Larry D. Lauer

A reality of institutional politics is that we generally hear what we want to hear.   Most of us hold preconceived ideas about many issues, and what we hear from others just reinforces what we already believe. 

Communication researchers call this reality “selective perception.” 

Democrats become better Democrats when they hear Republicans speak. And Republicans become better Republicans when they hear Democrats speak. This type of polarization also occurs with many of our issues in the institutional workplace.  An example of polarization is the use of the  word “marketing.”

For many, the word means “commercialization,” and whenever it is heard in the context of the academy, the perception is that the consequence will be to turn the institution into a retail sales organization. The word “brand” is another example of this kind of selective perception. 

In Lesson 48, and elsewhere, I argue that it’s a waste of time to focus on converting detractors. It is also true that some people who have preconceived ideas are not totally committed detractors, and that over time they might change their minds. In other words, they are “on the fence” with respect to their opinion.

We are open to changing our minds when new information appears and begins to confuse us. We then seek more information to resolve this confusion. This state of uncertainty is often called “cognitive dissonance,” and we all seem to have an inner drive to resolve it.

The political strategy in this situation is to raise key questions, describe the complexity of the moment, and then articulate the best alternative solutions… those, of course, that support our objectives. Open forums, staff meetings, invited meetings, and other opportunities for dialogue, can be created for this purpose.

To summarize, committed detractors should mostly be ignored. It is a waste of time to try to convert them. But many people are only “on the fence,” and it is possible over time, through thoughtful, patient and persistent dialogue, to change their minds.

Read Full Post »

In his 1990 classic The Fifth Discipline:The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization, Peter Senge argues that the only way to remain a leader in one’s industry is to learn faster than the competition.  I am amazed at just how much Senge’s work has influenced my thinking over the years.

My interpretation of Senge suggests that inspired leadership involves identifying  organizational deficiencies, learning about latest industry trends and practices,  clarifying identity and competitive advantage, and then implementing an education and training scheme that challenges managers and opinion leaders to “out think” and “out learn” the competition. 

While I was determining how I would approach writing my most recent book, Learning to Love the Politics, I once again came upon the work of Dr. Senge. This book is about how to gain support for a more sophisticated and integrated approach to advancing academic institutions, and once again I encountered the idea that finding a way to “teach” the organization about what this means is critical. 

First, I realised that as a foundation to understanding internal “politics” I would have to describe how universities are different from other organizations. Then, I found I would have to analyze the different types and styles of leaders that emerge in academic institutions, and the specific challenges involved in influencing their thinking.  That led me to outlining some “grassroots” tactics. But in the end there was no way to avoid the fact that advancement professionals would have to find a way to “teach” key people in the organization the basics of what they do.

In the book I use the example of how marketing and communication professionals could go about doing this. But those in other areas of advancement– fund-raising, alumni relations, student recruiting, and government affairs– should also do the same thing. 

Peter Senge made the case to me a long time ago that organizational leaders must systematize internal learning about their own industry’s trends, issues, and latest thinking. Indeed, I have come to believe that it’s the only way all organizations can remain successful.

In Learning to Love the Politics, I make the case once again.

Read Full Post »