4 AUA NEWSLINK
C h a ir ’s C o lu m n HR system as the HR professionals have become the ‘ true owners’ of their own process. More recently, examples of new areas developing within and outside higher education include roles in internal communications, marketing, proj ect management, and business planning. Job titles here, like in an HR department, will tend to avoid the term administrator preferring more specific titles that will more easily span different occupational groups, where higher education is j ust one of many potential areas someone might work. A more specific job title also conveys what it is that someone does, and implies that they have specific skills, knowledge, and/ or ualifications to undertake their role. The higher education sector has also grown to become more than a collection of institutions: statutory bodies have swollen in number in recent decades as have, naturally enough, the number of staff who are employed in these areas. From the HEFCE, HEFCW , and the S FC, through the OI A, UCAS , OFFA, the Q AA, and HES A, representative bodies like UUK and the Russell Group, to the growing list of related professional associations both large and small: AMOS S HE, ARC, AHUA, BUFDG, UHR, AUDE, CUC, etc, not forgetting, of course, the AUA and the staff of the National Office in anchester. Are all of these people university administrators? Many of them don’ t work in universities, for a start. Might ‘ higher education management’ become a new catch-all that can cover the numerous roles and different types of organisations? Possibly. Though the difficulty here is the myriad implications of the word ‘ manager’ that sit uncomfortably in the higher education sector, especially with non-administrative colleagues. For the implication of the term manager, unlike administrator, is that the manager controls and directs. A sports team might be made up of great players but it is the manager who controls them. W here this doesn’ t happen, such as when S ebastian Vettel decided in the alaysian heat in the final laps of the grand prix that he didn’ t like Christian Horner’ s instruction to keep his place behind his teammate Mark W ebber and muscled his way through to take
victory, the authority and purpose of the manager’ s role is naturally q uestioned. W ho was in charge that day? I t was meant to be the manager, but clearly it wasn’ t, and if a manager can’ t control, how can they manage? The higher education sector generally operates according to different principles than those commonly found in other sectors and the term manager does not sit comfortably. Does this mean the term ‘ university administrator’ , even ‘ administrator’ without the prefix, is doomed Will it become a title to be used only in the dwindling number of areas that specialisation has not yet reached or maybe j ust as an indicator of those staff working in support of something more specialised than their own role? Possibly. One of the issues holding back such a change, however, is that there is no agreement over what better alternative can be used. The issues caused by employing the term manager have already been discussed. Other new titles for the general area previously labelled as university administration have been fast developing, however, such as ‘ support services’ , ‘ professional services’ , simply ‘ services’ or the cornucopian ‘ professional administrative and support services’ . The trend for individual titles for ever more specific roles seems likely to continue. Though this is a development not without its own complications. All those newly created UKBA Compliance Officers are now seeking a new name as their role has outlived the organisation for which they are named, to take j ust one example of the perils caused by ever greater exactitude in j ob titles. The future is not clear. The time may have even passed where staff in higher education, other than academics, hold a common interest or bond in their
work. That would, I feel, be a matter of great regret. As I have commented before see Newslink massification in the sector has been the seed-bed of specialisation, and increasing regulation the super-strength fertiliser. That is why we have a ourishing environment for more, and more specialised, roles. That is where the silos we experience have come from. To be effective, however, req uires more than an indepth knowledge of one’ s current role. To work in the silo alone is to fail to be as effective as our organisations – and the sector – need us to be. That is why the AUA’ s role in bringing together staff from different areas is important but it is also why it so difficult because increasingly staff have more specialised, and more narrow, affiliations which make appreciating the complementary benefit of AUA membership more difficult to appreciate. Does our name help or hinder the AUA in its mission to advance and assist in the advancement of education? I know that I have spoken to any number of staff, those supporting international students for example, or staff working in public relations, who I ’ ve suggested j oin the AUA only to be met with a somewhat q uizzical look and the reply ‘ but I ’ m not a university administrator’ . From a certain point of view we are all university administrators now, while from another perspective none of us are. Given the turbulence in the terminology we use, however, is there a better alternative name for the AUA? Perhaps one way to avoid the issues associated with all the terms currently in use is to use something less specific, abstract even how about ‘ HE Progress’ ? Maybe we should fight to reclaim the term ‘ administrator’ and ensure that it feels welcoming and relevant to all staff? Answers on a postcard please.
W ill it become a title to be used only in the dwindling number of areas that specialisation has not yet reached or maybe j ust as an indicator of those staff working in support of something more specialised than their own role?