Content area
Full text
A recent survey of 146 postsecondary institutions found that 55%formed change task forces in the past 5 years. This article presents a detailed case of one private college that utilized task forces as a key strategy during a comprehensive change effort. Analysis describes the promise and peril of these innovative decision-making structures. Unburdened by day-today operational issues, the task forces focused on the change agenda, provided a "change friendly" environment, and became powerful change coalitions. The case shows how parallel governance structures devolve into "shadow" governance structures. Included are factors that determine how task forces enhance or compromise shared governance.
Keywords: academic governance: shared governance: organizational change: procedural justice: leadership
Cohen and March (1974) have famously observed that efforts to steer an academic institution are as effective as driving a car skidding on ice. Colleges and universities are, by design and inclination, organizations with diffuse power (Weick, 1976). No individual or single constituency has sufficient power to unilaterally advance a broad-based initiative. Also, a multiplicity of interests competes for the time and energy of faculty and staff, producing a diffusion of attention (Hirschhorn & May, 2000). Together, these factors inhibit consensus building and slow change to a glacial pace. As Clark Kerr (1982) notes, colleges and universities often end up sticking with the status quo because it is the only option that cannot be vetoed.
Of course, colleges and universities can change, and the mechanism that allows for the purposeful redirection of an institution is its system of governance. As Henry Rosovsky (1991) put it, "Governance concerns power: who is in charge; who makes decisions; who has a voice, and how loud is that voice?" (p. 261). The three most influential voices are generally acknowledged to be the board of trustees (or governing board), the administration, and the faculty (especially full-time, tenure-track faculty members). Although diverse views are held regarding the balance of power among these groups (e.g., American Association of University Professors, 1995; Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges, 1998), a central tenet of "good" college or university governance is that all key constituencies ought to have some say in institutional decision making. That is, governance ought to be "shared." The rationale for this is threefold:
1. Colleges and universities...