Learning Resources

Abstract: Strategic planning often involves the development of new or revised policies. Policy communication and operationalization can significantly impact morale and strategic plan buy-in and we must consider it in a well-planned and integrated manner in order to produce effective change. This presentation will focus on lessons learned in policy roll-out, and through sharing your own experiences, you will gain an increased understanding of challenges and opportunities in policy roll-out that can inform strategic planning decisions on your campus.

Abstract: Universities need to plan for rapid change physically, fiscally, and curricularly. In this session, we will explore the Campus 2050 survey results and share how 10 institutions are planning and adapting their campuses and built environment for economic, social, and operational changes over the next 30 years. You will learn strategies for mobilizing campus planning efforts at a faster pace and how to initiate, replicate, and improve upon current future-proofing strategies.

Abstract: There is no shortage of hype and technobabble around the promise of shiny new technology trends and their prospect for disrupting the universe as we know it. Twenty-five years ago, the World Wide Web and the underlying Internet did, indeed, change everything. Today the promise of AI, ML, IoT, XR, NGNs and the latest alphabet soup of tech trends promises to impact the campus in all its facets. This session will provide context, insights, and some prognostication on how the campus planning community should embrace its technology future through a ‘trust but verify’ lens.

Abstract: Societal challenges and opportunities no longer fit in departments. Future success requires business researchers, educators, and students to interconnect across the entire campus and beyond. In this session, we will explore how to plan a campus ecosystem that connects business with people, ideas, and resources to drive a new research and education model. You will learn key strategies and find opportunities—encompassing planning, programming, design process, and lessons learned from building use—to advance your institution's mission and build a framework to implement your initiatives.

Abstract: Higher education building projects include complex programs, multiple stakeholders, and ambitious expectations that can make the projects go over budget, requiring re-design. We will share how we used transparent predictive cost analytics before and during the programming phase to help key stakeholders prioritize wants and needs, allowing for a successful design-to-budget project. You will learn how to implement a predictive approach that minimizes costly re-design due to budget overruns.

Abstract: This article applies the three stages of change (mobilization, implementation, and institutionalization) to the academic curricular process change that occurred during the 2014–2015 academic year at the Indiana University of Pennsylvania. Reflecting on the manner in which this major initiative was conceptualized and executed has revealed an inadvertent yet seamless application of Curry’s (1992) organizational change model. Throughout each stage of this organizational change, some inherent principles were maintained while balancing the required condensed timeline for completion. These principles included consistent and transparent consultation with many branches of the university community and revision of proposed processes based on feedback from community members. The goal of the authors in sharing the change process at IUP is to provide potential insights for others on recognizing a need for organizational process revision. The authors highlight the actions taken at IUP, offer recommendations, and identify potential hazards to institutions contemplating organizational change.

Abstract: Today we find our institutions barraged by the forces of change, and dutifully we respond. Over time, however, we end up molding our institutions to these forces to our own peril, and now U.S. higher education is on the ropes, so to speak. We believe education leaders should take hold of our destinies and shape our industry not by the forces of lackluster government policy, self-serving press and media, and for-profit mega corporations, but to serve true learning and personal growth. There are many tools we can use to lead change. This article introduces the concept of Positive Turbulence, an intentional, disruptive approach for positive change, to the education industry.

Abstract: Higher education institutions are under pressure to make transformative changes aimed at improving key areas of performance: access, affordability, price, and productivity to name a few. Institutions have responded with budget cuts and efficiency gains with incremental success. Yet paradoxically the very success they have achieved has also impeded the transformative change their stakeholders seek.

Many theories exist to support adaptive change in higher education. A single foundational theory of organizational change in industrial enterprises explains the paradox and illustrates how incremental success slows transformative change. Structural contingency theory, introduced by Alfred Chandler in 1962, encapsulates a number of higher education change theories, further grounding practitioners as they assist institutions in adapting to changing conditions and informing their planning efforts.

To achieve transformative change requires a model of integrated planning to synthesize unit improvements into institutional change greater than the sum of its parts. This article presents structural contingency theory to explicate the change process and introduces institutional portfolio management as an operational model of integrated planning. It speaks to an audience of practitioners seeking pragmatic solutions to very real and present problems.

Abstract: State institutions of higher education in Connecticut are experiencing a dramatic and unprecedented period of change: the consolidation of four universities and 13 community colleges into Connecticut State Colleges & Universities (CSCU) and the creation of a new administrative structure. This article charts the early stages of this process, presenting events as they unfolded during Governor Dannel Malloy’s first term beginning in January 2011, through his November 2014 reelection, until his state budget was passed in June 2015.

Advocates of systemness in higher education are challenged to balance the promise of centralized leadership and localized prerogative in designing and implementing policy. Systemness offers the promise of synergy and innovation within and across the system guided by common purpose and vision.

This article discusses five specific implementation processes and challenges: a systemwide credit transfer articulation program; Southern Connecticut State University’s early Transform CSCU 2020 initiatives; an ongoing effort throughout CSCU to develop a systemwide identity; the potential impact of budget constraints on systemness; and difficulties selecting and developing administrators and leaders.

Abstract: New subscribers to the Harvard Business Review receive as a bonus with their first issue a compilation of fifteen classics, which appeared in previous HBR issues. One article, “Leading Change: Why Transformation Efforts Fail”, by John P. Kotter, first appeared in the March-April 1995 issue and is often referenced as a guide to strategic change in organizations. It is the purpose of the article to evaluate a change process undertaken at a large comprehensive baccalaureate institution in the context of Kotter’s suggested eight steps in transforming an organization.