The UVA imbroglio has the faculty up-in-arms, for apparently good reasons. The well-like president, Teresa Sullivan, was forced out in a palace coup. There was apparently no proper governance, and law suits may appear given the questionable procedures.
Perhaps all faculty members have had their share of run-ins with board members who are often successful business tycoons. Tycoons know a lot about running hierarchical structures where top-down decisions are quickly made and enforced. They know little about collegial governance. They generally don't understand the notion that science progresses through bottom-up experimentation and letting a thousand flowers bloom.
A Chronicle of Higher Education article by Jack Stripling argues that Sullivan was fired because she lacked "strategic dynamism", which is a code word for top-down imposition of a vision. Peter D. Kiernan, who until last week chaired the Darden School of Business' Foundation Board, let this cat out of the bag in a recent email.
Stripling summaries:
So what is "strategic dynamism," and who are its practitioners? Quite the opposite of the methodical, long-term visions found in most universities' strategic plans, strategic dynamism implies a near-constant "stirring of the pot" within an organization, explains Donald C. Hambrick, a professor of management at Pennsylvania State University's main campus.
That could mean wild changes in asset allocation within a company's investment portfolio or a radical alteration of a business's marketing approach. Proponents of strategic dynamism value the potential rewards of substantial, fast-paced change more than the stability of a gradual strategic evolution, Mr. Hambrick says.
There's another thing about executives who embrace strategic dynamism: They're totally in love with themselves, Mr. Hambrick says. In 2007, Mr. Hambrick co-authored a study that found a strong correlation between a chief executive's level of narcissism and his or her penchant for making frequent changes consistent with strategic dynamism.
The study used five indicators to measure a chief executive's narcissism, including the prominence of the executive's photographs in a company's annual report, the frequency of the executive's name in company news releases, the disparity between the chief executive's compensation and that of the company's second in command, and the frequency with which the chief executive uses first-person-singular pronouns in interviews.
For those keeping score, Mr. Kiernan's e-mail to Darden trustees contains 19 first-person pronouns.
Big egos provide the hutzpah to accomplish tasks. Big humility is needed to accomplish them well.
"Tycoons know a lot about running hierarchical structures where top-down decisions are quickly made and enforced."
I wouldn't know that is true, or not, among "tycoons". I am pretty sure it describes a subset of the business community. Indeed, my experience in the real world would suggest that model is in use by all kinds of individuals in all kinds of enterprises -- even academic ones.
"Strategic dynamism" is a faddish label for another form of stupid management touted as intelligent.
Successful management, in my experience, is all about blood, sweat, and tears shared with a common purpose to bring about extraordinary results no one individual could produce on their own. Everyone knows it when they see it. Does it have a name, or label, or even a footnote in a theorist's treatise -- I don't really care.
The good news, the silver lining, I feel it coming, is that good will come from this debacle.
As for narcissism, it is in full display, and not uniquely so by one person, Dragas, one group, the BoV, or one community (UVA). Best to keep that in mind.
Posted by: Eric Schmitz | June 22, 2012 at 12:39 PM
Eric, Good points and thanks for sharing. Regarding narcissism, the resignation of the Distinguished Professor, William Wulf, seemed a bit over the top. Why not hang in and help the team in time of trouble?
Posted by: Jonathan B. Wight | June 22, 2012 at 02:52 PM