Wright, Mary C. (2008). Always at Odds? Creating Alignment between Faculty and Administrative Values. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

92 Pages:     Price: $14.95     ISBN: 978-07914-7368-9

In her introduction, Wright describes the relationship between administrators and faculty within institutions of higher education as having been traditionally one of differing goals, values and perspectives (pp. 1-3). Wright explores the tracks that led educators to this point of disparity, while attempting to disclose any common areas where value paths may converge. The focus is primarily upon research institutions and universities, those institutions that are more science oriented.

Interestingly, Wright's subtitle includes the term alignment when coupling faculty and administrative values rather than agreement. Webster's II New College Dictionary defines alignment as "to adjust to produce a proper condition or relationship; to be in correct adjustment"(2001, p. 28) versus agreement which is interpreted as "the acceptance or conceding of something; to be of one opinion" (p. 23). Alignment does not necessitate the categorizing of one party as winning while the other loses. Rather, both parties arrange themselves to move in a common direction progressing toward a unified goal. In the case of higher education, the alignment of values among all participants and stakeholders regarding teaching, research and service is critical for forward movement to occur.

Wright's findings are based upon a grounded theory qualitative study exploring the junior faculty and lead administrators within four departments located in a large research university. Her study included both undergraduate and graduate level departments. Based upon her findings, Wright devised four categories that captured and personified the communication and networking styles of those departments that were thematically identified as: star department, universe department, divided department, and team department. These departmental types were further explored to determine effects upon job outcomes, and more importantly for educators, upon teaching and student learning.

Wright's work is unique due to its dual perspective of both administrator and faculty. Interestingly, she frequently notes the stance of junior faculty which she further describes as often significantly different from that of tenured faculty. Not surprisingly, Wright finds a positive correlation with value alignment on one hand and job performance, institutional continuity, and job satisfaction on the other. These findings have important implications for improving productivity, outcomes, and retention within institutions of higher education.

Wright reduces the idea of value alignment to the lowest common denominator: that of a personal fit with the organization. She coins the term "culture of congruence" (p. 35) to signify this alignment of belief systems. The central component for alignment is the shared understandings of policies and behaviors. More importantly, all participants must share common "interpretive structures" (p. 36), or shared guidelines for everyday practice. Alignment can never occur in the midst of chaos or in situations where opposing views are constantly being jockeyed for position and acceptance. In other words, alignment is a broad concept that starts at a very narrow point. An aligned department consists of aligned individual members, whether they are faculty or administrators. Further, aligned departments boast of productive, satisfied, long-term members working to promote its common values and beliefs. In an institution of higher education, such a department consists of faculty who are supported in their teaching and research efforts, students who are learning and satisfied with their instruction, and administrators who recognize and embrace their role in enabling both of these outcomes to occur. All components must be advancing in the same direction simultaneously for maximum forward momentum to occur. The misalignment of either faculty or administration can bring progress to a screeching halt resulting in backlash for all stakeholders.

Practical application is evidenced by case study excerpts deposited throughout the chapters. Wright describes the six departments included in her research study, characterizes them according to the four typologies presented in the first chapter, and peppers the dialogue with applicable quotes. The result for the reader is a deeper understanding of the concepts via applied knowledge. Applications for both faculty and administrators are offered. Further, an additional empathy for the other's position may be acquired via an open-minded approach when reading this book. Wright acknowledges that even small, subtle efforts have the potential for creating large effects in departments that cultivate a culture of shared beliefs and aligned values toward the common goal of teaching and learning.

The final chapter is devoted to offering specific strategies for the various players within educational institutions to cultivate an aligned value system characterized by shared beliefs and common teaching and learning goals. However in order for a single department to successfully achieve and maintain alignment, participants outside that department must contribute to the process. It is not enough for the department members only to agree to buy in to the process. Other key players include professional development staff, search committees, faculty support staff and future faculty (i.e., job candidates) also must understand and align to the shared values.

Wright acknowledges that her findings and typology may be very specific for the science-based research institution which she studied. Therefore, she suggests that further research studies targeting other types of institutions of higher education would expand the base of knowledge offered here. She specifically suggests that liberal arts colleges be explored. Further limitations include the departmental confines of her research. Broader applicability such as to entire colleges would be useful.

Wright's work is a valuable contribution due to its dual perspective stemming from both the administrative and faculty viewpoint. A shared understanding by these two bodies may lead to alignment of values and beliefs which may encourage increased productivity, job satisfaction, retention, and learning outcomes. As funding is ultimately tied to outcomes, the entire institution, its community of interest, and all stakeholders stand to benefit from the alignment between faculty and administrative values. Although this publication outlines alignment at the rather modest departmental level, it is implicated that small changes add up to great impacts. Ultimately, alignment between faculty and administrative values begins one individual at a time.

References

Webster's II new college dictionary (3rd ed). (2001). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Reviewed by Frankie Lyons, Program Head Radiography at Rowan-Cabarrus Community College and doctoral student, Adult and Community College Education, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC. Area of research interest: community college faculty and job satisfaction.