I’ve been meaning to share this excellent resource by Kim Scott, the author of Radical Candor: Be a Kickass Boss Without Losing Your Humanity and Radical Respect: How To Work Together Better, as it is highly applicable to what ails much of higher education leadership.
In my experience, being bullied in some form is, unfortunately, an experience many of us who work – or have worked – in colleges and universities share. Some of it can be attributed to deep rifts and academic or functional silos between faculty, non-academic staff, and executive leaders, each of whom possess little knowledge of or show care for the other groups. But much boils down to a lack of fundamental leadership development, non-existent professional pipelines, and careless assignment of people to managerial positions.
Apart from academic hazing among faculty, it is, sadly but frequently, non-academic and lower-level staff members whose experiences range from being relegated to non-entities by higher-ups to being treated with outright disdain and contempt. Ironically, such treatment comes not only from faculty or upper administrators but also from within a staff member’s immediate circle of leaders, managers, and peers.
It is worth repeating that, just as with much of the overall dysfunction in higher ed, there is no rule in the universe that such behaviors are warranted. In short: It doesn’t have to be this way. What many higher ed employees experience day in and day out is by choice, not by necessity.
Returning to what Kim Scott outlines in her piece, I find that all five factors she mentioned are at play when bullying behaviors appear in higher education: unawareness of impact; misguided intentions; ingrained habits; power dynamics; and stress and pressure.
While the latter two are certainly a function of larger systemic and structural issues, as well as a combination of the other four dimensions, the others can be addressed by embracing some of the following strategies:
- Provide both individual and group-based professional coaching to employees at the lower levels of the institution (college and departmental levels) as a benefit and development tool – and not only to the executive-level staff.
- Help new or emerging academic and non-academic leaders at all levels by providing formal opportunities to reflect on both overt and covert biases and expectations of self and others, and the real-life impact these have. Create awareness of how good intentions may have detrimental consequences to the emotional well-being of colleagues.
- Use targeted training and development to transform traditional managers into servant leaders who embrace a coaching mindset, actively listen, and ask questions before they act in the best interest of their charges. Allow these individuals to shadow and walk in the footsteps of those they lead. The more they understand the lived experience of their team members, the more human-centric their leadership style promises to become.
- Address issues of both institutional and team cultures that prevent employees from feeling psychologically safe to speak up and provide honest feedback to leaders and peers. Bring in outside consultants and facilitators, if internal capabilities are insufficient. (Yes, this is a HUGE task and will require much time and concerted efforts at all levels.)
- Finally, do your best to build a culture of learning and growth that is willing and ready to question the status quo, put human needs first, make humility a central disposition and requirement for all leaders… and separate from employees who are unwilling or unable to embrace these traits.
None of this is easy or happens overnight. Yes, it requires resources, but perhaps not as many as you may think. (For a deep dive, check out my series on Agile-based transformation of higher ed administration.)
Be courageous and patient, start small, don’t scale too quickly, and see what works within your specific institutional context and environment.
FAQs on Ending Toxic Leadership in Higher Education
According to Kim Scott’s framework, what are the five root causes of bullying behaviors in higher education?
Five factors are: lack of impact awareness, wrong purposes, deep-rooted habits, power, stress and pressure. The last two are largely associated with systemic and structural issues, whereas the first three can be more directly solved by training and awareness.
Students who are international, gay, lesbian and those with disabilities are most likely to be bullied in higher education institutions.
Many of the worst affected are non-academic and junior staff, treated with different degrees of neglect or outright contempt. This may come from faculty or senior administrators, but it may also come from their own immediate circle of leaders, managers, and peers.
How can institutions remake traditional managers into servant leaders?
Through targeted training that enables managers to listen actively, to ask questions before drawing conclusions and to shadow those they are leading. We want them to get a real sense of what their team members live through, so that their leadership style becomes more human centric.
What is the need for psychological safety to deal with workplace bullying?
Psychological safety is essential if employees are to feel comfortable speaking up or providing honest feedback to leaders and peers. If internal capabilities are not sufficient, institutions may have to bring in external consultants or facilitators to help build this kind of culture.
Does it cost a lot of money to fix a toxic culture?
Not quite as much as people think. The secret is to be brave and patient, to start small, and not to scale too quickly, taking the institutional context into account.