Academic Leadership

Chapter 11 – Innovator

223

external demands or evidence based theory (Raelin, 1995) may be delayed or
abandoned in response to the needs of individual staff members. Consequently, the
program may stop to evolve and eventually ‘die’, because students and industry will see
it as irrelevant. Coakley and Randall (2006) note that this is not adequate given the
higher education sector's increasing need for transparency and accountability. To this
effect, they espouse the application of Heifetz’s model of adaptive leadership (Heifetz,
1994; Heifetz & Linsky, 2002), to promote and guide change in the increasingly complex
university environment.

Adaptive leadership change model

Heifetz’s adaptive leadership model requires all parties with an interest in a change
process to become part of the leadership experience. This would certainly be the case
in a program or course review process. By having all parties involved, everyone is
responsible for considering external and internal requirements for change and for
becoming part of the organisational change process.
Most Academic Coordinators have the ability to manage the administrative issues
associated with program delivery, such as enrolment procedures and board of examiner
processes. However, adaptive problems and issues are much harder to resolve,
because they can have a significant impact on a variety of individuals and processes.
Coakley and Randall (2006) describe Heifetz’s adaptive leadership model:

• Identify the challenge: Is it one that requires a technical or adaptive solution? For
  example, if it is a technical issue such as an enrolment form problem, this can usually
  be managed by the Academic Coordinator and the enrolment office. If it is an
  adaptive issue such as moving to a new course credit structure and requiring
  alterations in content and assessment across the program, then clearly more parties
  are going to have to become involved in the process.


• Unbundle issues: Key issues must be identified and communicated to the
  stakeholders. In the case of the new credit structure, participants need to
  understand why the change is needed, how it will affect course delivery, and how it
  will impact on their teaching and assessment. Teachers who want to improve the
  quality of their teaching must be aware of their students' situations, and be prepared
  to change their teaching accordingly. Adopting such an approach to teaching in a
  program requires more than focused short-term projects.


• Framing the issues and focusing attention: Academic Coordinators must clearly
  articulate the key issues and develop a process to address them that remains
  focused on the needs of the primary stakeholders of the program. It is in this stage
  where any training and skill development issues will be identified and strategies
  developed to address them. For example, if moving to online delivery, there may be
  training needs in how to use the technology. Program renewal is a futures-oriented
  process of examining and renewing curriculum content and processes.


• Secure ownership: Deep and long-term change will only occur if stakeholders take
  ownership of the issue and develop solutions. Hence, Academic Coordinators need
  to develop strategies (with the help of the HOS) that get staff, students, and possibly
  industry people interested and involved in the change management initiative.


• Maintain stakeholders’ conflict and manage stress: Improving students’
  experiences of learning will require detailed reflective and interactive work by groups