DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 361 012 JC 930 378

AUTHOR Stevenson, Joseph M.TITLE Systemic Leadership Strategies for Community Colleges

Initiating Partnerships with Corporations andSchools.

PUB DATE Jul 93NOTE 17p.; Paper presented at "Leadership 2000," the

Annual International Conference of the League for,Innovation in the Community College and the CommunityCollege Leadership Program (5th, Washington, DC, July18-21, 1993).

PUB TYPE Information Analyses (070) -- Speeches/ConferencePapers (150)

EDRS PRICE MF01/PC01 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS College Planning; *College School Cooperation;

Community Colleges; *Cooperative Planning;Cooperative Programs; *Educational Cooperation;Educational Trends; Elementary Secondary Education;Futures (of Society); Institutional Cooperation;Leadership Qualities; Literature Reviews;*Partnerships in Education; *School BusinessRelationship; School Community Relationship; *SharedResources and Services; Two Year Colleges

ABSTRACT

Advocating community college collaboration withcorporations and secondary schools, this report reviews methodologiesfor undertaking "systemic leadership initiatives," or approaches tosharing resources based on collaborative networking. Following anoverview of intersector partnerships, section II presents quotationsfrom educational and management literature describing the concepts ofleadership, team leadership, partnerships, and collaborativemanagement. Section III, presents additional quotations to argue forthe role of systemic leadership partnerships in the reform,revitalization, and renewal of community development in terms ofeducation, the economy, and the environment. This section alsodiscusses resistance to collaborative partnerships on the part ofboth educators and industry; the role of the systemic leader inbridging the gap between institutional resources andcorporate/community needs; and provides brief descriptions of 15existing partnerships between corporations and educationalinstitutions. Section IV describes prototype initiatives for programdelivery between elementary educational institutions andcolleges/universities, including five faculty-centered initiatives,four student-centered initiatives, and four business and technologybased initiatives. A discussion of systemic planning and autonomy isalso included. The final sectio, outlines elemental changes in thetransition from traditional management/leadership approaches tosystemic leadership initiatives. (PAA)

***********************************************************************Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made

from the original document.***********************A***********************************************

C4

C)

ODCI

0 Systemic Leadership Strategies for Community CollegesInitiating Partnerships with Corporations and Schools

by

Joseph M. Stevenson, PhDSuperintendent of Schools (Acting)

Pleasantville Public SchoolsPleasantville, New Jersey 08232-3198

609-383-6810609-383-6840

The 1993 Leadership 2000 National ConferenceThe League for Innovation in the Community Colleges

Washington, D.C.

A body is not a single organ, but many.If one organ suffers, all suffer together. If one

flourishes, then all rejoice together.-Corinthians, New English Bible

"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY

J. M. Stevenson

TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)."

July, 1993

BEST COPY

U.S. DEPARTMENT Of EDUCATIONOthce or Educational Research and Improvement

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC)

ID his document has been reproduCed esreceived from the person or organizationoriginating itMinor changes have ben mad* to Improvereproduction duality

Ponta of view or opinions stated in this docu-ment do not necessaniy represent otticmlOE RI poithor. or ooltcy

Section I Purpose and Overview

Welcome colleagues to this prestigious "Leadership 2000"Conference in Washington. As a graduate of the 1988 League ofInnovation Leadership Institute, I am excited about returning tothe League to discuss school-collaboration with corporations andschools. I would like to begin my overview today by reading thefollowing statistical data to you concerning education, theeconomy, and the environment.

"By 1999 our urban population willreach 250 million; urban wealthwill increase fourfold, and theaverage family income will be muchhigher,' even in today's purchasingpower. To build for that growth,3,500 billion must be found; 1,500billion for new housing; 1,000billion for streets, highways, masstransporation, parking, hospitals,schools and colleges, sewers andsewage disposal and water supply;1,000 billion for commercial,industrial and utilitiesconstruction."

This quote was made in Newsweek nearly 25 years ago and wascited by Featherstone with Michigan State University (1968) inhis essay on future relationships between urban schools andhigher education. This reference had implications foreducational, economic and environmental development then in the1960s; and it continues to have implications now in the 1990s.These type of implications drive our needs as educators to beeffective systemic leaders.

I was very pleased to recently receive an invitation fromDr. Terry O'Banion with the League for Innovation, to providethis concept paper on systemic partnerships between schools andcommunity colleges. You will note that much of what I amadvocating is modeled after the partnership initiative betweenthe Pueblo Public School District and the University of SouthernColorado. I urge you to also view "The High School/CommunityCollege Connection" produced by Dale Purnell several years ago.

Let me begin by stating that some of my remarks areexcerpted from the other following documents that are availableupon request:

On Future Partnerships:

"Future University and Corporate-Business-Indqstry(CBI) Relations: Challenges for InstitutionalAdvancement In the 1990's and Beyond" (MiddleTennessee State University, 1988)

3

On Teacher Education:

"Bridging Computer Technology and Cultural Literacy forthe Future: New Direction Plaming for TeacherEducation at Stockton State College (1991)(See also Transformations Vol. 3, No. 2, Spring, 1991)

On Educational Collaboration:

"Toward Systematic Educational Restructuring: PreparingToday's Children for Tomorrow's Needs" (Chancellor'sOffice, Department of Higher Education, 1992)

On Children At-Risk:

"Public Policy in New Jersey: A Forum on EducationalIssues in the 21st Century: Children At-Risk" (SouthJersey Public Affairs Center/WTTH 96.1 FM Radio)

In all of these above manuscripts you will find a constantadvocacy for building intersector partnerships, promotingeducational collaboration, initiating campus-community linkagesconverging with systemic reform, and developing a vision for thenext century based on community-wide reform, renewal andrevitalization.

However, the purpose of this concept paper is to take adifferent approach, and review certain methodologies for movingforward with intra-institutional resource sharing initiativesthrough collaborative networking--or as I prefer to call"systemic leadership initiatives." I will begin by identifyingrecent comments on leadership and partnerships, then close withsome examples of prototype initiatives and visionary paradigms.You will note that there is particular focus on "teaming","collaboration", "interdependence", "interconnectness","alliance," "community" and "cohesiveness". These contemporaryterms not only describe future management paradigms; they alsoprovide the constructs for community college educators preparingfor the complexities of the next century.

After reading this paper, I hope I have convinced comMunitycollege leaders to first design the mechanism for connectingeducational communities through systemic 'leadership developmentbefore going forward with a strategic visiun---focusing on themeans versus the ends of educational resource sharing andcollaborative partnerships. This document is subsumed withacademic citations to references for future research. I am alsoavailable to answer any future questions. Please feel free tocontact me by calling (609) 383-6810 or 383-6840.

Section II. Systemic Leadership andTeam Collaboration:

Beyond the Educational Enterprise

MacGregor Burns once noted that leadership is "the mostobserved and least understood phenomena on earth". In the widelyrecognized Stogdill's Handbook of Leadership, Bass (1981)identifies that there are over 100 definitions of leadership.Moreover, as Phelps (1991) of Colorado-based ExecutiveDevelopment Associates states, "leadership is not an easy conceptto understand...each of us has our own ideas about its meaning."Among the requirements for future leadership effectiveness,Phelps identifies "multiple skills and structures (such aseffective teams) to adapt to changing situations".

In attempting to define leadership and collaborativemanagement, several theorists and practitioners have made bothsimilar and divergent assessments. Gardner (1990) in his popularbook, On Leadership uses the term "community" to connect the two.He writes, "a good community nurtures its members and fosters anatmosphere of trust...members deal with one another humanely,respect one another, and value the integrity of each person.They both protect and give a measure of autonomy to theindividual. Everyone is included...the healthy communityencourages individual involvement in the pursuit of sharedpurpose." Gardner (1989) advocated earlier in Kettering Reviewthat "in vital communities cooperation, compromise, and consensusbuilding will be widely shared pursuits." Senge (1990) of MIT,in The Fifth Discipline warns, "alignment is the necessarycondition before empowerment the individual will empower thewhole team. Empowering the individual when there is relativelylow level of alignment worsens the chaos and makes managing theteam even more difficult." Both Senge and Argyris of HarvardUniversity cite the historical difficulties with "managementteams." Argyris (1991) in Overcoming Organizational Defenseswrites, "the team may function quite well with routine issues.But when they confront complex issues that may be embarrassing orthreatening, the "teamness" seems to go to pot." Senge alsostates, "all too often, teams in business tend to spend theirtime fighting for turf, avoiding anything that will make themlook bad personally, and pretending that everyone is behind theteam's collective strategy--maintaining the appearance of acohesive team."

This dilemma of team vulnerability offers the concept of"systemic leadership development" certain challenges perhapsunique to the educational enterprise--since the very nature ofcollaboration and teaming is very significant to contemporaryprogram design, delivery and success.

4

Other theorists have addressed team leadership as well.Bennis (1989) of the University of Southern California, in WhyLeaders Can't Lead writes, "where there is leadership, there is ateam, a family, a unity. Even people who do not especially likeeach other feel the sense of community." Nanus (1989) also withthe University of Southern California, in The Leader's Edgesuggests that "futures-creative leadership demands the willingand enthusiastic cooperation of people and other organizations injoint efforts to create something new and better...The Leadermust be able to inspire others to share ideas, trust, andcommitment; to communicate well and frequently; to seekcollaborative solutions to problems, that will permit theorganization to grow, change, and constantly improve." On theconcept of "people working together", Sachkin (1988) of BrynMawr, in Charismatic Leadership writes, "perhaps it is obviousthat only through people can any vision be enacted and thusbecome real...Nonetheless, many elegant visions fail to provideroles for people, ways to involve people and give themresponsibility, and methods for effectively ccordinating andintegrating their activities based on involvement, rather than onstructure or rules." Kouzes and Posner (1988) of Santa ClaraUniversity in the Leadership Challenge, suggested that "fosteringcollaboration begins with creating and sustaining cooperativegoals. The best incentive for someone to help yor is to knowthat you will reciprocate this action and help them inreturn...Cooperation breeds teamwork as solutions are sought tointegrate people's needs...the process of building and enhancingpower is facilitated when people work on tasks that are criticalto the organization's success...and when they are well connectedto other people of influence and support." In the Secrets ofEffective Leadership, Manske (1982) advocates that, "theeffective leader builds group cohesiveness and pride...successfulteamwork is exciting."

Finally, Brown and Weiner (1984) in Supermanaginq, refers tothe process of interconnectness which should be the basis forsystemic leadership development in urban districts. They write,"it is important for managers to understand that awareness of theinterconnectedness of all things, of the fragility of thestructure of nature, and of the fact that we live in anenvironment that does have real limits has a substantial andgrowing effort on the values and behavior."

With all these suggestions of the attributes for teamcollaboration and leadership, there would be little difficultydesigning and developing "systemic leadership" programdeliveries; despite the pitfalls identified earlier by Argyrisand Senge. Perhaps what needs to first occur is the "tearingdown of organizational walls" as suggested by Kanter (1993) ofHarvard University. She emphasizes in The School Administrator,of the need for "cross department" teamwork. She adds,"professionals need to remain adapt at their specialties, but

5

they also should collaborate to solve problems or manage changeprojects that cannot be contained within just one area." This isparticularly paramount for today's K-12, corporate, governmentaland higher education sectors.

Section III Systemic College Partnerships:The Magnet for Corporate-Business-Industry Alliances

In a thought provoking article entitled "Joining Forces:Business and Education Take on Competitiveness" Galagan, (1988)in Trainin & Develo ment Journal, observed that "when biz wizH. Ross Perot leads school reform in Texas; when MinnesotaBusiness Partnership asks the governor for sweeping changes inschools; when {former} Xerox chairman David Kearns calls publiceducation the major barrier to U.S. productivity, it is clearthat business is getting more aggressive about its role in publiceducation." Galagan adds, "Business and education have beeninvolved for decades, but as in any long relationship, the.!ynamics change., One of the partners--business--is going throughsomething like a mid-life crisis in its struggles with decliningU.S. competitiveness...Many business-education hookups go underthe name of "partnerships" and have been more neighborly thanchallenging."

Lusterman (1977) in Education & Industry, once noted that"industry...is no less a segment of the nation's educationalsystem than our colleges and universities, technical institutes,and other schools." However, as corporate entities continue toconstruct their own "educational segments" within theinstitution, the need for systemic leaders to meet newcollaborative challenges between their institution and CBIconstituencies, becomes more pronounced as both Aectors preparefor the 21st century. Fiske (1985) of the New York Times,recently warned that "educational programs run by business andindustry have become a 'booming industry' that now consti-:utes analternative, if nct a threat to traditional colleges anduniversities."

No doubt, systemic leadership partnerships are necessary forthe reform, revitalization and renewal of community development---educationally, economically and environmentally. Perhaps somevariables to ponder are as follows relative to employment andeducational training, resource allocation, labor trends,technology, and mutual productivity.

Morse (1984) in Employee Educational Programs: Implicationsfor Industry & Higher Education, offers the following reasons whybroad collaboration on corporate/employee education has nothappened:

6

1. "Educators argue that corporate trainingactivities are not "educational" in thetraditional sense. They do not offeracademically grounded material and should beconsidered only as training, not aseducation. That is, programs offered byindustry are linear and company-specific, andthey are not cumulative learning experiences.

2. Industry argues that traditional educationalinstitutions are not responsive to industry'sneeds and have not recognized that concernsof firms and employees, that educators arenot willing to adjust their structure to theinterests and schedules of working students."

Nash and Hawthorne (1987) in Formal Recognizing Employee-Sponsored Instruction, state that the "the ultimate extension ofcorporate educations is a degree-granting college. Generally,corporations have not taken that step, leaving credit and degree-granting authority to existing colleges and universities. Insome institutions or "corporate college". These corporatecollege initiatives will add another paramount dimension to thecontemporary scope of systemic leadership. It could be arguedthat they are the result of limited articulation of sharedresources in the past between college-corporate-communitysectors.

Murphy (1986) in Handbook of Institutional Advancement,whose corporate support research initiative contacted over onethousand of American's largest corporations, found that"corporations look for cost efficiency, local service deliveryand the ability to fill an unmet need." He concluded that(Withers, 1986) "90 percent of responding companies ratedpotential benefits to the employees as very important indetermining the amount of charitable contributions." Withers(1986) in the Handbook, similarly adds that "more and morenonprofit organizations are seeking corporate support in tryingto make up the amount that has been trimmed from the federalgovernment social-spending budget in recent years...Becauseaccountability seems to be an important emphasis, it becomesincumbent upon the nonprofit sector to seek out relationshipsthat capitalize on this enlightened self-interest." Heconcludes, "as one corporate chair put it, if you are notsupporting higher education, you are not minding your business."Broce (1979) has according to Withers (1986) noted that "theseconsiderations include direct benefit to the business,improvement of the local areas, improvement of society, publicrelations, personnel recruitment, and preservation of the freeprivate enterprise system...there are also many business peoplewho just plain care and are attracted to worthy causes." Hereinlies implications for environmental development.

7

3

In the 1990s and beyond, systemic leaders will be in aunique position to establish new program deliveries and otherinitiatives to satisfy the emerging needs of corporateconstituencies through cooperative ventures, alliances, andpartnerships with business and industry.

The future will require both education and corporations tobe more "interdependent" and less independent despite thecompelling forces of academic territorialism within thetraditional academy and the free enterprise nature of corporateAmerica. The future systemic leader will be, in addition totraditional responsibilities, charged with bridging the gapbetween institutional resources and corporate/community needs.However, as Fidler (1982) in New Directions for CommunilyCollege, observes, "before the gap between business needs andinstitutional resources can be bridged, educators will need tolearn more about business operations and the impact of a trainedlabor force on economic development in the college region."Responding to "labor force" economic development is just oneamong numerous initiatives higher education must challenge in the1990s and beyond--particularly in preparation for "Workforce2000" and racial, gender and intellectual diversity.

Ferrari (1984) in the National Study of Cooperation BetweenHigher Education & Industry, reported in his study several yearsago that many postsecondary institutions had a strong interest instrengthening their relationships with CBI sectors. Johnson(1984) citing Ferrari writes, "at most of the institutions in onesurvey, the presidents did not give very high marks to theirpresent cooperative arrangements with industry, but they did ratethe potential for increased cooperation during the 1980s as veryhigh. Moreover, this positive interest was evident at all typesof institutions in all parts of the country." Jaschik (1986) ofthe Chronicle of Higher Education, similarly reported that bothtwo-year and four year institutions were directing academicprograms and services not only to student clientele but business-industry clientele as well. Likewise, Gould (1988) of theChronicle reported that "more and more colleges and universitiesare turning to the business community for advice on a number ofissues, including even the most sacred of academic artifacts, thecurriculum." Honicky (1985) of AT&T in AGB Reports added that"the subject of corporate efforts between higher education andthe business world is suddenly quite fashionable." Sculley(1988) of Apple Computer, Inc. in the Educom Bulletin, laterstated that "we are privileged to live during a extraordinarytime...It is the turning of an era...The world is in passage fromthe industrial age to the information age. This a time ofprofound changes, in which the key economic resources in theworld will no longer be capital, labor and raw materials, butrather knowledge, individual innovators, and information.Technologies emerging today will give us the ability to explore,convey, and create knowledge as never before...This has enormous

8

implications for us as individuals, as well as for ourinstitutions...Our colleges and universities will take onespecially heavy responsibilities as we make this transition."The Northeast-Midwest Institute (1988) stated in EducationIncorporated, that "the search for better corporativerelationships has become a dominant theme in contemporaryuniversity management...Sputtering productivity gains anddeclining national competitiveness in world markets have madeacademic research in enhancing technological innovation andbusiness development. Even private institutions increasinglyview their own viability and prestige as closely linked withtheir local economies...Businesses are responding to thesechanges, sponsoring research and relying on postsecondaryinstitutions to meet training and management assistance needs.The historic dynamic relationships between academic andentrepreneurial "cultures" - with conflicting ideals,orientations, and goals - is giving way to a search foraccommodation and collaboration."

Some examples of other partnerships are provided inScholastic Interface: Educators' Guide to Corporate Sumgrt(1989). This is a two-volume set I strongly encourage communitycollege leaders to review. The examples are as follows:

Champion International give grants toelementary and to secondary public schools inlocal communities to develop new initiativesin science education.

DuPont, GE, and Exxon, seek out talentedminority and disadvantaged students forinternships and scholarships in science andengineering careers.

For more than 20 years, Westinghouse Electrichas sponsored the "Annual Science TalentSearch" which receives media coveragethroughout the country.

Campbell Soup's "Labels for Education" hasfor decades suppliee many schools withequipment in exchange for labels collectedfrom millions of households. Many packagesgoods companies have followed Campbell Soup'sstrategy.

Companies that have both a national andregional presence-such as fast-food chains,retailers, banks, and utility companies-leaveit to the local outlets to sponsor schoolevents and programs. For example, only thelocal Apple dealer can allocate Apple's

9

"10

resources to the local school in its area.Only the local McDonald's can donate food toa local school.

American Honda's "Odyssey of the Mind"scholarships are awarded to teams of studentswho compete to solve practical problems suchas how to transport a person around a pondfor $5 or less.

Apple Computer hired a group of top educatorsto advise school administrators and otherhigh level decision-makers across the countryon long range technology planning.

AT&T will distribute its free curriculummodule "Introduction to and History ofCommunication" to any school that wants tointroduce students to technologies such aslasers, fiber-optics and bionics.

Binney & Smith has been conducting artcontests and awarding scholarships Incooperation with the National Art EducationAssociation, Binney & Smith is providing"Crayola Dream Makers" teaching modules.

Colgate's "Battle of the Bands" and"Superstar Magic Club" classroom kits helpteachers motivate students to practice goodoral care habits.

Faced with a shortage of teenage labor,Burger King is attracting employees with ascholarship program. Employees can earn upto t)2,000 for college or vocationaleducat4.onal expenses. Some crew members,their children and grandchildren are eligiblefor $1,000 scholarships for post-secondaryeducation expenses.

Utility companies offer a variety of resourcematerials on energy consacvation.

Financial services companies support a two-year high school program. "The Academy ofFinance." It integrates economics andfinance curriculum with internships.

More than 200 Bank of Boston employeesvolunteer in schools. They participate inreading programs in area schools, construct

10

I i

classroom teaching aids, assist withproduction of yearbooks and newsletters,offer math and computer tutoring, help withmarching bands, and serve as mentors to highschool students.

Boeing is a co-founder and supporter ofTechnology in Education (TIE). This groupbrings together people from business,industry, public school districts, and highereducation. The program allows educators toattend business and industry-sponsoredconferences, jointly planned short courses,workshop, seminars, and credit courseofferings through Seattle Pacific University.Boeing also allows teachers to attend Boeingoff-hour training courses at no cost.

Section II/. Prototype Initiatives forProgram Deliveries Basedon K-12 - College/University Collaboration

in preparation for the challenges, complexities, butuncertainties of the 21st century, systemic restructuring ofeducational leadership will become increasingly imperative forall sectors. However, the following programmatic deliveries andprototype initiatives, as well as many others, could beestablished through restructured intersegmental collaborationbetween colleges and schools (based on the Pueblo/University ofSouthern Colorado model):

Faculty - Centered Initiatives

Science - Mathematics - Technology Articulation: The developmentof a collaborative team of science educators from K-12, andhigher education could focus on enhancing science curriculum atall levels. The goal should be to clarify the content andexpectation of science instruction, using the resources of bothK-12 and higher education. This could facilitate increasedparticipation of women and minorities in science, math andtechnology.

Faculty Exohange Program: The goal of this initiative could beto explore innovative ways to involve K-12, and higher educationfaculty in teaching "critical thinking" across all levels ofteaching at the elementary and secondary levels. Resources couldbe consolidated to establish a "teacher development" center,serving as a resource for staff development activities. Herejoint faculty could initiate dialogue, and complete training, forcurriculum transformation.

11

12

Student - Faculty Research Initiative: This initiative couldtarget educational research efforts that would involve K-12,students, with the aim being to increase skills, interests, andattitudes toward the discovery and application of knowledge.Here dialogue could focus on developing balanced cognitive skillsrelative to equity.

School-College Bound Articulzttion Agreement: This agrLementcould be developed by both institutional staffs representing thecurriculum and instruction areas, and aimed at promulgatingcourse sequences for college admission and/or early enrollment inhigher education. This could be initiated to recruit, retain andgraduate minorities and women in underrepresented academic areasof study.

Graduate Education/Leadership Development: This desperatelyneeded initiative would provide in-district graduate educationfor teaching and administrative personnel whose aspirations areaimed at advanced professional training and leadershipdevelopment for learning more about culturally diverse studentpopulations and challenges.

Student - CItered Initiatives

Educational Leadership Mentoring Initiative: Academicallyqualified college students could be matched with at-risk youth(male & female) accor.ding to interests, backgrounds profiles, andother educational factors for the purpose of leadershipmentoring.

College Student Volunteers in the K-12 Classroom: This effortcould bring qualified volunteer aides (such as teacher educationor other discipline students) into the urban classroom to workwith students and teachers at designated grade levels. Hereminorities and women could serve as role models.

High School Seniors-College Sophomore Program: This joint-initiative effort between K-12 and higher education could targeta designated number of courses at the high school level andestablish dual credit, as well as dual faculty status, for acurriculum bridge between the two sectors.

Leadership Institute for Elementary School Students: Thisinitiative could involve the development of an intensiveleadership institute, on the college campus for carefullyselected elementary school students for the purpose of providinggrowth, development, skills analysis, and learning diagnosistoward enhanced leadership potential.

12

1 3

Business & Techno?.o -Based Initiatives

Telecommunications Technology Initiative: Higher education andK-12 personnel could collaborate on resourceful initiatives whichexpand the use of instructional television, interactive video,and other forms of educational technology. Some extent couldevolve around the establishment of targeted "distant learning"initiatives with the use of cable networking and video recorders..

Shared Library Resource Collaborative: This initiative could beextended between the two sectors to result in informationresource sharing and better utilization of information networkingthroughout the joint educational communities. Here is anopportunity to utilize the available multicultural libraries toaid teachers with diversity-centered teaching.

Shared Business Services Collaborative: This initiative isparticularly imperative as both sectors prepare for an era of"doing more with less". Fiscal and business officers from K-12,the county, and higher education could develop collaborativeefforts to increase effectiveness and efficiency in deliveringadministrative support services to the educational process.

Community-Based Revitalization Initiative: This initiative couldinclude development of shared leadership development programs andresearch efforts, to measure and assess institutional needs andcommunity service effectiveness for high-risk youth--particularlyminorities and women. (University of Southern Colorado, 1989)

Systemic Planning & Autonomy

Both institutions must reach consensus and mutual agreementof long range educational objectives, outcomes assessment anddistribution of human, fiscal, technological and facilityresources.

Respecting the traditional culture and autonomy of eacheducational institution, this restructured administration couldachieve the following objectives (a) improve the academic andcareer accomplishments of the students in the school district;(b) strengthen the educational experiences of students at thecollege; (c) achieve cost savings in the district and thecollege, which then can be reallocated to educational qualityinitiatives; (d) enhance faculty development & alliance betweenthe two sectors; (e) establish new organizational restructure;and (f) build on educational interdependence within the continuumand academic pipeline (University of Southern Colorado, 1989).

13

4

Section VI. Visionary Paradigm Shiftsfor Systemic Leadership

Gomez (1990) in To Advance Learning, with several of hisother ^olleagues outlined very key elements for systemicleadership between sectors. He suggests that there must be"cooperation and collaboration; equity in interinstitutionalrelationships; shared goals, specific objectives and strategiesfor advanced learning; core administration team and identif-rirm of fiscal resources; student academic reinforcementprogramming; meaningful involvement of constituency groups andparticipants and; internal and external evaluation." Theseelements were reinforced earlier during the 1980s by Hodginson(1983) in All One System. In Management in Transition, PhillipHarris (1985) also nearly a decade ago identified perhaps thecompelling paradigm shifts for contemporary leadership. They areas follows:

Transitional Management Paradigms

FROM

RIGID, CLOSED-MINDED

PAST-ORIENTED

SHORT-TERM

QUANTITY-ORIENTED

HIERARCHICAL

COMPETITIVE-COMBATIVE

COMPLACENCY-ORIENTED

PRAGMATLCiMECHANISTIC

ENVIRONMENTALLY AMORAL

AVERAGE PERFORMANCE

RESPOND TO CHANGE(See Kotter (1990) inA Force for Change

14

1 5

TO

FLEXIBLE, WEN-MINDED

FUTURE-ORIENTED

LONG-TERM

QUALITY-ORIENTED

TEAM-ORIENTED

COOPERATIVE-COLLABORATIVE

INITIATIVE-ORIENTED

CONCEPTUALIZES/SYNTHESIZE

ENVIRONMENTALLYSENSITIVE

COMPETENT/HIGHPERFORMANCE

CREATE CHANGE(See Kotter (1990) inA Force for Change

In summation, I ask the following question: I wonder how wellprepared educators, environmentalists and economists would be forthe 21st century if systemic leadership was initiated during theFeatherstone assessment (opening quote) in the late 19601s?Where would we be now in 1993 as we struggle with acceleratedchange, advanced technology and cLltural pluralism? The abovehopefully provides the passage, parameters and premises forcollaborating with partnerships toward the educational, economicand environmental advancement on behalf of all Americans.

Thanks again for inviting me to participate in thisimportant and timely "Leadership 2000" conference. Best wishesfor a productive dialogue, as each of you struggle withdeveloping ways to enact strategic visions for educationalenterprises in the 21st century.

* Citations to references are subsumed in the manuscript.

15

1 6'

BioJoseph M. Stevenson

Joseph Martin Stevenson, the only educator in the U.S. to joinFortune 500-type executives for a prestigious "LeadershipInstitute" in Colorado, has served as a management consultant in25 states. He is an author, researcher, teacher, futurist, lecturer,consultant and innovative leader. He specializes in leadershipdevelopment, organizational planning, work force diversity and"modern matrix management," a simple process he encourages forbuilding connection, coherence, collaboration, and cohesion withina public or private organization.

After 15 years in higher education management in California,Tennessee, Oregon, and New Jersey, Dr. Stevenson eiperimentedwith a timely transition from higher education to the Pre K-12sector in yesponse to the escalating crisis affecting high-risk youthin the United States. Dr. Stevenson is currently the ActingSuperintendent of Pleasantvilk. Public Schools in New Jersey, anurban district between Philadelphia and Atlantic City. In thisposition, he oversees district-wide administration; personnelinstruction; curriculum; staff development; budgeting; planning;program evaluation; special services; community education; grants;guidance and alternative education.

Prior to participating in executive and graduate education studiesat Harvard and Vanderbilt Universities, Dr. Stevenson completedhis undergraduate studies at California State University inSacramento, and his graduate degrees at the University of Oregonin Eugene. He has participated in leadership institutes designedfor senior administrators at Stanford, George Washington andCarnegie Mellon Universities.

Disk: TestimonyFile Name:Sys12000.conf

16

I 7