Accessibility Tools
Talented people make up the core of universities. To protect this core, European universities need to navigate regulations, support attractive career paths and promote leadership development for all, argues Karen Vandevelde.
Universities are not the kind of organisations they used to be.
From designing research strategies to financial literacy and coaching early career researchers: today’s academic profession is challenging. So why do we still hire, assess and reward academics as if excellent research output and adequate teaching skills is all that matters?
Judging by many universities' mission statements, they are well aware of their unique identity as harbours of academic thought, navigators of knowledge and learning, and incubators of new ideas. At the same time, universities operate in a competitive global landscape for two vital resources: talent and funding.
Universities are also professional organisations with high standards in procedures, legal frameworks and accountability. Whether we like it or not, universities have become complex organisations that must align with (legal and other) changes in society. Passionate academics may want to be ‘left alone’ in order to thrive, but we can’t let them. Nor should we expect them to be superhuman and deal with this complexity on their own.
Most of today’s established academics received their training on the job, through the mentorship or apprenticeship of a senior academic. They ‘learned by doing’. Some do well when the circumstances are favourable. A good few are the most wonderful role models.
But many suffer when the circumstances are challenging: setting priorities when budgets are tight, resolving conflicts when egos clash, coaching doctoral researchers whose careers are insecure. Academic staff are granted a high level of autonomy by their universities but often lack the formal training to use that autonomy with leadership ability. No doubt some academics feel nostalgic about an era when all of this ‘mess’ did not exist – because… leadership is messy.
When the European University Association published its ‘Key principles for attractive and sustainable academic careers’, leadership emerged as a cross-cutting topic that ties the five principles together. Without good leadership, there are no attractive careers. And without attractive career paths, universities will lose their appeal.
In order for universities to remain attractive places to work in the 21st century, we must be willing to change in order to stay the same. This is not a contradiction: universities must change the way they organise themselves in order to maintain their intrinsic quality and robust identity. Three areas must be addressed:
Take faculty structures hindering interdisciplinary collaboration, local language legislation limiting internationalisation or inefficient administration burdening research project management. As long as we accept these as unavoidable, we fight the wrong battles and risk losing what makes academia special: a place where knowledge is valued, shared and created.
Academics have brilliant minds but are not superhuman. Few are able to carry out excellent research and excellent teaching, plus manage €10 million in project grants, guarantee the wellbeing of early-career researchers, establish partnerships with industrial companies and raise a family (the 19th century academic had household help; the typical 20th century academic a stay-at-home wife).
If we are to address the right battles, we must diversify our career frameworks into paths for collaboration and individual excellence – be it curiosity-driven research, innovative education, strategy development, management, outreach, or training of early-career researchers – so that collectively, we reflect our university’s ambition. The old ‘academic staff’ versus ‘support staff’ distinction and its corresponding hierarchies belong to the past.
I like Gary Yukl’s understanding of leadership as the ability to steer a group of people towards a common goal. It is a useful definition of leadership with deceptive simplicity, applicable to all levels of leadership.
We need strategic leadership at the top of universities and faculties in order to plan and execute efficiently. We need team leadership in educational programmes and laboratories so we can identify clear targets, promote collegial collaboration and set boundaries where necessary. And we need one-to-one development of early-career researchers: act as role models, make staff feel valued and give and receive constructive feedback, so we help others to excel. Aren’t these shared goals in our university?
‘Leading academics is like herding cats.’
All the more reason why we should not take leadership skills for granted. Nor should we assume it is or isn’t in someone’s DNA. But most of all, let’s introduce leadership practices which are evidence-based.
The good news is that leadership can be developed. Merely 30% of leadership is nature; 70% is nurture – meaning that the majority of leadership skills can be developed in the majority of people. Even in academics.
And there’s more. Studies in leadership development have shown that although learning outcomes are higher for those who voluntarily take part in leadership training, the overall benefit for the organisation is more tangible when leadership development programmes are compulsory. This is visible in terms of turnover, wellbeing, job satisfaction and profit.
There is no scientific evidence that leadership in universities is different from other organisations. Benefits of leadership development can be expected at organisational level, but also in terms of attractive academic careers. Better leaders can foster and reward excellence, promote diversity and equality, support growth and collaboration, invest in early-career researchers and build career paths that serve society – exactly the five key principles for academic careers published by EUA.
Academic freedom is our most unique feature but it is no excuse to reward egoism over collegiality, to favour impact metrics over wellbeing or to cover up misconduct with silence. It takes strong leadership to advance the essence of academic freedom into the 21st century. Let’s make this our shared goal as universities.
