Leading Adaptive Change: Findings From a Four-Year Study of U.S. Colleges and Universities

• In Event: Thriving in Turbulent Times: Higher Education Leadership at a Crossroads

Short Description

The goal of this research was to study the environmental characteristics of exemplar institutions that have demonstrated characteristics of the adaptive change model. A total of 44 executive leaders, administrators, faculty, and staff participated in research interviews. The presenters will share findings, themes, and five recommendations for practice.

Detailed Abstract

Multiple market forces have converged to significantly impact the environment in which colleges and universities operate, resulting in pressing challenges for administrators and faculty in attempting to achieve institutional missions. Higher education leaders, politicians, students, and the media frequently confront such issues of common concern as institutional funding models, costs and debt loads for students, retention and graduation rates, and increasing demands for a more relevant education (Blumenstyk, 2014; Kezar, 2009). Many higher education leaders have recognized the need to successfully implement change efforts, yet colleges and universities are often perceived as resistant to change (Blumenstyk, 2014; Selingo, 2013; Zemsky, 2013). The purpose of this research study was to better understand the environmental characteristics of exemplar institutions that have consistently created and implemented adaptive solutions to significant challenges.

In a market environment of increasing costs, changing student demographics, and increased scrutiny and accountability, the pressures confronting higher education institutions present an adaptive challenge, defined as maintaining audacious aspirations amid difficult realities (Heifetz et al., 2009). An adaptive challenge is momentous enough that current capabilities will not allow resolution, so transformation is required (Kegan & Lahey, 2009). Adaptive challenges are the product of significant changes within societies, markets, customers, and competition and result in the need for organizations to refine values, create new strategies, and learn innovative ways to operate. Successful adaptive change is required when deeply held beliefs are challenged, previously successful values and approaches become less relevant, or when competing perspectives have emerged (Heifetz & Laurie, 1997). Adaptive challenges are not easily solved by technical expertise or authoritative edict, even if those involved in the situation would prefer a clear set of guidelines or answers (Heifetz et al., 2009). Organizations unable to respond and adapt to these challenges often face the potential for disruption or extinction (Heifetz & Laurie, 1997).

Adaptive change often requires implementing new roles or making significant changes to values, beliefs, habits, relationships, behaviors, and approaches to work that necessitate challenging the routines that have been developed and commonly accepted (Heifetz & Laurie, 1997; Heifetz & Linsky, 2004). Adaptive change also involves the acquisition and implementation of new knowledge (Heifetz et al., 2009) to identify potential solutions and demands a willingness by people throughout the organization to change (Wagner & Kegan, 2006). Identifying such solutions requires the input, creativity, expertise, and collaboration of employees at all levels of an organization, rather than relying solely on people in leadership positions (Heifetz & Laurie, 1997; Heifetz & Linsky, 2004; Heifetz et al., 2009). Finally, adaptive challenges by their nature are difficult to resolve, although people often feel pressure to identify and implement solutions quickly. The goal of adaptive change is to enable thriving by building on the best historical approaches to help shape the future (Heifetz et al., 2009).

The goal of this research was to study the environmental characteristics of exemplar institutions that have demonstrated characteristics of the adaptive change model. A comparative case design (Yin, 2014) was implemented with two institutions selected for their demonstrated ability to successfully navigate adaptive change on an ongoing basis. The primary data source for this study was interviews that were conducted during one-week visits to each campus. A total of 44 executive leaders, administrators, faculty, and staff participated in this study.

After the interviews were coded, the primary themes that emerged were that change occurred in distinct phases, a sense of urgency initiated the change, an openness to pursuing creative and calculated risks sustained the change, and defining organizational stories was integral to ownership of the change process. Three distinct phases of change were evident in these institutions. The first phase, motivating change, included generating a broad desire to pursue change efforts. During the second phase, implementing change, intentional and fast-paced activities were identified as contributing to the execution of a significant initiative. Administrators and faculty demonstrated a bias for action and a willingness to proceed with new approaches quickly. The success experienced following the implementation of initiatives contributed to the third phase of sustaining change in which there was a continued effort to cultivate an environment in which change could occur on an ongoing basis.

Based on these emerging themes, five recommendations for practice are suggested: (1) analyze and communicate about market forces; (2) develop a broad sense of urgency that relies on both fear and opportunity to cultivate a bias for quick action; (3) value mistakes in the process of experimentation; (4) cultivate risk-taking; and (5) repeatedly tell the story. Each of these recommendations will be the focus of specific examples in this session.

A key finding from this research was how leaders encouraged faculty and staff knowledge of market forces impacting higher education in general as well as the regional issues shaping the competitive position of the institution. One of the primary contributors to the consistent sense of urgency at these institutions was the increasing awareness of context among faculty and staff. It was also evident in these institutions that university employees understood that failure is tolerated, and even encouraged, because of the potential for new learning. New learning was promoted in these institutions by encouraging people to learn from failure and make improvements to projects, while also holding people accountable to improve. This willingness to fail in the process of learning and improving resulted from an environment that communicated a commitment to risk-taking. The challenges confronting higher education today require radical solutions and a willingness to attempt new approaches that represent fresh thinking for higher education.

In this environment of risk-taking, urgency, and learning from failure, it is vital for executive leaders to identify a compelling organizational story that confirms a collective identity and prompts action based on aspirational goals. The data from this study demonstrated the benefits when institutional leaders, particularly the president, develop a community story that reflects core values along with a vision for the future. Each institutional story in this study resonated with employees because it was true to the institutional identity but simultaneously provided motivation and propelled people into the future.

Participants

• Tabatha L. Jones Jolivet, Azusa Pacific University

• Laurie A. Schreiner, Azusa Pacific University

• Eileen Hulme, Azusa Pacific University