Research Leaders & the Faculty/Administration Interface
When research leaders enter certain domains, they will see instances where faculty and the administration each play vital, necessarily interwoven roles that cannot be simplified to transactions. These domains can be rich with potential but can also be confusing, intimidating, and seemingly unstable.
Presented below is the second of two excerpts from chapter 3 of my book, Catalyzing Research: Research Leaders and the Complex Faculty/Administration Interface. (Previous articles in Medium’s Catalyzing Research publication presented adapted excerpts from the book’s introductory chapter and chapter on research leaders [part 1].)
Targeting a Complex Interface
As described above [see part 1 of the chapter excerpt], the interface between faculty and the administration can be complex and challenging — driven by histories and cultures specific to a given institution as well as extending from the long traditions of academia and academic research. Even for research enterprises outside of academic institutions, including those within independent research institutes and healthcare organizations, the faculty and very often the senior leaders were trained in, and came up through, academic institutions and systems of academic thinking and doing.
The histories of faculty tenure and traditions of strong faculty governance permeate universities and academic medical centers and have left their marks on a wide range of other research organizations. While the term “faculty” has its origins in academia, a broad range of research organizations use it to refer to their principal researchers whether or not they have formal faculty appointments, which, in turn, may or may not come with tenure and other benefits. In this book, faculty is used in this general sense.
J.V. Lombardi describes university faculty as a capital asset, a metaphor that has some value across other times of research organizations:¹
[A] university’s mission, purpose, and goals succeed or fail on the basis of its investment in [faculty]. The administrators, staff, buildings, students, and alumni do not create the value of the university. They contribute to it and support it, but the astute investment in the capital asset of faculty produces the institution’s value to its constituencies and owners.
Meanwhile, in recent decades, research organizations have increased the sizes of their administrative staff, in part, to handle increasing regulatory responsibilities placed on them by federal and other research funders. Regardless of their abilities and value to the organization, these individuals inherently bring a very different set of experiences and expectations than those of faculty.
Administrators, particularly those supporting an organization’s research enterprise, have been described as needing to balance (1) serving the faculty, and (2) ensuring the stewardship of funds and protection of the institution. While this contributes to part of the complexity of the faculty/administration interface, another factor is that, in many ways, the common touchpoints between faculty and the administration have been largely transactional in nature. Faculty might request the help of the administration to compete a certain task, or the administration might require something from faculty to submit a research proposal. The touchpoints are numerous, but what is much less common — and far more complex — are attempts to truly collaborate on a deep level across this interface.
When research leaders enter certain domains, including the research enterprise focus areas highlighted in this book — core research facilities, research centers and institutes, research development, and strategic research investment — they will see instances where faculty and the administration each play vital, necessarily interwoven roles that cannot be simplified to transactions. These domains can be rich with potential but can also be confusing, intimidating, and seemingly unstable.
Acknowledging the Challenge
As a starting point, it is important for research leaders to make the open and clear admission that:
It is OK to think about the faculty/administration interface as being complex and challenging, and it is OK to call it that way.
While it may seem that this admission is inappropriate or harsh, it is valuable — and, in a sense, liberating — to come to a common agreement that this interface is a structural element that exists in the vast majority of nonprofit research organizations. Recognizing this structural element provides the research leader with a set of helpful boundaries to define the challenges and opportunities at hand.
This admission does not mean that either faculty or the administration are leading activities or pursuing agendas that are bad, inappropriate, or mischievous. It also does not mean that any individuals or groups are engaging in behavior that does not have the overall benefit of the research organization in mind. Instead, it is just a recognition that the two sides of the interface have different histories, languages, perspectives, and motivations, and that when they necessarily come together, the interactions and collaborations can be challenging.
Learning and Engaging
If research leaders can accept the statement that the faculty/administration interface is complex and challenging, then what? There are, on a simplified level, two options:
- Avoid or minimize
- Learn and engage
In the first option, avoid or minimize, research leaders could remain, or grow, fearful of the messiness and potential pitfalls of getting too close to, or spending too much time at, this interface. They could view the interface as a black box and try to minimize the activities in which they engage that require spending time and expending effort at the interface.
Research leaders have a lot of potential activities and roles on which they can focus their attention, time, and energy, so when choosing, they could choose to avoid this challenging, complex interface, either consciously or subconsciously. They might even justify the selection by imagining the time they will gain by not having to spend so much time thinking and learning about the interface and coming up with ways to operate and make progress in its murky waters.
One of this book’s premises is that one clear way that research leaders can differentiate themselves — and thus enhance their value and service to their research organizations — is to strive to more fully understand this interface and to focus disproportionate shares of their attention and energy on areas that lie at the complex, challenging space between faculty and the administration.
In the second option, learn and engage, research leaders could strive to learn and further their understanding of this interface and the research strategy and management areas in which complex faculty/administration interfaces are encountered. They could engage in these areas confident that they can help bridge the interface by taking advantage of their experiences and perspectives from both faculty and administrative viewpoints. Research leaders could even view this process of learning about the interface and engaging in areas in which it is central as a challenge that they, as leaders, should be capable of overcoming.
This book clearly suggests that research leaders and aspiring research leaders choose this option: learn and engage. One of this book’s premises is that one clear way that research leaders can differentiate themselves — and thus enhance their value and service to their research organizations — is to strive to more fully understand this interface and to focus disproportionate shares of their attention and energy on areas that lie at the complex, challenging space between faculty and the administration.
In transition to Part Two of the book, four focus areas have been selected for exploration. The areas explored in depth in Part Two “live and breathe” at the nexus between faculty and the administration, and they represent important areas in which research leaders can differentiate their ability to catalyze research:
- Core research facilities
- Research centers and institutes
- Research development
- Strategic research investments
References
- Lombardi JV. How Universities Work. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press; 2013.
This material is excerpted and adapted from the book, Catalyzing Research: Research Leaders and the Complex Faculty/Administration Interface.
RAND HALEY has devoted his career to helping organizations strengthen their scientific research enterprises. He has partnered with leadership and faculty at a wide range of leading and emerging research institutions and led research strategy and management projects at over 50 organizations.
