Educational middle change leadership in New Zealand: the meat in the sandwich

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to report findings from a larger study into the role of middle leaders of change in New Zealand higher education.Design/methodology/approachIn total, ten middle leaders from the New Zealand higher education sector took part in a recent research project which examined successful change leadership in higher education. As part of that larger study, each middle leader answered questions about their views on being in the “middle” in their change leadership roles and their views on middle leadership in general.FindingsThe ten middle leaders all described their place in their respective organisations in terms of being “caught in between”, or “sandwiched between” senior management to whom they were accountable, lecturers whom they described as colleagues or peers, and subordinates for whom they had some functional and often moral responsibility. The paper discusses the perceptions of being in the “middle” and how change leaders reconcile their position as a subordinate, an equal and a superior. Insight is gained into how educational leaders reconcile their position in the “middle” as they hold management responsibility for both academic and general staff who are hierarchically, beneath them; lead teams of colleagues in collegial decision making; and answer to higher authority in the form of senior organisational leadership.Research limitations/implicationsThe participant contributions of personal observations and unfolding real life stories which meld personal common sense with local meaning have formed a unique local ontology therefore allowing for a deeper understanding of the contributing factors toward being in the “middle”. Some of these perspectives have been used by the author's own organisation in the development of leadership training for future organisational change, particularly those aspects concerning communication and participation that are tailored to meet the unique needs of management and staff.Practical implicationsFor middle change leaders the focussed examination of the working relationship between middle change leaders and staff groups might prove to be a rich area of further study. These relationships take a variety of forms, including where a staff member has risen through the ranks (off the shop floor as it were) to take on the mantle of leadership, or simply where there is a shared understanding based on subject or professional backgrounds which binds the two together. Further investigation into these relationships may provide perspectives that enable leaders to develop a greater understanding of how change occurs.Originality/valueThe paper shows how the participants locate themselves as being “very much” in the middle in terms of line management of both resources and academic matters and often as being caught between competing imperatives, institutional dynamics and institutional structures.

The Perceptions Community College Advising Coordinators Have of Their Institutional Advising Models: An Exploratory Study

“…As a member of middle management, advising coordinators often, but not always, occupy an institutional status below the position of dean but lead an academic or administrative department. This definition of middle management is consistent with the existing literature (Floyd, 2016;Marshall, 2012;Pepper & Giles, 2015;Preston & Price, 2012). However, three participants who were identified for this study were not only responsible for coordinating professional advising services on their campuses but also held the administrative title of dean because their institutions did not have a specific ''director / coordinator of advising'' position.…”

Exploring Key Competencies of Mid-Level Academic Managers in Higher Education in Vietnam

“…However, they can face serious and genuine challenges in becoming professional academic managers who can bring about the changes needed for institutions' sustained performance [22,23]. For one thing, there is an issue of role ambiguity and role conflict [11,12,[24][25][26][27][28][29] and blurring boundaries of authority and power [11,26,[29][30][31][32]. For another, there is an issue of training and professional development.…”

“…For another, there is an issue of training and professional development. Different scholars have remarked on this lack of research into the professional qualities and professional development for heads of departments [13,26,27,29,33]. Nguyen [24] particularly points to the Western-biased nature of existing studies on mid-level academic managers, highlighting the need to understand mid-level academic leadership in a specific context and tradition.…”

“…A shared perception now is that the role of academic heads nowadays is not purely operational or administrative, but "has evolved into something more strategic and empowering" [36]. Middle management is seen to be highly complex, multifaceted, multidirectional, and demands negotiation amidst networks of professional and power relations [29]. Meek, Goedegebuure, Santiago, and Carvalho [20] note that middle managers at institutions are increasingly expected to possess management capabilities, namely having the capacity to "define missions, objectives, and strategies", "manage financial and human resources", and "assume strong leadership" [20].…”

Middle‐Up Relations in Basic Education in Mexico City: A Challenging Opportunity

“…The current literature on the role of middle management in change contexts argues that, provided with a conducive climate, the hierarchical position of middle managers not only propels a more fluid communication flow (upward to top management, downward to front-line employees, and sideways across middle management) but also, given their closeness to the end beneficiaries, makes middle managers sensitive to the requirements and needs of local interest groups, the bases of culture and traditions, and the needs of the service providers. Middle managers (1) have first-hand data and information to negotiate the provision of adequate levels of human, financial, technical, and material resources to implement the reform strategies; (2) have a certain level of autonomy to counter and overcome unpredictable obstacles resulting from uncertain and constantly changing contexts and circumstances; and (3) have a certain level of flexibility due to the immense variability in the demographic, geographical, and socioeconomic settings that are characteristic of the education system (Floyd & Wooldridge, 1992;Guth & MacMillan, 1986;Harding, 1990;Ikavalko & Aaltonen, 2001;Kanter, 2004;Marshall, 2012;Oshry, 2003;Regn er, 2003;Rouleau & Balogun, 2011).…”