department)• Line-managed 5 staff: – Academic Quality Officers x 4 – Academic Quality Administrator
ACADEMIC QUALITY UNITORGANISATIONAL CHART Pro Vice-Chancellor (Academic) (2007) Dean of Quality Enhancement Head of Academic Quality Unit Academic Academic Academic Academic Quality Officer Quality Officer Quality Officer Quality Officer Grade 8 Grade 8 Grade 8 Grade 8Academic Quality Administrator Grade 4
BREAKOUT (1) (10 mins)• How does this kind of organisational structure affect management and communication? What are the ‘pros and cons’?• How might such a structure impact individuals’ roles, development and progression?
Academic Quality Unit (2007)• ‘Flat’ organisational structure – 4 of 5 staff at the same grade and with the same job description• Management responsibility located with HoD only• Limited internal progression opportunities• Does not facilitate ‘succession planning’
The Manager’s vision (2007)• Department needs to grow to manage an increasing workload (larger schedule of programme approvals including expanded collaborative provision)• Growth can be used as an opportunity to re- structure, in order to: – Devolve management responsibilities (without delegating HoD’s accountability) – Create a structure that facilitates progression and contributes to staff’s personal and professional development by creating new roles that build expertise (rather than simply dividing up the work) • But this has to be achieved with no additional institutional funding
The Manager’s challengeTo identify and secure new sources of (external)funding through: Activity Skills Networking and – Entrepreneurship, e opportunity nvironmental spotting scanning Enlisting the – Influencing and persuasion, ‘intrapr support of eneurship’ (Pinchot, G University & Pinchot, E., 1978) managers
The Manager’s challenge (contd)To identify and secure new sources of (external)funding through: Activity Skills Writing bids and – Financial planning business cases and project management Competing with – Business rival bidders and communication ‘pitching’ to skills external clients
BREAKOUT (2) (20 mins)• Businesses must change in order to survive and grow (the alternative is stagnation)• But it is also destabilising for individuals/teams and leads to fear and insecurity• In groups of 3-4, consider the following: ― What are the benefits of change? ― Where are the hazards? ― Identify examples from your own experience of where change has been managed successfully and/or unsuccessfully
Introducing change• Businesses must change in order to survive and grow• But it also creates disequilibrium for individuals and within teams• Change needs to be managed to counter resistance and ‘unfreeze’ previous behaviours (Schein, E.H., 1978)• Change can be a potential source of interpersonal/intra-organisational conflict if not managed fairly and equitably• Change can also be motivating when presented as an opportunity for individuals to develop and grow• Change requires leadership - but are managers always good leaders? (Steers, R.M. & Black, J.S., 1994)
Motivation• Individuals perform best when the expected reward is of high value (Vroom, V.H., 1964)• Extrinsic motivators are important, e.g. we all need food, shelter and security (Maslow, A.H., ‘Hierarchy of Needs’, 1943 & 1954)• But higher-level needs for self-esteem and self- actualisation are powerful intrinsic motivators• Task accomplishment, job satisfaction and personal growth are also the recipe for successful group behaviour (Homans, G.C., 1950)
Challenges• Managing the downstream effects of internal promotions within an existing team (conflict resolution and mediation)• Identifying appropriate staff development for individuals in new (managerial) roles• Using secondments to fill promotions – what happens later and at what stage is there a moral imperative to secure individuals’ jobs and grades?
Group discussion (20 mins)• Where are the (non inter-personal) issues in our own teams – are they related to: – Capacity (team size and numbers, ‘critical mass’) – Structure and roles (e.g. may require adjusting to address changed business imperatives) – Skills (skills deficit, imbalance or lack of alignment with the organisation’s business and mission, etc.)• How do we propose to address these, e.g. through re-organisation and/or staff development (for managers, as well as staff)• Where do we perceive the main obstacles and enablers to introducing change – can ‘resisters’ be turned into ‘advocates’? (Waddell, D. & Sohal, A.S., 1998)
ReferencesHomans, G.C. (1950) The Human Steers, R.M. & Black, J.S. (1994)Group Organisational behaviourMaslow, A.H. (1943) Theory of Stevens, R. (2008) OrganisationHuman Development People AlchemyMotivation, Psychological Ltd.Review Varney, S (2008) LearningMaslow, A.H. (1954) Motivation Organisations People Alchemyand Personality Ltd.Pedler, M., Burgoyne, J. & Vroom, V.H. (1964) Work andBoydell, T. (1996) The LearningCompany: A Strategy for MotivationSustainable Development Waddell, D., & Sohal, A.S.Pinchot, G. & Pinchot, E. (1978) (1998) Resistance: aIntra-corporate constructive tool for changeEntrepreneurship management in Management Decision Vol. 36Schein, E. H. (1978) Careerdynamics: Matching individualand organisational needs