Al Baldwin, Ph.D. Campus Dean, Lakeshore Campus College of Lake College Grayslake, IL

 This presentation examines issues in achieving overall organizational goals from a multi-campus educational institution from a ecosystem perspective.

Individual campuses are distinct organisms Multiple campuses add complexity to the management of the institution. Multiple campuses can add uncertainty to the institutional decision making process. The distinct nature of individual campuses can be leveraged to meet the goals of the institution while meeting the needs of the service area where each campus is located.

 A system formed by the interaction of community entities such as public school systems, employers, ethnic groups, and local/state governments within their environment.

 Ecosystems are controlled both by external and internal factors. External factors such as politics, the educational governing bodies control the overall structure of an college/university ecosystem and the way things work within it, but are not themselves influenced by the ecosystem.  Ecosystems are dynamic entities— invariably, they are subject to periodic disturbances and are in the process of recovering from some past disturbance.

 Although definitions of ecosystem management abound, there is a common set of principles which underlie these definitions. A fundamental principle is the long-term sustainability of the production of goods and services by the ecosystem; It also requires clear goals with respect to future trajectories and behaviors of the system being managed. Other important requirements include a sound ecological understanding of the system, including connectedness, ecological dynamics and the context in which the system is embedded.

 Managing independent campuses becomes increasingly difficult as resources become scarce.  Managing multiple campuses adds complexity, uncertainty, multidimensional, and often contentiousness in pursuit of scarce resources.

 Can serve distinct populations  Can help to filter information and positively direct information flow  Can help to increase efficiencies

 Can give the institution a “black-eye”.  Make basic tenets of a multi-cultural institution difficult.  Cause faculty/staff isolation and angst Cause inefficiencies across individual campuses.

 Ideally we want to manage the collective ecosystem (all campuses as one interdependent organism.)  We should recognize that institutional decisions impact interdependency resulting in multiple effects (permutations or ripples) throughout the collective ecosystem. These effects can be; Indirect or cascading Synergistic Cumulative

Campus 1 Campus 2 Campus 3 Can goals of the organization be achieved independent of other sister campuses? Campus 1Campus 2 Campus 3 Can goals of the independent sister campuses be achieved independent of the primary campus?

Primary Campus Campus 2Campus 3 Campus 2Campus 3 Primary Campus Campus congruence to institutional mission and goals Campus congruence Are there negatives or positives in being closely aligned to organizational mission and goals? Are there negatives or positives in being closely aligned to service area differences?

Status quo ecosystem management Slow evolution of components within the ecosystem Accelerated evolution of components within the ecosystem Abrupt change or disruption of the ecosystem

Tipping Point (Critical Mass)

 Command means to have authority over or to direct resources.  Control means to manipulate, govern, manage, or regulate, in the sense of observing a given situation.  Assessing the difference from the desired state (stated institutional strategic goals and objectives) from the specific needs of the satellite campus and having the authority to act on campus differences.

Pathological Organization Bureaucratic Organization Adaptive Organization Don’t want to knowMay not find outActively seek information Messengers are “shot”Messengers are listened to-if they arrive Messengers are trained and rewarded Responsibility is shirked Responsibility is compartmentalized Responsibility is shared Bridging is discouragedBridging is allowed but neglected Bridging is rewarded Failure is punished or covered up Organization is just and merciful Failure results in learning and redirection New ideas are crushedNew ideas present problems New ideas are sought and welcomed

 An adaptive organization is one that actively engages its environment, seeking information (positive or negative), rewarding those that bring it, and learning from it.

 In times of turbulent change in which survival is threatened, questions may arise as to the most viable approach to mediate threats. Should the focus be on the entire ecosystem? Should the focus be tailored to the survival of the species

 Prescribing remedies that protect the entire ecosystem (organization). Exp. Standard operating procedures, public relations, human resource processes.  Pros – can save money by centralizing functions, offer legal protection from having unclear/ambiguous processes between organisms.  Cons – can restrict operations or individual campus development in targeting specific populations in meeting organizational goals.

 The fine filter approach focuses on protecting individual species or guilds (species that exploit a similar resource a similar way). Exp. Wolves or whooping cranes  Pros- appeals to stakeholders that have an affinity for maintaining status quo or historical references  Cons – does not examine the larger impact on the entire ecosystem.

 Routine  Culture  Incentives / Rewards Systems  Conflict vs. Conforming  Control vs. Flexibility

Questions/Comments???