People make the campus go round: the importance of connection in universities

While the main thrust of this website and my own approach to enhancing how we work and teach often leans towards digital (more the ways of working than the teaching to be honest), today's blog is more about the other major tentpole of university life; the people.

We can throw all the tech we want at a situation. We can automate all the admin, work remotely, and we can collect all the data in the world to have a sense of which direction to travel in and how to get there. But without people, it's ultimately pointless and none of it will work or be worth anything. People are the centre of what universities are all about. To my mind our jobs is to give the young people that come to us the best opportunity to realise their own potential, to equip themselves with the skills to achieve that potential, and to go out there in the world and make a difference. We're (or at least I'm, as I don't want to speak for everybody) not looking just to provide the next workforce (in whatever sector that might be); we're looking to help send people out into the world who have used their time at university to understand what impact that time can have on the world for the better. That might mean becoming part of a workforce of some kind to then slowly chip away at something important to make it better. It might mean a meteoric rise to a position where they can bring about positive change they can measure in their own careers. Whatever it is, positive change can only come about through people interacting, challenging, collaborating, conversing and learning from one another.

So what does this have to do with universities in particular? Well universities are a little different to many sector themed institutions, be that retail, industry, travel, healthcare, construction, whatever. Universities are businesses in the sense that they have finance, HR, estates, IT, and income and expenditure (and now of course we also have a "product" in our teaching, and "consumers" in the way that paying fees somehow means the customer is always right). They don't have to align perfectly to national curriculums and exam boards like schools and colleges. They compete in their own sector, but not for a profit margin or a contract. And they have stakeholders like any business, just not shareholders and investors. But their core "business" is people, and enabling people to do and be better. Every area of a university, whether consciously aware of it or not, is working towards that same goal.

Now, many of these professional and support services tend to work in more of a "traditional" business model. The mechanisms and systems that keep the core business viable. And in these areas it tends to be that if you're part of one of those teams when you could be working in the private sector and maybe earning a lot more, you're there because you want to be part of the culture and the place that a university is all about. So beyond this, arguably the most people focussed area of a university is the student facing side; the academic, technical, library, and student support staffing groups. But without interactions between the student facing and business driving sides of the place, neither side can begin to learn from one another, tailor how they do what they do and how they work in their own areas to make the place as a whole work as best it can for the people it's ultimately responsible for; the students. It becomes a game of two sides, a place of two places. An "us" and a "them." And that kind of thinking does nothing to enhance our practice and ready those young people (and mature students - don't worry, I haven't forgotten about them/you!) to go out there and help build a better future.

And I think that is where a university make sense as a place constantly trying to perfectly blend the corporate and the academic. It makes sense that the Vice Chancellors of universities are often also listed as the CEOs - they're walking a dual line of being accountable for millions a year going in and out and meeting legal requirements, governance assurance, and everything else corporate while still keeping the small town of learning and living that is a university campus going as a thriving place that people (staff or student) want to be part of.

But because of that small town metaphor, it means that everyone within it, staff or student, academic or support, is a citizen of that town. They all have something invested in it, and in being in it. And that creates a situation where we need to ensure we constantly keep the walls of hierarchy, of staff role, and of voice down to a maximum height of a lovely back garden fence over which you can easily talk to your neighbour and keep your finger on the pulse of the neighbourhood. You're at a university (to work or to study) because you (hopefully) care about where you are and what you do. That means transparency, true consultation, and knowing your neighbours (I'll figure out how to get off this small town metaphor and back to the point in a minute I'm sure). In the corporate world where maybe the value of a person, of whether respecting them may come from what position they hold or what they wear rather than from the value of what they have to say or what they can do, management is key to keeping things flowing and to stay on target. But they often remain really quite separate from those working under them, cut off from the transparency and conversation that makes universities such a rich place to be a part of. And because universities walk the line between both worlds (corporate and academic), management is still something that's needed.

But let's not go conflating management with leadership. Don't get me wrong, if you're great you can be both. But those in positions of leadership in the university world are those who, ultimately get to drive what happens or decide what won't. Managers make that happen (and it's entirely possible to be in a leadership position but be more or a manager in how you use that position). Managers are critical, and you need groups of staff managed to keep things moving, to deal with issues, to handle logistics and achieving objectives that feed into strategies. But you need leaders to recognise the need for change, to recognise where that change might come from, to listen to those around them from all areas, and to both have and enact vision. Sounds hairy fairy doesn't it? Like the opener to any executive job description, right? "You will have the vision to take us into the blah blah blah." Corporate rhetoric that more often than not is evidenced by having "led" on something when in fact it was your literal job to be "in charge of it" and that doesn't always mean you actually led but instead maybe just wielded the managerial gavel. But let me explain. A colleague of mine (I daresay friend at this point?) who is quite senior, often lowballs their own abilities (half jokingly) at being to see how to connect people in order to solve a problem or deliver on a project or to enhance something. If anything their skill is vision, and they really are brilliant at it. They don't pander, they don't bluster, they don't hide behind a veil of strategic buzzwords and metrics. They talk to people, get to know them, to know what their skillset is (not necessarily what their job title is or role responsibilities are) and what makes them tick. Then when something comes up they take a step back, think through what is being put to them, and make those connections by bringing people together. And those people might be from wildly different parts of the place, at different grades. But just by putting those people together, even if just for a conversation to see what's what, those people connect and learn more about one another. And more importantly, about how the place works.

Of course there is the risk of going the other way with leadership in academia when it comes to the academic side of the institutional coin. Of sticking too closely to the hierarchical way of working. And it's here that the way of the manager masquerading as a leader can come about. Communication is paramount in a university (you have a lot of moving pieces in play, a lot of different groups and types of people to keep informed, and have to decide what needs more or less detail when you are informing them). So in that same way of thinking as the back garden fence, where having vision, driving innovation, and knowing what you're responsible for brings out leadership qualities and someone people can truly follow, being a leader in the academic sense means getting in among your peers. And it's this word, peers, that is key. Colleagues is thrown around a lot (you might notice I used it a couple times), but I always feel that it's fine as a word when referring to someone, but less so when addressing people. It takes the connection out of the equation, the relationship, the mutual respect based on who you are not what you are. I always feel "everyone" is more friendly, and sets the tone for a conversation between people who have a common goal and just happen to be at different paygrades or work in different areas. If you're someone who uses the chain of command as a way of passing on communications, or always has messages sent out to those you are responsible for via someone else then you're keeping yourself at a distance from those you're supposed to be inspiring confidence in following you to greatness. It's an approach that works for managing a situation or a group of people, and it does indeed keep things on track without distraction. But distraction is often where people come together and innovation is born. We can all connect and keep the campus spinning more smoothly if we use the advantages of university working life to make sure those walls between people and groups stay low. A silly movie that I shamefacedly admit I enjoy every time I see it, Down Periscope, has a great line that might apply here when it comes to making university work better by recognising the people for who they are and what they do, not where they sit or what they are. In it, Lt Commander Thomas Dodge (played by Kelsey Grammer) goes against orders in a war game, to which the admiral says over the radio "Watch it Dodge, you're addressing a superior officer." To which Kelsey's Dodge responds, "no, merely a higher ranking one."

I have to admit, being one of the more confident, (generally) light hearted, and *ahem* frank academics in my institution, I've been very lucky in getting to be involved in projects and panels and committees with a whole range of staff from across the campus(es). From student advisors and policy makers, from IT architects to cloud engineers, from admissions to librarians, from to project managers to directors, to pro-vice chancellors and governors. And I've learned soooo much about how universities work and how they can be better - but more importantly, how I can contribute to that and try to help as many people (staff and student) as I can. And who can help me help others by virtue of who I get to meet by stepping outside my academic exercise yard once in a while. It could be that's come about through my endless jokes and sarcasm, or being loud and opinionated, or maybe (and I kinda hope it's this one) through all that they see someone who simply wants to help make a difference, has a lot of ideas on how to do that, and can take that step back to look at a problem and evaluate it from as many angles as possible to see the best way forward (but it's probably just people thinking "he'll be keen, and he'll totally say yes to doing it). Whatever the reason, I get to make connections, talk and laugh and troubleshoot with people all over the place. And I'm grateful as sin for all those people in places different to me and in roles more senior than me, who saw something worth bringing into their corner of the university and to help break down those walls of the corporate. It's an approach I take with my students (in case you thought I'd forgotten about the very wards on which all this connection talk is based). They aren't student numbers, or groups artificially segregated by their background. They are individuals with individual needs, dreams, stories. And I'm not some high and mighty key-keeper of their future. I'm just a guy who cares very deeply about their futures and wants to do what he can to give them the best opportunity to race toward those futures. And that means making connections, listening to them, doing the right thing even if sometimes it might get me in trouble, and making the time to show to them that I give a damn.

Because they, and we, and the staff we never see and the senior staff we may not necessarily get to engage with, are what make a university a place worth being part of.