Regional vision plan integration and implementation : phase II : final report - Page 147 |
Previous | 147 of 161 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
141
D. Organization
The overall direction of both the TIP and centers of excellence programs were set by the
Minnesota legislature, but operational decision-making authority in regards to promoting
the targeted industries was decentralized in both programs. In the case of TIP, the
interviewee said that the state university and college system was “under some pressure
not to have the infrastructure and staff in a central office.” As a result, the system office
issued an RFP to its educational institutions seeking a “host” organization. Once a host
institution was selected for a given industry, the host would hire project staff. The
project staff, in turn, would convene a “coordinating council” made up of business
leaders and educators to which the project staff appeared to defer.
The interviewee noted that this arrangement created some tensions. While the system
office had some power over the host institution, it had no authority over the actual
operations of the industry programs. Therefore, there were some disagreements between
the system office and university and college deans, who were concerned not only with the
success of the program but also their overall enrollment totals. “Our colleges and
universities’ funding comes from enrollment,” said the interviewee. “The deans will
collaborate to a point, but [they say] ‘If it impacts my enrollment, I won’t.’”
For the centers of excellence, the delegation of authority was much clearer. Once a
center of excellence is awarded to a university or college, the system office does not
manage it. More resources were granted, and system administrators hoped that local
control would lead to more curriculum development, faculty buy-in, and career
articulation. The verdict is still out on this front, but initial indications are positive.
Similar to TIP, staff at each of the centers of excellence assembled an industry-specific
“leadership council.” The meetings are considered advisory as opposed to work-oriented,
and staff defer to the requests or recommendations of council members. If requests
require follow-up work, staff assemble committees of experts to elaborate programs,
develop curricula, etc., and then report back to the leadership council.
E. Industry Involvement
According to the interviewee, the lesson learned from industry participation in the TIP
and centers of excellence programs is that the commitment should be modest and the
topics discussed high-level. Staff make an effort to schedule the quarterly meetings in a
corporate environment (such as a country club), and do not pressure participants for
additional money or time. They also make sure to follow participant recommendations in
order to build trust and validate industry partners’ participation.
That said, these efforts do not always succeed. At a couple of the centers of excellence,
business members of the leadership council are “dropping like flies.” In these cases, staff
are prioritizing networking over formal deliberation in meetings.
Object Description
Description
| Title | Regional vision plan integration and implementation : phase II : final report - Page 147 |
| Full Text | 141 D. Organization The overall direction of both the TIP and centers of excellence programs were set by the Minnesota legislature, but operational decision-making authority in regards to promoting the targeted industries was decentralized in both programs. In the case of TIP, the interviewee said that the state university and college system was “under some pressure not to have the infrastructure and staff in a central office.” As a result, the system office issued an RFP to its educational institutions seeking a “host” organization. Once a host institution was selected for a given industry, the host would hire project staff. The project staff, in turn, would convene a “coordinating council” made up of business leaders and educators to which the project staff appeared to defer. The interviewee noted that this arrangement created some tensions. While the system office had some power over the host institution, it had no authority over the actual operations of the industry programs. Therefore, there were some disagreements between the system office and university and college deans, who were concerned not only with the success of the program but also their overall enrollment totals. “Our colleges and universities’ funding comes from enrollment,” said the interviewee. “The deans will collaborate to a point, but [they say] ‘If it impacts my enrollment, I won’t.’” For the centers of excellence, the delegation of authority was much clearer. Once a center of excellence is awarded to a university or college, the system office does not manage it. More resources were granted, and system administrators hoped that local control would lead to more curriculum development, faculty buy-in, and career articulation. The verdict is still out on this front, but initial indications are positive. Similar to TIP, staff at each of the centers of excellence assembled an industry-specific “leadership council.” The meetings are considered advisory as opposed to work-oriented, and staff defer to the requests or recommendations of council members. If requests require follow-up work, staff assemble committees of experts to elaborate programs, develop curricula, etc., and then report back to the leadership council. E. Industry Involvement According to the interviewee, the lesson learned from industry participation in the TIP and centers of excellence programs is that the commitment should be modest and the topics discussed high-level. Staff make an effort to schedule the quarterly meetings in a corporate environment (such as a country club), and do not pressure participants for additional money or time. They also make sure to follow participant recommendations in order to build trust and validate industry partners’ participation. That said, these efforts do not always succeed. At a couple of the centers of excellence, business members of the leadership council are “dropping like flies.” In these cases, staff are prioritizing networking over formal deliberation in meetings. |
