I have always worked very closely with my academic colleagues, on whichever programme, or sets of programmes, that I have worked on. The change in team set me thinking about the qualities that are necessary for support staff within Universities.

There are some who will have you believe that the role of an administrator in HE is mainly data entry, with little responsibility and decision making. I have to say that this, in my experience, is not the case. In order to be an effective administrator, you need to have excellent attention to detail – it is likely to be you who picks up on little things that your academic colleagues may miss. You need to know your programme(s). I have learnt over the years that having intimate knowledge of the workings and nuances of the programmes you work on is vital. Each programme, or group of programmes, will have its own little differences – you may have a flexible part time programme. You may have a post graduate programme that operates strangely out of sync with under graduate programmes. Each student on the programmes will have their own set of circumstances that may effect them in assessments, and considerations will need to be made at assessment board time. It is often you, the administrator, who has some of this specialist knowledge. There are times when you will be the point of contact for a troubled student. I have managed to retain students on a programme in the past when they were on the verge of withdrawing, but was able to advise and suggest a suspension of studies as an alternative. This kind of ability is invaluable to a university and to a programme team (especially when numbers can make or break a programme!).

I have always felt that a programme needs a dedicated administrator – and the last two weeks have confirmed this for me. A collaborative programme is likely to have differences that a home programme does not. You are often working within more than one set of regulations – your institution, and the partner institution. These programmes can not be managed by multiple people. They need to have a single person who can truly get to grips with the nuances.

I’m hoping that support staff reading this blog post are nodding sagely at what I say. We are the foundation of the success of our institutions. If you are the type of person who does have attention to detail; who notices the little things; who works well to a structure that has deadlines, regulations and application, you will make an excellent HE administrator.

I have certainly seen it happen, and I understand the skepticism.  I have had every possible range of experience working with consultants, from the very good to the very bad to the simply mediocre and useless.

Why use consultants?

A recent (September 2010) CASE article by Andrea Jarrell called “Help Wanted: Making the most of consultant expertise” identifies the following factors to help universities (or any organisation, really) identify when they might need a consultant:

Four factors generally cause institutions to seek outside expertise: scope, know-how, objectivity, and politics.  The first two are fairly obvious: Is the job simply too big for campus professionals to handle in addition to their regular responsibilities? Is the expertise required to accomplish your goals lacking on campus? If the answer is yes to one or both of these questions, you need help from a consultant. Even if you have the time and expertise on campus to handle the proposed project, you may need the objectivity of outside counsel to ensure success.

I recently helped co-ordinate the work of a branding agency to help Wales’ newest university re-name and re-brand, and despite expected complaints from some at how much was spent developing a “logo,” I know first-hand how much work was involved from the research and benchmarking stages through to the advocacy and lobbying and internal communications and then the part that everyone sees – the brand identity.  It didn’t go perfectly, and everyone learned from the process, which is to be expected.  But I also know for a fact there is absolutely no way either I or my team or even a working group of academic and administrative professionals could have achieved the necessary output without professional assistance, for all the reasons listed in the article above.

Working expectations – beyond the “brief”

And now I’ve moved from briefing and coordinating the work of consultants to being one myself. Reflecting on my experience, I think the key to a successful working relationship is to spent the time at the outset agreeing the terms of the arrangement.  And by this I don’t simply mean the contract and what constitutes breaches, setting deadlines, etc.  But rather a very frank discussion about working styles and expectations. As one of my favourite teachers used to say, “you can’t staple your head to the paper.”  Meaning, it may all be “up there” but if you don’t spell it out, how can anyone possibly know what you mean?

So talk about preferences – email vs. phone vs. chat; experience managing these types of projects (on the client side) – do they need help and guidance?; pros and cons of being fully involved in each stage of the project; time commitments and availability; learning/thinking/feedback styles – do you go with your gut or do you like to digest and think about it first? And so on…this can take place before the contract is awarded even, so that both parties clearly understand what they’re getting into.

I find it strange that so much time is spent hiring permanent or even contract staff in terms of the application process and interviews, trying to figure out if the person is the right “fit” for the organisation, but the same types of consideration aren’t part of the equation in hiring a consultant.  It’s understandable, but I think both the client and the consultant would benefit from similar discussions so that the decision isn’t simply based on previous experience/recommendations or cost/benefit but rather on the interpersonal relationship the partnership brings to the team.

The (near) future of consulting

It’s a tough time to try to work with universities – with massive budget cuts, it’s hard to imagine that financial resources will be made available for consultancy-based projects. However, with the increasing competitiveness and need to source and develop additional revenue streams, given the above criteria, hiring consultants and interim managers is a logical stop-gap measure when longer-term funding is unknown. The options are endless too – it’s no longer just a matter of having someone come in and do a bit of research and leave you with a 100+ page report for you to read and implement (although if that’s all you’re after…!) but rather consultants can be used in house where staffing gaps might exist or to implement particular projects or to train staff on new ways of working – or all of the above!

The right partner can be worth their weight in gold if used effectively, particularly if flexible and as committed to the success of your organisation as you are. In this way, you are not chained to them if it’s not working, but if it is – the link is solid, and they don’t just walk away at the end of the project with no concern for the effectiveness of the implementation of their recommendations and ideas.

Over time these games developed and are now we have a regular booking on an outdoor pitch where we have our weekly “Staff versus Student” football matches, with both academic and non-academic staff playing. Everyone is welcome to play and it’s quite a casual (if at times quite competitive) affair which everyone enjoys. We often have up to 20 people per week coming along to play and demand continues to grow.

Aside from it being an enjoyable distraction for both staff and students it has greatly helped the working relationship between all that take part. Students no longer see the staff as a bureaucratic obstacle they need to overcome; they see them as real people who need to have certain procedures in place to do their job. Staff also have a deeper understanding of the students’ issues and as such can do more to help.

Walking around the university now, you will often see students chatting to staff about the previous week’s game or looking forward to the next one. Some of the staff who play are also non student facing so these events are the only chance they get to see the students.

When it started I had no idea that a simple social game of football would have these added benefits. I think it stresses the importance of seeing students as individuals and not just as problems as one can easily do when under pressure. Seeing students in a less formal setting lends itself to this very easily.

Although the football games that I organise have grown very organically it is very much something I would encourage others to create. I think any form of social activities where staff and students can come together away from their university would have beneficial effects on any institution, even if only in a small way.

A novel idea

If employees are required to spend a whole afternoon attending that kind of training, they might as well have some fun doing it. I’m sure someone has had this thought before.

With this in mind, the university took a whole new approach on equality and diversity training, bringing actors on campus to impersonate real situations that can happen in any workplace. These have to do with all sorts of uncomfortable situations including peer bullying, sexual and racial discrimination, autarchic management, prejudice, etc. Staff members were asked to sit through a number of short acts each representing different workplace situations. Each act was followed by an open discussion, where we were asked to give our opinions and possibly suggest ways of challenging problematic behaviours like those we just watched.

Was it fun?

Yes! For several reasons:

• A very innovative training model – none of the attendees had done anything like that before.
• Audience participation was encouraged and expected – and on several occasions audience suggestions were used to replace the original script.
• We felt like we were included in the action and were given the “power” to make changes and recommendations.
• Who wouldn’t enjoy a free theatre performance on an afternoon that they would otherwise spend working?

Was it useful?

Yes! The reasons for this are quite obvious:

• Diversity and equality are indeed key priorities in any workplace and all members of staff need to be aware of the relevant policies. Instead of filling our heads with useless details, we were presented with situations we had seen, or were able to see, ourselves in.
• By watching the acts we were able to see the practical implications of specific behaviours within the workplace.
• We were engaged in discussion among ourselves and with the actors, and a lot of useful conclusions were drawn out of this.
• At the end of the day, we had started contemplating our own behaviour in the workplace and challenging ourselves.

And that, I think, was the most important lesson we learned that afternoon.