Surrendering Territory

It is said that bureaucratic programs are easy to create but impossible to destroy. It is said that they develop a life of their own. There is some truth to this. As I have written before, when decision making becomes ‘policy,’ it becomes unowned—no one has responsibility for the decisions and their consequences anymore, they are ‘just following procedure.’

This also occurs because egos of those involved can feel failure if the program they created, manage or are part of is no longer needed, so they seek to justify its existence.

Paradoxically, programs and policies live on because no one wants to risk sticking their neck out to take responsibility for a potentially unpopular decision or other display of true leadership. Sometimes it happens out of a desire to save their careers because they don’t want to expend the energy to search for a new opportunity or are fearful of losing the security they have in their current position.

In both cases, the root cause is fear. Fear of losing prestige, a job, authority, influence and so on. Fear of taking a risk and making a mistake. Fear of making others angry or unhappy.

The motivation has switched from achieving a goal to self-preservation. This results in innovation becoming stagnation, and leadership degenerating into management.

Paying for Others' Mistakes

As I prepare for the first summer term of classes, I will be reflecting over policy changes in the syllabus that might be needed due to new loopholes students may have found. Life would be so much simpler if folks would just do what is expected of them. But that is one of the problems with humanity. We are anything but simple.

Innovation versus Selfishness

One of the blogs I follow is that of Seth Godin, a marketing ‘guru’. He’s a lot better as saying more in fewer words than I am. (Classic difference between a marketer and a teacher!) Today, his post is Jumping the line vs. opening the door, about the difference between inconveniencing others by jumping to the front of the line and jumping to create a new stream for traffic flow.

One is selfish and one is an act of service. In academia, we have no shortage of policy bottlenecks, and one’s effectiveness is often measured by how well they understand what rules to bend and how. Students in particular appreciate faculty who can cut through the red tape to accomplish logically simple tasks that procedures drag out. As committee members, we can re-evaluate where we really need policy and where we need competence in ourselves and staff.

What a ministry opportunity!

SDG

It's The Policy

If you teach multiple sections of a course like me, or even 1-2 large sections, your syllabus probably gets longer with the number of students with more and more legalese to cover every possible scenario, usually added just after it happens. Students today seem more able (and willing!) to find every loophole rather than just sit down and learn the material.

When they come to me with their sob story and demand time out of my busy schedule to resolve their issues, it is easy to fall back on policy and give them an answer based on the syllabus or university handbook or whatever, and wash my hands of the 'blame' for an unpopular decision.

When I do this, the Spirit convicts me, reminding me that >I< wrote the syllabus. I'm not some middle-management cog, I am the instructor of the course, and even if I were a cog in the wheel, I have been given a job to do--to resolve this person's issue. I am reminded, that in my case anyway, I am teaching because I want to help raise up the next generation of citizen-chemists. Policies don't mentor, people do.

Will I be professional enough, mature enough, to take responsibility for what happens in my course? Will I respect my students enough to listen to them, evaluate their situation, and make a fair decision, even if it is one they don't like? Am I willing to bear their displeasure or do I feel compelled to capitulate to earn their goodwill? The vernacular for this is being a 'people-pleaser,' and it is generally viewed with disdain. Jesus is not a respector of a person's self-esteem. He is a respector of truth, because He is the truth. As His people, we are called to do likewise.

Of course, just making such decisions is not mentorship. Mentorship is helping the student to understand the situation, and why the decision is a fair one. They are not always receptive, but deep down, they probably respect you more.

There is an 'old-fashioned' word for mentorship. It's discipleship.

SDG