Introduction
Background
A Framework to Foster Diversity at Penn State: 2004 - 09
Campus Climate and Intergroup Relations
Representation (Access and Success)
Education and Scholarship
Institutional Viability
and Vitality
Conclusion
Appendix 1
Appendix 2
Notes
Framework Main Page

Archive
A Framework to Foster Diversity at Penn State:
1998 - 03

Printable Version
A Framework to Foster Diversity at Penn State:
2004 - 09 (PDF 2,606 KB)

Adobe Acrobat Reader

Institutional Viability and Vitality

Challenge 6: Diversifying University Leadership and Management
Central to our institutional mission of creating a world-class University is the question of what kind of leadership best facilitates success. Perhaps nowhere else are our values and priorities shown more clearly than by whom we choose as our leaders. As our student population and society in general become more diverse, we must commit to the goal of establishing a University leadership that reflects society’s diversity. Well-managed diverse leadership teams are able to take advantage of a broader range of perspectives, insights, and approaches to better understand and serve all University constituents. Internal and external constituencies both expect to see visible signs of commitment to diversity reflected in the institution’s leadership.

It is particularly important that this Challenge be addressed not only at the level of each individual unit, but through the coordinated efforts of the central administration and other supervisory bodies that provide the direction and set the tone for the University as a whole. As originally noted in the 1998-2003 Framework, “Penn State’s commitment to diversity must be visible in its most public face, that of the senior managers and leaders of the University. The charge to colleges, units, and departments to recruit and retain a diverse faculty and staff rings hollow if not modeled in the leadership and management of the University” (p. 33 of the printed publication, A Framework to Foster Diversity at Penn State 2004 - 09).

During the 1998-2003 Framework period, there have been several endeavors regarding best practices for hiring, including initiatives from the Commission for Women, the Commission on Racial/Ethnic Diversity, and the Affirmative Action Office and Diversity Education. There have been several executive searches during the 1998-2003 Framework period and in virtually every instance the pools have been significantly more diverse than in previous years. Penn State has made noteworthy advances in diverse hiring practices, particularly in appointing women to administrative posts at all levels. Assessment of the 1998-2003 Framework suggests that similar progress in regard to ethnic minority leadership remains an area for improvement, although some units such as the Commonwealth College and the University Libraries have made gains.

The University’s Administrative Fellowship Program is one initiative that has had some success in providing diverse internal applicants for leadership positions, but this program alone is not sufficient. Enhancement of the present programs/practices and development of new initiatives designed to diversify the University leadership and management and provide opportunities for advancement for qualified internal candidates will help to address perceptions about the current profile of University leadership. While it is not practical to expect to make a diverse appointment for each open position, administrative hires should have the capacity for and experience with leadership to foster the inclusive and equitable environment Penn State seeks to achieve. Having managers and supervisors at all levels who have the skills to recruit, manage, and mentor diverse populations will be an important factor in the long-term vitality and viability of the institution.

Entities such as the Commission for Women, the Commission on Racial/Ethnic Diversity, and the Commission on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Equity have long advocated for inclusive implementation of University policies and practices with recommendations aimed at proactively enhancing institutional viability. Advisory bodies that are not tied to a specific strategic planning unit, such as President’s Council, Academic Leadership Council, Faculty Senate, and Alumni Council, must be considered in light of the link between diversity and institutional vitality. Not only is it important for such entities to demonstrate the University’s commitment to diversity, but such leadership bodies may benefit from diverse perspectives, insights, and approaches to better serve the University. Continued recognition by the Board of Trustees of the importance of diversity to institutional excellence is also vital to our success. The Board’s 1996 statement in support of Penn State’s diversity goals, as well as its annual meeting with representatives of the Commissions for progress updates, have helped to establish the foundational importance of diversity and equity.

Targeted Areas for Improvement Include:

• Demonstrate support and leadership for addressing all of the Challenges/dimensions.
• Implement a results-oriented plan for recruiting and retaining diverse administrators. Conduct post-search reviews to identify any impediments to recruiting diverse pools of candidates and assessing credentials that could be avoided in future searches. Explore the feasibility of using executive search firms if current strategies generate few competitive candidates from underrepresented groups and women.
• Require demonstrated skills in managing divers-
ity as a standard qualification for all leadership positions.
• Compose search committees that are broadly representative and also knowledgeable of the University’s diversity objectives. Provide complete information about expectations regarding candidates’ skills and experience with managing diversity.
• Cultivate diverse management teams at all levels of the University, especially in administrative and advisory levels.
• Include members of underrepresented groups in strategic planning committees, senates, and other governing and management bodies within the unit.
• Appoint members of diverse groups to University-wide commissions, task forces, and governing bodies.
• Provide opportunities for faculty and staff from underrepresented groups to be promoted to leadership positions.

Assessment Questions:

1. How are unit leaders actively involved in diversity efforts?
2. What is the diversity profile of the unit’s administrative and executive levels?
3. Describe the procedures followed to create both diverse applicant pools and search committees for administrative searches. How is information about expectations regarding candidates’ skills and experience with managing diversity communicated to the committee and to the candidates?
4. How does your unit identify staff and faculty from underrepresented groups who have administrative aspirations and potential, as well as assist them in developing leadership and management skills? How are such individuals supported in identifying opportunities for advancement?
5. Which strategies for diversifying your unit’s leadership and management have been most successful? Which have been least successful? Which could be termed “best practices”? (Best Practices are processes, programs, and procedures that most successfully lead to the unit’s ability to reach the University’s diversity goals and can be validated through measurable outcomes.)
6. What measures of success have you identified to gauge your progress in this Challenge? Include data demonstrating outcomes.

Challenge 7: Coordinating Organizational Change to Support Our Diversity Goals
If we truly believe that diversity is an essential component in contemporary higher education, Penn State’s structure and organization must reflect this value. Our efforts to improve the climate for diversity, ensure representation, and broaden the curriculum must be undergirded by systemic change. Diversity must become part of the Penn State culture to assure our vitality and viability in an increasingly diverse society. Leadership in coordinating organizational change to support diversity goals remains essential.

The progress we have made toward implementing diversity initiatives must be made permanent by committing to long-term fiscal investments; comprehensive, public, and meaningful systems of accountability; and an efficient and collaborative infrastructure.

Making funds available to support diversity initiatives is a difficult challenge in our current fiscal environment in which inadequate levels of public support have become the norm. We must remain vigilant in upholding diversity as a priority. If we truly believe that diversity is as important in today’s world as technology, new budget and development strategies must be employed to secure our diversity priorities.

As public financial support for higher education decreases, collaborative efforts are necessary to achieve a number of institutional goals. Since the early 1990s, coordination of Penn State’s diversity efforts has been located in the Office of the Vice Provost for Educational Equity. At the same time a number of critical units are housed in other administrative areas including Affirmative Action and Diversity Education, the Office of Graduate Educational Equity, Minority Admissions and Community Affairs, the College Directors of Multicultural Programs, and several offices located in Student Affairs. The current organizational pattern reflects an effort to strike a balance between centralized activities where collaboration and efficiency are maximized, and decentralized activities that require critical functional areas to assume direct responsibility for ensuring equitable delivery of services to all. For this structure to operate optimally, we must continually assess the efficacy of the existing configuration of offices and reporting relationships to identify methods to facilitate and enhance coordination between centralized and decentralized units.

Additionally, meaningful linkages with underrepresented communities are valuable resources to draw upon as we work to achieve our diversity goals. For example, several colleges have cultivated relationships with high schools and Historically Black Colleges and Universities that have led to long-term channels for sustaining commitment to diversifying the student body. The work of the College of Arts and Architecture with the Hamer Center provides an example of how research, service, and teaching have been integrated to provide students an opportunity to be engaged with underrepresented and underserved groups in a diverse community. And, expansion of the course “Rethinking Urban Poverty in the United States” into a new intercollege service learning initiative named the Philadelphia Semester of Public Scholarship involves developing courses that respond to inner-city communities’ needs such as small business development, nutrition and health, transportation, and housing.

One of the strongest aspects of Penn State’s diversity progress is a system of accountability that is comprehensive, participatory, and public. All progress reports related to the implementation of the 1998-2003 Framework have been reviewed by representative committees and posted on the University’s Web site. The integrity of this system of accountability must be maintained and improvements made in order to address the widely held but inaccurate perception that units are never “punished” for failure to advance diversity goals nor rewarded for significant progress.

Targeted Areas for Improvement Include:

• Institute any necessary organizational realignments, systems of accountability, resource mobilization and allocation strategies, and long-term planning strategies necessary to ensure realization of the University’s diversity goals.
• Ensure that the unit mission statement and strategic plan reflect the University’s strategic emphasis on diversity.
• Assess the efficacy of the existing configuration of offices and current reporting relationships, and identify methods to facilitate and enhance coordination between centralized and decentralized units.
• Prioritize diversity initiatives in development initiatives and capital campaigns.
• Identify new approaches to safeguard the financial stability of our diversity priorities.
• Develop meaningful linkages with underrepresented communities.
• Define systems of accountability and reward.

Assessment Questions:

1. How does your unit’s strategic plan reflect the importance of diversity for meeting your goals and objectives?
2. What organizational realignments, systems of accountability, resource mobilization and allocation strategies, and long-term planning strategies have been implemented by your unit to ensure the realization of the University’s diversity goals?
3. What budget and development approaches have been implemented by your unit to ensure financial stability of diversity priorities?
4. Describe the systems of accountability and reward that support the achievement of diversity goals.
5. What partnerships, with internal or external units and/or constituencies, have you created to advance the University’s diversity goals?
6. Which strategies to coordinate organizational change in support of diversity goals have been most successful? Which have been least successful? Which could be termed “best practices”? (Best Practices are processes, programs, and procedures that most successfully lead to the unit’s ability to reach the University’s diversity goals and can be validated through measurable outcomes.)
7. What measures of success have you identified to gauge your progress in this Challenge? Include data demonstrating outcomes.

TOP