The AV-1.insider

Innovation and Change: Why Bother?

Foreword

In 2006, I accepted a leadership position at UNC to which Hotline, Labs, and Classroom Design reported. Our charter was to do great things and be agents of change. Despite the great expectations attached to the new role, it was difficult to imagine getting everyone in the organization to agree to even a modest change for very long. 

Our budget enabled me to enlist a consultant, and so I hired the best I could find: George Smart of Strategic Development, who infused me and my excellent management team with an alternate perspective on leadership, organizational development and change management.

For our first project, we transitioned the UNC campus from "free printing" to swipe-and-release printing. Various ITS units had made abortive attempts over the previous six years, each time arguing that it could not be accomplished for the lack of "political will." (That's what is said when one can't coerce the Chancellor to do your dirty work and issue a decree.)

Using George's philosophy (calling it a "technique" might mislead you to think we engaged in some kind of trickery, when in fact, we were inclusive and transparent at all levels throughout the project) we accomplished a successful transition in 90-days that was heralded by the student government and, more importantly, the student newspaper as a timely success. First-year savings exceeded $1M. It was the first of several successful initiatives.

The Context: The Call for Innovation

Last Fall, we presented two areas that merit outside-the-box thinking: simplified classroom technology and projector lifecycle strategies. We challenged you to reject the status quo and to adopt a more active role to overcome the daunting challenges (technical as well as process-oriented challenges). 

At the time, we neglected to provide a framework for successfully re-thinking these areas. This first installment shares some observations rooted in the process for change that we developed with George Smart. It concludes with a few simple steps to help get started so that you can begin to make change-that-sticks in your organization.

Why is lasting change elusive?

Few quarters exist in which administrations do not routinely entreat the masses to "be more innovative, harr-rumph!" The results of such sloganeering often fall short of over-hyped expectations and those that achieve measurable progress rarely hold their ground. Why is that?

1. People cannot be expected to innovate-on-demand. In the trenches, line managers and their reports shake their heads and quietly dismiss such campaigns as "someone's bright idea," perhaps an oblique suggestion that the special "someone" in question is neither bright, nor known to be a fountain of higher cognition.

2. The problem is not that the staff are not "team players." This is not to say that innovation itself is pop-business-school puffery. Genuine innovation (yes, it does exist outside of Apple) is real and life-changing, however, expecting to achieve it by decree may indicate somewhat simplistic views of leadership and organizational development. [From the Editor: In the spirit of full-disclosure, the author has personally confessed to numerous transgressions in this regard.]

3. Innovation necessitates personal change (and occasionally, spare-change). Real change requires moving from a place that is known (predictable and comfortable) to (what may seem to be) an other-worldly realm of uncertainty. Bad conditions tend to persist not because folks just love dysfunction and inefficiency, but because of the unexpressed fear of the proposed alternate universe. "Sure, things are bad now, but they could be a whole lot worse..."

4. We value knowing why something ought to be changed, and especially why we should put forth the effort (or stick our necks out) to make it happen. Why do things differently? What is so bad about the way things are?

5. Organizations are conditioned by the consistent failures of top-down edicts. When change comes by decree, such as through "new policy" or reorganization, it rarely lasts. (When it does last, it rarely produces the expected outcome). The masses shake their heads and mumble, "Why bother? They (the new administration) will get bored and move on to some other hair-brained idea in a week or two."

6. Buy-in cannot be coerced. If grumbling and foot-dragging could be neatly translated, we might hear our people say, "Change is difficult, especially when it requires me to change something I'm comfortable with. If I'm going to put myself out, there ought to be a compelling reason, else why should I bother at all?" The masses cannot move in unison without understanding a) what is broken; and b) what would a future-state look like with the problem eradicated.

How can I start practicing change agency in my own shop?

Line managers and their staff are expert problem-solvers who live to sink their teeth into a real challenge. So, when we present a pre-digested solution (however well-thought-out) without vetting the problem and priorities, we devalue their critical contribution to day-to-day organizational success. 

Avoid suggesting all-you-gotta-do-is -type solutions. Such simplifications are what get most organizations into the acute pickles they now ignore (until the next bright idea).

1. Instead of delivering marching orders, present your top-three headaches (you'll want to begin with an exhaustive list that you can prioritize) and the unfortunate consequences of those headaches. (Be sure to present your case clearly, leaving no room for misinterpretation.) 

2. Without suggesting a solution, describe what their world would be like in the absence of that problem. Be sure to seek their confirmation that that the problems you described are valid (most groups can agree on a problem, it is the solution that causes all the trouble.)

3. Ask the open-ended question, "what would need to happen to get from point-A to point-B in X-weeks?" and take note.

Use these observations as conversation-starters in your own organization and, by all means, report back to us via the forum or in the comments at the end of this article and let us know the conditions on the ground at your org.

 

	by Joe Schuch
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.

AV-1 Survey Results (Part Two): Organizations, Funding & Regions

Earlier this week, we delivered our first-pass results of the AV-1 Salary and Education survey. It proved to be the most-read article on the AV-1.insider, to-date. At that time, we promised you a bit more granularity in a subsequent report and here it is!

From the Editor: As always, AV-1 invites you to share your thoughtful insights on the AV-1.forum and in comments at the bottom of this article. Your participation adds value to this timely, thought-provoking topic. Thanks in advance!

The IT Connection

To the question that has stirred much debate over the years, "should AV and IT converge?" we found that more than half the community provides services within an Information Technology organizational structure. After ITS, no single department scored higher than 10%.

While this may put to rest any uncertainty surrounding IT/AV convergence, far more interesting are assets that each party brings to this shotgun wedding...

• What can AV learn from IT in key areas such as processes, ROI, best practices, funding models, and future technologies?
• Can IT learn anything from AV in terms of customer service and production values or, like so many HTML tags from the 1990s, have these concepts been deprecated from our revised understanding of quality of service?

No Tech Management in K-12 or Corporate?

Only one out of every ten respondents worked outside higher education. What is the take-away? Do we hear enough from our K-12 and corporate counterparts? Is the dearth of input from these demographics an indication that, with the exception of higher education, all learning-space related issues have been resolved? Is there no interest in learning how business and K-12 resolve important issues like lifecycle funding, standardization and long-range planning? Does the AV-1 community have tools and information that could benefit the business and K-12 sectors? Do technology management roles simply not exist in K-12 and business? Is there something AV-1 can do to attract these critical service providers to the discussion?

Data Reported by Region

Within each region (except "Outside U.S." for which a 6% response yielded insufficient data) average salaries are indicated for directors/managers. More interesting than the salary values are the span between bands...

• On average, directors in the Midwest earn 25% more than the managers who work for them.
• That bump increases to 28% for Middle-Atlantic states, and 37% in the Northeast.
• The gap between directors and managers increases to 40% in the Southeast and West, which may contribute to some feelings of inequity from down the org-chart.

About the AV-1 Surveys

In any survey, there are many ways to slice and dice the data. When the AV-1 advisory board broached the idea of fostering dialog through inquiry, everyone agreed that a long, tedious survey would be a buzz-kill (for us, as well as you readers). 

Rather than being the definitive end-word (let's face it, even detailed ones rarely are), the AV-1 surveys are designed to be conversation starters.

We agreed on a methodology that struck a balance between short-and-sweet and git-her-done. If it stopped being fun and interesting to us, well, we couldn't expect AV-1 readers to follow along. (At AV-1, we're all about eating our own dog food.) 

In truth, this survey pushed the envelop because it contained more than six questions (our arbitrary survey-pain threshold) and required two newsletter entries to deconstruct. (We decided that surveys are like Polaroid snapshots: the fun keeps going as long as you can see the results right away.) 

With all mea culpa accounted for, we hope you will continue to participate in our periodic surveys. If you have an idea for an article or suggestion for surveys (or anything else), email us or add it to our nifty, new suggestion box at the right ==>>

Thanks for joining us, and welcome to YOUR COMMUNITY!

	by Scott Tiner
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.

AV-1 Survey Results (Part One): Salary and Education

Nicely Done! Over 200 people -- better than 1/3 of all AV-1 members -- responded to the second AV-1 survey (Salary and Education). Significant sample data such as these enable us to feel comfortable suggesting that some of these statistics fairly represent the learning space microcosm, as a whole. (We expect that you will let us know otherwise!)

Later this week, we'll share some organizational demographics gleaned from your responses, however, today we cut right to the chase and show you the money, so-to-speak...

Salary and Education

85% of the community possess some kind of college degree. Educational background, though not a guarantee of success or position, clearly contributes to income: 

• On average, those with Bachelor's degrees earned almost 8% more than those with 2-year degrees.
• Those with a Master's earned nearly 20% more than they would have with just a 4-year degree. 
• The average salary of those with a terminal degree bested a Master's by another 16%.
• Does this speak to the professionalism of the group?  Does this help us convince people (including ourselves) that we are not just cart pushers?

Roles, Leadership and Salary

Nearly three-quarters of us occupy a formal position of leadership. However, by virtue of the inclusive, non-hierarchical nature of the AV-1 community, it is reasonable to infer that the remaining 28% participate in their organizations as well-informed specialists and change agents.

It is surprising that, although Directors commanded the highest salary, one-third of all Directors possessed only a 4-year degree and at least two Directors commanded a $100k+ salary with only a technical certificate to their credit.

With nearly half of us earning at least $65,000 on average, is this an indication that there is genuine growth potential for those of us who occupy positions in the lower salary range?  (Or, does it only make us envious of those 18 people making over $105,000?)

Salary Bands Across Business Sectors

In recent years, concerns over pay-scale inequity between similar roles in the public and private sectors have led many institutions to revise methodologies for assessing/rewarding competencies, encouraging professional development and recruiting/retaining a talented, diverse workforce.

Initiatives such as career banding were designed to offer the promise of fair-market wages to talented tech workers choosing between the public and private sectors.

To assess the extent of the wage-gap between the public and private sector, we compiled the average salaries for Directors and Managers with Master's or Bachelor's degrees.

• Between private, non-profit organizations ($72,653) and publicly-funded institutions ($73,115) we found no statistical difference in average wage.
• Between publicly-funded institutions and for-profit businesses, we found less than a 5% deviation in average wage.
• Do these results seem representative of your observations in your region?
• Would a broader sample from the for-profit sector reveal greater contrast?
• Are there measures that your institution is implementing to close the gap?

	by Scott Tiner
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.

AV-1 Survey: Salary and Education

The AV-1 community is based upon the belief that successful stewardship of learning ecosystems includes those engaged in every facet from planning and design to management and support. 

Because of your participation, AV-1 is the first place to browse for insights, support, occasional LOLs and, sure, even a little moaning and groaning. 

We think the community could benefit from a better understanding of the demographics of our diverse members -- who we are, where we come from, where we work and how our jobs compare to those of our counterparts.

This week's AV-1 survey takes the initial steps toward that better understanding. The survey will take less than 60-seconds to complete and results will, of course post by the end of the week. It is entirely anonymous and non-fattening so click here and do it now!

	by Scott Tiner
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.