I am currently sitting in the office of Social Responsibility and Leadership being taught a some Afrikaans and about South African delicacies. For all I have done in 6 weeks, it appears there is a lot more to experience. This reality proves there are always two perspectives--a glass can be half full or half empty.
In a recent UWC experience there were surely more than just two perspectives. On Tuesday, as we drove to campus, the radio newsflash warned that UWC students would be protesting and that classes may be interrupted. As a person who sees students and administrators daily, this was the first time I had heard anything about the protest or the issue being raised. I was relieved this morning at a managers meeting where the acting Rector said she was also taken by surprise.
In any case, I went to my first meeting without any change in routine, but when I came out to head to the 11:30 Inaugural Amy Biehl Lecture at the Library, I was deterred by a growing gathering of students. Students huddled on the large staircase chanting African songs, stomping in rhythm, waving arms and signs, and responding to slogans inbetween chants. This gathering shifted location throughout the day from 8:00 am-4:30 pm and students were adement that a "Injury to one is an injury to all." Thus no students were able to write their exams or attend classes whether or not they agreed or disagreed with the protests.
Being a curious person, I set out to better understand the situation talking to students, staff and administrators. Generally the discrepency between students and the University has to do with allocation and distribution of student financial aid. But when asked, the various stakeholders held quite an array of opinions.
Student opinions ranged from not having any idea or concern because they were international students from Namibia to being dedicated to standing up against "poverty as a tool of mass destruction" to accusations that administration was incompetent. Another student shared his perspective that only the Black students protested and that colored students did not find that course of action appropriate. He did not buy the unity of the student body and stated outright that students ran with their own. Other students were angry that they were trapped in the library when it was locked down or unable to write the test for which they had studied hard.
Staff and mid-level managers did not find the strike to be the most effective response by students. If they are worried about student financing, then what are they doing to help? How much are they spending on parties? One discussed the negative implications on image and recruitment. They also did not think University leadership effectively communicated to staff to prepare them on the situation.
When I asked a higher level manager about this, her response was that other univerisities have three times the amount of staff doing the same amount of work and the head of the university had been out ill and it was the systemic underresourcing that accounted for the lack of communication. Also, come to find out, the students leading the protest did not follow through on feedback from administration on how to resolve the problem at hand. Thus not empowering the administration to address their concerns effectively.
This sitaution clearly has many sides and is complex. From my vantage point, being between student and staff, I do my best to stay neutral but really appreciate hearing all the perspectives. The situation is a good case study allowing me to gain insight about how the hierarchy of stakeholders at univerisites perceive situations and to reflect on how the situation might have been handled better.
Lesson: there are always two sides to every story and any manager or adminstrator needs to understand both to empathetically respond to situations when they arise.
No comments:
Post a Comment