QUESTION 27 Has collegiality improved over the past three years?

I cannot tell.

No it has declined

I don't know.

I'm new, and I've only had positive experiences so far.

n/a

No, I think the administration's implementation of the "chain of command" is not collegial.
In my Faculty, it is very hard to get to see the Dean for example.
Everything is supposed to be funnelled through the Dept chair.
I think the Dean should have a lively interest in the faculty in encouraging us and knowing us. Otherwise all the Dean sees are "problem" faculty members.
At the same time I think the same thing should go for the AVP. He should be willing to see any prof. who would like to meet with him -- few would abuse the opportunity. It should not be that I have "failed" in attempts to talk to the dept. chair or the dean before I can meet the AVP. I think the essence of collegiality is that the higher ups should take the trouble to know us.
We once had a dean who made the rounds and came to each of our offices for a 15 min. chat at least once a year. He really knew each one of us and that proved very valuable in the long run. Not so now.

I support your efforts to work on this issue but I don't have any personal examples to share.

Since I am no longer chair of my dept., I have little interaction with the senior administration, however, I see no evidence that much has changed over the past three years. I became cynical 20 years ago, when the then head of HR mentioned to me that "we pay you [professors] big bucks...." when in point of fact I could have been earning a salary 2-3x higher in industry. I concluded that the administration basically resents paying us any salary at all. Former senior staff in the registrar's office oozed contempt for faculty as well, as shown by (1) insulting nicknames they assigned to individual faculty (I personally had to threaten the person in question with a grievance if they didn't stop addressing me in this manner), and (2) condenscending memos from that office.

This probably aren't the kind of anecdotes you were seeking, and they date back in time, but it is nice to vent. Thanks!

n/a

No.

It has further deteriorated. The EMG appears deaf to faculty/staff/student concerns. Furthermore, managerialism has become the new modus operandi ...and management expands. SMU has become colder. And the management wonders why SMU has the lowest alumni participation rate (for financial giving) in the country (2.5%).

There has not been a noticeable trend in either direction, in my opinion.

Yes

no comment

No adverse effects to date.

I have no experience from which to comment on this issue.

Yes.

No, but not in the way you argue. I have seen more departments where there are factions (often old boys against newbies) and where each (the blame can be spread) make decisions based on self-interest and not on equanimity.

The University makes heavy water out of "consultation" but proposals, programs and projects brought forward under this guise seem thin on real listening and are quite formulaic. Issues of core concern are ignored (space) in favour of glitz (Atrium); issues of core concern (maintaining infrastructure) take second place to the next shiny toy. So the place is falling apart through neglect while new (and probably redundant) work is undertaken. How many times has the Dean of Arts' office been revamped?

The University has made disasterous choices in Deans. Apart from the Dean of Science (who is a breath of fresh air), the Deans of Arts and Commerce are detrimental to the University. Their inter-personal skills and favouritism have cost the University good faculty; their authoritarian and abrasive manners have impeded morale in some departments and among new hires.

No

I think so.

No, I agree with the statement above.

I would say no. It does seem that the university is focusing maximizing the number of bums in seats (especially at the ug level) while minimizing the cost (usually part-time instructors) to maximize revenue while paying lip service to the claim that the educational experience is a priority.

There also seems to be an increased interest in creating programs that can generate revenue in excess of break even. Once established these programs become favoured; e.g., the money making MFin program recently had a room renovated exclusively for MFin students and the room is unavailable for any other classes.

There are other events administration should have followed a process of consultation but, instead, choose to decide unilaterialy - not collegial.

I haven't noticed...

God, no. Self-interest has become more rampant, both from the perspective of the university and individual faculty member, in the last few years...maybe including me. Faculty members seem to have become more insulated, spending less time in the office, attending fewing meetings or functions, having fewer constructive discussions about serious university matters. The administration is growing and is directly university directions and policies with less serious input or influence from the faculty. More academic decisions and, indeed, whole programs are introduced or continued motivated almost solely to bring in revenue. Far fewer university community members seem to be questioning what a university is supposed to be providing and, sadly, faculty are turning inward to focus on their own careers and paths of least resistance in their dealings with the university. This is certainly anything but collegial.

No, I don't think it has.

N/A

No.

No

yes-- I feel that the admin does actually work with us and not against us, even if we don't always agree

PS this was a very leading question as are several others on this survey

Neutral

Breaucratic processes have exploded over the last three years as a direct consequence of the mangerial ethos of the expanded administration. This trend must be reversed if collegiality is to be restored.

No. We have become a machine, one that often misfires.

I haven't any instances to make an informed decision on this issue.

Collegiality has declined over the past three years (well, it had declined by the time of the last contract negotiation; it remains to be seen how this next one will go). But increasingly, academic programming is being dictated by adminstration on the basis of market criteria, and this is unacceptable.

No. The collegial model has been replaced by competition between units and individual employees. This had a a deleterious effect on working conditions as well as the quality of education provided.

Collegiality is fine. EMG does a good job.

Yes, it has improved.

No - it has declined and this includes the Deans. I find less and less discussion of issues to reach a mutually agreeable solution or course of action and more and more dictates from the Deans' offices as to "how things must be done". This means less time to actually do my work since more time is spent trying to address bureaucratic road blocks set up by the admin (especially Deans). Ten years ago faculty had far more autonomy and freedom in teaching activities and relations with students than we do now. For example, we now have to get "permission" from the Dean if we want to give a student an "IC" grade or if we want to conduct a Directed Reading/Study course with a senior level student. The Dean also refuses to assign teaching assistantships to faculty and students until the end of the first month of each term. Essentially this means that neither students or faculty are able to plan until the second month of classes. This "control" on the part of Deans impacts significantly on our ability to develop course evaluation tools.
Another significant governance issue is the annual report and now faculty input on those reports. This constitutes an erosion of tenure and collegiality in that it forces faculty to "keep up with the Jones" rather than committ to their own teaching and research agenda.
Dean's offices also now have far too much input on hiring matters. As faculty retire, departments are losing "full" professors and are only "allowed" to hire at the Assistant" rank. This has profound impacts on department strengths and resources.

NO!

Absolutely not. Especially the Registrar's Office has become governed by an obsessive and people-phobic computer-software dogmatism.

In my view not at all. The fact that something called the Executive MANAGEMENT Group has become part of the vocabulary at SMU says it all. The individuals in this group are administrators of a university -- their use of the corporate term management says it all.

One possible exception is the Dean of Science office. Dr. Butler appears to run his office in a much more collegial and inclusion fashion than did his predecessor.

The creeping up of class sizes is an example of the lack of collegiality. Another example is the bad negative advice being given to faculty members about promotion - especially in the Arts FAculty (I'm not in Arts). In a perverse way, the weakness of collective agreement language contributes to a lack of collegiality. Management here usually relies heavily on the collective agreement. But by the same token seems to believe that if the collective agreement is weak or silent on an issue, then they don't have the obligation to be collegial. In fact, the true test of collegiality is whether the administration acts collegially EVEN WHEN the collective agreement doesn't explicitly require it.

There is no direct effect on my work.

Disimporoved

I have not noticed that it has or hasn't.

not yet

Probably not, but I doubt that it has decreased much, either.

I have not noticed any changes, although I should mention I wasn't monitoring
this issue.
I agree that collegiality is extremely important.
I recall Colin Dodds as an AVP was very approachable, something I appreciated.
I cannot say the same for Terry Murphy.

No it has not. I heartily agree that the centralization of decision making in the EMG has been detrimental to the collegial life of this university. The effects are primarily visible in the attitude of "support" services in the university from Human Resources to the management of physical plant. There seems to be little appreciation of what makes the teaching and research possible. If I were to select a model unit for collegiality it would be service oriented Library.

Collegiality also implies that there are faculty willing to serve on the endless committees required for an institution to function in a collegial manner. Before we make an issue of this we have to determine if people are willing to serve on Board participating in the decision-making process about allotment of furniture and renewal of the physical plant. If faculty are prepared to serve on such Boards, they need to have their service given much more recognition in the tenure and promotion process.

I think the centralization in the EMG with only marginal faculty input is a tragedy for Saint Mary's. It is leading more and more to Them vs. Us attitudes.

Yes. The new Dean of Science is operating in a very collegial manner.

No

NO

Do not know.

There is no contact.