External Adaptability of Higher Education Institutions: The Use of Diagnostic

Interventions to Improve Agility

Rana Zeine, MD, PhD, MBA Assistant Professor,

Saint James School of Medicine Bonaire Caribbean Netherlands

Michel Lukas, MS AgilityINsights

Sphere Advisors AG, Zug, Switzerland

In Collaboration with Cheryl Boglarsky, PhD

Director of Research, Human Synergistics International

Patrick Blessinger, MS Founding Director,

International Higher Education Teaching & Learning Association

Survey of Higher Education Professionals on Organizational Effectiveness

Rationale To Cope with the Challenges of Unpredictability Requires: • Planning, Communication, Collaboration, Confidence,

Cohesion, Knowledge Management & Organizational Learning that impact Performance (Dool, 2010; Nold III, 2012)

• Regular Scanning of the External Environment (Morrison, Sargison & Francis, 1997)

• Internal Organizational Effectiveness (Szumal, 2001)

• Assuring Good Decision-Making at All Levels (Michel, 2007)

• Excessive Passive/Defensive & Aggressive/Defensive Cultural Styles, and Insufficient Constructive Styles Found in Higher Education Institutions (Sanilippo, Bendapudi, Rucci & Schlesinger, 2008; Zeine, Boglarsky, Blessinger & Hamlet, 2011)

Current Culture Ideal Culture OCI®

NOT-FOR-PROFIT

FOR-PROFIT

N=34

N=24

N=17

N=12

CONSTRUCTIVE

AGGRESSIVE DEFENSIVE

PASSIVE DEFENSIVE

50th Percentile (Historical)

Higher Education

OCI Results

Zeine, Boglarsky, Blessinger & Hamlet, 2011.

SUBGROUPS

PRESENTATION

Impact of Culture on Effectiveness

Effective, Creative Self-Enhancing Develop Others

Coercive Abrupt Cynical

Noncommittal Self-Protecting

Volatility

Vulnerability

Sustainability

Research and development by Cooke & Lafferty. Copyright © by Human Synergistics International. All Rights Reserved.

Confrontational

Withdraw

Receptive

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24USAIndia

UKAustralia

FranceEthiopia

EgyptMacedoniaCosta Rica

JordanWales

New ZealandCanada

SpainDenmark

Greecend

Number of Respondents

Higher Education Professionals Home Countries of Institutions

North America Europe India Australia Latin America Middle East Africa

OCI, n=63 OCI-Ideal, n=33

OEI, n=52

Organizational Type & Institutional Level Distributions for OEI® Respondents

Percent of Respondents 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Type of Higher Educational InstitutionFor-profit, Public

For-profit, PrivateNot-for-profit, PublicNot-for-profit, Private

Institutional LevelAssociate's CollegeBachelor's College

Master's College / UniversityDoctorate-granting University

Special Focus Institutionnd

DEMOGRAPHICS

Gender & Organizational Level Distributions of OEI® Respondents

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%

GenderFemale

Malend

Organizational LevelFaculty / Professor

DirectorDepartment Chair

Associate DeanDean

Provost / Dean Academic AffairsPresident

nd

Percent of Respondents DEMOGRAPHICS

Percentage Distribution of Number of Years Spent by Respondents at their Present Higher Education Institution

< 6 mo, 4% 6 mo to 1 yr, 6%

1 to 2 yrs, 6%

2 to 4 yrs, 19%

4 to 6 yrs, 23%

6 to 10 yrs , 19%

10 to 15 yrs, 6%

>15 yrs, 15%

nd, 2%

Years with Organizational & Education Level Distributions for OEI® Respondents

Percent of Respondents 0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

Years with Organization< 6 months

6 months to 1 year1 to 2 years2 to 4 years4 to 6 years

6 to 10 years10 to 15 years

>15 yearsnd

EducationProfessional degree (Certificate)

Master’s degree Doctorate degree

MD / PhDJD

Other

DEMOGRAPHICS

DESIRABLE

NOT DESIRABLE

HISTORICAL AVERAGE

13

18

Skill Variety Task Identity D

ownw

ard Com

munication

Goal Acceptance

Selection & Placem

ent Autonom

y Em

powerm

ent D

istribution of Influence Articulation of M

ission Total Influence O

rg. Bases of Pow

er Participative G

oal Setting Feedback U

pward C

omm

unication Training &

Developm

ent G

oal Difficulty

Fairness of Appraisal Personal B

ases of Power

Goal C

larity R

espect for Mem

bers Significance C

omm

unication for Learning Interaction Facilitation Task Facilitation U

se of Rew

ards U

se of Punishment

Custom

er Service Focus Em

ployee Involvement

Consideration

Goal Em

phasis Interdependence

Gap Analysis for Effectiveness Causal Factors (Totals) Desirable vs. Undesirable OEI®

Higher Education

OEI Results

Human Synergistics Inc., (2012, April). HETL-Keller Higher Ed OEI® Research Project, Report.

Gap Analysis for Effectiveness Outcomes (Totals) Desirable vs. Undesirable OEI®

2 1

9

DESIRABLE

HISTORICAL AVERAGE

NOT DESIRABLE Stress

Inter-Unit C

oord.

Role C

onflict

Motivation

Job Insecurity

Satisfaction

Intention to Stay

Role C

larity

Adaptability Exter.

Quality (D

ept.)

Quality (O

rg.)

Intra-Unit C

oop.

Higher Education

OEI Results

Human Synergistics Inc., (2012, April). HETL-Keller Higher Ed OEI® Research Project, Report.

External Adaptability (Agility) Scores Higher Education Institutions (pooled results)

0 1 2 3 4 5Female

Male

FacultyAdministrators

For-profit, PublicFor-profit, Private

Not-for-profit, PublicNot-for-profit, Private

Total

Mean Score ± SE Historical Average

Median, 50th Percentile

Constructive Benchmark

n = 8 n = 30

n = 10 n = 4

n = 20 n = 25

n = 26 n = 25

n = 52 Undesirable

Agility rather than disruptive change

• Agile firms grow faster and deliver higher profits (MIT, 2011)

• The ability to constantly adapt (Haneberg, 2011)

• Strategic sensitivity, collective commitment, resource fluidity (Doz and Kosonen, 2008)

• More coordination less control (Hugos, 2009)

• Innovation, organizations dedicated to the human needs of people (Hamel, 2012)

• Innovation and adaptation is needed for the design of systems (Hope and Player, 2012)

• Empowerment, authorization, trust (Appelo, 2011)

The need for a different management approach

The Performance Triangle: Dynamic Model

PEOPLE

C o l l a b o r a t i o n

LEADERSHIP SYSTEMS

CULTURE

SUCCESS

Bridge: People and Organization

Ideas, creativity, knowledge that reaches out for opportunities!

People

Future

Present

Past

A virus-free environment that

releases the productive

energy

Organization

Organizational Relationships to Achieve Flow and Enable The Inner Game

People Inner Game

Diagnostic Systems

Choice Rules Awareness Routines Attention Tools

Leadership Trust Interactive

How Do You Know Agility Is ‘In’ There? The test for client-orientation, collaboration, entrepreneurship

A: My organization delivers what it promises to its stakeholders B: Our leadership team shares the same intent, agenda, and norms C: Leaders productively interact with employees on purpose and contribution D: We make effective and fast decisions without too much bureaucracy E: I am able to apply all my knowledge, ideas, thoughts, and skills

To what extent do you agree with the following statements?

Instructions: Insert your score as Low, Medium or High into the Performance Triangle and color the box accordingly.

L M H

L M H

L M H

L M H

L M H

E

PEOPLE

C o l l a b o r a t i o n

LEADERSHIP C SYSTEMS D

A

CULTURE

SUCCESS

B

Green: Excellence Yellow: Mediocrity Pink: Failure

Green: Vibrant Yellow: Invisible Pink : Toxic

Green: Interactive Yellow: Busy Pink : Remote

Green: Diagnostic Yellow: Formal Pink : Defect

Green: Creative Yellow: Compliant Red: Checked-out

To Do

L

C o l l a b o r a t i o n

LEADERSHIP M SYSTEMS M

M

CULTURE

SUCCESS

L

PEOPLE

Mediocrity

Toxic

Formal Busy

Checked-out

Financial Services

To Do

M

C o l l a b o r a t i o n

LEADERSHIP L SYSTEMS M

H

CULTURE

SUCCESS

H

PEOPLE

Excellence

Vibrant

Formal Remote

Compliant

Education

10 Years of Data Ac r os s I ndus t r i e s

What Can You Do For Higher Agility? R ec onc i l e s e l f - i n te r es t w i t h t he des i r e t o c on t r i bu te

Do more of: •Trust enhancing dialogue •Interactive conversations •Relate people •Focus attention

Do more of: •Controls to enable focus •Routine to raise awareness •Rules to provide choice •Diagnostic, closed-loops

Do more of: •Close knowledge-doing gap •Shared sense of purpose •Purposeful work environment •Match support to skills

What Can You Do For Higher Agility? R ec onc i l e s e l f - i n te r es t w i t h t he des i r e t o c on t r i bu te

Stop doing: •Command on what to do •Detailed objectives •Interfering with work •Motivating people

Stop doing: •Formal bureaucracy •Resources on budget •Annual planning •MbO / Incentives

Stop doing: •Internal competition •Information secrecy •Tighter control •Detailed processes