|
| [ HERDSA ]
[ Proceedings Contents ] |
Most leadership and management development efforts in higher education focus on the provision of formal learning opportunities yet research studies strongly support non-formal learning - mentoring, structured placements, secondments and job exchanges - as a significant approach for senior executive. So why isn't our practice reflecting the theory?The drawback to non-formal learning schemes is that they are very labour intensive and therefore draining on the limited resources within any one university. The establishment of a regionally based consortium project of seven Victorian universities puts the theory into practice. By drawing upon their collective potential, a range of non-formal schemes create opportunities for self directed professional observation, reflective learning and shared developmental experiences with other accomplished colleagues. Such schemes allow participants to control the scope, pace, and timing of their learning to suit their own particular needs without the confines of often inflexible schedules that characterise formal programs.
Until recently, leadership and management development has barely existed and where present, has essentially been an informal process. Academic leaders - heads of departments, deans and deputy vice-chancellors - generally have risen through the ranks, learning administration on the job. In the United States, the first systematic efforts of formal leadership and management development programs began in the 1960s (Green, 1988) and in Australia, generally only in the last five years. The expansion of higher education that spawned new administrative positions, the growing recognition that systematic preparation for these complex jobs was desirable, and to a lesser degree the Karpin Report on leadership and management skills (1995), all served to focus attention locally on the need for this development activity. Mostly, efforts have concentrated on the provision of formal learning that are typically institutionally sponsored, classroom based and highly structured (Marsick and Watkins, 1990). They are the most visible, receive the most attention and the greatest investment.
In providing formal programs, there is an assumption that deep and long lasting learning will result. While research does show that learning often takes place in formal training programs (McCauley, 1986), there are few studies of whether this learning is transferred to the workplace. As Argyris (1990) suggests, new awareness does not necessarily lead to changes in our leadership behaviours. Indeed, evaluation of the outcomes of such an approach in academic institutions at an individual knowledge level, behavioural level or at the organisational results level is the one aspect of staff development where little work has been done (Kirkpatrick, 1994).
Studies of top-level executives reveal that they place formal training low on the list of factors contributing to their success or effectiveness (Margerison and Kakabadse, 1984; Glickman, Hans, Fleishman and Baxter, 1968). In her definitive text Leading Academics, Middlehurst (1993) deals mostly with type 3, the formal provision, but gives clear recognition to the potential significance of deliberate learning from experience through the non-formal approach of "integrated managerial". In a study of university executive development, Middlehurst and Elton (1992) found respondents made frequent reference to the importance of "informal managerial" processes, for example learning through observation or experience, and "integrated managerial".
In a separate survey of nine hundred managers (Wick, 1993), participants were asked to reflect on the key developmental experiences which had resulted in significant increases in their ability to contribute to their organisations. On-the-job development was reported by 74 percent (special assignment 25 percent, relationships 17 percent, and transfer to a new project 32 percent) as being significant. By comparison only 7 percent reported formal training and development and 19 percent reported off-the-job development (university courses, military service, personal and family trauma).
By drawing upon the collective potential of a far larger pool of people than exists in any one university, opportunities for self directed professional observation, reflective learning and shared developmental experiences with other accomplished colleagues becomes more possible. Such schemes allow participants to control the scope, pace and timing of their learning to suit their own particular needs without the confines of often inflexible schedules that characterise in-house formal programs. The cross fertilisation of ideas not only allows individuals to pursue their own personal and institutional learning goals without constraint but likely will result in the establishment of executive support networks with greater collaboration and co-operation between institutions.
Seven schemes have been devised and are shortly to be implemented between the participating universities. They include one-to-one support (mentoring and shadowing); individual job placements (special projects, job exchanges and structured placements); and special interest groups (networks and action learning). Each scheme, designed to provide maximum flexibility for the learner to participate as and when they can, are defined as follows.
Mentoring: a tutorial relationship between two colleagues where the more experienced teaches, guides, helps, counsels and supports the less-experienced in order to facilitate career development. (Burke et al, 1991).
Shadowing: the opportunity for a participant to be placed with a colleague in a similar or more senior role in order to observe that person's daily/weekly routine and work practices. The participant reflects on the experience through discussion with the observed.
Special projects: a focus on a specific task and/or outcome. Such assignments have a set time frame and the method and desired outcomes are negotiated with the participating university in advance. Projects can be in the leadership or management areas or can include emphases that benefit tertiary institutions through improving management processes. Involvement can be on a full-time or part-time basis.
Job exchanges: the direct exchange of positions between two senior managers or Heads of Department at different institutions, with similar responsibilities and position levels. During the term of the exchange, continuity of service is maintained but the participants are considered members of their receiving university and are subject to its terms and conditions.
Structured placements: a formal position with another university for an agreed period of time. During the term of the placement, continuity of service is maintained but the secondees are considered members of the receiving university and are subject to its terms and conditions. Salary and costs are the responsibility of the receiving institution.
Networks: common interest groups that develop a structure and process shaped by the needs, demands and expectations of the participating individuals.
Action Learning Groups: groups with a common need, issue or functional responsibility that collaborate to investigate and discuss real work problems or situations in order to seek improvement. Action Learning Groups may arise from within a particular network and the balance between action and reflective learning may vary between groups and at different points in a group's life.
The drawback to all non-formal learning schemes is that they are usually dependent upon the drive and motivation of the individual participants to create and sustain their commitment. Support is needed but it is very labour intensive and a drain on the limited resources within each participating university. To reduce these effects, a full-time Coordinator and a part-time Administrative Officer have been appointed for the project as well as 0.2 equivalent Liaison Officers in each university. The project is currently in progress with the development of a model and an operating framework for the schemes being finalised. Response to the schemes is as yet unknown. Evaluation procedures are being developed to assess the outcomes of each scheme and of the overall project. Based on the findings, recommendations will be formulated about the possible extension of the model to a national level and the continuation of the regionally based schemes after the life of the funded project.
In reality, development occurs through a variety of experiences - a combination of both the formal and the non-formal. The nature of academic leaders, particularly, necessitates flexibility to allow them to develop as and where they see the need. As Middlehurst (1993) suggests, leaders and managers learn both in a random and a planned manner with the individual controlling the duration and the path of the learning journey. The results of the project should assist us to better understand the role non-formal learning schemes play in leadership and management development and to help our practice better reflect the theory.
Burke, R.L., McKenna, C.S. and McKeen, C.A. (1991). How do mentorships differ from typical supervisory relationships? Psychological Reports, 68.
Glickman, A. S., Hans, C. P., Fleishman, E. A. and Baxter, B. (1968). Top Management Development and Succession. New York: Committee for Economic Development.
Green, M .F. (1988). Leaders for a New Era - Strategies for Higher Education. New York: American Council on Education.
Hoare, D. (1995). Higher Education Management Review. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.
Karpin, D.S. (1995). Enterprising Nation: Report of the Industry Task Force on Leadership and Management Skills. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.
Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1994). Evaluating Training Programs - The Four Levels. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Margerison, C. and Kakabadse, A. (1984). How American Chief Executives Succeed. New York: American Management Association.
Marsick, V. J. and Watkins, K. E. (1990). Towards a theory of informal and incidental learning, Informal and Incidental Learning in the Workplace. London: Routledge, 12-34.
McCauley, C.D. (1986). Developmental Experiences in Managerial Work: A Literature Review. Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership.
Middlehurst, R. and Elton, L. (1992). Leadership and management in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 17(3).
Middlehurst, R. (1993). Leading Academics. Buckingham: SRHE and Open University Press.
Mumford, A., Robinson, G. and Stradling, D. (1987). Developing Directors: The Learning Processes. Sheffield: Manpower Services Commission.
Wick, C.W. and Leon, L.S. (1993). The Leading Edge. New York: McGraw-Hill.
| Author: Dr Judi Brown-Parker, Professional Development Centre, Monash University Fax: (03) 9905 6801 Email: Judith.Brown-Parker@adm.Monash.edu.au Please cite as: Brown-Parker, J. (1996). Non-formal leadership and management development: Making the practice reflect the theory. Different Approaches: Theory and Practice in Higher Education. Proceedings HERDSA Conference 1996. Perth, Western Australia, 8-12 July. http://www.herdsa.org.au/confs/1996/brown-parker.html |