How Innovative is Your Workplace?

Christenson sets the stage for The Innovative University by questioning the innovation of higher education institutions.  The former Education Secretary’s comparison of universities to “mature enterprises” was an interesting way of framing the shortcomings of higher education. “Increasingly risk-averse, at times self-satisfied, and unduly expensive,” these characteristics are not shocking criticisms, but I hadn’t really attributed these traits as a reflection of the maturity of higher education business model. In my environment at a large UC campus, many of our obstacles stem from the complex bureaucratic processes that consume everyday tasks. As a slower moving beast, change is something that is challenging to say the least.

It’s clear that one educational model won’t meet the needs of every community, but for some reason imitation tends to be more common than innovation when it comes to setting university program objectives. The Harvard model is still seen in many schools of thought as the gold-standard of education, but as Christenson points out, very few institutions have the resources to sustain a Harvard-type institution. And what’s more is that we, as a country, may not need more Harvard’s to serve our population and remain globally competitive. The text made me think about how we model our university programs and if there might be too much value placed on the exterior. Things like rankings, and competitive admission, while desirable should not overshadow student learning outcomes.  I’m most interested in how to design innovative university programs that are mindful of the environment that students enter upon graduation. Do you think your place of work is preparing students for the current economic reality? How can we be more connected to our student’s needs? These are thoughts that frequently run through my mind in the slow but steady process of disturbing the aura of the ivory tower.