Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Lessons Learned’ Category

I have encountered “group think” in executive teams in many institution over the years. In each case it was a very dangerous situation. The eventual consequence is that leaders lose their abilities to effectively guide their institutions through rapidly changing conditions.

Group think happens this way:  An executive team first finds success managing in a certain set of market circumstances. They may have followed their instincts and got lucky. Or they may have followed market research. Whatever the explanation they were able to find a successful model and manage the institution effectively over a period of time by following it.  However, in doing so they gradually stopped receiving external information. They no longer welcomed input. They began to reject criticism, and silently felt threatened by new ideas. Simply put, they became isolated while the world outside was changing.

On the other hand, some executive teams manage to avoid destructive “group think.”  And in my experience these teams tend to have a common set of  behavior characteristics:

1. They understand they must out-learn their competition. They must stay on top of  industry trends, continue to study their market, and stay current on new technology. And to do this they put specific mechanisms and programs in place which ensure that constant team learning takes place.

2. They operate in a culture where they do not compete for resources.  Rather they challenge each other to come up with the best possible proposals to advance each area of operation. Then, they collaborate on setting priorities and making budget allocation decisions.  Everyone is heard, and everyone buys into the compromises essential to moving forward together.

3. In addition, every member of the team celebrates colleagues when they achieve something significant…an award recognition in their field or a success in the institution. Everyone puts aside any tendency for professional jealously by frequently articulating the positive outcomes of these team celebrations.

4. Outside input is invited on a regular basis. Research is conducted. Consultants are invited in to share ideas. People inside the organization with thoughts or criticisms are invited to the table to express them. Everyone understands that the tendency for executive isolation is natural and universal, and that overcoming it is the only road to continued success.

In the final analysis, “group think” as a result of executive isolation is the primary reason institutions fail, aristocracies decline, civilizations fall, and entire societies disappear. It is the lesson of history. Every public or private executive  team in every society must therefore learn this lesson. Otherwise, they will falter for a while, and  then very likely fail.

Read Full Post »

While writing last week’s post I recalled two teachers who long ago changed my life.  Who knows where I might have ended up had I not encountered them. And in a world where student performance on standardized tests has become the mechanism to measure teacher performance, I must say my transformation had nothing to do with such a measure.

No one in my immediate family had ever gone to college. I did not score high grades in the public schools and was clearly on a road to a blue-collar job after high school.  As a teenager I managed to find a part-time job selling shoes and decided that if I took a few business courses at the local junior college I might be able to eventually become a store manager.  And all that time I was also flirting with the unrealistic belief that by dabbling in radio I might be able to become a big time rock and roll disc jockey, which of course was the highest calling in life!

I had not attended junior college very long when it became dramatically clear that I was not connecting with the accounting and introduction to business courses I was taking!  As a result one of my fellow students advised me to enroll in a philosophy class that he was finding very exciting. My first response was, “What the hell is philosophy?”

But it was that course in philosophy, and the exciting world of ideas it represented, that began my transformation. It was there I learned how to think, how to analyze issues, how to solve problems, and how to write. And it was there I learned that if I could be evaluated on those variables I could excel. 

So from there I enrolled in a history class. One day the professor  invited me to join a discussion group he was starting with some of his students. I reminded him that I was not doing all that well on his quantitative tests, but he responded, “Yes, but you can think, you love ideas, and you write fairly well.  Concentrate on those strengths and you will be fine.”  

And so in less than one year, professor of philosophy Johnathan Winter, and professor of history James Hartnett changed my life forever.

Geography, inherent strengths and weaknesses, economic  conditions, family realities, all these determine each student’s immediate possibilities. In an inner city situation, for example, initial success might be merely helping a child gain self-confidence about rising above his or her immediate predicament. Or for a budding writer, artist, or even entrepreneur, masterful teaching might be simply nurturing  inherent talent and not allowing difficulties in other  disciplines undermine creative achievement. 

The bottom line is that a master teacher will have the capacity to help each individual find and develop his or her strengths. Personal attention and mentoring  just takes too much time and human compassion for it to happen while endlessly pushing students to memorize facts for standardized tests. I will be forever grateful that I encountered two professors in a junior college in York, Pennsylvania that understood that!

Read Full Post »

The Council for the Advancement and Support of Education (CASE) held its seventh annual Summit for Advancement Leaders this week. This Summit, however, would be quite different for me. I was to receive one of those lifetime professional achievement awards.  

I had watched others receive this award over the years and thought I knew what to expect. But standing there before hundreds of my peers I found myself thinking, “How in the world can this be me?”  My mind was racing. “There are so many smart people out there,” I thought. “What must they be thinking about all this?” I became consumed with the thought that I had learned everything I know from these and other colleagues! 

Suddenly I was recalling what I had learned from two CASE board of trustee chairs, one of them also receiving an award this day. I had watched them both pilot the board through a particularly troubled time in the association and it became a very memorable lesson for me in skillful leadership and courage. I had written about leadership, but I had learned the really helpful lessons from them.

Then I found myself recalling when, as a very young faculty member, I had asked my academic dean at TCU for a promotion in faculty rank. He responded: “We better get you tenure while we can… I think you are going to need it!”  He was right. His insight paved the way for a long and rewarding future as a maverick who was destined to get involved in changing how things were done. It was my first practical lesson in strategic thinking and timing.

I also recalled the academic vice-chancellor who knew I was not headed into administration but nonetheless asked me to take a position directing the University’s evening college, summer school, and non credit programs. I had been complaining about the programs and so he challenged me to take the job and fix them. Later, when I went to him with my problems, he countered: “I hired you for solutions, Lauer, not to bring me problems.”  That experience became one of the most  important learning opportunities of my career.

Another major career-changing moment came when a development vice-chancellor brought me into this field, thereby enabling me to practice what I was teaching. It would require rethinking everything in the communication  division. But this would open the door for everything that would follow… my books, presentations, articles, travel, and literally everything that led to this award. 

Beyond those board of trustee chairs I mentioned there were many other strong professionals involved at the time in  CASE.  Talented volunteers and innovation-minded staff became my collaborators and teachers as we worked to bring new levels of sophistication to the communication field. Together we were able to inject strategic and integrated marketing concepts into our work. Timing was everything, and no one could have done it alone.

More recently I had a mentor-teacher at the American Council on Education (ACE) who taught me the importance of  advocating on behalf of the issues that are shaping the future of our industry. And with my academic hat back on, I found new collaborators at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). They helped me conclude that the internationalization of higher education would bring significant world problem-solving opportunities that we had never before even anticipated.

This moment of personal recognition clearly had me realizing that everything I know came from someone else. We all stand on the shoulders of many others, and it is especially during these moments that we fully understand and recognize that it is not ultimately about us. It’s all about our teachers and mentors.

Finally, I must confess that I also wanted to be giving a speech that day about how lucky our young professionals are to be in this field at this moment in time. Our industry is becoming global, governments are changing, and as a consequence advancement professionals are moving front and center in their institutions. We are in the middle of a major “sea change” in higher education, and the leaders in our field will literally have an opportunity to help change the world.

Read Full Post »

More than five years ago several key members of the board of trustees and professional staff of the Council for the Advancement and Support of Education (CASE) could see a “sea change” coming in higher education, one that would thrust advancement professionals into a new level of leadership with a completely new set of performance expectations.

This “sea change” is both good and challenging news for the profession. The good news is that new and better rewarded opportunities will appear in the U.S. and abroad for the best among us.  The challenging news is that extremely high performance will be expected which will also require a new level of sophistication and understanding of the industry’s market issues, realities and trends.

Past CASE annual conferences concentrated mostly on the most current fundraising, alumni relations, marketing and communication tactics and cases. However, in order to meet the coming industry challenges an annual Summit was designed primarily to prepare advancement leaders to deal with the issues and competitive realities ahead.

This year’s Summit will kick off in Washington on Sunday. Here are eight “beyond tactics” concerns that are currently on my mind: 

1. How will today’s state legislative cutbacks change our core business, and what are the implications for advancement?  And how do for-profits factor into this equation?

2. How will essential increases in tuition be managed when the public thinks we already cost too much? What are the consequences of the recent questioning of the basic value of a college degree?  And what are the implications here for advancement?

3. How will internationalization effect competition for students, money and reputation at home? Will even the smallest U.S. institution be affected?

4. Are back-to-back comprehensive campaigns sustainable? How do we maintain donor loyalty when every nonprofit in the U.S. and abroad is out looking for philanthropic resources?

5. What is the future of on-line education?  Can it actually save money? How will it affect institutions that already have huge investments in maintaining a residential-based college experience?

6. Where will jobs in the future be found?  What will be the appropriate preparation for getting one of them? Is this sufficient preparation for a lifetime?  And does advancement have a role to play here?

7. What should liberal arts based institutions do now?  What happens to the “education for both a career and for a happy life”  philosophy?  How does advancement help address these situations?

8. Are boards of governance changing in make-up and expectations?  If so how?  Is there a trend toward more financial  risk taking?  Is there mounting pressure for a more corporate style management?  Is there a different traditional academic culture that should be maintained?  How should advancement respond?

In this new world of higher education there is little doubt that advancement will face increasingly high expectations, and will be required to play a key role in overall strategic planning and institutional problem-solving. Those professionals who stay focused only on tactics, even when those tactics are the cutting edge new media ones, will no longer qualify for the top leadership positions, or so I think.  Simply put, the coming “sea change” in higher education is bringing new very complicated, and in many cases institutional survival related, demands.

I suggest that only those advancement professionals who have moved beyond the tactics, and have developed the intellectual capacity to manage critical issues in a rapidly changing landscape, will qualify for taking on these new leadership opportunities. And the annual CASE Summit for Advancement Leaders is the perfect place to begin your immersion in these critical issues and to learn all about these exciting leadership challenges.

Read Full Post »

My wife and I spent this week at the Chautauqua Institution, a cultural, educational, and family vacation retreat in upstate New York. We had been told that attending one time would have us coming back again and again for years. And I must admit we are hooked.

The main morning program for the week was moderated by Jim Lehrer, retired host and executive producer of the PBS News Hour, and was focused on a review of  all of the issues related to the current presidential campaign. The topics ranged from the latest political poll findings, to the polarization of the parties, to the role of presidential debates, to the future of science and research, to an analysis of what voters need to know.

Only several times was the role of the media itself mentioned. Finally on Friday, Michael Gerson, former aid to George W. Bush and current conservative Washington Post Columnist, suggested that the new media world of 24/7 cable channels, talk radio, and bloggers has created a situation where people can now select only what they want to hear. There are no editors, and no effort to achieve balance of viewpoints. People therefore end up reinforcing their biases and further polarizing their opinions, rather than expanding their understanding and tolerance.

What we need now is a situation where people  become their own editors, and where a personal objective of theirs is to learn from other points of view. They can no longer demonize and treat opponents as enemies. We must find a way to return to the day when we debate during the day, socialize in the evenings as friends, and then sit down and work out our differences in an environment of mutual respect.

At the end of the week I concluded there is much to be discussed about the role of the media in all of this polarization. Do too many of today’s journalists see polarized gridlock as a happy source of ongoing daily headlines?  Should the modern journalist bear some responsiblity for reminding people to become their own editors, and to show them how to do it? In the final analysis, is the media part of the problem, and should we have more discussions on campuses, in schools, and at places like Chautauqua about the psychic and social consequences of media?

Read Full Post »

The longer I work in the strategic communication field the more I find credibility in a kind of “you are what you eat” theory of how media affects us.

When print was the dominant medium in society, using it caused people to become more rational and structured in their thinking…or so it seemed to me and Marshall McLuhan. But when television became the dominant medium, using it caused people to take on more of its characteristics, and they became more emotional, fragmented, less rational, and more impatient.  With TV came less detail and more drama. Indeed, TV even changed the way we arranged the furniture in our living rooms, thereby changing how our families interacted… or how they didn’t!

Now the new digital media revolution is changing the world once more, and all the basic questions about social and psychic effects are being asked still again. How is it affecting how we think and learn?  Has it again changed behavior patterns in families, and is that good or bad? 

How about politics and government?  How much is media to blame for the extreme polarization we now have in our political campaigns, and in our legislatures?  What impact have these new media platforms had on how governments operate, and on who has the power?

What about the news?  In this new environment how do we know what is fact, and what is not?  What happened to the editors that checked the facts and demanded multiple sources before news was published?  Do 24/7 cable news channels, bloggers, website aggregators, citizen journalists, and social media users merely generate information clutter and create more confusion about what is really gone on?   

What impact has economic cutbacks had on how international events and crises are covered and reported?  Who is really reporting this news, and how is it distributed?  Why does it seem that all of the network and freelance reporters herd to crisis locations, thus leaving the rest of the world unreported? 

How has social media changed the ways nation’s conduct diplomacy?  What is “public diplomacy,” and why is it so important in today’s information cluttered environment?  What can we expect as more and more people inside closed societies find out about how people live in other parts of the world?

And what impact has all this had on institutional religion, on education at all levels, and on every organization–public and private, profit and nonprofit–trying to be understood with relentless data implosion going on all around them?    

Today’s reality is that each person now must become his or her own media editor?  The fact is that we can regulate our choices so as to receive only information we like, or we can achieve a more balanced diet.  It’s now up to each of us to decide.

But does this mean that to have intelligent consumers of media in the future we must introduce  media literacy education in our schools?  And if so, how and where?

These are the fundamental questions I will address this fall with some of the brightest Honors College students we have at TCU. And I will use this new media to bring experts and great thinkers into the classroom from various locations to collaborate with us. Stay tuned, you won’t want to miss the “breaking news!”

Read Full Post »

Since writing a book about internal institutional politics, I have had many conversations with colleagues probing their deep inner feelings about their work environment and the people they must deal with in order to get the job done. Many of these feelings are subconscious, but they can come to the surface in heart-to-heart conversations.

For example, one executive told me about the guilt he felt when he had to admit to himself that the incredible talent of a subordinate was threatening to him.  The executive was not proud when he confronted the reality that he actually was preventing a person on his staff from having contact with other executives in the organization, and was not approving his participation in external projects. “It’s this guy’s job to put me out front, not for him to steal the limelight,” was the executive’s attitude. But, of course, he was only setting up a barrier that was holding back the career of a very talented professional.

Another person admitted in a conversation that he was fighting the feeling that he was really hoping a colleague who was getting attention for his talent would ultimately fail. This person had excuses for his feeling such as, “this person is getting too big for his britches.”  But the truth of the matter is that this is a classic case of professional jealously.  And the harm done was negative “office talk” about a professional’s genuine achievements. This situation is what reinforces the classic, “you can’t be a profit in your own land,” reality.

Another person admitted that she was doing things to impede a colleague’s recognition because she just didn’t like him. Questioning revealed this to be a common case of personality conflict.  “He makes me mad every time he opens his mouth,” was one observation.  Another was, “when he walks into the room he makes my skin crawl!”  Sometimes a person’s style is a problem for the entire office. But more often than not it is a problem between two people, and the behavior of one of them can become destructive to the well-being of the other.

Truthfully, it’s not unusual to feel unhappy about co-workers’ successes and to have difficulty celebrating their achievements.  Whatever good happens to them can feel like a setback to us. It’s a common feeling that is rarely admitted, and rarely dealt with directly. 

Indeed, most of us are in denial about our feelings, and make up excuses for them if we must. We simply conclude that the person is a selfish corporate climber, or an elitist social climber, or just a plain ego driven maniac.  “He thinks it’s all about him,” is what we say. But the truth often is that he (or she) is merely trying to advance his ideas and exercise a sincere passion he feels for making a difference.

My little book “Learning to Love the Politics,” attempts to look at leadership styles and typical barriers to individual advancement and support, and to propose some ways to deal with them. This book is mostly about university politics, but many of the situations are universal. Internal politics are in fact the big barriers to professional  achievement everywhere, and many people never have realized that they can work hard and actually be penalized for it.

There is no doubt about it, our unspoken feelings can be destructive. Getting them out in the open so we can deal with them is a major step toward organizational and individual progress.

Read Full Post »

I got into a discussion with colleagues this week about the meaning of the word “integration” as it applies to all areas of university advancement. I explained my approach to the topic this way:

Integrated marketing is simultaneously considering product, pricing, program delivery, and communication so that communication can be effective.  It’s impossible to communicate a wrong product, or a product that is priced poorly and delivered inefficiently.

In fact, brand identify is often the primary product of an academic institution. It is what constituents are actually “buying.” And so integrated group processes become essential to clarify a differentiated brand identity and to stimulate essential word-of-mouth communication.

Integrated communication is using multi-platform media tactics simultaneously to converge intensively enough to cut through today’s media clutter. Effectiveness comes from using only the preferred media tactics of each market segment and age group.

Integrated planning usually results in using both “old” and new media, as print often still serves as the tangible “hold-in-your-hand” symbol of an institution or program while electronic tactics facilitate information searching  and two-way relationship building.  I think of integrated communication as “orchestrated” communication.

Integrated advancement then is the bringing together of all this with alumni relations, fund-raising, government relations, and student recruiting.  A task force composed of representatives of these areas can be used to make certain that the institution’s mission, vision, values, and how they come together in branding themes, are commonly understood.

Confusion and breakdown can also be avoided by implementing integrated advancement. For example, in both alumni relations and development there are tendencies to want a brand and logo for every event and program.  Campaign directors also often think a separate theme and logo are needed for fund-raising to be successful.  Yet, if everything an institution does is really to advance the overall brand, why would any of these activities need a separate identity?  Does this not work contrary to the cause?  Imaginative ways to enhance overall brand intensity can be found through integrated planning.

Ideas about how knowledge in one area can strengthen another are also uncovered through integrated planning. For example, how does what development officers know about building relationships with donors help people in communication with their news media constituents.  When the role of each is better understood by the other new ideas emerge that strengthen the whole.

Alumni relations professionals are beginning to expand their programs so as to function as a “portal” through which all alumni can access the total university for their lifetime.  Development operations are also looking to other advancement areas for help in addressing concerns about donor fatigue and loyalty. And marketing and communication practitioners are devising media platforms and strategies to help upgrade the effectiveness of the other advancement areas.

Integrated advancement therefore is simply using group processes and coordinated communication tactics to speak with one voice.  This results in a differentiated, competitive and effective brand identity. And it’s a compelling brand  identity that enables an institution to achieve its primary goal of academic distinction.

Read Full Post »

I spent a half-day this week with the institutional advancement officers in the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities System. In the past my impression had been that many state systems were in a constant search for clarity of role and identity. But this week I collaborated with a highly energized group of professionals, and as I reflected on our time together I came to see more clearly just how they might function effectively in this current environment of government cut-backs and public criticism.

1. Who better than a state system can put together an impressive case for state support of higher education, and then to represent it in the legislature with one voice and ongoing persistence? Who better can make an effective case for insuring diverse access, meeting workforce needs, stimulating economic development, researching new products, solving community problems, and much more?

2. Who better can lead the rethinking of core business plans? Cut-backs are likely to remain permanent to some degree. What will  be the new ratio of revenue sources?  What proportion will now have to come from tuition, philanthropy, federal government, state government, fees, etc.?  How can we insure the needed amounts from each source will be available?

3. Who better can coordinate the best professional development programs, and provide access to the best experts in the fields of philanthropy, alumni relations, marketing and communications?  A new level of sophistication will be required in all these areas to meet future revenue and admissions needs, and the system can make sure this is available to every member.

4. Who better can assess the impact of globalization on the institutions in the state and guide a planned response?  Both opportunities and threats will have to be taken into account as a part of core business rethinking.  Does it make sense to have programs abroad?  What is the likelihood of foreign institutions successfully rasing money and recruiting students in this region?  How should each institution respond? 

5. Who better can help clarify where and how institutions can cooperate, and yet compete at the same time. For example, where might institutional student recruiting, and therefore marketing and communication initiatives, overlap? Where might the same donors, foundations, and corporations be solicited by individual institutions?  And what are new and better ways to build donor loyalty and avoid back-to-back campaign donor fatigue?

6. And who better can facilitate making an “everyone on the same page” case for higher education to the general public?  In this age of negativity and skepticism a strategic communication initiative to clarify higher education’s overall brand identity is essential, and a state system can lead the way. Even if a system is not in a “political” position to launch such a public campaign, it might help and encourage an outside group or association to do so.

Indeed, there are many roles for state systems to play in these uncertain times.  It’s exciting to think of the possibilities!

Read Full Post »

This week I found myself discussing with a colleague the significance of calling on important people in areas of interest just to get to know them.  Sometimes you get a new special insight. Other times you will pick up important information about new developments.  And often this contact will lead to others that can be helpful later on.  We readily agreed that making the effort to get out and get to know key people never turns out to be a waste of time. And before you know it you have a network with which today’s new media will allow you to stay in touch.

Many years ago fundraisers demonstrated for me the power of third-party contacts.  It’s a matter of everyday practice for them to realize that they might not be the best person to call on a given donor for a particular gift.  Rather, a third-party that knows you both very well is likely to make a more effective ask. And so you equip your third-party with talking points and a proposal to make the call with you, or in some cases for you. 

This is not rocket science, but I have found this approach often can also work for news reporters, foundation heads, government officials, legislators, business leaders, and virtually anyone from whom you might one day need help. 

It’s a great tactic for advancing the brand as well.  It’s even possible to ask many of these people a few basic research questions to take back their feedback, or to ask for word-of-mouth support for a special project, event or your entire institution.

These networks can also often lead to productive partnerships.  A great partnership is one where just the association brings you and your organization instant expanded visibility and prestige.  Nothing is more effective than the right  third-party partner. But also, nothing is worse than the wrong partner… one that no one ever heard of or is a rung or two down on the brand reputation scale.

The truth is… it’s all about relationships. The more key people you get to know the more effective you can be in everything you undertake. It’s just as simple as that.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »