WonkHE recently posted an interesting opinion piece with the title Academics and Administrators: No more ‘us and them’. In that post, Paul Greatrix rebutted criticisms of professional services (administrative) staff in Universites from some academics. To illustrate his point, he quoted recent articles in which administrators were portrayed as a useless overhead on the key tasks at hand (teaching and research).
This flows both ways, as Greatrix himself points out. As Enterprise Architect, I work with Professional Services colleagues and I have heard some of them express opinions that clearly fail to understand the nature of academic work. Academics cannot be treated as if they were factory workers, churning out lectures on a treadmill.
I think these comments reveal a fundamental clash of ideas about how a University should work. Some people who come into management positions for other sectors tend to frame the University as a business, with students and research funders as customers to be kept satisfied. Those from an academic background prefer to see the institution as a community of scholars, in which the students are the most junior members of that community and not separate from it.
Clearly, the University has to bring in enough income to survive. It has to maintain reserves to insure against unexpected problems, and it has to conform with employment law and many other regulations. In this way, it is a business.
The University also has to promote academic enquiry, to encourage academics to pursue their own disciplines, and to develop students as critical thinkers. In these ways, it is a community of scholars.
In practice, both models are valid, in different ways. The approaches are governed, in our University, by the twin bodies of Court (business) and Senate (scholars). Academics and professional services staff all have to recognise these twin roles.
In the enterprise architecture world, we can incorporate these different viewpoints into our models. It would be an interesting exercise to map the motivations, goals and principles using the Archimate motivation modelling elements, which can map stakeholders, goals, values, and similar concepts.
This flows both ways, as Greatrix himself points out. As Enterprise Architect, I work with Professional Services colleagues and I have heard some of them express opinions that clearly fail to understand the nature of academic work. Academics cannot be treated as if they were factory workers, churning out lectures on a treadmill.
I think these comments reveal a fundamental clash of ideas about how a University should work. Some people who come into management positions for other sectors tend to frame the University as a business, with students and research funders as customers to be kept satisfied. Those from an academic background prefer to see the institution as a community of scholars, in which the students are the most junior members of that community and not separate from it.
Clearly, the University has to bring in enough income to survive. It has to maintain reserves to insure against unexpected problems, and it has to conform with employment law and many other regulations. In this way, it is a business.
The University also has to promote academic enquiry, to encourage academics to pursue their own disciplines, and to develop students as critical thinkers. In these ways, it is a community of scholars.
In practice, both models are valid, in different ways. The approaches are governed, in our University, by the twin bodies of Court (business) and Senate (scholars). Academics and professional services staff all have to recognise these twin roles.
In the enterprise architecture world, we can incorporate these different viewpoints into our models. It would be an interesting exercise to map the motivations, goals and principles using the Archimate motivation modelling elements, which can map stakeholders, goals, values, and similar concepts.
Comments