the 3rd avenue: Eckel. P. and Kezar, A. (2016) "The Intersecting Authority of Boards, Presidents, and Faculty," in Bastedo, M. N., Altbach, P. G., and Gumport, P. G. (Eds.) American higher education in the twenty-first century: Social, political, and Economic Challenges (4th ed.), The Johns Hopkins University Press.

2016/06/17

setting the organization's mission and overall strategy
monitoring organizational performance and holding the administration accountable
selecting, evaluating, and supporting the president (remove, if necessary)
developing and safeguarding the institution's financial and physical resources
serving as a conduit between the institution and its environment

benefit of lay boards; fresh vision, focus on critical challenge, critique from knowledgeable outsider, illuminate old problems
ineffectual board; dissatisfied with their role, not confused about their role
boards should focus; fiduciary, strategic, generative

Exemplary; influence institution and interpretation (that define the reality of other organizational relationships)
Modal; manage institution, no affect relationship
Failed; develop a adversarial relationship

be visionary and pragmatic
have an on-campus presence, work externally off-campus
focus on immediate needs, and, keep an eye on the future
balance long-term patience with immediate intensity
appreciate and understand complexity of the job, the institution, the environment, and, keep things simple
exude confidence, and, have humility

faculty senate; emerged after WW2 <- faculty = professional, professional should have direct input into overall organizational decisions + overarch admin and academics
research university = freedom and autonomy, less selective = restraints and involvement in governance
senates; exert leadership potential, play in university decision making

4 categories by Birnbaum; bureaucratic, collegial, political, symbolic
5 categories by Tierney; directional, news related, ceremonial, conformational, decisional (decisional is important, role of the senate is making decisions)
4 types by Minor; functional, influential, ceremonial, subverted

new generation = no interest in participating in governance <- challenge to shared gov

presidential leadership; affected by admin routines, environmental pressures, political process (history and culture)
institution-specific context of leadership (=dynamics)

dual sources of authority; (1) bureaucratic structure and legal rights (administrative), (2) professional (academic) = high degree of knowledge, expertise
loose coupling; advantage in (1) able to respond more sensitively to environmental change, (2) promote and encourage localized innovations, poor adaptation from spreading to other parts of the organizations, disadvantage; admin leaders cannot easily create organizational efficiency
garbage-can decision making (organized anarchies); 3 conditions creates the dynamics

inconsistent, ambiguous, uncertain goal (may conflict);
core functions (teaching and learning) complexity
time and attention limitation
3 ways of decision making; (1) resolution (make a concerted effort), (2) flight (unlearned sets of problems), (3) oversight (too busy to participate)

spend time on the problem
persist in the decision process
exchange status for substance (individuals concerned about being involved, than achieving a particular outcomes)
put a large number of decisions on the table
provide multiple garbage cans
focus on small-scale change

transactional = focus on leader-follower exchange (resources, rewards, status)
transformational = leaders who interact with followers, (appeal to higher needs and aspirations), motivate others by connecting through higher moral purposes

cognitive theories of leadership; organization s consist of events and actions that are open to interpretation
team-based leadership