Department head is widely regarded as probably the worst job in a university.
Everyone above you is an administrator, responsible for monitoring and changing the people and processes at lower levels – including you! And while they can inspire and help academics achieve, they can also distract and distort incentives. As a head, you have to push back against the procedures and control mechanisms they typically seek to add to academics’ workloads – but, even then, you’ll still be accused of messing with the independence that draws many academics into the profession in the first place.
That said, there are a great variety of personality types in university departments, and it’s a great idea to try to understand each one and figure out what makes them tick. This is a lot harder than it sounds. If you have a psychology degree, it helps. I didn’t. But I did serve as head of department for two four-year terms, and in that time I think I saw it all.
Here, then, are all the archetypes I encountered and heard about – and my tips on how to manage them.
探花视频
?
The Regular Academic
Let’s start with the easiest case. Most academics are well meaning, balanced and self-motivated. They may be achieving everything that they set out to if their goals were realistic. They’ve found their niche in life, and if nothing ever changed, they would be as happy as clams.
Unfortunately, universities often want to improve their rankings to attract more or higher-paying students, and this can put pressure on the Regular Academic. The key to keeping them at their peak is regular, open communication – informally, over coffee – to identify problems before they become too large to overcome. Are they annoyed at the new bureaucratic procedures? Aren’t we all? Is there some way to make it easier?
探花视频
Meanwhile, more formal workplan meetings can allow them to express what would make them happier. Workplans with very specific goals become mere task lists. Trusting regular academics by setting very broad goals will preserve the empowering sense that they are working for themselves, rather than working to rule.
?
The Lifestyle Academic
When I was a deputy head, I was asked to motivate faculty members to do some research. What became obvious very quickly was that some faculty had no interest in undergoing the rigours of research. They chose an academic career primarily because it fitted into their life better than an industry career.
If you think you have found a lifestyle academic (it isn’t easy), figuring out what makes them happy is the next step. What is the lifestyle that they are balancing?
For example, one lecturer valued the flexible timing because his partner worked long hours in a powerful industry job and he was the primary carer for his two kids. He was a careful and thoughtful teacher, but he just didn’t fit the typical balanced academic role. He eventually retired early and returned as a sessional lecturer.
Many people in such a position may be willing to do new teaching preparations just to be able to teach on specific days when they have childcare or at specific times of the day so that they can do school drop-offs and pick-ups.
If the distraction is another business or hobby, figure out when the Lifestyle Academic wants flexibility. If you can meet what they need to be happy in their preferred lifestyle, they might just thrive.
?
The Expert Shirker
This person takes advantage of the system to do as little teaching as possible.
Take the woman who negotiated teaching relief for every PhD student when she started. She got so many students that she didn’t have to do any teaching, until a couple years later, a cap was put on teaching relief – at which point she left.
探花视频
Another academic scheduled his Australian long service leave over the second half of one semester and the first half of the next semester – hoping to make it so inconvenient to schedule him that he would get out of teaching for two full semesters. When I got him teaching half a class each semester, he asked to change the dates to accommodate no teaching for a full semester.
At another university, a gentleman was sick one day every week (which does not require a medical certificate). It just happened to always be the day that he was scheduled to teach. That went on for approximately one year.
Expert shirkers are quite common and are particularly difficult to manage without losing your mind. You have to try to think like them and anticipate their moves. You need to find someone in the HR department you can trust to help you learn all the rules they might bend.
Also – take good notes in meetings to avoid “he-said-she-said” standoffs about what was agreed. The best notes are done by email, even if just to yourself! Then you’ll have a date stamp. But assume any email will be read out in open court (worst-case scenario), so include just the facts.
Ideally, you would improve the shirker’s work ethic by making them happier. To that end, I would ask them, in a non-confronting way, why they choose to be an academic. Often, though, the answer was to do research – and the research-only position that would have made them happy was neither in my gift nor, in many cases, merited by their research abilities.
Given that it is so difficult to get expert shirkers to work, departure is typically the best option you can hope for. If they are stuck at a certain academic level, maybe you can support them to go to a more senior position at a lower-level institution where they might be happier. Other methods are more Machiavellian. I know of one head who gave someone two new subject preparations every semester until that person left because of all the extra work. But this is not recommended: you really don’t want to single the shirker out by treating them poorly.
At the extreme, you may have to put someone on a development and/or performance improvement plan and meet with them regularly, possibly every week or two. The ultimate goal then is for them to improve their work or to exit the university. This option is not to be taken lightly, however. You’ll need good HR support to make sure you do everything right, and it is a long process. If you have only one three-year term, the expert shirker is going to try to outlast you – perhaps by going on indefinite stress leave.
?
The Undermining Comparer
Remember the good ol’ days when there were per diems? Or when we didn’t have to lodge risk forms? Or when students had to read a textbook? OK, maybe the last one was an exaggeration, but the times are always a-changin’ – and always seemingly accreting more compliance and reporting obligations. Some academics can’t or won’t adapt.
They are always the last to do anything, and even multiple reminders don’t always push them beyond the observation that the world used to go round perfectly fine without any of this nonsense. Left unchecked, their negativity can spread to others.
But if you put them in charge of overseeing some procedures – for example, running a degree review – they will better understand all the bureaucracy around accreditation and university procedures that makes it necessary. Make sure you meet with them regularly, though, to ensure they make progress!
Also, encourage them to submit concerns about bureaucratic excess to the compliance people to help them improve their systems. Or ask them to head a working group (don’t call it a committee!) to try to “fix” the procedure. Again, this forces engagement with other parts of the university, and they may even end up being successful.
Will this change their attitude? It is tough, but maybe.
?
The Unrealistic Self-Promoter
This archetype takes credit for achievements in which they only played a small role, or they overvalue their accomplishments, such as by claiming a low-level publication has changed the world.
At the extreme, they may claim something entirely false, which could result in termination. For instance, some academics have lied about having PhDs – so independent verification of degrees is a new compliance requirement. Faking references has also occurred, so now a phone call to the letter-writer is a requirement. ?
It was hilarious one time to be on an interview panel and have two separate candidates claim to have done most of the work on the same project. If your field lists authors alphabetically, you can’t use the order to determine their real contribution level, and you may not know the co-authors, especially if it is a research project across multiple institutions. But one telltale sign of the Unrealistic Self-Promoter is a lot of one-off co-authors – people don’t tend to continue to work with someone who doesn’t contribute.
For contributions to teaching or service, it is best to consult with others involved to make sure that what is being claimed is true. Did that person really streamline the onboarding process for new PhD students – or did they just photocopy the old list? Ask the academic who is primarily in charge of the PhD students. And ask committee chairs about members’ relative contributions.
?
The Overcommitted Helper
One academic may always answer your requests for volunteers no matter what the service role. This sounds great but it is difficult for people to be good at everything and while they may enjoy helping others, sometimes they may simply be afraid to say no. The worst-case scenario is that they say yes to everything, going well beyond their 20 per cent service component, but only manage to get things done at a high personal cost.
Ask others to cover some tasks, and have a frank discussion with the Overcommitted Helper about what is best for their career – where they can add the most value – rather than allowing them to spread themselves too thinly, or in too many low-value activities.
?
The Passive Observer
These are the academics that always come to meetings but don’t say much even when they have something to contribute.
Of course, you can call on them in meetings, but you don’t want to seem like you are picking on them. It may be a difficult conversation, but asking them privately if they are happy with their contribution to communal endeavours may be a good start.
If they are not speaking up due to a lack of confidence or fear of public speaking, suggest that they get practice through a public speaking club, such as . If the issue is more to do with natural introversion, overcoming this can also be a difficult discussion. However, if done one-to-one, in a non-threatening environment, it may be possible to instil a desire to improve their communication skills.
If the person is still not interested in changing then the right service role may be something operational that can be accomplished via email. When they are on committees, their contribution may have to be indirect. Can they be used to report to the committee or to you? Can they work on a special project to prepare a report on an issue that requires some deeper thought or background work?
?
The Explosive Academic
Some academics are only passive observers up to the point when they suddenly get so passionate about an issue or an obstruction that they end up yelling.
探花视频
One way to defuse the Explosive Academic is to seek their opinion on the agenda items before any meeting starts, so they have a chance to voice their concern early. Get them involved in any committees they complain about; they probably won’t complain about themselves! And they may change it for the better. If they decide not to get involved, it is unlikely they will complain as loudly the next time.
?
The Entitled Academic
Identifying an Entitled Academic is not difficult – they often demand things that make you look twice – and refuse to do anything you ask them.
People are often told to “learn to say no”, but someone has to do the work. Does the person saying no already have a full load? Then can you take some work away to help them? Or are they only saying no because the task is inconvenient – such as lecturing on a Friday evening? By rotating the people assigned unpopular tasks, you can promise each individual that they won’t have to do it again for a good while.
If someone is acting entitled, any advice you give may fall on deaf ears, so you may need to enlist someone they trust to confirm (or not) their belief about how they should be treated. This can be a rude awakening for some people, so be prepared for a backlash!
One example was someone who felt that he should be promoted to senior lecturer on the basis of his publications with his PhD supervisor. When he was advised to wait so that he could demonstrate his own contribution, he moved to another institution for a quick promotion.
I have also tried asking the Entitled Academic’s advice on what to do as a way of trying to create some empathy.
In some cases, special treatment may be deserved if people bring a lot to the department in other ways – superstar researchers are a good example. In these cases, go out of your way to assist – but it is very difficult if these people are arrogant.
?
The Damaged Academic
If someone has issues that are making them difficult to manage then it may be impossible to break the pattern.
The damage may be from something from their childhood or from a later-life trauma. One individual suffered from low self-esteem and his way of compensating was to create a fantasy world in which he was important. A woman on probation told me she could not change her behaviour due to her upbringing and turned vicious after not getting confirmed in her position.
As head, it is not your responsibility to fix any psychological issues, but you certainly may want to try to help the person. Offer advice and be as supportive as possible when it comes to addressing specific issues. If you focus on the immediate performance only, this can give a focus for the conversation.
If the academic volunteers justifications of their behaviour, politely ask if this is how they want to continue. Is there something about themselves that they want to work on so they can overcome this issue? Admitting a problem is often more difficult than solving it. But sometimes suggesting they get help will not be appreciated.?
Do your best, but definitely protect yourself from any repercussions. Don’t make accusations. Email the person after every meeting so there is no misinterpretation; be very clear about next steps.
And remember – you can’t take anything a Damaged Academic says personally as their comments reflect their issues and not you!
?
The Time Waster
A certain faculty member may be wasting your time (and theirs) for a multitude of reasons. They may have no one at home to speak with, so they drop in to your office at the end of the day, every day. Or they may be unsure of themselves and want advice all the time because they can’t make decisions. Or they may just want to spend more time with you in order to try to understand you better.
Try to be patient. You have a duty to listen to them, but you have to shorten the exposure somehow. I don’t think it is fair to delegate supervision since this would just be passing the problem to someone else. If you are getting repeated, random interruptions then one technique is to ask them to schedule an appointment at a time of day when you need a break. For me it is 10.30am or 2.30pm, when I need a coffee.
If the Time Waster stops by to chat, ask how much time they need. If they say it will only take five minutes then agree but take the conversation to the kitchen, with your tea cup to refill. Or ask them to walk with you to the next meeting. Both of these activities have clear endings so you can get away gracefully – though I’ve heard of one faculty member who even followed the head into the bathroom, rather than have to stop talking!
?
The Visionary Dreamer
These academics really have a lot of good ideas but haven’t developed all the skills to see their vision through to implementation. They are extremely good at talking but not at doing. They often succeed in leadership positions, where they can direct someone else to do the actual work, but they have to earn their way there first!
The best use of them in the meantime is to put them on a committee to help generate ideas or assign them a strategic advisory role. If you want them to actually do some implementation work, you can set it up to require outcomes at the end and not simply ideas.
Creating very focused interim goals can help Visionary Dreamers to get through big projects – though one woman couldn’t even focus on these and eventually gave up.
?
The Academic Left Behind
These are people who either haven’t kept up with the department and their field or have been shown up as their university or department has moved ahead in research quality.
This is a tricky group to manage because they had all the right skills and may have been performing well before the world changed.
As a first step, ensure that they understand what has changed: it may not be obvious. If the changes are substantial and university-wide, the likely phase-in period can serve as a warning that something more is needed. If the change is research quality-related, academics who joined years ago when only a master’s degree was needed may need to get a PhD to keep their job – but maybe the university can support their study. Offering support on how to be successful can also be helpful, such as workshops led by successful faculty members or outside experts. Maybe even time-management gurus. Or visitors from top universities.
Ultimately, finding what each person needs to be successful is your objective, but this may be difficult if they don’t know themselves! A development plan and possibly a performance improvement plan is a last resort.
?
The Research Perfectionist
These academics may be very well trained, possibly with very good credentials, and they often have high expectations of themselves. However, their success may be limited by a refusal to call time on a research project until everything is perfect – and it rarely is. There is always something else that could be done to improve it.
They may be acting like this because they are afraid of rejection, but this attitude is not sustainable: they need to get on with it and develop a thicker skin.
If the academic is stuck on a project for a long time, they may welcome an offer to connect them with people who can offer advice (such as reading their manuscript to determine if it really needs more work) or even take over the lead. Be careful about offering to help yourself though as they may interpret this as trying to take advantage of them. And you don’t have time anyway!
Micromanagement is rarely a good strategy with academics, but in this case you might want to make an exception. Work with the Research Perfectionist to set a time frame with due dates for each component of what they think they need to do to finish the project. They want to rewrite the introduction? Give them two weeks and insist that whatever they have by then is what they must use, to keep?to their schedule. Negotiate a strict deadline for each component and help them get to the end.
?
The Procrastinator
As well as perfectionism, procrastination is another basic characteristic that many of us have, but some academics are more severely affected than others – and that can be a problem.
For example, finding casual lecturers for a large subject is partially managed by individual subject coordinators. The pool of available casual lecturers is largest before anyone is allocated, so if you know a coordinator is a procrastinator, point out the advantages of completing the allocation quickly. If they see an obvious benefit, they may be willing to work earlier/faster.
Setting deadlines – and enforcing them – is also key. For instance, ask for documents such as nomination forms or promotion applications early so that you can do your work on them well before the central administration’s own deadline. You could ask for a draft version by an even earlier date to ensure that they start early.
?
An overarching theme of all this advice is to directly confront issues yourself if you need to. There is no point in making enemies needlessly through being too abrasive, but if the situation warrants a discussion, then don’t shy away from having one.
If the faculty member knows you are being honest and are legitimately trying to help them, there is a higher probability that they actually may listen and take the advice to heart. And then you will have been successful in your job, helping the people in the department for both their own and for the university’s benefit.
is a professor of finance at the University of Technology Sydney. He is currently on a one-year sabbatical and is working on a guide to becoming a department head. He would like to thank Martin Bugeja, Paul Kofman, Marco Navone, David Gallego Ortega, Kate Sweetapple and Sue Wright for helpful comments and camaraderie during his time as department head. All content is the author’s sole responsibility.
探花视频
Register to continue
Why register?
- Registration is free and only takes a moment
- Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
- Sign up for our newsletter
Subscribe
Or subscribe for unlimited access to:
- Unlimited access to news, views, insights & reviews
- Digital editions
- Digital access to 罢贬贰’蝉 university and college rankings analysis
Already registered or a current subscriber?
