Reaction: HR Mgmt

Jessica Stevens

October 12, 2011

PAF 9308

            Although I have found many of the readings each week very interesting, there is one of the Hanover Research articles that really stood out to me more than the others. I actually found myself going back to re-read it just to make sure that I understood each of the various points made. The “Effective Practices for Succession Planning in Higher Education” article started one of the conversations that I do not feel is happening in Higher Education enough.

            In Higher Education there is a huge push to develop people into their best self. However far to often I do not believe this is being done effectively for all the different sectors within each institution. There is a large emphasis on helping faculty achieve; to research more, to teach better, to publish more or higher level material. At the same time there is a drive to develop its students academically and more recently socially and emotionally. The goal of the institution is to graduate the best class of students into the world possible. While I believe that the students and faculty should be the focus as they are important to the success of the institution, what about the administrators and staff. Administrators, especially the high-level and senior positions, are just as crucial to the success or downfall of the institution as the faculty.

            In recent years there definitely has been a push for professional development and helping people be successful at their job in a lot of career fields.  However in higher education I feel as though there are many missed opportunities. Many institutions offer professional development opportunities in the form of courses, classes, workshops, etc but are they really effective? I have been to many of these types of courses at my current institution and honestly have learned very little. I go because they are part of my PFP, not because I feel as though they will help develop me and make me a better leader within the institution. I am sure that many people have similar experiences as there is always a groan in the room when employees are told that they need to attend these workshops.

            Even though there is not a direct tie I believe that the argument can be made that these are missed opportunities. Many institutions are not successfully “growing” leaders from within. So when high-level administrators leave, retire, or move-on the common practice is to have an open search. While I do believe that this is necessary and not all hires should be internal, it is rare to find one that has moved up the ranks and is effective. I am sure there are examples where a candidate moved up for a variety of outside reasons, while there appear to be few that indicate they were truly ready and planned for. At many institutions there are high quality workers that have the drive and with some mentoring, coaching, and opportunities could be effective future leaders at the institution.

            In the Hanover Research this concept of the development of internal candidates is called succession planning. Their research  indicates that for Higher Education Institutions succession planning is a newer concept and while some may have some sort of system, few have a formal plan in place. However, I was happy to read that the “realization of the importance of succession planning appears to be taking root within higher education”.

            The research conveys many of the same sentiments that I believe about this subject. While there is not a model currently for higher education succession planning, there are elements from the corporate world that are transferable. Using the best practices stated in the research is a great place to start. There are two components that need to exist for the start of such succession plans to work. The first is the support of leadership, meaning the president, the Board of Trustees, those people that currently possess the senior-level positions. The second is the “alignment” of the organizational structure to the strategy. The plan needs to fit with the overall make-up and goals of the institution otherwise the succession plan will not be effective nor long-lasting.

            With the buy-in from the senior positions and integration into the university fabric the rest of the process will be much easier. While it is a conscience decision process that needs to be made, it will make sense as succession planning will be a part of the future goals and strategies for the institution. Identifying potential senior level candidates that are already in the institution and having it be a part of the interview process for new hires. Once this group is identified, communicating and meeting is very important. They should also partake in performance evaluations. These evaluations should be two-fold, to access their current performance but also their growth towards the potential positions.

           The next is the heart of succession planning, the actual development of “high potential employees.” In theHanoverresearch it indicates that a three-pronged approach is the most effective, I would agree. “These plans will provide for the three major categories of (1) work experience and assignments, (2) coaching and (3) educational courses and seminars.” I find it very interesting that the research agrees with my earlier statement that further education is one of the more obvious approaches yet it is the assignments and job experiences that are far more effective. In a way it is puzzling to me as this is the route most institutions take, yet its proven to not be the most effective. Creating structured learning opportunities for these employees and having them experience the many sides of the institution is what will develop a high quality effective leader.

            In the end this topic really speaks to me because of my current position and I have seen it happen a few times. I would even venture to say that I am reaching that point. I want to learn and grow in my position but do not feel that is going to happen because of the type of supervisor I have. I do not think that he has the ability or been taught how to build those learning opportunities for his staff to grow. In the end it creates a stifling work environment. There are effective leaders that could be developed, and want to learn but aren’t given the opportunity. Which means that one of two things will happen, they either wont grow into their potential or will take their skills elsewhere where they can be more successful. I do not think that is the environment that everyone wants to work in. There should be a balance of internal and external opportunities and job movement. Succession planning is an important step for the future success of higher education and its employees.