Synthesis Presentation

1
AGAINST FUNCTIONAL SILOS

• A case for Collaboration
• Othman Zaimi

2
Outline
3
Outline

1. Characteristics of Functional Silos
2. Strengths and Weaknesses of Functional Silos
3. Innovative Suggestions to promote Collaboration

4
What are Functional Silos?
5
Characteristics of Functional Silos
One Size Does Not Fit All Traditional and
Innovative Modes of Student Affairs Practice
Kathleen Manning, Jilian Kinzie and John H,
Schuh
6
Characteristics of Functional Silos

• Example of Administrative Centered Models
• Evolved from Bureaucratization of Student
  Affairs
• Red tape between offices in the same institution

7
Characteristics of Functional Silos
8
Characteristics of Functional Silos

• ACPA Student Learning Imperative (1996)
• Fragmented unites that operate as functional
  silos that is, meaningful collaborations with
  the other units is serendipitous (p.4)

9
Characteristics of Functional Silos
The Handbook of Student Affairs
Administration George S. Mc.Clellan. Jeremy
Stringer and Associates
10
Characteristics of Functional Silos

• Chapter 16th The Dynamics of Organizational
  Models with Student Affairs Linda Kuk
• Functional Silo Model among the traditional
  models of student affairs practice (324)

11
Characteristics of Functional Silos

• Allegiance to the specific function area
  literature in lieu of broad spectrum student
  affairs literature
• Autonomy by function and often by space and
  resources
• Decentralization of supervision, professional
  development and oftentimes goals
• Competition for resources and student attention
  among departments

12
Allegiance to the specific function area
literature in lieu of broad spectrum student
affairs literature
13
Characteristics of Functional Silos

• As student affairs evolved into different
  specializations the literature and scholarships
  specialize as well
• Each functional area collects its own literature
  and encourages research in its own specific field

14
Characteristics of Functional Silos

• Generalist perspective
• Focusing on
• Student development
• Leadership skills
• Understanding of the higher education system
• Other skills applicable to all types of positions

15
Characteristics of Functional Silos

• Nature of ARP project calls for specialization
• Week 13 of SAA 761 Where would we like to
  present ?

16
Characteristics of Functional Silos
17
Characteristics of Functional Silos
Functional silos encourage and reward those who
specialize in the field...But will those
specialists manage to succeed elsewhere?
18
Autonomy by function and often by space and
resources
19
Characteristics of Functional Silos

• Functional silos requires their own space and
  resources
• Budgets are assigned separately
• Dwindling funds means not enough space or
  resources for everyone

20
Decentralization of supervision, professional
development and goals
21
Characteristics of Functional Silos

• Staffing and managerial needs for each office is
  unique
• Multiplicity of supervisors and managers

22
Characteristics of Functional Silos
Labor Intensive or Labor Expensive Donna M.
Desrochers Rita Kirshstein American Institutes
for Research (AIR)
23
Characteristics of Functional Silos

• Universities rely more and more on part-time
  faculty
• The continuous addition of non-faculty positions
  on campus
• Whether this administrative growth constitutes
  unnecessary bloat or is justified as part of
  the complexities involved in running a modern-day
  university remains up for debate. (p.13)

24
Competition for Resources and Student Attention
among departments
25
Characteristics of Functional Silos

• Competition is sometimes a curse sometimes a
  blessing
• Offices have to compete with each other for
  funding
• Territoriality and fiefdom trumps sense of
  common goals

26
Characteristics of Functional Silos

• Claims to have Successful Silos
• Programs operate on performance-based budgeting
• Admits that it undermines a unified
  institutional brand

27
Characteristics of Functional Silos
28
Strengths and Weaknesses
29
Strengths and Weaknesses

• Mitigated strengths and clear weaknesses

30
Strengths and Weaknesses

• Staff member expertise
• Specializing makes us good at what we do
• Specializing prevents us from developing global
  skills

31
Strengths and Weaknesses

• Stand-alone budgets
• Management of budget increases survival in bad
  times
• Stand-alone means easy to cut

32
Strengths and Weaknesses

• Organizational clarity
• Easy to see who does what from the inside
• Students dont see it as silos, they see it as
  one unnecessarily complicated entity

33
The problems
34
Strengths and Weaknesses

• How do we avoid specialization and increase
  understanding of other functional areas?
• How do we avoid waste of resources as each office
  requires more of the same?
• How do we form supervisors being in charge of
  uniting offices under a common mission?
• How do we avoid creating competition between
  offices that are in the end part of the same
  family?

35
The solution
36
Strengths and Weaknesses

• Collaboration

37
Innovative Suggestions to promote Collaboration
38
Promoting Collaboration

• The Shifting Role of University Systems Steven
  Mintz
• Allocating capital and operational funds
• Auditing campus expenditures
• Establishing uniform rules regarding governance,
  personnel, academic and student issues
• Providing shared services
• Setting system wide priorities

39
Promoting Collaboration

• Kuk(2009) suggests committees, task forces, work
  groups and other functional teams to
• Enhance communication and to work
  collaboratively across units and department
  boundaries (315)

40
Promoting Collaboration

• UWEC example Immigration Series for
  Non-International Student Advisers
• A team composed of Advising, Career Services,
  Office Support and Student Workers

41
Promoting Collaboration

• The structure is short-lived and is not imbedded
  into the fabric of the organization (Kuk, 2009,
  p.315)
• Highlighting best practices in innovative
  collaboration

42
Promoting Collaboration
43
Promoting Collaboration

• Revamping of traditional views of leadership
• Leaders are now the individuals who have
• superior technical, disciplinary and
  job-specific knowledge and sill (p.14)

44
Promoting Collaboration
Ruben (2013) p.15
45
Promoting Collaboration

• Personal Competencies
• Ethics, Enthusiasm, High Standards
• Organizational Competencies
• Vision-setting, Technological capability, Crisis
  management
• Communication Competencies
• Credibility and trust, Interpersonal relations,
  Conflict resolution
• Analytical Competencies
• Self-Assessment, Problem-definition, Review and
  analysis of results

46
Promoting Collaboration
Next-Generation Advising David Attis and
Collaborators The Advisory Board Company,
Washington DC
47
Promoting Collaboration

• Problem
• Typical career planning checklist too vague and
  not synchronized with academic advising
• Solutions
• Discipline-Specific Cocurricular Maps

48
Promoting Collaboration
Next-Generation Advising (p.65)
49
Promoting Collaboration

• One seamless map that requires collaboration
  between the different offices
• Access to the map from multiple sources including
  information booths, recruiting events and online

50
Promoting Collaboration

• Problem
• Separation of academic advising and Career
  advising meetings
• Solutions
• Hybrid Advisors positions

51
Promoting Collaboration
Next-Generation Advising (p.68)
52
Promoting Collaboration

• As Academic advisors leave, they are replaced
  incrementally by hybrid advisors
• Initial training investment is high but it offers
  potential for long term savings
• First-year retention increased by 4 in
  2007-2008

53
Promoting Collaboration
Operation Excellence Steering Committee (2010)
54
Promoting Collaboration

• Headed by the Chancellor and representatives of
  different groups (p.8)

55
Promoting Collaboration

• The objective is to engage collaboration in five
  major areas
• Procurement
• Organizational simplification
• IT
• Energy management
• Student Services

56
Promoting Collaboration

• Procurement
• Negotiating university-wide best-priced strategic
  vendor contracts
• Standardizing and managing demand for commonly
  purchased goods

57
Promoting Collaboration

• Organizational Simplification
• Create Shared Services for Common functions
• One-stop shops for office support

58
Promoting Collaboration

• IT
• Consolidate infrastructure
• Collaboration between IT services for common
  resources

59
Promoting Collaboration

• Energy Management
• Incentive system to reward smart consumption of
  energy

60
Promoting Collaboration

• Student Services
• Resizing services based on alignment
• Identify redundant functions

61
Conclusion
62
Conclusion

• Function silos are comfortable
• Specialization is not always ideal
• Collaboration to curb decreased funding
• Innovative ideas are the key

63
References
64
References

• Attis, D., Enyeart, C., Vlajic, J., Miller, C.,
  Tisdale, H. (2012). Next-generation advising.
  Washington DC University Leadership Council.
  Retrieved from http//www20.csueastbay.edu/oaa/fil
  es/student_success/NextGenAdvising.pdf
• Desrochers, D., Kirshstein, R. (2014). Labor
  intesive or labor expensive?. In Delta Cost
  Project . Washington DC American Institution for
  Research.
• Kuk, L. (2009). The handbook of student affairs
  administration In G. McClellan J. Stringer
  (Eds.),The Handbook of Student Affairs
  Administration(3rd ed., pp. 313-332). San
  Francisco Jossey-Bass.

65
References
Manning , K., Kinzie, J., Schuh, J. (2014). One
size does not fit all. (2nd ed.). New York
Routledge. Mintz, S. (2014, March 26). The
shifting role of university systems Web log
message. Retrieved from http//www.insidehighered
.com/blogs/higher-ed-beta/shifting-role-university
-systems Operation Excellence Committee. (2010).
Achieving Operational Excellence at University of
California Berkley. Retrieved from
http//www.uh.edu/af/budget/UCB.pdf