Friday, August 11, 2006

"Rise of the Corporate University - ASU?

The 'corporatised university' is obliged to respond to demands for greater accountability in relation to their financial situation, their core functions of teaching, research and community service and to document and report on these and other government policy imperatives, such as equity, minority representation and ethical considerations. With this obvious make over and blatant touting from president Crow of ASU to 'The New American University', (which is obviously to "CORPORATISE' it.....WHY is the ABOR, media, politicians and public not asking for strict ACCOUNTABILTY through its transition???????

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

2. President Crow seems to think that he is implementing a business / corporate model at ASU, but I suspect that most 21st century businesses and corporations would reject what they see. Sometimes he seems to be modeling the university after the corporations described in 'Good to Great' (by Jim Collins). But I think a case can be made that he is not following those models, at all, but actually is implementing a much older, outdated, and discredited version of “corporatism.”

Here are some examples:
Good to great company leaders “build enduring greatness through a paradoxical blend of personal humility and professional will” (p. 21) Crow may have the will, but there is no humility. “Level 5 [the good to great leaders] “channel their ego needs away from themselves and into the larger goal of building a great company.” Crow's ego beyond tolerability P. 21. Good to Great leaders also set the company up for success in the future by building successors from within. Crow is not hiring from within and has demoralized the infrastructure. Also (p. 32). The good to great companies typically promoted leaders from within; the comparison companies turned to outsiders, six times more often than the good to great companies. Also, p. 35. The good to great leaders “look out the window to apportion credit to factors outside themselves when things go well….at the same time, they look in the mirror to apportion responsibility, never blaming bad luck when things go poorly.” (president Crow blames the 15 years under Coor/Glick for most things. . ABOR might be interested in what Collins has to say on page 36: “…boards of directors frequently operate under the false belief that they need to hire a larger-than-life, egocentric leader to make an organization great….” Collins conclusions in this section (p. 39), “Level 5 [good to great] leaders display a workmanlike diligence—more plow horse than show horse.”

Michael Crow’s management and leadership are anathema to the advice given by Collins throughout the book). Collins compares a good to great company with a comparison one (that did not make it to “great”). “Whereas the … crew acted as a strong team of equal partners, ferociously debating eyeball to eyeball in search of the best answers, the … weak generals would wait for directions from above. “ The person who inherited the weak company described the management climate this way: “I came away quite distressed from my first couple of management meetings. Not only couldn’t I get conflict, I couldn’t even get comment. They were all waiting to see which way the wind blew.” (p. 43). And I could give you numerous examples of how president Crow verbally silenced not only faculty and chairs, but also the deans council which was once quite outspoken.