In the last post I talked quite a bit about altruism. I think it’s important to note that altruism isn’t a quality only found in Captain America nor is it something that is only for the enlightened. As a matter of fact, it can be found in most public servants and is most likely the reason for their career choice in the first place. I feel that in a time like COVID it is important to recognize this fact, and the altruistic sacrifices that so many have made. This country may have been built as a “home of the brave” but it is kept alive by the hearts of the selfless.
Altruism is a quality found within an individual, but when it’s found within a group it is a part of the culture. To paraphrase Brené Brown “culture is who we are and how [and why] we choose to do things… most of the time it is a side effect of what we do.” In academia there is constant talk of changing our culture and there are steps that are laid out, usually through multiple emails, to help us supposedly achieve a desired cultural shift. Leaders today believe that culture is something that can be created through old systems and fail to realize that the systems themselves are what is creating the culture. A good example of this is an administrator wanting to create a culture of hope and aspiration but holding meetings that are still list driven and managed by reading directly from prepared talking points. Because culture is a side effect of this meeting style simply adding an agenda/talking point for “changing culture or creating hope” will not at all effect or solve the need for changing the culture nor for creating hope but instead may even make it more difficult or add to the problem. The same can be said in the classroom as well.
Through the many years of my career I have heard my fellow faculty express how they would like their students to change, either to gain some positive quality like a stronger work ethic, or to lose a negative quality like lethargy, and yet many of those same faculty refuse to change the way they teach. They will instead lecture students on how things used to be as if students could in some way erase their upbringing and twelve previous years of educational culture on their own. This isn’t to say that none of the responsibility for change rests on the student, when in fact a lot of it does. What I am saying is that it is the responsibility of the educator as a leader to lead students through this by recognizing, adapting and changing and thus creating a new culture that better instills the desired attributes.
This does not call for educators to change the content of what they teach, just as it would not call for administrators to change the substance of what they wish to accomplish. Rather this calls for new thinking and growth beyond the complacency and comfortability of old systems. This can be quite difficult for most of us because we use our own experiences and what has been taught to us to lay down the ground work for how we teach and thus we see it as the “only way” or the “only way I know how.” To be fair academia has recognized this issue and has installed avenues to help faculty, such as ACUE training and other faculty development programs but these often times only help educators in the classroom environment, and seldom address issues in the conference room environment.
As mentioned in the previous post the conference room is a political landscape and though the classroom can have its similarities it isn’t nearly as dangerous an environment. Directors/Managers (I refuse to call them ‘leaders’ simply because of their position or title) tend to view leadership as purely strategic or tactical. Though strategies are important in determining goals and the steps to achieve them they lack the ability to enact substantive change in culture. Strategic management sees each step as an achievement, giving the idea of inching towards a finish line one step at a time or scratching a line off of a to do list. Achievement is vastly different than success which is a feeling or state of mind and more in line with culture. Because many directors/managers (DMs) misunderstand power and leadership they also misunderstand the difference between achievement and success and the importance of culture. In turn many DMs tend to overwork or burnout their faculty/employees because they are more concerned with an achievement rather than the feelings or state of mind of their faculty/employees.
DMs who don’t understand the importance of culture also tend to separate themselves from those beneath them in rank or for whom they are responsible for. This separation creates a culture of disconnection which can lead to faulty communication, disrespect, and further detachments from frontline issues. Probably the most powerful or hurtful result of achievement driven management is the lack of empathy under the guise of being a “no nonsense leader.”
Whether in the classroom or the conference room an educator must understand the importance of culture in the environment and the valued role it plays on the hearts and minds of their colleagues and students. Otherwise, achievements will be made but little change will occur, and little success will be felt.
Please see previous post for an exceptional reading list and list of insightful podcasts.
