Nearly all college and university leaders want to foster more creativity and innovation in their organizations. Yet the concept of innovation remains nebulous and the conditions that enable it are not well understood.
Higher Education Leadership
Performance funding applies financial incentives to higher education, tying a portion of public institutions’ state appropriations to retention rate, degree completion and other student outcomes.
How should the civic work of institutions be measured and related expenses justified? And what does productivity mean when applied to a concept like the public good?
Time devoted to producing measurable products that reflect a return on public investment often becomes the most salient factor in assessments of academic productivity and efficiency.
To deliver a quality education in a budget-constrained environment, academic and financial decision makers must understand the activities, costs and margins associated with teaching at the course level.
Data sources in higher education are now more comprehensive than ever, enabling researchers and policymakers to conduct carefully considered performance assessments.
Policymakers should be at least as interested in analyzing productivity in terms of student characteristics and geography as they are in the productivity of institutions relative to one another and over time.
Perhaps because their daily work involves so much planning, many college and university presidents under-plan for the retirement phase of their lives.
Given the many challenges higher education faces today, visionary leadership in the sector has never been more imperative. Yet little has been done to define and develop the competencies public university presidents need.