Speaking as a former Columbia administrator, there's plenty of fat to cut! cut! cut! but it's also important to recognize that all administrators are not equally competent or responsible. In my experience, there tend to be a small proportion of 20- and 30-something workhorses that really hold different offices and programs together while then there are a ton of useless middle managers and their pet flunkies wasting time and money and office space. I'd think over half of those administrative jobs could be cut without students or faculty noticing much, but cutting the wrong ones could cause a bunch of problems.
I completely agree. The trick is to identify the workhorses (which I imagine wouldn’t actually be all that difficult). It’s also interesting that from what I can tell, it’s a similar story for the military. I noticed a the same sort of thing while I was in the Air Force, though not to the same degree. The ratio seemed to be more even.
I've seen instances where competent people are specifically held back because their bosses don't want to lose the reliable ones who take care of the work, so I'm not sure how easy it would be to identify the workhorses based on self-reporting vs. hiring consultants to assess what's what.
Hmmm consultants would be interesting, given that consulting seems to be an industry with a high proportion of the kinds of BS jobs Graeber talks about
I've had a few times when I've had to be interviewed by consultants about the workings of dysfunctional organizations for them to issue a report. My impression is generally that the leadership wants to do what it wants to do and tends to hire consultants to be the bad guy to blame for any painful decisions that need to be made.
Most consultants understand, that strategic realignment requires changes, updates, new structures and systems. They are prepared to take the message forward on the behalf of their client, to the highest level. They know, that if they do their job well, they will have to be Switzerland with the potential of facing anger and denial. (Denial is NOT a river in Eygpt). A consultant can look back and judge their value on where the organization goes after they share the good and the bad results of their consultation.
Speaking as a former Columbia administrator, there's plenty of fat to cut! cut! cut! but it's also important to recognize that all administrators are not equally competent or responsible. In my experience, there tend to be a small proportion of 20- and 30-something workhorses that really hold different offices and programs together while then there are a ton of useless middle managers and their pet flunkies wasting time and money and office space. I'd think over half of those administrative jobs could be cut without students or faculty noticing much, but cutting the wrong ones could cause a bunch of problems.
I completely agree. The trick is to identify the workhorses (which I imagine wouldn’t actually be all that difficult). It’s also interesting that from what I can tell, it’s a similar story for the military. I noticed a the same sort of thing while I was in the Air Force, though not to the same degree. The ratio seemed to be more even.
I've seen instances where competent people are specifically held back because their bosses don't want to lose the reliable ones who take care of the work, so I'm not sure how easy it would be to identify the workhorses based on self-reporting vs. hiring consultants to assess what's what.
Hmmm consultants would be interesting, given that consulting seems to be an industry with a high proportion of the kinds of BS jobs Graeber talks about
I've had a few times when I've had to be interviewed by consultants about the workings of dysfunctional organizations for them to issue a report. My impression is generally that the leadership wants to do what it wants to do and tends to hire consultants to be the bad guy to blame for any painful decisions that need to be made.
I can definitely understand that logic. And consultants as professional fall guys is pretty funny.
Most consultants understand, that strategic realignment requires changes, updates, new structures and systems. They are prepared to take the message forward on the behalf of their client, to the highest level. They know, that if they do their job well, they will have to be Switzerland with the potential of facing anger and denial. (Denial is NOT a river in Eygpt). A consultant can look back and judge their value on where the organization goes after they share the good and the bad results of their consultation.