Prioritizing Academic Programs and Services: Reallocating Resources to Achieve Strategic Balance, Revised and Updated

by Robert Dickeson, Stanley O. Ikenberry (Foreword)

Prioritizing Academic Programs and Services REVISED AND UPDATED Increasing economic concerns make the new edition of this best-selling classic an invaluable resource for those who want and need to implement a proven step-by-step approach to reallocating resources in tough times. Thoroughly revised and updated, Prioritizing Academic Programs and Services includes new recommendations from the field, communication strategies for more successful campus implementation, a new section on the sources of hidden costs, and a Prioritization Process and Implementation workbook designed to help administrators avoid costly mistakes. This book includes access to additional content online, including models for prioritization from a variety of campuses. Based on the author's extensive consulting experience, this necessary and timely resource offers the best advice for addressing the current economic concerns affecting most colleges and universities. Praise for Prioritizing Academic Programs and Services "For more than a decade, higher education leaders have turned to Dickeson's practical guide to academic program assessment. These newly expanded approaches are just in time for today's competitive environment."
—SUZANNE SHIPLEY , president, Shepherd University "Dickeson provides a compelling rationale for program prioritization as well as a practical planning structure that promotes alignment between programs, resources, and university mission. Presidents and provosts can use his approach to frame campus discussions around the future of the institution and away from legacy programs whose time has passed."
—KYLE R. CARTER , provost and senior vice chancellor, Western Carolina University "Dickeson's approach ensures that critical decisions regarding academic programs and resource allocation are aligned with strategic goals and institutional mission. As one of the early adopters of the process that he proposes, I am convinced that it is a powerful and practical tool for any college or university committed to remaining focused, resilient, vital, and relevant in a dynamic and increasingly challenging environment."
—DAVID MAXWELL , president, Drake University

Genres: Education, Nonfiction

256 pages, Hardcover

First published December 15, 2009

Reviews

[Elizabeth Schlatter · Rating 4 out of 5]

For me, this book was sort of a "secrets of university administration REVEALED!!" type of resource. I work in an academic museum at a university that is not currently undergoing a prioritizing process. But I'd seen mention of this book in other places, so I thought it might be useful to learn how some universities weigh/determine/improve/decrease their programs, and what type of criteria they seek when making those decisions. This was written by an education consultant, so this is his recommended process and shouldn't be taken as an absolute.

Nonetheless, it was very helpful to see things like the list below of 10 criteria to be used to gather quantitative and qualitative indicators of all variety of campus programs. Also, he addresses different kinds of universities and colleges (public, research, community, etc.). Museums, libraries, and performing arts centers don't receive any special mention that I could find, however he does offer a different and longer list of criteria for measuring administrative programs (p. 161). These departments tend to straddle the line between academic and administrative, so a mix of criteria would probably be best. Overall it was a worrisome book (who likes to read about how to get rid of programs??), but I did admire how often the author stressed full transparency for this process, constant referral to the university's mission when determining prioritization activities, clarity over who is ultimately responsible for any changes (the board), and also his precise and relatively jargon-free writing style.

"To permit a synthesis of quantitative and qualitative indicators that will facilitate meaningful prioritization, I recommend using the following criteria (p.66)

1. History, development, and expectations of the program
2. External demand for the program
3. Internal demand for the program
4. Quality of program inputs and processes
5. Quality of program outcomes
6. Size, scope, and productivity of the program
7. Revenue and other resources generated by the program
8. Costs and other expenses associated with the program
9. Impact, justification, and overall essentiality of the program
10. Opportunity analysis of the program

[Dave · Rating 4 out of 5]

I suspect most administrators or faculty who come to read this book do so with fear and trembling. For those who read Dickeson in this anxious state, there are likely two outcomes: 1) surprise that his recommendations seem reasonable or 2) resistance regardless of what he says. For those who see the possibilities for success in this prioritization model, there is, it seems to me, much help to be found in Dickeson's counsel. But beware the college or university that ignores his admonition to reaffirm mission and purpose. For too long colleges and universities have tried to be all things to all people while also attempting to be as reputable as Harvard. If prioritization leads to an attempt to accomplish this with 21st-century technology, don't expect much. This is a call to be faithful to reality.

[K · Rating 5 out of 5]

Simply a quality book with excellent suggestions for evaluating academia.

[Rhonda · Rating 3 out of 5]

Not as much balance and justification for the way he advocates allocating resources to my mind. Some sound advice on streamlining through extremely open communicative process, though.

[Samantha Hines · Rating 3 out of 5]

Pretty light on the "and services" part of the discussion, which is why I checked it out. Still thought of a few people at UM who could benefit from a read, though.

[Glen · Rating 2 out of 5]

In the interests of disclosure, let me first of all state that I am an executive at a large, comprehensive, urban community college that also serves an enormous (>12,000 square miles) service area that includes a lot of rural communities. That leads me to my main critique of this book, which is that it is almost entirely focused on baccalaureate institutions and universities, hence has little or nothing to say about some major components of the community college mission; e.g., continuing education, basic education for adults. In fairness, I did think that many of the suggestions were applicable to workforce education decisions, but only by means of extrapolation. My other criticism is that this seems to have been written for the novice or inexperienced college administrator, as the "well, duh!" factor reared its cynical head on multiple occasions. No one who has worked at a college for more than a fortnight could fail to understand that making decisions about program expansion, contraction, creation, or elimination is a contested business, to put it mildly. Yet much of the book is devoted to detailing the myriad fields on which such contests are played out, and I found that to be rather tedious, if not outright padding. On the happy side, there were a number of wise admonitions that can certainly stand repetition, and the book is long on suggestions about how to actually begin and maintain the process of program prioritization and carry it through to implementation. "Resource B", one of the book's appendices, is in fact a sample process agenda that I think could be of enormous practical assistance. For the reader pressed for time, "Resource G" is essentially a précis of the entire book (or at least the core thereof).

[Noor O'Neill · Rating 1 out of 5]

If I could give this book zero stars, I would. This is a backward approach to improving higher education, based on old-fashioned management accounting and unit cost equations that discount the interrelatedness of academic units in a university. Chapters on how you go about cutting programs are full euphemisms and fake sympathy (one section discusses the importance of making counseling available for the faculty who are let go in a re-prioritization process). My administrators tried to apply this model at my university, and it was a huge waste of time and resources, tanked the morale among a majority of employees, led to a vote of no confidence for the chancellor, and didn't save any money in the end.

[Neil R. Coulter · Rating 3 out of 5]

I read Prioritizing Academic Programs and Services as part of my background reading leading to designing a new doctoral program at my institution. I want to learn to speak "academic administration" so that I can frame the program proposal in the right terms, addressing the essential factors in such a process. For that purpose, I found Dickeson's book very valuable. Especially helpful were his lists of 10 Criteria for Prioritizing Academic Programs (chapter 5) and the External and Internal Factors Acting on an Institution's Equilibrium (chapter 9). I find these to be useful categories in which to arrange details I've gleaned from other resources.

I highly recommend this book to new university faculty members and all university administrators.

[Katy · Rating 1 out of 5]

Why is it that books on higher education are written like they are PowerPoint slides? Most of the suggestions in this book have no relation to reality. You can't run a college like a business. Some skills must be cultivated which are intangible and for which there are few internal or external demands.

There is a problem with higher education, but most of it is not the inefficiencies of academic departments.

The only way an academic department could do this work is if they weren't also teaching at the same time. Why bother to hire someone to do this kind of analysis? That's what drives up the costs of higher ed--more administrators doing busy work.

Dull, waste of time.

[Hiba]

This book presents an argument that is only becoming more relevant with time: Higher education resources are limited and should be well managed for a higher education institution to survive. The author presents his opinion on how to manage these resources through prioritizing academic programs. Although not everyone may agree with his opinion, it is definitely worth looking into and reflecting upon.