Senior leadership positions can be lonely. All eyes are on you, as others are affected by the decisions you make. And while your decisions are often public, the complexities of decision-making often include sensitive and confidential information, as well as competing interests among different constituencies. Even the strongest leaders struggle with these challenges.
Regular coaching and advising provide a number of important benefits:
A confidential space where you are free to discuss anything from personnel issues to personal challenges affecting your role
A thought partner invested in your success — who gets to know you and your organizational culture, while offering insights that only an outsider can bring
An accountability partner who can help you stick to your strategic priorities, even as you balance the day-to-day challenges
And since most contracts are structured on a retainer basis, regular check-in calls can be supplemented by additional meetings to address pressing issues that may arise from time to time.
Most plans fail. I’ve seen beautifully written strategic plans that never come to fruition because what they promise isn’t realistic. And I’ve seen organizations ignore plans that don’t connect to their missions or their people.
Successful plans need buy-in from relevant constituencies, and they have to be realistic.
I have worked with dozens of leaders to design strategic planning processes that strike the right balance of the collaboration necessary for a good plan and the expediency required by the quickening pace of change. There’s no cookie-cutter process that works on every campus or in every organization, but together we can develop the right process to meet your needs.
I’ve spent years writing and editing speeches, gift proposals, book chapters, press releases, and op-eds. Recently, I had the pleasure of working with my longtime boss and collaborator Rebecca Chopp on her memoir, Still Me: Accepting Alzheimer’s Without Losing Yourself. A reflection of the value I place on deep relationships, I’m gifted at helping people find their voice.
When it comes time for leaders to write something important — when the message truly matters — it’s critical to consider its impact on various audiences. Too often, I’ve seen preventable campus crises arise from poor communication or a failure to foresee how a particular audience would receive a particular message. I’ve seen presidents publicly backtrack simply because initial communications didn’t adequately convey their decision-making processes.
One of the greatest challenges in a time of crisis is maintaining perspective. Whether students are staging a sit-in or faculty are calling for a vote of no confidence, decision-making seems a lot harder when tensions are high. That gets further complicated when everyone from the press to your own alumni are calling and demanding explanations and answers.
Often, even as you’re still gathering the facts yourself, other parties are driving the public narrative. Especially at this stage, leaders can default to vague, legalistic language. Though their impulse to “get all the facts” before responding substantively can make sense, it can be all too easy to issue a communication that lacks empathy and does little to reassure audiences that you’re responding appropriately.
Communication ought to follow, rather than drive, decision-making. Constituents want to know what you are doing and how you will continue to address the issues at hand. Crisis-management consultants can provide real-time support in these critical moments, but who is helping you keep perspective and focus on long-term ramifications?
Time and again, I have seen organizations get stuck because there has been a breakdown in trust. Perhaps a prior change effort was handled poorly, and those with institutional memory are skeptical that today’s efforts will go differently. Or maybe unprofessional behavior has created unresolved issues for some team members.
I’ve worked with departments where coworkers had trouble even looking one another in the eye and saying "good morning." I’ve seen cabinets whose dysfunction struck me as that of an unhealthy family. And I’ve stood in front of rooms with employees so distrustful of leadership that they openly ask, “Why even bother?”
I cannot promise resolution or perfect harmony. In fact, I have sometimes found that a breakdown is so severe that the only resolution is for someone to leave a department or organization. But I have always found that confronting issues directly is the only way to move forward.
I’m unafraid to step into uncomfortable conversations — to ask questions that no one has been willing to ask before. My goal is to help participants achieve clarity and common understanding. Many times, this serves as the building block for re-establishing trust over time.
Amid growing distrust in institutions, strong governance becomes even more critical. A well-structured board engaged in the right ways should be a huge asset to an institution and its leadership.
Unfortunately, many board members feel under-utilized. They might focus on the wrong things or find that they are having the same conversations meeting after meeting, year after year. This can lead to disengagement as easily as it can lead to counterproductive engagement.
Most people who join higher education or nonprofit boards do so because of their love for the organization. They want to put their time and wisdom to good use for the benefit of the institution.
If you don’t feel your board is actively engaged in productive ways, it may be time to reassess how board meeting time is spent and what the most effective role of a trustee should be.
My work has required me to be an intermediary — a translator among different individuals or groups. Especially when communication breaks down and leads to disengagement, low morale, or conflict, intervention is critical. These efforts can be big or small, depending on the complexity of the underlying issues, but they are necessary to make progress.
Most people shy away from potential awkward conversations, especially ones that surround conflict. My strong belief is that resolution comes from direct, intentional, honest, careful confrontation. Ignoring a problem lets it linger, and almost everyone suffers as a result.
I’m unafraid to enter sensitive and difficult conversations because I believe everyone benefits from putting the issues out there and developing solutions based on concrete actions.