In my last post I focused on different types of innovators.  In this post I want to share some thoughts on different types of innovation.  But, I’d like to start with a quick mention of the Wikipedia entry on innovation, which states (with some minor editing):

“Innovation is the creation of better or more effective products, processes, services, technologies, or ideas. Innovation differs from invention in that innovation refers to the use of better and, as a result, novel idea or method, whereas invention refers more directly to the creation of the idea or method itself. Innovation differs from improvement in that innovation refers to the notion of doing something different rather than doing the same thing better.”

All of those things — innovation, invention, improvement — tend to jumble together in my day-to-day conversations and thinking.  For example, I have a hard time saying something is simultaneously the creation of something better, but then also saying it’s not an improvement.  So, for the purpose of this post, I’m really not going to treat them any differently.

Now onto the heart of the actual discussion:  types of innovation.  There really are no set types, per se, and there are a lot of sources that discuss types of innovation (here and here for example).  But, I tend to think of innovations on a spectrum that looks like this:

Incremental innovation involves small adjustments to existing services or approaches, and I feel like this is what we see the most of in higher education.  A few examples:  in the career services field, where I currently work, this would be something like putting QR codes on the table tents at a career fair.  In admissions it might be using a new way to reserve spaces for campus visits.  These types of innovation, although small, still matter a lot.  So, please don’t interpret the spectrum as a substitute for bad-to-good or less-meaningful-to-more-meaningful.  Iterative innovations are vital.   But, on the downside, they typically do not bring about larger changes.  So, in instances where large-scale changes in not only style but substance is needed, you typically won’t get there through iteration.

Evolutionary innovation can seem like a large-scale change.  But, at its heart, the “new thing” is still strongly grounded in the “old thing.”   Again using the career fair example, this would be like hosting a “virtual career fair.”  It’s a new medium and environment, but is basically the same otherwise.  An academic advising office that begins to have digital signage to notify students where they are on the list of those to be seen (like Apple’s Genius Bar) is an evolutionary innovation.  These are a little more dramatic and noticeable than iterative innovations.   Evolutionary innovations have the potential to lead to larger-scale changes.  But, with hindsight, they tend to be an intermediary step along the way to something different.

Revolutionary innovation, as one might deduce, truly involves something different that leaves much of the old behind.   Continuing the career fair thread, whatever replaces fairs entirely (whenever that may occur) will be a revolutionary innovation.   When career services offices stopped doing “placement” and converted to “career education,” it was a revolutionary innovation.   Again, that’s not always to say these have more value, nor am I trying to imply that everyone is in a situation that demands or even needs to consider revolutionary innovation.   But, some of us may be.

Here is where I’d like to involve you in the conversation more purposefully.  How many truly revolutionary innovations can you think of in student affairs?  Some, no doubt, would have occurred around various civil rights movements.  Also, in what areas do you think there is a need for revolutionary innovation?  I’d love your thoughts.

What is innovation? One way to look at innovation, is the convergence of ideas to create a new idea. In a ‘big picture’ sort of way, innovation usually occurs through various networks of ideas that when engaged produces a new idea. Similarly, when an idea is created, the firing of neutrons (visually) looks like a web. This is a great metaphor for the formation of new ideas or information networks. It is the ebb and flow of the network that can dictate how information or growth moves. Throughout our #SaChat on innovation in Student Affairs, there was this exploration of ways we can be innovative and where innovation needs to occur. What I would like to explore, is the ‘how’ component. How do we create an environment conducive to innovation?

We can take what we know about structural predictors of organizations that encourage innovation and apply it to our offices. Through a multitude of studies a couple of trends/concepts emerge as predictors. I think a good way to reference these concepts, is in terms of strengths. Not only does it help with clarity, but it can provide a concise set of guidelines for any office. Each has the ability to balance the other out.

The strength in weak ties concept describes the connection of both influence and information networks (think Malcolm Gladwell). Weak ties are shown to allow information to travel more efficiently and information is more likely to arrive in different contexts, because they tend to bridge the gaps between distinct social groups. This encourages innovation, because the threat of conformity remains small. Think about it, if you get information from one source, you are only looking at things through one lens.

Strength of directed ties refers to a unilateral relationship between two people where the separation between influence and information has occurred. One can think of directed ties as having a mentor, without that person actually knowing. Microblogging and “tagging” have heightened the ability to create these ties and maintain them more efficiently. We all have people whom we unofficially communicate with through Twitter or by reading their blogs. We use them for information or even best practices.

Strength of network diversity is the creation of a blended network. This network can include individuals (family, friends, acquaintances, organizations) who you have had no prior contact with, yet still remain influential. When individuals have a strong diverse network, individuals tend not to become so tied to their specific role in an organization due to their broaden perspective. Because they are obtaining information and influence outside of their role, they are able to seek out information and act not solely as an academic advisor (for example), but a practitioner who can develop skills outside of student development theory and increase their professional performance.

How can an office strive to strengthen these predictors? How can these concepts be tied to simple initiatives? I believe the first step is the continual push, from the top down, towards the development of human capital in each member of an office. For this reason, I do not like the term professional development, because I believe it conjures up an idea that is too narrow- the network is not expanding (think conformity). There needs to be a push to expand employees network passed its normal boundaries. There needs to be a desire to develop new knowledge, skills and personal connections. Google has produced many of the platforms that we use today, because of this ethos. Employees are instructed to use a portion of their work day to develop ideas outside their established role (weak ties, diverse ties). Here are some items I feel warrant discussion and would have immediate impact on the strengthening of the three network ties :

1) Conferences: Are there conferences outside your specific area that may still be beneficial? It is very easy to attend your associations conference each year, but could there be others?

2) Serendipity: Can you devote time to pursuits outside your specific role?

3) Participation: Are you strictly operating within your office or area/specialty? Participating in the SA Collaborative (direct ties) has been a huge eye opener for me. I have found new perspectives, new avenues for information (weak ties) and a great community. Most of which has been outside of academic advising, but still extremely beneficial. Are there new ways your office can participate within your campus/community to gain new perspectives or connections?

4) Et cetera: While conferences can be expensive, does your office take advantage of webinars? Perhaps there is a great book that an office can read as a collective for inspiration. Do you take time to collaborate or converse about processes or how to make things better? Do you hold others accountable to pursue these goals?

Finally, we need to operate in an environment where it is okay to take risks. For offices wanting to foster innovation, the development of a culture that promotes new and uncharted ideas is a must. If you have taken the time to expand your information network and developed new skills, what are you going to do with this new knowledge? For example, embracing social media for an office might be seen as a risk. Does it have to be?

When I think of taking risks, I love this quote:

“Chance favors the connected mind” – Steven Johnson

More often than not, innovators are taking chances and operating in expanded networks. Individuals should be pushed to develop beyond their current capabilities and then act on them. Not only can it be beneficial for the individual, but beneficial to the office as a whole. To me, offices who look to develop individual’s stronger weak ties, direct ties and create a more diverse network tip the scales in their favor when taking risks.

I recently read an article in the Harvard Business Review and was curious to gain some much needed advice on how to advance in the workplace. The Ambition and Gender at Work study conducted by Europe’s Institute of Leadership & Management concluded women have lower confidence in the workplace compared to their male coworkers. The study also indicated women in management positions are more likely to doubt their performance and are hesitant to seek out promotions.

The study identifies four ways in which women create barriers to their own success:

1. Being overly modest.
2. Not asking.
3. Blending in.
4. Remaining silent.

The article indicates that men are more likely to speak about their accomplishments more openly than women. I was speaking with a colleague about seeking promotions and he asked me was I self-promoting within the office. For a moment I had to think about the last time I consciously sought out opportunities to brag about myself. Sometimes I feel I’m so involved at work, how could anyone not realize this level of involvement. However, the article states your boss and colleagues will not know what you are capable of if you do not tell them. But we don’t want to play the martyr, now do we?

I had a supervisor that used to say, “You don’t ask, you don’t get.” The article states that some women are passed up for promotions because they do not ask for the promotion. When we job search we are told to “ask,” for the job, so it makes sense to “ask,” for the promotion. Asking for a raise or promotion will accomplish two things: 1. You will have communicated your interest and intentions the organization; and 2. Their reaction to your request will determine where you stand with the organization. Ah, but we do this for the students; it’s not about the money or the prestige.

According to the article some women would prefer to blend in and remain silent rather than stand out in meetings or at events. Blending in hinders anyone’s chances to leave a positive impression on a supervisor or colleague. I can recall times that I have sat in meetings silent because I thought what I had to contribute was not important, but I also can recall times when I have spoken from experience on a topic and inherited a project and a committee to assist. But why would the Vice President want my opinion about alternative approaches to student programming?

I realize this study grazes the subject of gender roles; women are not characteristically assertive while men are asserting at all times of the day. What are your thoughts on this topic, considering that student affairs is a heavily female-dominated field? Are women deficient when it comes to self-promotion? Do we fail to speak up for a promotion out of fear of judgment?

Carla Finklea Green is a residence hall director at Old Dominion University.

By now, you may have seen a link circulating across social media and email inboxes highlighting the ad campaign created by a group of students at Ohio University. The posters show students holding a picture of a Halloween costume, either worn commonly at parties or sold in party stores, depicting caricatures of their culture. You can see the full account with pictures of each of the posters here.

I post about it here on the Student Affairs Collaborative because every year, there is always one theme party that makes national headlines (not to count the thousands that don’t) as being derogatory, racist, offensive, and  whole list of other words that indicate unsafe environments for students with traditional marginalized identities. When I was an undergraduate student, my University community, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign was torn apart over a Greek mixer titled “Tacos ‘N Tequila”- I’ll let your imagination do the work here, but suffice it to say that students were not dressed up as food or bottles of alcohol. The experience, which still elicits a physical reaction with me, cast a shadow over my college experience which, for all intents and purposes, was otherwise one of the happiest times of my life. I remember feeling frustrated, alienated, and hurt that people who lived in a place I love and called my home could make me, as a person of color, feel so unwelcome. Last year it was the Compton Cookout hosted by UC San Diego students, but there are plenty more out there that don’t make national headlines.

As student affairs practitioners, I feel that we are the ones responsible for addressing the issues that arise from such incidents. We are the ones that are held accountable for the parties occurring, though they are never officially University sanctioned. They are often a classic example of higher education, and especially student affairs, of being reactive versus proactive. Have you had any proactive conversations on campus about what to do if/when an oppressively-themed party hits your campus? What did you discuss?

As a student, I remember feeling frustrated that the administration didn’t automatically remove these students or ban the particular organizations from campus. Now, with a few more years under my belt, I understand their decisions as a necessary step to protect free speech rights at a public land-grant institution. But it still doesn’t feel good nor does it change the fact that, even though I was not a part of the group directly being stereotyped in the party, I still felt like an outsider in my campus community.

It is wonderful to see students at Ohio U. taking a proactive stand against a very public display of intolerance. I applaud the unsung heroes of the initiative, including the advisors who helped them with the program and funding for the project, the people writing articles about them in major news sources, and all the other supporters of the initiative. I think it is a wonderful example of student empowerment and activism and I hope to see the proactive educational initiatives continue.

How do you feel institutions should respond to theme parties? Can you give where an institution effectively responded to such a situation? What other ways can higher education, or we as individual practitioners, support proactive measures to counter negatively themed parties/costumes?

Viraj S. Patel is a Hall Director at Georgetown University.

Hope that was enough hashtags for you!

If you’ve always thought about taking the Twitter plunge in the name of professional development, we’ve got some great things in store for you this week in conjunction with the NASPATech conference in Newport, RI.

In addition to our regular Thursday #sachat this week we will feature a “special edition” chat in conjunction with our “Behind the #sachat” presentation at the conference. Please join us for an open discussion from 4:30 pm – 5:30 pm CST and feel free to recruit some new participants who may want to test the waters a bit.  In addition, for those attending NASPATech we hope you will join us at our session! Bring your laptop or mobile device and participate in #sachat while we discuss the potential that social media has to enhance networking and (free!) professional development opportunities.

Hope you will join us!

That line is something that every syllabus should include in its first few lines. Not in the context of, “This is too hard.” or “This is too much work.” but rather in the context of “you aren’t challenging/stimulating/engaging me.”

In any classroom the facilitator should be engaging the participants in the learning, as opposed to lecturing and breathlessly spraying knowledge into the air. The latter is akin to throwing spaghetti against the wall, hoping some of the noodles stick. To take the analogy further, lecturers will show off the noodles that stick (A’s for those who learn by listening) while brushing the ones that don’t stick (C’s for those who learn better by doing) under the rug.

What brought me to this topic is a perfect storm of an insightful Seth Godin blog post (also titled, “Please complain”) and a blog post by one of my students who innocently touted, “My classes are way too easy… They are kinda pathetic in a way.” Upon approaching the student, I encouraged her to complain and let me (as one of her educators) know that the classroom that I’m running isn’t challenging, engaging, or stimulating her thinking. I’m not sure if she was more stunned by the fact that someone was actually reading what she was putting on the internet or by the fact that I was empowering her and encouraging her to follow through on her willingness to be challenged. In any case, we’ll see if she follows through.

My point is this, in a higher education environment that is increasingly focusing on costs, revenues, returns-on-investments, and customer satisfaction – who are we to not encourage and empower our students to complain if they are unhappy with their academic or co-curricular experiences? We are here to facilitate their learning, to create safe environments for their self discovery through successes and failures, and to ask questions such as “how would you make it better?”

In the end however, it’s up to us. We can either challenge, support, and engage or we can keep throwing spaghetti at the wall and hope enough of it sticks to make a difference in the appetites of our hungry learners. Seth Godin says it best:

“Acquiring and processing user feedback is a choice. If you want people to speak up, be clear and mean it. If you don’t, don’t pretend.”

Is this a mentality of higher education becoming consumer focused? Is this the mentality of a generation feeling entitled enough to tell an educator when they are teaching in ways that are no longer efficient or applicable?

I hope you feel challenged, engaged, and stimulated enough to comment and continue the discussion.

The Journal of College and University Student Housing recently published a study by Gavin W. Henning, Kristan M. Cilente, Dean F. Kennedy and Tomecca M. Sloane titled, Professional Development Needs for New Residential Life Professionals. Participants of the study ranked competencies necessary for the professional growth and development of entry-level professionals in residential life. Briefly, the top seven competencies are as follows:

1. Understanding job expectations
2. Enhancing supervision skills
3. Moving up in the field of student affairs
4. Adequate support from supervisors, mentors, and colleagues
5. Fostering student learning
6. Developing multicultural competencies
7. Understanding the culture and facilities of the college/university

I think it is worth it to note that the top three competencies are not typically topics found in a student affairs graduate curriculum. I agree these competencies are important; if not the most important for a new professional to master quickly. If you cannot understand your job, meet job expectations, and manage the people you supervise efficiently; moving up in the field will be challenging.

The article also speaks to the fact that there is no real consensus on what competencies new professionals should master to progress through the field. I have noticed personally and through other colleagues, that we briefly start out as generalist and then begin to develop interests in areas that will give us “expertise.” Once we become an office-proclaimed guru, our new found expertise makes us more marketable for the jobs we want in the future.

Participants also ranked their preferred delivery method for professional development. In almost every category mentoring was the preferred method of professional development followed by workshops, self-teaching, and administrative shadowing. It is clear to me why mentoring is the preferred method of delivery. No surprises here; mentorships offer many benefits including an unbiased opinion, one-on-one consultation, and networking opportunities. I wish the study expounded more on methods of self-teaching, but I’m assuming this means new professionals are taking advantage of webinars, scholarly books and articles, etc.

This is a reoccurring topic in students affairs, typically under the heading, “What I Wish I Would Have Learned in Graduate School.” The article does state that while there are professional organizations that have outlined core competencies for professionals; there is limited data on whether graduate programs are using these core competencies in graduate curriculums.

I have been out of graduate school for a while, but have programs evolved to include more core competencies like staff supervision, management, workplace politics and human resource management? If not, shouldn’t they be doing so?

Carla Finklea Green is a residence hall director at Old Dominion University.

What started as a question from Kelley McCarthy on Twitter asking if anyone would be interested in participating in her #52in52 project turned into a conversation about a lack of resources for new student affairs professionals. Student affairs graduate students have the support of their cohort, professors in their program, mentors through personal connections and programs like #saGROW, and special initiatives coordinated by professional associations. New professionals, though, are at a key transition point in their life and do not have a centralized support system. Our solution? #SAYR1 (Student Affairs Year One)!

The vision of #SAYR1 is to discuss the key issues facing new professionals in student affairs and provide avenues of support from the last year of graduate school through their third year as a professional. One of the ways we will be doing this is by creating support groups of approximately three individuals who will journey through these first few years together. With the small-sized groups, you will have the benefit of a consistent and tight-knit support system without the nearly impossible task of having to coordinate the schedules of a big group (we’ve all been there!). Groups can communicate in person, through phone calls, e-mails, Google + hangouts, Skype, on Twitter, or however your group decides works best for you! The #SAYR1 Core Team will be providing discussion questions, topics, and resources to get everyone started.

#SAYR1 will provide you with a group of people you can talk to about what’s going on without trying to explain (for the 4,534th time) what it is exactly that you do again. It will give you an avenue to discuss current issues and trends in the field and how they’re impacting your work. With #SAYR1, you will have a network that will support you in trying times, celebrate your successes with you, and continually encourage you to be the best version of you. If this sounds like something you’re interested in, please visit this link and complete the form. You can join a group that’s already been started or start your own. Groups can be by functional area, year, region, or just a pure hodge podge – it’s up to you! Please feel free to contact anyone from the Core Team should you have any questions. We are all excited to get this program started and hope you are too.

#SAYR1 Core Team:

Brian Gallagher (gallagb@gmail.com) Hall Director at Southern Illinois University Carbondale

Karen Schomaker (kschomaker@gmail.com) Coordinator for Community Service at California Lutheran University

Kelley McCarthy (kmccarthy1985@yahoo.com) 2nd Year Graduate Student and Graduate Assistant for Leadership Programs  in the Office of Student Leadership and Civic Engagement at Nova Southeastern University

Melissa L. Brown (melissabrown47@gmail.com) Residence Hall Director for Moore Hall, University of North Carolina School of the Arts

Tricia Cesarino (tr.cesarino@gmail.com) Program Coordinator for Sorority and Fraternity Affairs at the University of Florida

Tracey Walterbusch (twalterbusch@gmail.com) Residential Life Coordinator at Ohio Wesleyan University

Brian Gallagher is a hall director at Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.

I often hear some of my fellow educators talk about their lack of interest in politics. More specifically, politics includes your run-of-the-mill office politics, local government politics and national government politics. What is most surprising to me is that with each of these levels of politics, I get the keen sense that most people have no understanding of how they are impacted and the implications politics has on their jobs and the ability of students to be successful at institutions of higher learning, especially during such hard times where educational budgets are heavily targeted to be slashed, in the name of cutting costs.

When asked how I view politics, I often reply that “politics are like building relationships; you figure out the kinds of relationships that you need to foster and how those relationships impact you and what you do on a daily basis and the implications those relationships has on those around you.” Additionally, I believe that not all politics are bad and that many great things can happen when you are at your political best. With this being said, here are some thoughts to ponder:

• Take the time to observe the office culture. This allows you to see how to operate in that office culture. From observing, you’ll be able to see how people get things done by negotiating and working with others and navigating their way through the office politics.

• Build relationships. Once you learn the office culture, figure out how you fit into culture and how you can build the relationships with the people who impact you the most. This not only includes supervisors, but their support staff as well. Having a solid relationship with support staff is an excellent way to get a foot in the door and the inside scoop on important things that are happening. Don’t take anyone for granted, regardless of who they are and the position they are in!

• Stay away from drama! It’s not in your best interest to get involved in the problems that others may be having at work. Of course, as you build relationships, you may connect with some people more so than others. This leads to people sharing their woes or problems. You can listen, if you choose, but stay out of it! You do not want to be pulled in the middle of something that you probably have no idea about and it certainly raises eyebrows from supervisors. If there are unpopular decisions that are made, it may not be in your best interest to join the local band wagon and protest. I suggest that you take the time to look at the big picture and evaluate if that issue is something that is worth the time and effort to devote your frustrations. This can certainly save you lots of heartache and pain in the short term and future if it’s not in your best interest.

• Praise in public, address concerns in private. Yes, you’ve heard this before. The truth of the matter is that this really makes a huge difference. If people see you as someone who is always criticizing others, they are least likely to want to work with you, out of hesitation that you may do the same to them. Hence, if you do have feedback to give to others, kindly and respectfully pull them aside and share that feedback in private. This allows for any misunderstandings or miscommunications to be easily resolved without the rat race of gossip that can spread so quickly.

Navigating your way through the wavy waters of office politics can be tricky, but following these general guidelines may be a good way for you to coast on the sailboat vs. rowing in the canoe. Stay focused, build those relationships and be mindful of the culture and how you fit into that culture. Politic away!

Rinardo Reddick is a doctoral student in Educational Leadership and Policy Studies at Iowa State University and coordinator for America Reads/America Counts.

Explaining the experience of first-generation college students is a task that many of us quickly deflect if at all possible. Just because a subject can be classified as “well, every situation is so different” does not mean that we cannot try. A few years back, a hall director I worked for needed me to come up with a first-generation college student (FGCS) program for her resident assistant staff. After some thought, I came up with the following, relatively quick program:

Materials needed:

Two (or more) sheets of paper

Pencils (preferably the stencil pencil kind)

Or use a whiteboard/chalkboard

(Groups should be 5 or less/group)

Preparation:

1. Design two like house outlines (basic blueprints with basic room options)

2. On back of each, list:

Rooms needed:

Kitchen

Bathroom

Living room

Master bedroom

Spare bedroom

Upstairs bathroom (shared between the two bedrooms)

Appliances needed:

Oven, fridge, sink, pantry, island, counters, cupboards, dishwasher

Sofa, couch, TV, coffee table, plants (x3)

Soap and towels

Bed, armoire (x2), treasure chest, nightstand (x2)

Repeat for spare bedroom (add a desk)

Rules:

Designate 2 “parents”

Divide group into (two) equal halves

Parent 1 = you know the ins-and-outs of home building. Feel free to help with all aspects of the basic design. Give pointers but allow for choices!

Parent 2 = you try to help with basic design but have no prior experience. Accidentally, you give the group bad advice and misguided direction. Five minutes into the activity, you get frustrated and leave.

Allow for 15-20 minutes for groups to finalize their houses.

Once completed, ask the following questions (plus your own):

1. How did the “parents” help/hurt?
2. What were the difficult decisions?
3. Why did you place/label each room where/what?
4. What are the differences between groups?
5. How does this relate to first generation college students?
   1. Parents who can help/ parents who are inexperienced
   2. Some decisions are made without understanding
   3. Communication between student-home is stressed
   4. Transitioning as a freshman becomes immediately more difficult
   5. Does FGCS correlate with low socio-economic status (SES)*?

Treat this as a basic start to get the discussion/training session started. The point of the project is to metaphorically show students that matriculating through a successful college career is similar to building an efficient house— it helps to have an experienced architect. However, it takes student leaders and student affairs professionals to make sure that each student who does not have an experienced parental architect is aware of the plethora of resources offered by their university.

Remember, first-generation college students (FGCS) and students of low socioeconomic status (SES) are not necessarily correlated and should be understood as separate but equally important variables when further understanding our student populations.

Tyler Martin recently completed his M.Ed. in Higher Education and is seeking a position in Student Affairs.