Organizational Power Dynamics

    Last week, we briefly touched on navigating power for change and what that might look like in a higher education context. In that article, I introduced Foucault’s theory of power. Here’s another theory of power to consider when navigating your own change goal(s): and it’s my brain’s favorite one run on auto when I’m learning about a new organization. Systems theory situates power dynamics within interconnected systems, highlighting their influence on organizational outcomes through feedback loops and interdependencies. Systems theory emphasizes understanding the components of a system through their interrelationships with other parts and systems, rather than examining them in isolation. 

     In a recent study I conducted, during the restructuring of reporting lines for professional academic advising units at a university research site, their service components were analyzed in relation to student affairs systems rather than academic affairs systems. Relational bridges were constructed to integrate academic advising units with student affairs systems, while the growing divide between advising units and academic affairs systems remained unaddressed. Have you ever known an academic advisor who succeeded by disconnecting themselves from the academic programs they served? Neither have I. And I’ve met a lot of advisors. 

     Higher education leaders must consider numerous factors when making decisions that affect institutional operations and the broader organizational environment. In a study by Becker et al. (2023) studying power dynamics in a higher education institution of 23,000 employees, it was found that faculty members perceived too much administrative power existed that made decisions on their behalf without feeling adequately consulted, which contributed to an increased sense of being devalued. Considerations included in the study by Becker et al. (2023) were strategic priorities, resource allocation, and the overall impact on institutional culture. 

     Faculty participants in my study expressed concerns regarding excessive administrative power being exercised without sufficient consultation with those affected, leading to feelings of devaluation and marginalization. Several faculty members specifically lamented the reallocation of academic advisors away from faculty administrative tasks, perceiving it as an added burden compounding their existing professional overwhelm. In higher education institutions, this organizational power dynamic can be organically observed through the organizational hierarchies present that give structure, direction, and definition to its many employees and students. 

     Additionally, throughout the years of growth, the Office of Academic Affairs was the primary funding source for individual schools and colleges within the larger university I studied, also academic departments, the faculty members employed, and the professional academic advisors. All colleges and schools at the research site need primary budget approvals from the Office of Academic Affairs each year to continue funding and growing their academic departments and respective professional academic advising departments. This funding is increasingly dependent on performance metrics tied to student retention, graduation, and post-graduation employment. As the professional academic advising community was asked to shift from its faculty-support duties to more student success-centered tasks, navigating the circuits of power surrounding funding was increasingly difficult as funding metrics were historically designed to support success inside the classroom. This created an ongoing need to ensure the university’s mission and vision were equitably met while expanding to serve a continuous, record number of students in the regional community. 

     The tension in this organizational power dynamic began to show itself as the university transitioned the reporting line of professional academic advising units from their respective college to one executive director overseeing all professional academic advising units. Previously seen as an extension of direct faculty-support (for student success inside the classroom), professional academic advisors were now engaging in initiatives and directives centered on students’ persistence, retention, and completion of academic programs (for student success outside the classroom that enabled success within). 

     Hence, if you find your institution in a similar dynamic, and you’re attempting to enact change, navigating organizational power dynamics surrounding a change like this to garner the support you need is essential in continuing the change and meeting the long-term mission and vision of student persistence, retention, and success. 

     So, what do you think? Is this a lone observation, or can you find this dynamic happening in your organization? 

Arnold, R. D., & Wade, J. P. (2015). A Definition of Systems Thinking: A Systems Approach. Procedia Computer Science, 44, 669–678. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2015.03.050

Becker, A., Ed. D., Goode, C., Ed. D., Rivers, J., Ed. D., Tyler, M., Ed. D., & Becker, J., Ed. D. (2023). Shared Governance and Systems Theory: A mixed methods study of faculty perceptions and ideas. Higher Education Politics & Economics, 9(2), doi: 10.32674/hepe.v9i2.5974 ojed.org/hepe. https://web-p-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.neu.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=0&sid=e3122961-d6cb-422f-aa70-1bf9ce0fd4c3%40redis

Dar, L. (2012). The Political Dynamics of Higher Education Policy. The Journal of Higher Education, 83(6), 769–794. https://doi.org/10.1353/jhe.2012.0039

Deacon, R. (2002). Truth, Power and Pedagogy: Michel Foucault on the rise of the disciplines. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 34(4), 435–458. https://doi.org/10.1080/0013185022000011844

Dominici, G. (2012). Why does systems thinking matter. Business Systems Review, 1(1), 1–2. https://doi.org/10.7350/bsr.a02.2012

Fiaz, S., & Fahim, S. M. (2023). The influence of high-quality workplace relational systems and mindfulness on employee work engagement at the time of crises. Heliyon, 9(4), e15523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e15523

Manning, K. (2017). Organizational Theory in Higher Education (Core Concepts in Higher Education) (2nd ed.). Routledge.

Powers, K., & Schloss, P. J. (2017). Organization and administration in higher education. In Routledge eBooks (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315630656

Sensoy, O., & DiAngelo, R. (2017). Is everyone really equal?: An Introduction to Key Concepts in Social Justice Education, Second Edition. Teachers College Press.

Tomás‐Miquel, J., & Vicedo, J. C. (2021). Beyond cultural and geographical proximity: delving into the factors that influence the dynamics of academic relationships between students in higher education. Higher Education, 83(5), 1143–1162. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-021-00734-3