who oversee specific departments; and, as the number of departments and programs have grown, so, too, have the number of vice presidents who serve on a cabinet. As each will
wish to present their interests and agendas to the president and other members of the
cabinet, more and more time is spent in cabinet meetings. But while the argument is made that such interaction is critically important, it may in fact prove detrimental – if for no other reason than what was mentioned previously regarding time spent in meetings.
Moreover, there is no requirement that a president’s cabinet be comprised of every vice president or chancellor overseeing a particular
department. This just taxes the president’s time and thereby takes away from other duties. One means for streamlining operations and reducing the time staff demands place on presidents is to adopt an administrative framework structure around C-level executives. As a recent article in University Business stated: “As business is upskilling and government seeks to modernize assistance for educational programs, universities that get to know the new chief influencers of corporate learning can build strategic relationships that yield greater collective success.”19 Specifically, the article pointed out that:
As corporate leaders address skill deficits within their workforce and educators design curriculum, corporate-academic collaboration is essential for mutual success. According to the World Economic Forum, a proactive effort is necessary to prevent further job losses and talent shortages. At a time when meaningful introductions are limited by safe, social distances, it’s important to work together to identify parallels and shared missions. To fully prepare for the future of work, grow resources and progress, strategic partnerships are key. So, it is perhaps more important than ever for
university leaders to understand how corporate structure has transformed. The C-Suite is
growing and its influence shifting. In this new landscape, there are three chief introductions to empower university and workplace relations.20
What would such an administrative structure look like? It would be comprised of a Chief Executive Officer (CEO) or president (sometimes the two titles are joined under one person), who reports to the board and is responsible both for realizing the mission and ensuring fiscal stability of the institution; a Chief Academic or Learning Officer (CAO/CLO), who is responsible for academic programming; a Chief Financial Officer (CFO), who is responsible for finance and payroll; a Chief Information an Security Officer (CISO), who is
responsible for the technology ecosystem, data quality, and strategies emerging therefrom; a Chief Operating Officer (COO), who is responsible for human resources, and facilities and grounds; and a Chief Communications or Marketing Officer (CCO/CMO), who is responsible for communications and public relations. But this list could be reduced even more by placing the CFO under the oversight of the COO and the CCO/CMO under the oversight of the CISO.
This means that instead of a cabinet comprised of 12 members or more reporting to a president/CEO, there would only be three: the Chief Academic Officer (CAO/CLO), the Chief
Information and Strategy Officer (CISO), and the Chief Operating Officer (COO). Respective
The impending cliff bringing increased competition among schools will only further emphasize the need for multidimensional leaders who provide “vision” by seeing the big picture, but who have the technical skills to “get in the weeds.
125