The Globe and Mail says the Canadian undergraduate experience has deteriorated (October 10, 2011, “Canadian universities must reform or perish”). But is it the lack of emphasis on teaching by professors that is undermining the reputation of higher education in Canada, or does something else ail the system? Canadians want their universities to rank with the world’s best; we value organizations able to demonstrate intellectual leadership, challenge thinking, and inspire hope for a better future. Yet our universities can’t quite seem to persuade people about their attributes. As a result, we’re left with the impression that the “good” universities are somewhere else.
If university presidents want change they don’t need better teaching, they need to build better brands. Each of them needs to focus on getting more people to believe in the positive impact of their respective school’s expertise.
How do you invest a university with meaning? Certainly not with logos and ad campaigns. To build and maintain a meaningful brand, learning organizations must refine their approach to outreach: the traditional focus on programming contributes only to the building of ramparts, making it difficult for outsiders to penetrate and understand what is going on inside. A strong identity does require excellent programming, but also an equally strong ability to project. Repositioning the university so it is understood to be the place to engage with leading ideas requires these institutions take greater responsibility for developing and promoting meaningful content.
Publishing ensures brand claims to excellence are always defensible. In its many potential forms, publishing is crucial to keeping the research and teaching missions of top schools appear relevant; about showing a university to be a trend-setter, not a trend-follower. Restoring an effective capability for scholarly publishing would firmly position these schools in the marketplace of ideas and ensure audiences know their missions are being successfully accomplished.
I’m reminded of Carleton University’s strategic planning exercise in 2008, which declared the university expected faculty members to be the “designers and custodians of the future” who will extend “the benefits of learning and knowledge to the furthest possible limits.” But scholarly publishing wasn’t part of their strategic plan. Without the capability to tell the world about its expertise and accomplishments, Carleton’s message can’t spread beyond the classroom.
Mount Allison University’s president, Robert Campbell, told the Globe our “universities have lost their ‘foundational narrative thread.’” The narrative they should want is one that positions them as the top place to access leading ideas – in whatever area it is they choose to be good. At a time when there seems to be great parity among colleges and universities, you would think more schools would be busy crafting a better narrative, and communicating the stories of their unique research. Publishing enables programming and projecting to work in tandem. Evidence of unique knowledge helps people understand the organization has valued assets; is a tool to help schools evolve beyond a local presence and reach targets in a fragmented marketplace; and, ultimately, helps them meet their financial plans: strong universities whose confident, individual brands collectively support our national aspiration for intellectual leadership.
Isn’t that what Canadians want?
