Learning Resources

Abstract: by Julie R. Posselt
Stanford University Press: Palo Alto 2020
240 Pages
ISBN: 978-1-5036-1271-6

Abstract: Is a strategic plan necessary for institutional success? In preparation for a new strategic plan at UTEP, we reviewed literature and found many publications that described the procedures of plan making and also case studies of how plans are produced. We also found substantial literature that questioned the value of strategic plans. These findings prompted us to think about the historical and theoretical basis for strategic plans: How did they emerge, what is their theoretical value, and is there a right way to do them? In our article we offer surprising answers to these questions based on a review of a century of theory and planning literature.

Abstract: Working across boundaries is essential for student success, but also incredibly difficult to do. This session looks at the collaboration between enrollment management and departmental faculty—specifically the planning, monitoring, and communication of student progress in an online doctoral program. You will learn techniques to improve communication between departments that historically work independent of each other, along with opportunities for future interdepartmental partnerships that improve student success.

Abstract: Academic strategic planning can be difficult given the bevy of stakeholders and often multiple sets of accreditation criteria. Recognizing the limits of the traditional SWOT model, our program chose to use the Strategic Planning Engine model. The model itself is quite laborious, and to increase its usability, we simplified the environmental assessments. Our results proved to be useful and relevant, and we developed a series of feasible objectives. In this article, we describe and evaluate our experience. In comparison to SWOT, we found this process to be more objective and replicable, scalable and responsive to multiple criteria, flexible to accommodate changing strategic plans or criteria, and transparent. With that being said, we caution about the level of labor required and organization and communication needed. Finally, we recommend implementing a leadership team, a communication plan, and a plan on how to respond to uncontrollable circumstances and developing a level of comfort with limited resource allocation.

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: The past two decades have seen great social change and both massive consolidation and expansion of institutions of higher education, clearly presenting circumstances warranting the use of formal approaches to planning. Varying planning theories, past failures and successes, and differing circumstances have generated several partially contrasting planning models to guide organizational change. Therefore, institutions of higher education have a variety of such approaches from which to choose. This article presents a case study illustrating the use of several approaches to planning that is distinctive because it relies heavily upon experience-based planning, examples of which are unfortunately lacking in the literature base.

Abstract: After its first application nearly 40 years ago, responsibility center budgeting/responsibility center management (RCB/RCM) is now in place at nearly 70 major North American universities. An unstudied fact is that despite its popularity RCB/RCM is rarely deployed to its fullest extent. Instead, it usually exists in parallel with conventional planning and budget models. This study asks why, instead of fully implementing RCB/RCM, universities have chosen to apply it partially. The study finds multiple explanations. On the revenue side, some universities hold back a portion of income to create funds that are used to underwrite institution-wide strategies or subsidize mission-central academic programs that cannot be fiscally sustained under RCB/RCM. In other cases, revenue is held back to fund shared “public utility” services, while in still others the practice of holding back revenue for allocation by some other means is due to difficulty in drawing a functional line between the “academic” and the “non-academic.” On the cost side, some universities have limited the application of RCB/RCM in order to limit market behavior and forestall “fragmentation” (Burke 2007). The study points to several problems in both the practice and theory of RCB/RCM. For example, models meant in theory to complement RCB/RCM may in practice compete with it or promote monopolistic behavior.

Abstract: The number of individuals receiving a U.S. doctorate degree continues to grow; however, we know little about the precise factors that affect wages for recent doctorate recipients over time. Using data from approximately 10,000 respondents who completed the Survey of Doctorate Recipients, the study presented in this article examines factors contributing to wage growth over the time period 1999–2008. Findings show wage benefits for degree recipients over the decade, but also show significant differences by gender, race, discipline, and other characteristics. Findings have strong implications for individuals who may consider doctorate or other advanced training, for academic planners, and for policies in graduate education.

Abstract: Before the recession, planning offices were the workhorses supporting institutional growth strategies by translating the ambitions of senior administrators into action. However, the recession derailed many institutional ambitions; austerity suddenly supplanted growth. The future role of planners seems uncertain beyond operationalizing short-term damage control. Yet this article asserts that planners are uniquely positioned to assume an essential role in colleges and universities: sensemakers and sensegivers. Through sensemaking and sensegiving, planners can focus institutional dialogue on the meaning of austerity. Instead of accepting resource constraints as a ubiquitous rationale for retrenchment, planners can guide institutional dialogue toward acknowledging that new constraints merely discipline earlier ambitions within new parameters.

Abstract: In February 2008, the U.S. Army and Fayetteville State University established a partnership that has changed the process of healthcare education for active duty social workers. Before this time, the army relied on public universities to be solely responsible for recruiting, evaluating, and educating active duty social workers to serve the needs of service members and their families. However, to meet an immediate need for more social workers to deal with the wounds caused by the War on Terror and to help it get the best possible return on its educational investment, the army decided to partner with a university to establish a distance education Master of Social Work program at the Army Medical Department Center and School at Fort Sam Houston, Texas. Fayetteville State University in Fayetteville, North Carolina was the university partner selected. This article outlines the background of the partnership and the issues other public universities should consider if they want to partner with the military or another federal agency. The article also highlights the benefits of such a partnership.