Feeds:
Posts
Comments

A big challenge for higher education’s future will be to reestablish on campus, in our communities, and with our global relationships, a more collegial willingness to agree to disagree.

When I began university teaching in 1966 I had the feeling that when I debated issues and ideas with colleagues we had a common understanding that different opinions would be respected. We agreed to disagree and I came to see this as a necessary foundation for finding workable solutions to both internal and external problems.

When I was a student in Washington in the early 1960’s I actually observed legislative compromises. Partisan ideas were viciously debated in elections. But once elected, at least a good number of legislators came to Washington ready to govern… enough to at least get some things done.

Today, however, it seems that compromise and statesmanship have been totally lost. To be sure, the many election debates and campaigns ahead will be filled with partisan attacks. That is to be expected. But is there any hope we will at least spot few candidates who might have some potential to become statesmen in Washington?

It is my hope that we in the academy will at least set an example by aggressively communicating the value of respecting differing ideas, reestablishing the agree to disagree approach to community, and demonstrating that give and take and step-by-step are the ways to make progress solving complex problems.

With this as our shared foundation, as we globalize our future we just might also be able to educate leaders capable of moving us toward a much more collegial and statesmen-like world.

 

The comment on my previous post about the overlap between the digital media revolution and the transformation of higher education was quite perceptive.

The writer points out that how people consume and share information is vastly different now than even a decade ago, and that the changes have just begun. He goes on to observe that how universities adapt to how we share and receive information will be key to their survival.

For several years I taught an honors college colloquium titled “How Media Revolutions Change Everything.” We explored how family life, individual behavior, politics, government, foreign policy, religion, and education always experience fundamental changes as a consequence of media revolutions. The classroom is a great case in point.

For example, in the past I gave lectures, answered student questions, and discussed the issues. In this new media world I have students search basic information and answers to questions before class, and then “Skype in” experts from around the world to dialogue with us. I quickly discovered that long lectures were no longer needed.

And what’s more the students and I were able to experience personally and in real-time how the Internet, laptops and other devices connect the world and accelerate the globalization of everything. We were also able to see the importance of “media literacy” in understanding global change and its significance in influencing the future of higher education.

This week I fine-tuned my blog site to focus more on the global future of higher education. I have come to believe that international education is our best hope for achieving world peace, expanding media revolution literacy, solving debilitating global problems, achieving cross-cultural understanding, and producing informed and effective global-thinking leaders.

As a result, I spent several years studying globalization in general and have concluded there are two primary forces already at work reshaping the academy:

Disruption: The digital technology revolution has disrupted the academy with new social media platforms, interactive websites, and other Internet innovations. Technology changed how we teach and replaced traditional lectures with Internet searches and ever-expanding interactive media tools and resources. New on-line markets are also appearing. How institutions are marketed and communicated has changed as well. And the changes brought about by the Internet revolution have even enabled governments to change their national priorities and refocus their education roles.

Convergence: These forces are extremely powerful, but may be less apparent. They are accelerating globalization while at the same time stimulating the transformation of higher education. Beyond technology disruption, forces such as worldwide economy shifts, changing faculty and student migration patterns, intensified foreign competition for money and students, increased world travel in general, the impact of polarized political ideologies, new aggressive foreign policy initiatives, a growing nationalism in some part of the world, and aggressive nation-branding campaigns, all are converging to change and globalize virtually everything.  And all of these forces also have strong implications for how international higher education will inevitably evolve.

In the coming weeks and months we will be exploring the implications of these forces for university advancement professionals, academic leaders at all levels, faculty, students, alumni, donors, business leaders, foundation heads, prospective students, politicians, and everyone  affected by the consequences and opportunities of the globalization of higher education.

Coming in August: My new book The Transition Academy: Seizing Opportunity in the Age of Disruption addresses many of these issues. (CASE Books at http://www.case.org/books)         

 

This week I attended the Council for the Advancement and Support of Education’s annual Summit for Advancement Leaders.  Each year the CASE Summit examines the issues that will disrupt and change the future of higher education. My last post discussed some of these higher education issues and previewed my new book on the topic coming in August.

The fact is almost all nonprofit institutions face many of the same challenges. They must find new donors, deal with the consequences of a technology revolution, compensate for changing government support, and face the economic and marketing realities of globalization. This certainly will require more sophistication. But because most of these problems are related to advancement work, there also will be many new opportunities for higher levels of institutional leadership.

As I thought more about what success in this changing marketplace will require I became more convinced than ever that advancement professionals will have to be very integrated in how they go about their work. In fact, I now believe they should go so far as to incorporate each other’s language when explaining their individual goals and visions. For example, when talking to donors  fundraisers should also reference the need to build strong institutional brand identities, the importance of consistency in explaining competitive advantage, the need for high visibility in new target markets, the coming changes in student recruitment, the benefits of an international student experience, etc. And this same type of cross-discipline referencing should apply to everyone else in advancement as they communicate with their constituents.

In other words, when all advancement professionals talk with their constituents as if they are all in the business of marketing the institution, the result will be the perception that this institution understands the challenges of a rapidly changing world and is on its way to a whole new level of academic distinction.

A number of forces are converging to change the future of higher education: (1) Governments everywhere are changing how they support education, often cutting back. (2) Digital technology is changing both how we teach and how we tell our institutions’ stories. (3) Globalization is gradually and steadily changing the competitive dynamics of our marketplace.

In the United States all of this is happening in an atmosphere of state government cutbacks. Many institutions therefore are focused more on saving their core business and local markets than on exploring international opportunities.

But the facts suggest that global forces are already changing higher education… ready or not. Migration patterns of both students and faculty are already changing. Institutions everywhere are recruiting and raising money in markets previously foreign to them. Institutional partnerships are being formed. New campuses are being built. And technology is creating new international on-line markets, while at the same time changing the communication of everything from subject matter to institutions.

In such an environment it is only prudent for institutions to consider these international realities at the same time they are addressing their local core business disruptions. And what’s exciting is that all of these challenges are ones that all advancement professionals are capable of addressing. Who better than they can identify the parts of the world where their institution has  fundraising potential? Who better than they can call upon alumni in other countries to help recruit students and lift visibility? Who better than they can access and clarify the international appeal of their special program strengths? And who better than they can understand and explain how media revolutions change everything?

The only bad news in all of this is that advancement work will require more sophistication than ever before. But the exciting good news is that there is no one in all of higher education better suited than advancement professionals to help lead the way.

My new book with much more on this topic is coming soon from CASE Books: The Transition Academy: Seizing Opportunity in the Age of Disruption  (http://www.case.org/books).

 

 

After criticizing President Obama’s handling of several crises, I am now inclined to give him much higher marks on his handling of several critical issues. Handling crises requires a quick, decisive, confident response. Handing issues requires a much different approach.

In the case of Syria and Russia the president took too long to respond. His time-consuming analytical approach made him look indecisive. In the case of Syria he drew a line in the sand but then ignored it. In the case of Russia he made demands and imposed consequences that Putin ignored, giving Russia the appearance of seizing the upper hand.

Nuclear power negotiations in Iran and renewing trade with Cuba were handled much better.  Effective leadership on issues requires clarifying all competing positions and then imagining possible compromises that can lead to acceptable win-win conclusions. With Iran and Cuba this is being managed more skillfully.

The fact is, effective leadership on issues allows for making a favorable impression even when a deal is not reached. This is because the deliberation process itself can make news, and skilled leaders have the opportunity to sound impressive and come off looking like statesmen.

Crisis communication is a matter of confidently and quickly doing the right thing. But leading on issues is more a matter of strategic thinking and skillful facilitation.

While Obama is not a participant in the EU vs. Greece deliberations, it will be very interesting to see which participants get high marks as leaders, and why.

There is little doubt in this age of digital technology that television can be a powerful tool to cover senseless and violent crises and explore their causes. The horrible killing of nine innocent people  in the church in Charleston once again has me thinking about both the power and responsibility of television news.

Any new media technology will always be used, especially when it proves to be powerful. Over time serious users will perfect ways to make it more and more effective. In the case of television it’s strength is in its capacity to use carefully selected images and editing to dramatize. Extended television news coverage of major crises is therefore inevitable.

All of this raises questions about the potential for both positive and negative influences. These three have been swirling around in my mind:

1. What level and tone of television coverage informs the public most appropriately?

2. How much coverage of details about a perpetrator’s planning and background is appropriate? When might these details and images actually produce a celebrity status in the eyes of like-minded individuals and possibly encourage future assaults? And at what point might this coverage actually help achieve the perpetrator’s public relations objectives, and even those of sympathetic extremist groups?

3. And when might lengthy in-depth coverage move beyond mere observing and reporting into unintended participation in the event itself?

In order to address these and other questions, should television and other news media be  evaluating their own  impact on society and human behavior more visibly and more often… maybe even at times other than when a crisis has occurred?

And since media consumers are pretty much on their own to edit and evaluate their many  information sources in this 24/7 digital media world, is it also a good time to consider more media literacy courses and forums in schools, colleges, and community organizations?

 

When I arrived at TCU in 1966 to teach radio-TV-film my closest colleagues and friends were in the art department. I found myself hanging out with oil painters, graphic artists, sculptors, and photographers. They were asking me about the psychic and social impact of television and I was learning about the power of imagery from them.

Looking back I can see clearly now that I believed early on that art had the ability to give context and tone to big ideas… and even enhance their power. In theatre the background set reinforces the dramatic impact of the story. In a marketing brochure graphic design and photography attract attention and reinforce the importance of the content. And the right magazine cover sets the stage for everything else that follows. In today’s media world you certainly can tell a lot about a book by its cover!

But it goes even deeper than this. Creative artists of all types provide insights and truths unavailable to many of us. The daily lives of poets, novelists, essayists, dramatists, composers, musicians, all take us a little closer to the basic truths we all seek. So when you engage with artists, appreciate what they do, see up close how they do it, and bring your compelling content ideas into the dialogue, you are enabling the kind of multi-sensory communication essential to influencing today’s audiences.

In the past I thought that intellectuals were only those high IQ people who could remember names and dates on objective tests. They were those scholars who could master numbers and put complicated formulas on blackboards. But over time I came to see that true intellectuals also include those who struggle to give birth to new ideas and surround themselves with creative people as a way to accomplish higher goals and deeper understanding. I love these people, and you should too.

This past week I was impressed by several interviews with the trainer of the Triple Crown winning horse. I have been thinking about what he said ever since. He repeatedly said it was all about having the right horse. He dodged every opportunity to take credit for the win, pointing out that the only way this can happen is having a horse with both the talent and the will to do it.

It occurred to me that athletic coaches wanting to win championships have said basically the same thing. It’s all about the players. It’s absolutely necessary to have the right athletes with the right talent and a single-minded commitment to winning. In other words, even a really good coach must have talented athletes with commitment in order to be able to use his or her knowledge and experience to enable their best performance.

I have learned this same lesson about teaching. For many years I was just fine teaching anyone in my classes about what I thought I knew about communication and media. But in time I realized that when it came to helping students achieve truly major things it was all about them. If they had the talent and a relentless desire to make a difference I could call on my hard learned lessons to help them turn their potential into impressive accomplishments.

And I also found that this applies to strategic communication and marketing administrators and leaders. My last blog post described both Bob Schieffer and former TCU Chancellor Michael Ferrari as opportunity enablers. Looking back on my administrative years I now know that my greatest satisfactions came when I hired people with extraordinary talent and helped them develop it.

In the end, helping professionals fine-tune their special talent enables satisfying working relationships that continue well beyond your time at work. In fact, you are making an ongoing difference in people’s lives that you may eventually come to see as your “crowning” achievement… your Triple Crown.

 

Broadcast journalism pioneer and icon Bob Schieffer hosted his last Face the Nation program and retired from CBS News today. Also this week Mick Ferrari, higher education giant and former TCU Chancellor, passed away. Both enabled opportunities and careers for so many students and others who had the good fortune to cross paths with them at this grand university.

It was in this environment I learned to advise my students to always send a thank you note to every interesting person they meet. Never ask them for a job. Rather ask, “Could I please schedule a few minutes of your time to learn more about what you have learned?” While there also ask, “Could you suggest others I might meet with, and do you mind if I mention that you suggested I talk with them?” One contact leads to another, which leads to still another… and on and on. Before you know it your world will have been enlarged in miraculous ways, and opportunities for projects and even jobs will open to you along the way.

For those students and others who demonstrated above average initiatives, Bob Schieffer enabled contacts with giants in the media, in government, in politics and at think tanks in Washington. Contacts led to contacts and many high level careers followed. This happened both at CBS, and TCU.

Chancellor Ferrari consciously enabled this kind of relationship-building for those around him who demonstrated potential for more responsibility. As a matter of course, his associates would meet other leaders in higher education, education associations, foundations, corporations and individual philanthropists. Careers were enlarged. Opportunities followed.

Both of these giants meant more to me than I can say. I spent this week in deep contemplation about how they made themselves so accessible to so many. Ferrari’s journey is over. But Schieffer’s will continue on in many new and exciting ways. It will be fun to see what comes next.

The key lesson for me in all this is that enabling larger opportunities for talented students and colleagues can be the most satisfying thing a person can do.