1 / 31

Implementing and Evaluating Strategic Change

Implementing and Evaluating Strategic Change. Prof. Judith Welch Wegner UNC School of Law ABA Associate Deans’ Conf. 6/15/08. Some Key Questions. What do we mean when we talk about “change”? What possibilities for change arise in connection with the Carnegie Report?

Jimmy
Download Presentation

Implementing and Evaluating Strategic Change

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Implementing and Evaluating Strategic Change Prof. Judith Welch Wegner UNC School of Law ABA Associate Deans’ Conf. 6/15/08

  2. Some Key Questions • What do we mean when we talk about “change”? • What possibilities for change arise in connection with the Carnegie Report? • What are some top tips for change-makers?

  3. Talking About Change Your Thoughts Some Theory Some Lessons to Take Away

  4. Talking About “Change” (1) Take a moment and reflect: • When I say the word “change” what image comes to mind?

  5. Talking about “Change” (2) Take a moment and reflect: • What forces or factors have you observed that may drive change for your law school?

  6. Talking about “Change” (3) Take a moment and reflect: • If you could bring about one change in your law school in the next five years, what change would you choose and why?

  7. Talking About “Change” • Framing “change” is complicated • Image and narrative from past experience • Objective or perceived forces, opportunities, threats • Hopes for something different and better • But wait… there’s more… theory can help.

  8. Theories of Change: Terms, Dimensions* • “First-order” (minor, among individuals). v. second-order (thorough-going, paradigm shifts, transformational) • Targets of change: process v. outcome • Adaptive (responding to external environment) v. “generative” (shaped by learning within the organization) • Resulting from innovation (new, intentional, geared to producing benefits) v. dissemination (from elsewhere) or adaptation (response to environment) • Kezar, Understanding and Facilitating Organizational Change in the 21st Century (ASHE, 2001)

  9. Theories of Change: Drivers • Environmental theories (organization responds to external stimuli) • “Teleological” or purpose-driven (often driven by top leaders) • “Social cognition” (organizational learning, knowledge developed based on past information, multifaceted, recognizes need for interpretation, recognizes that individuals may not have a shared reality of experience) • Mixed models (Peter Senge, The Fifth Discipline): especially noted mental models (recognized and altered), need for shared vision, importance of systems thinking, crucial team learning

  10. Theories of Change: Contexts • Higher education is especially challenging: • Independent organizations and relatively independent from environment • Conflicting organizational cultures: collegiums, political, organized anarchy, bureaucracy • Core values: complex: academic freedom, shared governance, belief in access, value in specialization • Authority structures: reliance on referent and expert power rather than coercion, rewards • Loosely coupled: limited linkage between programs, change tends to be local, improvisational, slow

  11. Theories of Change: Striving for Prestige* • Institutional types: prestige, prestige-seeking, reputation-building • Forces compelling striving: competition, scarce resources, environment, seeking legitimacy through mimicry, academic reward systems, disciplinary ties more important than institutional commitments • Effects: students (contact with, climate, engagement, who’s admitted), faculty (teaching load, satisfaction, time on research v. institutional activities, work-life climate, emphasis on “stars”), mission (less on teaching, service, governance), resource allocation (PR, amenities, admin.) *O’Meara, “Striving for What? Exploring the Pursuit of Prestige,” in Higher Education: Handbook of Theory & Research (Vol. XXII, 2007, John Smart, ed.)

  12. Change: Some Take Aways • Be aware of your own premises/assumptions • Work with evidence and communicate it • Have a reason, share it, remember it • Recognize the complexity: no simple formula • Appreciate the interplay of individual and institutional dimensions of change • Remember that it’s a journey, not an endpoint

  13. The Carnegie Report: A Force for Change? Context Premises Findings Simplicity, Complexity and Missing Pieces

  14. Carnegie Foundation: Context • History: Flexner Report and others in early 20th century (www.carnegiefoundation.org) • Present: Program on Preparation for the Professions • Teaching and learning practices • In diverse arenas: clergy, law, engineering, nursing, medicine • With focus on connection between education and the professions in the world at large • Providing mirrors and windows with both “insider” and “outsider” perspectives

  15. Cross-Professions Framework (1) • Defining Professions & Goals of Professional Education • Fundamental knowledge & skills (academic base) • Capacity to make decisions under conditions of uncertainty • Capacity to engage in complex practice • Capacity to learn from experience • Ability to create and participate in responsible professional community • Ability and willingness to provide public service

  16. Cross-Professions Framework (2) • Three “apprenticeships” and “professional formation” • Cognitive/knowledge • Skill/practice • Identity/purpose • But “professional formation” is more than sum of these parts • “Signature pedagogies”: the power of teaching • characteristic approaches: visible, accountable, widespread • where theory/practice align • Surface, deep, tacit structure; but shadow • “Learning sciences”*: the power of learning • Novices to experts in contextualized settings • Tacit learning through observation, imitation, experiences • Thinking “like an apprentice” different from “like a student” *Bransford et al., How People Learn (2000) (National Academies Press)

  17. Key Observations: Law Schools • Provide rapid socialization into standards of legal thinking (epistemology & construction of knowledge) • Rely heavily on one way of teaching to accomplish the socialization process • Use the case-dialogue method which has real strengths but unintended consequences • Are underdeveloped with regard to the apprenticeship of practice and the apprenticeship of identity and purpose • Are underdeveloped in assessment • Approach improvement incrementally not comprehensively

  18. CFAT Recommendations: Integration as Key • Recognize a common purpose: formation of legal professionals • Operationalize that purpose • Offer an integrated curriculum • Join “lawyering,” professionalism & legal analysis from the start • Weave together disparate kinds of knowledge & skills • Make better use of second and third years • Make better use of assessment • Support faculty to work across the curriculum • Work together within and across institutions

  19. Carnegie, Simplicity & Complexity • Power of Simplicity: • Deep insights from across fields and links between academy and profession • Deep insights from focusing on learning and teaching, opening the way for faculty to reassess • Opening the way for exploration, and re-examination in a way that should be relatively unthreatening….

  20. Questions for Discussion (for example) • Do the characteristics of professions ring true? • Should legal educators prepare students for the profession(s)? What challenges arise? • Do the “three apprenticeships” ring true? • What are the implications of the case-dialogue method as “signature pedagogy” • Is law school about developing expertise? If so, expertise of what sort?

  21. Risks of Simplicity in the Face of Complexity • Limited “theory of change” • Limited understanding of institutional realities and differences • No “user manual” for bringing about change BUT… that’s where you come in…

  22. Your Thoughts? • Observations? • Critiques? • Questions?

  23. Tips for Change-Makers Personal Observations Research Insights Your thoughts

  24. Tips for Change-Makers • Know your context: qualitative, quantitative • Your personal assumptions, blind spots, hopes • Traditional narratives, sources of pride • Faculty beliefs and experiences • Student characteristics • Expectations: profession and university • External forces: e.g. competitors • Past experiences with change • Imperatives for change

  25. Tips for Change-Markers • Build shared knowledge • What are faculty currently doing with classes? • What frustrations do they currently have (may be an imperative for change) • What would they want to do if given the chance (e.g. mid-life transitions, changing scholarship)? • What are innovative possibilities happening elsewhere (may need to bring in first-hand speakers with experience?) • Make space and time for conversations

  26. Tips for Change-Makers • Give small collaborative clusters real questions and ask for meaningful answers: • What’s the point of the second year v. third year? • How might “partnering” strategies be used to introduce targeted skills training in range of courses? • What options are there be for “modular” or “inter-session” short courses? • How do leading practitioners, key faculty and students see the needs for education in a given substantive areas

  27. Tips for Change-Makers • Use “systems thinking” to develop creative answers: • Do students with analytical and writing problems know how to read? • Could students taking ethics in a given semester be given the option of a two unit supplemental course involving pro bono work to strengthen sense of identity and professional values? • Can problems with progression in student learning be addressed by new (non-faculty) forms of advising and optional “professional portfolio” awards?

  28. Tips for Change-Makers • Keep your eyes on the prize • Take objections at face value, try to draw out and really understand the bases for disagreements • Foster alliances across many sectors (including students and staff) • Develop facilitation skills so you know how to deal with conflict smoothly • Don’t let the perfect become the enemy of the good; and remember that most of the time, it’s not “all or nothing” • Make peer contacts to help you learn and share

  29. Tips for Change-Makers: Research Suggests* • Promote organizational self-discovery • Attend to organizational culture and institutional type • Be aware of politics • Lay groundwork • Use interaction to develop new mental models • Articulate and retain core characteristics • Connect change process to individual and institutional beliefs *Kezar (supra)

  30. Tips for Change-Makers • Your tips? • Your doubts? • Your questions? • Your hopes?

  31. Thanks and Good Luck • Please keep me posted on your efforts! Judith Wegner (judith_wegner@unc.edu) UNC School of Law, CB 3380, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3380 (919) 962-4113

More Related