32, no. 3 (Spring 2001): 120-121
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
No Works Cited |
|
Life after the Chairmanship
ANN BUGLIANI
I RECALL an incident early in my chairmanship. I bumped into a colleague who had just stepped down from chairing her department and whom I hadn’t seen in a long time. In passing, I made a mental note of how good she looked. She no longer had that harried air about her. She seemed unencumbered and free. As she breezed by me, she flashed a broad smile and said, “There’s life after the chairmanship.” Although the incident stuck in my mind, I must confess that when I was chairing I gave very little thought to life after leaving the job. It’s now been more than eight years since I resigned, and I realize that there are many things that I should have thought of and planned for while chairing and even before assuming the job but didn’t. I am writing this now, in the hope that I might inspire chairs to think about their futures in ways that they may not have done otherwise. I hope my remarks will also be helpful to colleagues considering whether they would like to chair a department.
Those who do not go on to another administrative job after chairing, who are content, as I was, to return to full-time teaching, research, and service after their stint as chair, need to consider each of these activities—teaching, research, and service—and the challenges that a return to them on a full-time basis entails. But there are also other considerations. I, for one, relish the privacy I regained after stepping down and the time and space I now had to shape my career and to get my life back to normal after all the pressures and demands of administrative work had disappeared. There was a significant downside, however, the impact of which I had not anticipated—and that was the pay cut. When I returned to full-time teaching, I had to face a significant financial adjustment. This harsh reality explains, perhaps, why many people seek to hang on to administrative jobs long past the time when their effectiveness has peaked. They simply can’t afford to quit. Yet I believe that with careful planning we can, indeed, resign gracefully.
I begin my remarks concerning teaching, research, and service with some observations regarding service. The years spent as chair clearly enable us to continue making very significant service contributions after stepping down. We become a tremendous resource not only to our department but also to the college and the university at large. Because of our administrative experience, we now know how things work, and we usually are a great deal better at time management than are those who have never had responsibility for a department. After returning to the ranks, we may be called on to serve in the arena of faculty governance, interdisciplinary initiatives, grantsmanship, or university-wide committees. Following my service as chair, I found myself in great demand, and it seemed to me that I was able to get things done more quickly and efficiently than many of my colleagues. I was also less easily intimidated by circumstances or personalities. I directly attribute these heightened capabilities to the rigors of the chairmanship. I had to learn, however, how to say no, although I must admit that I usually say yes, because I find much of this work very satisfying. Since leaving the chairmanship I have gained a new institutional perspective, and I am pleased to be able to bring an international viewpoint to all the work I have become involved in. I am aware that often, without me, this viewpoint would not be represented.
My return to full-time teaching was also enthusiastic, although it took me a while to recapture some of the popularity I had with students before I became chair. In the last several years, I have had wonderful opportunities to do interdisciplinary work and to design new programs at both the undergraduate and the graduate levels.
As might be expected, the most difficult transition was in the area of research. I made every effort while I was chair to keep up with my field, but the fact remains that it was very hard. My problem was compounded by the fact that I was an associate professor when I assumed the chairmanship. I now advise colleagues not to seek or accept the job of chair unless they have attained the rank of full professor. I know that it is not always possible for the chair to hold this rank, but there are many reasons why it is desirable. These reasons include some that have important ramifications for the functioning of the department. Clearly, many senior faculty members do not gracefully accept the oversight of someone that they outrank. But more germane to my argument are reasons that have a bearing on what happens after the chairmanship. After stepping down, it took me six years to attain the level necessary for promotion to full professor in my institution, which is a research university. My first project was editing and contributing to Chairing the Foreign Language and Literature Department. That was followed by the publication of my third book. I was grateful for the institutional support I received—two paid leaves and a summer stipend—but I feel that I probably would have been promoted seven years earlier had I refused the chairmanship and concentrated on my research. I could have served as chair later, when I would have been in a much better financial position.
There may also be missed opportunities because of a lack of readiness. A good chair will be a prime candidate for other, even more high profile, administrative positions. In my institution, however, full deanships are only open to full professors, and, generally, full professors who have been chairs. No matter how outstanding your performance as chair may have been, you will not be eligible to become dean unless you are at full rank. Climbing the administrative ladder, for those so inclined, is impossible if you have accepted the chairmanship as an associate professor. First you must be promoted, and by the time you’ve accomplished that, you will no longer be as in touch with what’s going on as you were when you stepped down. The ideal scenario, the one that leaves you with the most options, is to wait until you are at full rank before assuming any administrative position. Then, given an inclination to do so, you will be fully qualified to move up if and when opportunities present themselves.
In some ways the current climate represents a harsh new reality. In the old days, when I entered the academy, people with administrative ability could rise even if they had not attained full rank. They would be socially promoted, as it were. That is, they would be granted a full professorship with a full deanship. The rationale for this was the rewarding and utilization of administrative ability, which is not always accompanied by strong research productivity. This kind of promoting is no longer done. Administrative leaders must now demonstrate that they have successfully met all the requirements of academic life, and rightly so.
In my own case, I’m very pleased that my life after the chairmanship has included full-time teaching, research, and service. I’m proud of the contributions I made as chair, but I feel that the last eight years have been as rich and as fruitful as the six years I served as chair.
© 2001 by the Association of Departments of Foreign Languages. All Rights Reserved.
ADFL Bulletin 32, no. 3 (Spring 2001): 120-121 |
|
|---|
|
|
|
|
No Works Cited |
|
