Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
A MUST READ FOR ALL ACADEMICS! Now on Amazon Kindle. Click on Professor Goat above to be directed to the book.
DON'T BE A SHEEP
UT's Officially Disapproved Information Source and HISTORICAL ARCHIVE. The only source of truth, where Paradox Manifests: Hundreds of thousands of visits. Yet No One Admits to Reading It. Welcome to the "Grey Area" where "Unethical Utterances," i.e., criticisms of administrators, are commonplace. Make U.U. here where genuine civility still reigns, a.k.a., freedom......................... UNIVERSITY OF TOLEDO'S EQUIVALENT TO RADIO FREE EUROPE
Search This Blog
NEW!!! Hard Eight by Professor Extreme
HARD EIGHT
Hard Eight: Auto-Ethnographic Essays on Academic Culture Featuring the End of the Arts & Sciences College, University of Toledo, 2010
Daily Koan
Should the newly discovered black hole be named in honor of UT BOT?
Swamp Bubble
Do you agree or disagree that University of Toledo suffers from administrative bloat?
How do you feel about the proposed UT Degree Guarantee program? (Reposted to allow more people to vote.)
How do you feel about the proposed UT Guarantee program?
How would you grade the overall performance of the Jacobs' administration on running the University of Toledo?
COMMENT OF THE WEEK
Bloggie applauds this perspicacious observer:
"The administration is in a panic mode to implement controversial and irreversible structural and curricular changes campus-wide by early February fiscal plan deadlines with only the vaguest notions of their impacts. The plan is, according to an interview with a top administrator published in the most recent Independent Collegian, to cast out many seeds and "see what grows." This experimental garden, as most senators articulated in many different ways, seems a costly recipe for disaster. Utter madness. Stay tuned."
Print Version of Dictionary of Academia Available on Amazon.com
The profound ruminations of the goaty Sage are now available in this 119 page satirical masterpiece. See: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1480292494/ref=pd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_2?pf_rd_p=486539851&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=B009RC0SJA&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=1JV8N5BYAYY9WC9SJWD2
"Dictionary of Academia" Read it While it's Hot
A MUST READ FOR ALL ACADEMICS! Now on Amazon Kindle. Click on Professor Goat above to be directed to the book.
Comment of the Week
"This is that old tension between the corporate way of doing things and the academic way of doing things. In the corporate world, you sweep everything under the rug to make your b.s. as shiny, pleasing to the nose, and profitable as possible. In the academic world, you operate with a higher moral standard. Veritas and all that."
Comment of the Week of August 13
Re UT academic posers and hypocrites:
Have their checks calculated in units of postmodern theoretical currency and issued in photocopied legal tender notes signed by Walter Benjamin with a photo of Karl Marx and a seal stamped “In Derrida We Trust”.
Comment of the Era
Wow! Ain't that something.
-Anonymous
Comment of the Week
Mention goes to the the anonymous commentator of Feb 7, who, regarding UT President Llloyd Jacob's "Investing in Faculty" letter, stated: "If we could use the same criteria for 'investing in administrators' we could cut most of those positions."
Comments to HLC
Make sure you address your comments to HLC to the email address listed below in the "Higher Learning Commission Wants to Know" post. This may be the only chance you have to be heard. Bloggie hears that UT administration has discussed giving faculty "training" so that faculty members know how to "properly" talk to the HLC folks. How's that for stacking the deck? Does everyone get a little script to read? Make sure you practice before a mirror at being bright-eyed and bushy-tailed.
Comment of the Week!
Definitely, the Comment of the Week award goes to Anonymous 12:14 pm, Dec 3, under the "Higher Learning Commission Needs to Know" posting by Diogenes. Pithy and pointed!
--Love,
Bloggie
MESSAGE OF THE DAY:
DON'T BE A SHEEP
Independent Collegian Article on Dicey Administrative Spending
IC reporter Casey Cheap looks at bow ties, apartments and movie tickets purchased by UT administrators at university/public expense. See
TO CONTACT BLOGGIE . . .
Bloggie is always glad to consider submissions to this blog. If you have something that you wish posted please send it to:
ascbloggie@gmail.com
Letter and Petition from Foreign Languages Faculty Member
A couple weeks ago, at the beginning of summer break, we in the Department of Foreign Languages were informed that our secretary's position was being eliminated and that while she will not lose her job (she'll be transferred), that position is not to be filled. We apparently will be expected to do our own jobs plus what we can of the secretary's. That is clearly not acceptable, and so one of the steps we in FL are taking against it is an online petition now available for any who want to (including those who for whatever reason--not a registered Ohio voter, not a US citizen, etc.--cannot sign the petition against SB5), to read and sign.
I know not everyone on the blog will be interested in this; I'm not asking anyone who doesn't want to, to sign or even read the petition. I do think that there are many who would be interested and would want to sign it--if they knew about it.
It's scary to post this under my own name; I'm as afraid as anyone of repercussions. But this is simply too important to keep quiet on, and we have to do something! FL is not the first department that this has happened to, and it's almost certain not to be the last if we don't speak up in a way that the administration will hear us and in a way that makes clear that other people are seeing that it's going on.
Here's the link to the online petition:For those who can make it, there will also be an informational meeting--including lunch and petition-signing--next Friday, May 27 in FH 2420, 12:00 - 2:00 p.m.
I know not everyone on the blog will be interested in this; I'm not asking anyone who doesn't want to, to sign or even read the petition. I do think that there are many who would be interested and would want to sign it--if they knew about it.
It's scary to post this under my own name; I'm as afraid as anyone of repercussions. But this is simply too important to keep quiet on, and we have to do something! FL is not the first department that this has happened to, and it's almost certain not to be the last if we don't speak up in a way that the administration will hear us and in a way that makes clear that other people are seeing that it's going on.
Here's the link to the online petition:For those who can make it, there will also be an informational meeting--including lunch and petition-signing--next Friday, May 27 in FH 2420, 12:00 - 2:00 p.m.
Katherine Best
Wave of the Future or Merely Sometime Later This Week?
The Chronicle of Higher Education ran a deeply fascinating article called, "When to Dissolve a Faculty Senate." Apparently this is any time that it becomes "adversarial" to administration.
The online comments to the article are priceless.
Nemeth on Mammon in IC
David Nemeth's most recent tour-de-force
Professor Nemeth has another fabulous and timely article in the new and increasingly wonderful Independent Collegian. See http://www.independentcollegian.com/forum/the-kraken-attacks-1.2340091
Nemeth Does it Again
See the forum article in The Independent Collegian at:
Nemeth's New Article in Collegian
The Independent Collegian has run another of Professor Nemeth's fine and provocative articles in its latest edition. This one discusses the double-talk by mouthpieces for the current UT administration concerning the effects of and reasons behind so-called strategic reorganization. Make sure you get the latest version of Newspeak 5.1 if you want to decode what UT administrators are really saying.
UT Ranks 13th Nationally on Administrative Bloat
See Appendix B of the Administrative Bloat report posted on 8/28 for evidence, but UT now has a higher proportion of administrators to students than all but 12 public universities in America. President Jacobs has finally put University of Toledo in the top tier. With Strategic Organization he may be aiming for number one.
This Blog is a free and independent information source. Contributions and comments are welcome. Contact: ASCBloggie@gmail.com WARNING AND DISCLAIMER !!!! This blog is entirely non-official!! People may express opinion here, exercising freedom of speech and association.
Recent Letters from The Blade
Jacobs' arrogance is astonishing
Recently, President Lloyd Jacobs of the University of Toledo stated that bonuses were justified because his administrators "took all the risks."
As a professor at UT, I am outraged that President Jacobs claims that administrators take all of the risks. What risks do they take that the other faculty and staffs on campus do not?
Administrators are protected by state and federal employment laws and by their contracts.
When ex-President Vik Kapoor was terminated, he remained a professor with a salary near what he was paid as president.
As president emeritus, Dan Johnson retained a salary greater than his pay as president.
In the recent layoffs, exceptionally few administrators were terminated. It seems to me that low-level personnel at UT have far more risks because the greater proportion of the layoffs have come from their ranks. And they did not have continuing salaries.
President Jacobs' answer to questions on two occasions regarding relinquishing part of his bonus was to the effect that he earned his bonuses and what he did with them was his business.
Administrators do not risk their personal money in their duties: they use taxpayer money and funds collected through donations and grants to the university.
Administrators take home salaries in the hundreds of thousands of dollars and then add bonuses for longevity and whatever else the president decides is fitting for their contracts.
However, the lower-level personnel have much lower salaries and no such bonuses. Where is the risk?
It seems to me that these bonuses are convoluted: The lower-level personnel are taking the greater risks with no bonuses while the administrators with very rewarding jobs with little risk receive large bonuses.
Am I missing something here?
WALTER W. OLSON,
Mechanical, Industrial, and Manufacturing
Engineering,
University of Toledo
It's the same old, same old at UT
I could hardly believe the arrogance of Dr. Lloyd Jacobs, president of the University of Toledo, when a reporter asked if he would be willing to forgo his bonus in light of the layoffs, raise in tuition, etc.
His comment was that he worked for it. Is that to say that the ones being laid off did not work for their pay?
All I can say is, business as usual at UT. Some things never change.
SANDY FLICK
Rose Acres Drive
UT also has checks, balances
In response to letter titled "Professors must focus on teaching," I would like to point out that the University of Toledo operates on the basis of shared governance.
This means that faculty members participate in the administration of the university.
A focus on teaching requires faculty to address administrative issues such as policies, procedures, and yes, finances, because these all affect classroom outcomes. A university with solid and equitable finances benefits everyone, including and especially the students. Just as the U.S. government is constituted to have checks and balances, so is our university government.
The UT-AAUP is one of those checks against UT administrators who most recently have displayed more concern for their own profit rather than a concern for the common good.
LINDA M. ROUILLARD,
Associate Professor
of French,
University of Toledo
Quote of the Year (so far)
The following is excerpted from the recent UT AAUP newsletter concerning the official university response to news of the bonus scandal:
. . . . Either Jacobs is misleading the media or he has misled the Board of Trustees. President Jacobs objected to "the general tone" of the UT-AAUP Newsletter. Many persons on this campus object to the "general tone" of the Jacobs Administration. During his tenure as President, he has introduced an administrative culture of fear and intimidation. . . . A point of logic must be raised here, with all respect to UT AAUP, the conclusions that President Jacobs has (1) misled the media and (2) the Board of Trustees are not mutually exclusive. Both would seem likely given his considerable talent at spinning "visions." |
How to Contribute
The Blog is now under new management, a consortium of ASC faculty who pooled their longevity bonuses to purchase it from its original owners. Your comments are still welcome but look for some changes. Contact: ASCBloggie@gmail.com. Your contributions might include new posts, images, comments to existing articles/posts, concerns about process and substance at UT's College of Arts & Sciences. This blog is entirely non-official, for which you can be thankful, unless you enjoy reading self-serving bureaucratic propaganda, and is intended as a discussion and commentary forum for UT A&S faculty and community.
Another Claim and Disclaimer
A blog is a blog is a blog. Information, comments and opinions found here don't represent official views, instead they represent truthful and sincere ones. If you want the official line on things go elsewhere. This is a discussion and comment page. You may even read things here that you disagree with, and then, maybe not.
ASCBloggie
Google News for "University of Toledo"
Google News for "Higher Education Ohio"
Blog Archive
-
▼
2010
(179)
-
▼
September
(17)
- Just a few questions
- Worship of Mammon
- Chronology of UT Reorganization
- Saturn Reorganizes The College
- RIP UT College of Arts & Sciences 1909-2010
- Slides From Arts and Sciences College Death Announ...
- Sexual Harassment Policy
- Even Smaller Boxes
- Research About UT That Did Not Make The UT News
- Dean's Plan
- From the Chronicle
- Letter of Honest Concerns
- imitation
- Reorg/Strategic Plan Meetings
- ANNOUNCEMENT!!! The Journal of Administrative Anti...
- Organizational Communication at UT
- Confusion
-
▼
September
(17)
Links
48 comments:
Irony
Not irony. Commentary.
call me a xenophobe...but those aren't North American briefs. Are we now employing pricey European consults? Not a good idea given the exchange rate.
Concerned Alum
They certainly won't need ironing after this.
Are those Jakes undies?....Ewwwwwww!
I get it!
"Liar! Liar! ***** ** ****!"
That underpants on fire makes me laugh! It reminds me. Now the administration has no clothes! Everyone can see into their hearts. Is this “transparency” finally? By the way. Did you read “The Naked King?” What a story! The king and ministers were full of hypocrisy and arrogance. Like at UT a bit. “Give me a plan to get rid of A&S College!” says the king. “Here’s the plan!” say the ministers. They are scared to death because their plan is full of made up words and nothing makes sense. The king reads the plan. He doesn’t understand it but he doesn’t want his ministers or anyone else to think he is ignorant. “It’s a great plan!” says the king. He signs his name and prints ten thousand copies. Everyone at UT reads the plan. “What a great plan!” they all say. They are scared to death, is why. The king decides to put the plan on the Internet. But nobody is afraid on the Internet. “This plan is full of made up words and doesn’t make sense!” everyone in the world says. They all laugh. The king and his ministers are in trouble with the BOT. They have to flee in small boats in the middle of the night. A storm comes up and sinks all their boats. The next king is wiser.
Rush to change! Isn't that how we got into this mess to begin with? Didn't we rush through a merger that has cost us plenty since?
Now we are rushing to change A&S. We are rushing to change the university.
Don't we ever learn?
I would wait before proclaiming victory... indeed I think that on the 24th Big Jake will tell us that the College of A&S is kaput, finished, muerto and that we have to welcome those "new transformative sustainable forces that are shaping up our world".
Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.
And then afterwards Jake will retire to his farm for a burger and fries, to gaze awestruck at a chicken or two. The coolest of God's creatures.
And then he'll play a round of Grand Theft Gallbladder, thinking about how removing one is about as hard as an A&Sectomy.
Yr humble & obt
John Dickinson.
If one were to believe the street literature, our educational system is broken. The Economist, the US News and World Report, The New York Times, etc., supported by the conservative think tanks, American Enterprise Institute and the Goldwater Institute and several books including those by Andrew Hacker and Claudia Dreifus and by Taylor, all claim that we had the finest educational system in the world but have lost it.
If that is so, then I would think would identify what changes we have made to our educational system in the past twenty years BEFORE recommending how to fix the system.
The first change that I see is the funding model. The cost of higher education moved from the state coffers to the individual student receiving the education. However, this has been offset by a greater availability of scholarships than ever existed before. The question of how higher education is funded is far more complex now than ever before. But most analysts seem to feel that there is more burden on the individual student.
One can not ignore the growth in administration. Whereas Dean’s offices in past years were the Dean, one Associate Dean, and perhaps two clerical staff, now, Dean’s offices are often larger than the departments served by the Dean. Associate Deans are often assigned to Graduate Programs, Undergraduate Studies, Research Programs, Assessment, Finances, Facilities and a myriad of other tasks. And each Associate Dean has their staff of clerical workers. The staffs of the Provost, the Vice Presidents and the President grew in similar ways. The end results of this are increased salaries and increased bureaucracy.
The Dole-Bayh Act, where universities could now own and sell their research, is yet another change. Universities actively try to protect their “Intellectual Property.” Universities look at research products for the potential to return profits. Some universities have gone an additional step of requiring research projects and publications to be reviewed before publication for the potential of the results to be protected and marketed. The university has essentially become a research institute focused on providing research products from its faculty.
Another factor has been the growth of boutique programs that has little lasting scholarship value but satisfy a perceived political or social need. Many of these are pedagogically unsound, having little for a foundation other than the emotional fervor of the supporting group and waste the educational time of the students who enroll in these courses.
One also has to question the changes to the mission of higher education. Twenty years ago, the mission of higher educational institutions were almost solely directed at delivering an educational product to students. Indeed, the mission was so well understood and accepted that many universities did not publish its mission. Today, we find extensive committee written mission statements that are try to please everybody and underscore the loss of education as the sole mission of the university. Universities then attempt to pursue these non-educational missions in their strategic plans. The result is less time and resources for teaching the student.
Thus the higher educational model today is seen as failing. Students receive a substandard education that does not provide a foundation for future endeavors and what they do receive costs too much. By changing the focus of the university from education to other social/political needs, by increasing the size of the administrations, by creating a research profit center, by reducing state funding for the university, by reducing professor’s time teaching, and by creating boutique programs, the student is being short changed.
Based on my perceptions of what has changed in the Higher Educational System of the United States, I would suggest that none of the so-called fixes will succeed. In fact some of the fixes such as redefining colleges and turning to contingent faculty will make the situation worse.
Thanks for your thoughtful, well-written and informative post. You have identified many of the changes but neglected some others. For example, you don't mention the impact on PHE of the increased competition for students from for-profit higher education. Also, you don't mention that PHE administrators today are not experienced academics themselves, and why this has come about, and its impacts and implications for preserving the breadth and depth of a traditional liberal arts undergraduate college student experience. Most importantly you do not address the strength and impact of a long-term and concerted attack by neoliberal ideologues on traditional state PHE structures and institutions.
Most importantly you do not address the strength and impact of a long-term and concerted attack by neoliberal ideologues on traditional state PHE structures and institutions.
Do you think it possible that the vast neoliberal conspiracy is itself a reaction to the public's lack of interest in funding postmodern bullshit with their tax dollars? I'd say there is a very strong connection.
If we think the public owes us their hard earned dollars so we can teach their kids that America is racist, TV is as good as Shakespeare, and victims deserve their own Studies, we wrong, wrong, wrong.
Yr humble & obt
John Dickinson.
Your comments on for profit higher education are welcome. This is also a change in the last twenty years to higher education in the United States.
There were a number of changes that I could not mention as the limit for posting is 4096 characters. However, I mentioned the ones that I thought had the most impact.
I also hope that others contribute as well. Understanding the forces which have lead to the shape that we are in is critical to identifying strategies to improve academia.
It is clear that we do not have control over many of the changes imposed on us. However, we can address those that we do have control over.
It seems to me another case of lies:
I was wondering why UT wasn't bragging about its enrollment figures like that have in past years.
The Blade says that UT's enrollment is down 416 students or 9.5%. Furthermore it claims this was planned!
I don't remember anyone saying at the end of Spring Semester that they were planning for a loss in enrollment! I don't have the assumptions that were used for the budget, (maybe someone else does,) but I seem to remember that enrollments were expected to be up!
If someone said our enrollments would be down 9+%, I think that we would have remembered that.
Freshman enrollment is down 9.5 percent. Overall enrollment is flat. Please, let's not start using phrases like "enrollment is down 9.5 percent" when the admin can easily point out that isn't true.
Please see: http://toledoblade.com/article/20100908/NEWS04/9070357
There is so much the administration is doing wrong and by advancing incorrect information it makes it that much easier for the admin to dismiss faculty concerns.
I love comment No. 15. You all are such idiots! Did you even read the Blade story? You all have such hard-ons to yell at the administration you gladly embrace false or incomplete information to sell your chosen narrative.
You look ignorant and moronic when you argue enrollment is down 9.5 percent. How can you possibly educate anyone when you are so completely uninformed on basic facts that are easily and widely accessible to anyone who can read!?
Maybe this is why A & S needs broken up... you clearly house idiots!
Hey, what's enrollment at? Is it down 9.5 percent?
Is it the official position of A & S that enrollment dropped 9.5 percent? Please say it is. It's like playing baseball with a beach ball with you people.
You'll just ignore it, right? Assume no one will read your comments section and that the fact you approved a comment with a moronic factual error will be forgotten? It won't. I'm pretty sure people will be aware A & S Council's position is enrollment is down 9.5 percent.
From the Blade: "Its incoming class this year of first-time adult students and freshmen fell to 3,955 from 4,371 last year, or 9.5 percent."
Is it the A & S Council position that UT has only 3955 students? And that we only had about 4,400 last year? Cause I thought we had more than 20,000. Hell, doesn't A & S have nearly 3955 students all by itself?
I found a link to quote from Rush Limbaugh saying higher education is bloated. Thought you might wanna post that to match the other right-wing sources you've been highlighting. Whom should I send it to to get posted in red on the side?
That's it? No snappy comeback from Brian, er, Bloggie about how I'm spinning and shilling for the administration and my numbers are a lie and your 9.5 percent number is real?
"Freshman enrollment is down 9.5 percent. Overall enrollment is flat. Please, let's not start using phrases like "enrollment is down 9.5 percent" when the admin can easily point out that isn't true.
Please see: http://toledoblade.com/article/20100908/NEWS04/9070357
There is so much the administration is doing wrong and by advancing incorrect information it makes it that much easier for the admin to dismiss faculty concerns."
Which I see they have been happy to do. Sigh.
Re John Dickinson
John, you are absolutely correct in saying:
"Do you think it possible that the vast neoliberal conspiracy is itself a reaction to the public's lack of interest in funding postmodern bullshit with their tax dollars? I'd say there is a very strong connection.
If we think the public owes us their hard earned dollars so we can teach their kids that America is racist, TV is as good as Shakespeare, and victims deserve their own Studies, we wrong, wrong, wrong."
Right-on, John.
Just as the UAW and other unions try to blame the demise of the Big 3 automakers entirely on management (who are indeed largely, but by no means entirely to blame for the collapse of the American auto industry) the AAUP and college professors refuse to accept responsibility for their own central role in the demise of higher ed and liberal arts education -- through the self-serving abuses of faculty tenure, the dumbing-down of the curriculum and academic standards, refusal to be accountable for faculty incompetence and misconduct and dismal student academic outcomes, propagation of corrosive campus and academic political correctness, "postmodern bullshit" etc. etc.
The professoriate has smugly thumbed their noses at the public and the countless serious warnings of critics for decades and now that they have finally killed the goose that has laid so many beautiful golden academic eggs for them for so long and reality has finally come to the academy and the game is over – the professoriate reacts with shock, indignation and outrage and points accusing fingers at the “right wing” and “neo-liberals.”
How very, very sad it had to come to this.
OK, The Blade article did say enrollment is down 9.5% … “incoming class this year of first-time adult students and freshmen”. Commenter #15 is incorrect in that whoever it was left out an important set of modifiers.
No one said that commenter was speaking for the A&S Council! The A&S Council has people that are more than willing to speak out for it and sign their names if needed.
I find it very interesting that there are a number of people that immediately jump on #15 without stating the true error made, willing to call that person names, and willing to try to impose that person’s error on the whole of A&S Council. Because of the nature of this blog, there is no guarantee that that person is even a member of the A&S Council. For all I know, it could be some highly paid administrator intentional trying to stir up trouble with first posting an error and then acting like they are so righteous in correcting it!
I think that the error should be corrected but this can be done in a manner that is factual (Anon 7:56 did that by quoting the Blade article) but I also think that name calling and trying to assert positions of groups in this matter is abhorrent and bespeaks volumes more about the character of the of those giving the critiques.
I am "Anon #15" that wrote the incorrect statememt.
I apologize for the error. I had read the article earlier in the day but did not have access to the article when I wrote the post from my home. I clearly am in error and I regret the storm that I created. I am not a member of the A&S Council and my comment should not be considered as a statement from the A&S Council.
However, I do not remember anyone stating in the Spring that Freshman enrollments would be down by 400+ students. Therefore, I do not believe that it was planned and that people are rewriting history.
Do you work for Stupid Inc.? I bet we do:
http://www.bnet.com/blog/tribal/do-you-work-for-stupid-inc/168?promo=713&tag=nl.e713
substantive posts on the main page have been lacking...are the site gate-keepers busy teaching or something?
Most organizations are so incompetent that they’re best described as flat-out stupid. Does this label apply to the place where you work? Take the Logan Organizational Stupidity Exam (LOSE) and find out. Every time you say “Yep, that’s where I work,” give your company a point.
1. In the last five years, at least one senior manager has sent out many copies of a small business book with big type and a catchy title that is painfully devoid of thought. Now, some business books are of value. I visited a company recently where the CEO sent all employees a copy of The Essential Bennis — the antithesis of the bad business book I ranted about a couple of posts ago. He asked people to read it carefully and with personal reflection. Not surprisingly, that company is doing well. Replace Bennis’s great book with any text about cheese, and you’re at Stupid Inc.
Bonus: In a related move, if people boast about having attention deficit disorder, give your company a bonus point. Stupid thrives when people brag about not being able to have complex conversations.
2. When someone at the top royally screws up, it’s never discussed, but when someone lower down makes a mistake, it’s fodder for endless root cause analysis. Stupid is most incapacitating at the top.
3. Every executive speech follows this format: things were bad when I took over, I’ve worked hard to turn it around, and now the future is rosy. This statement is stupid for two reasons: (1) it repels any lessons from the prior regime other than it was incompetent, and (2) focuses on the action of the leader rather than the group. “I,” “me,” and “my” talk is a sure sign of organizational stupidity, and an inability to think past the tenure of the current leaders is a sign that the stupidity is here it stay.
Bonus: If the executives routinely use “we” instead of “I” but clearly mean themselves, give your company two stupid points instead of just one.
4. Organizational learning is seen as nirvana. With deep respect for the pioneers of organizational learning, my two year old learns a new word every day and recently figured out how to work my iPod. Learning is simply a prerequisite to thinking, and organizational thought (mass innovation) is the real key to growth. If your company aspires only to do what a two year old does naturally, it’s high on the stupid scale.
5. Managers follow standard HR advice and get in trouble if they don’t. This advice includes:
Hire for skills, not for values. Standardize interview questions to drive out any chance you might actually get to know the person.
Give out salary increases to people according to a bell-shaped curve, telling people that an extra 1% is proof that they are deeply, deeply valued.
Measure employees against pre-determined criteria rather than other results they produced. We don’t want our employees distracted by opportunities we didn’t plan for.
Bonus: The need to hew blindly to HR advice makes for a nifty-looking employee handbook that will be blessed by corporate counsel. And that will make stupid spread like misquotes in summer. If you have this handbook on your bookshelf or accessible over your intranet, give your company an extra point.
Scoring:
Organizational stupidity is more than fodder for Dilbert cartoons. It’s the reason our country is lagging behind in competitiveness and why American wages are declining. If your company scored 4+, the place you work is part of the problem.
Do you work for Stupid Inc.? If so, please tell us about it (no names, please) in the comments below.
Most organizations are so incompetent that they’re best described as flat-out stupid. Does this label apply to the place where you work? Take the Logan Organizational Stupidity Exam (LOSE) and find out. Every time you say “Yep, that’s where I work,” give your company a point.
1. In the last five years, at least one senior manager has sent out many copies of a small business book with big type and a catchy title that is painfully devoid of thought. Now, some business books are of value. I visited a company recently where the CEO sent all employees a copy of The Essential Bennis — the antithesis of the bad business book I ranted about a couple of posts ago. He asked people to read it carefully and with personal reflection. Not surprisingly, that company is doing well. Replace Bennis’s great book with any text about cheese, and you’re at Stupid Inc.
Bonus: In a related move, if people boast about having attention deficit disorder, give your company a bonus point. Stupid thrives when people brag about not being able to have complex conversations.
2. When someone at the top royally screws up, it’s never discussed, but when someone lower down makes a mistake, it’s fodder for endless root cause analysis. Stupid is most incapacitating at the top.
3. Every executive speech follows this format: things were bad when I took over, I’ve worked hard to turn it around, and now the future is rosy. This statement is stupid for two reasons: (1) it repels any lessons from the prior regime other than it was incompetent, and (2) focuses on the action of the leader rather than the group. “I,” “me,” and “my” talk is a sure sign of organizational stupidity, and an inability to think past the tenure of the current leaders is a sign that the stupidity is here it stay.
Bonus: If the executives routinely use “we” instead of “I” but clearly mean themselves, give your company two stupid points instead of just one.
4. Organizational learning is seen as nirvana. With deep respect for the pioneers of organizational learning, my two year old learns a new word every day and recently figured out how to work my iPod. Learning is simply a prerequisite to thinking, and organizational thought (mass innovation) is the real key to growth. If your company aspires only to do what a two year old does naturally, it’s high on the stupid scale.
5. Managers follow standard HR advice and get in trouble if they don’t. This advice includes:
Hire for skills, not for values. Standardize interview questions to drive out any chance you might actually get to know the person.
Give out salary increases to people according to a bell-shaped curve, telling people that an extra 1% is proof that they are deeply, deeply valued.
Measure employees against pre-determined criteria rather than other results they produced. We don’t want our employees distracted by opportunities we didn’t plan for.
Bonus: The need to hew blindly to HR advice makes for a nifty-looking employee handbook that will be blessed by corporate counsel. And that will make stupid spread like misquotes in summer. If you have this handbook on your bookshelf or accessible over your intranet, give your company an extra point.
Scoring:
Organizational stupidity is more than fodder for Dilbert cartoons. It’s the reason our country is lagging behind in competitiveness and why American wages are declining. If your company scored 4+, the place you work is part of the problem.
Do you work for Stupid Inc.? If so, please tell us about it (no names, please) in the comments below.
3. Every executive speech follows this format: things were bad when I took over, I’ve worked hard to turn it around, and now the future is rosy. This statement is stupid for two reasons: (1) it repels any lessons from the prior regime other than it was incompetent, and (2) focuses on the action of the leader rather than the group. “I,” “me,” and “my” talk is a sure sign of organizational stupidity, and an inability to think past the tenure of the current leaders is a sign that the stupidity is here it stay.
Bonus: If the executives routinely use “we” instead of “I” but clearly mean themselves, give your company two stupid points instead of just one.
4. Organizational learning is seen as nirvana. With deep respect for the pioneers of organizational learning, my two year old learns a new word every day and recently figured out how to work my iPod. Learning is simply a prerequisite to thinking, and organizational thought (mass innovation) is the real key to growth. If your company aspires only to do what a two year old does naturally, it’s high on the stupid scale.
5. Managers follow standard HR advice and get in trouble if they don’t. This advice includes:
Hire for skills, not for values. Standardize interview questions to drive out any chance you might actually get to know the person.
Give out salary increases to people according to a bell-shaped curve, telling people that an extra 1% is proof that they are deeply, deeply valued.
Measure employees against pre-determined criteria rather than other results they produced. We don’t want our employees distracted by opportunities we didn’t plan for.
Bonus: The need to hew blindly to HR advice makes for a nifty-looking employee handbook that will be blessed by corporate counsel. And that will make stupid spread like misquotes in summer. If you have this handbook on your bookshelf or accessible over your intranet, give your company an extra point.
Scoring:
Organizational stupidity is more than fodder for Dilbert cartoons. It’s the reason our country is lagging behind in competitiveness and why American wages are declining. If your company scored 4+, the place you work is part of the problem.
Do you work for Stupid Inc.? If so, please tell us about it (no names, please) in the comments below.
Hi, you blog is intriquing. We'd love to hear more from you and your readers on our website and blog. www.highereducationquestionmark.com
Best, Claudia Dreifus
co-author with Andrew Hacker of
"Higher Education?"
Great. Now Calvin and Hobbes chime in. I have read their book. They argue that universities serious about practicing good stewardship in support of their academic missions should divest themselves of their medical schools. Suggest that at the next Jacobs Town Hall meeting if you care to hear a pin drop.
"The travesty of high tuition is that most of the extra charges aren't going for education. Administrators, athletics and amenities get funded, while history departments are denied new assistant professors. A whole generation of young Americans is being shortchanged, largely by adults who have carved out good careers in places we call colleges."
This is the last paragraph from the interesting op-ed piece written on the LA Times by Andrew Hacker and Claudia Dreifus.
Read it here: http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-dreifushacker-college-cost-20100912,0,6821452.story
And by the way, if Andrew and Claudia will write another book on the subject or plan to update the one they have written I invite her to include the disaster at UT as further evidence that medical school should stay separated from a university.
the hospital subsidizes the the university
What the previous post meant to say was that the hospital subsidizes the College of Medicine.
Correct. Would you rather that money come out of the money that otherwise goes to other colleges?
Last commenter raises all sorts of red flags!
1) What is the transfer of the hospital to the Medical School?
2) What are the limits on the expenditures from these funds?
3) Is the hospital in transferring fund unable to be a better hospital?
( If you go to
http://ohiohospitalcompare.ohio.gov/HospitalMeasuresQualityComparison.aspx
and look at patient satisfaction, UTMC has the worst in Lucas County!)
4) Are the funds being controlled and budgeted like the funds budgeted to other colleges on campus?
I do not have answers to any of these questions. Because of the lack of transparency of this administration, I can not trust the answers that they give because I can not independently check their answers.
And so now we have yet another cause of mistrust!
doctoral-level reasoning number forty-one
This is exactly what happened to me! People sat around discussing the finer points of visitations, and nobody thought to go get a bucket of water! 42 comments! Must be a record.
A friend of mine was not feeling well. Kept going to the emergency room there. They kept telling him there was nothing wrong with him. He went to Toledo and they discoverd he had a rather serious blood clot. They treated him and he is fine.
Shortly after the merger, I did go to UTMC for a condition. I was having a severe shortage of breath and I had a fever. I couln't get past the emergency room: I signed in and sat there for two hours. Then I left and went to Flower Hospital. Within ten minutes of arrriving I was seeing a doctor and within thirty minutes, he had me on an IV with antibiotics and a mask with oxygen. I think I could have died at UTMC before I would have seen a doctor. Never again!
I had an aunt, who's husband's sister's friend knew a couple who's stepdaughter's father's brother heard from the man who cleaned his pool that his mother-in-law went to UTMC once and it was bad.
I'm uncomfortable with efforts to knock our colleagues over at UTMC especially when their in contract negotiations. They need our support not attacks. You may think you're just attacking administrator but you're attacking the people who provide the real care, the nurses and technicians.
I don't think complaints about conditions at UTMC is a knock to our colleagues but rather a criticism of the same administration that is getting rich on the backs of the people that they lay off. Consider this: when UTMC published there great results with the JACO (I hope this is the right acronym) inspection, they almost immediately laid off quite a few of the staff that helped them achieve that outcome. I believe that the hospital probably has suffered worse than the academic side with this administration. However, they do not have nearly the freedom of speech to say so as we do as they do not hold tenure and they are in a very autocratic form of management. Our colleagues at UTMC clearly work hard and are dedicated to their callings. But they are understaffed and micro-managed to the point where they may have difficulties being as effective as they want to be.
Post a Comment