CAREERS IN UNIVERSITY COMMUNICATIONS
with Laura Barlament, Thomas Dean, Roger Williams
Hosted by Paula Foster
Edited by Susanne Kelley
May 2002
The following Guest Speaker Discussion originally took place on WRK4US in May of the year 2002. Because WRK4US has a confidentiality policy, all names and email addresses have been altered or removed, except for the moderator's and the Guest Speakers'.
The discussion can be read in two ways- by simply scrolling down and reading the whole thing, or by clicking on the topical links below, which take you to specific places within the discussion. The discussion can also be printed out in its entirety for your reading convenience.
Special thanks to Susanne Kelley who volunteered her time to edit this discussion and prepare it for posting on the web. If you are interested in editing a future discussion, your help will be much appreciated; email Paula Foster, WRK4US List Manager, at pfchambers@sbcglobal.net
INTRODUCTION OF GUEST SPEAKERS
POSSIBLE TITLES AND PLACES FOR "OFFICES OF PUBLICATIONS"
RECOMMENDED EXPERIENCES FOR JOB CANDIDATES
SALARIES
WORKLOAD
A LIST MEMBER'S EXPERIENCE & TIME MANAGEMENT
CAREER PROSPECTS IN UNIVERSITY RELATIONS & A DISCUSSION ON THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN FACULTY AND RELATIONS PROFESSIONALS
RESUME CONSTRUCTION
CLOSING THE DISCUSSION
Introduction of Guest Speakers
Laura Barlament:
Senior Project Editor, Purdue Marketing Communications
Hello! My name is Laura Barlament. I completed a Ph.D. in English literature at Emory University (Atlanta, Georgia) in May 2001. Since the summer of 1999, I have been working as a writer and editor in Purdue Marketing Communications at Purdue University (West Lafayette, Indiana).
Purdue Marketing Communications (PMC) is part of University Relations, along with the University News Service, University Periodicals, and the Visitor Information Center. While News Service handles media relations and puts out press releases, and Periodicals handles, well, periodicals (University-wide ones, that is), we do print publications, Web sites, and other types of promotional materials for clients from all around the University. Our services are "free" to any department or division of the University -- they all pay into our budget. PMC consists of writer/editors, graphic designers, Web designers, and support staff.
A little background on how I got from there to here: I entered graduate school without really knowing what it was "all about," from a professional perspective. I had loved studying literature in college, and was very good at it, so I basically thought it would make sense to keep right on going. Emory is very good to its graduate students financially -- when I entered, the school offered every student admitted to a Ph.D. program four years of financial support. So I went for it.
I did not enjoy graduate school, however; I never felt like I really fit in. The professionalization process never really "took" with me. Being the consummate student, I did well in my coursework and on exams. I had mixed experiences teaching. But I kept plugging along, and eventually discovered a set of mentors who became my dissertation committee.
Then something else important happened: a relationship. He was a student at Purdue, and the relationship grew serious enough that, when I entered the dissertation phase of the program, I decided to move to Indiana to be with him.
Furthermore, I decided that instead of adjunct teaching while I completed my dissertation, I would seek some other part-time job. I had found teaching to be quite time-consuming and too emotionally exhausting for me to get much work done on my dissertation at the same time.
Here's where other sides of my background and experience come into play. I have a knack for writing and, especially, editing. I had experience in these areas from college journalism work (internships, summer jobs, the school newspaper). Purdue University is a huge operation with many communications offices and positions, so I started networking over there, setting up informational interviews with people in communications at the University, and finding out what types of jobs were available.
One of the places where I presented myself, my resume, and my writing samples was what was then known as the Office of Publications. They were short-staffed at the time and almost immediately hired me on a trial basis. I passed the trial, and they offered me a contract (I think it was for 9 months) to work for them 16 hours per week. When my contract was drawing to a close, they asked me to take a full-time position as senior project editor in the office -- which was about to change its name to Purdue Marketing Communications. I accepted. I completed the last revisions to my dissertation during the first half year or so of working full time.
On almost every project, I work on a team with a designer. My basic responsibilities are to manage the project schedule, take the lead in client relations, and develop and edit content for the publication or project. The "developing and editing content" part encompasses everything from creating a concept for a print piece or the flowchart for a Web site, to writing all of the content, to proofreading and checking printer's proofs, and all of the steps inbetween. I am always juggling a number of different projects -- I usually have 15-20 active jobs at once, in various stages of development.
One of the things that makes this job interesting to me is the sheer variety of projects I work on -- variety in content, variety in media, variety in tone, variety in audience, etc. Maybe I'll just give you a quick laundry list of some of the projects I have worked on: Admissions Web site redesign; revised version of "Unique Purdue," a magazine-type piece that Admissions sends to its top prospective students; solicitation mailings for Annual Giving; a Web site, poster, and solicitation mailing for a new giving program directed at seniors; President's Council Report, a magazine for Purdue's top donor group; a brochure/course catalog advertising a summer academic program for kids from grade 3 to 12; a communications/marketing plan, various print pieces, and redesigned Web site for the Technical Assistance Program, an outreach initiative that connects Indiana businesses with Purdue technical expertise; ... well, enough of that for now. Suffice it to say that the list goes on.
There are many other things I could say about my job, but for now, I think I've written enough. Please feel free to fire away the questions!
Thomas Dean:
Special Assistant to the President, The University of Iowa
The common mantra of most of us on the WRK4US list working in non-professorial positions is "I didn't plan to get into this." Well, of course, the same applies to me. I currently hold the position of Special Assistant to the President at The University of Iowa. My primary duties are in the realms of speechwriting, report editing, and research. I work closely with University Relations, as well as other units around campus, such as the UI Foundation. Although I am not officially part of the UI "PR team," much of my work is focused on the public promotion of our institution, as that is one of the primary functions of a modern university president, ours included.
First, a little background. I have bachelor's degrees in English and music history, and an MA and PhD in English. Since I was in 1st grade, I never wanted to be anything but a teacher and/or a writer. I loved my college experience, and I envisioned myself as a professor of English. And, indeed, that's what I became. I received my PhD in English, with a concentration in American literature, from The University of Iowa in 1991. For eight years following that, I taught in three different colleges/universities, in three very different types of departments and institutions. I was assistant professor of English (tenure-track) at Cardinal Stritch College in Milwaukee (where I also served two years as Director of the Freshman Seminar Program), a lecturer in American Thought and Language (first-year writing with an American Studies content emphasis) at Michigan State University, and an assistant professor (tenure-track) of multidisciplinary studies (an alternative entry general education program) at Moorhead State University in Minnesota. I won't go into gory detail about these institutions and programs now, but if such become germane to the discussion this week, I will be happy to. Suffice it to say that I
found these positions rewarding in many ways, and frustrating in others. My impulse to leave a traditional professorial position was not so much to "get out of the academy," though many of my frustrations--with particulars of these jobs as well as generalities of the profession--made it easier to dislodge myself from the academy in the traditional sense. It was actually an impulse toward a particular kind of environment, and a particular community, that ultimately led me to my current position. As the years progressed, I discovered that I indeed was happiest in a Big Ten-type university environment, as well as happiest in a smaller city with a large university like Iowa City. Indeed, I carried a torch for Iowa City itself ever since I had left it. So my leap from the academy was in fact to return to The University of Iowa and Iowa City specifically. I really have NOT left higher education--which I honestly would find very difficult to do--I have just redefined my relationship to it.
In 1999, I was offered the position of program assistant with the UI Honors Program. I also was working toward the possibility of establishing a non-profit organization that would support place-based education in Iowa (I'd be happy to talk more about this in the discussion as well). My duties with the Honors Program were to supervise the student employees who organized our many program activities, as well as work with program publications, recruitment, public relations, etc. I was student-oriented in my teaching career, as well as publicly-oriented in my scholarly and community activities. My teaching positions were as generalists, so I had broad background with many types of students in many contexts. I fit the requirements of the job well. As the position was very low level, and I in fact took a significant pay cut in order to move back to The University of Iowa, I did not see this as a permanent position.
After I put in an academic year with the Honors Program, my predecessor in the President's Office was retiring, and an advertisement for her replacement went out. Again, my academic background (in a number of different types of institutions), my generalist credentials, my administrative experience, and my public orientation to my work--as well as my writing skills--made me a good candidate. My previous experience as a student at Iowa, and a year working in a multi-faceted job with the Honors Program here that allowed me to interact with offices and programs across campus, also were crucial to my successful candidacy for this job. I could not have planned a series of experiences for getting hired for this position--and, at the same, I could not have planned a BETTER series of experiences for this position had I tried!
As I said earlier, my job's primary duties focus on speechwriting for our President, Mary Sue Coleman. She requires remarks for between 75-100 events per year, ranging from 5-minute welcomes to graduation or honors banquets, to 3-minute speaker introductions, to donor social events, to commencement speeches, to 20-minute state of the university addresses, to plenary presentations at national conferences. I am involved in the drafting and finalization of virtually all of these remarks, though the procedure can vary, depending on the type of event and remarks. I also am responsible for writing letters of congratulations to faculty, staff, and students who receive grants and awards, as well as special request letters (100th birthdays, Eagle Scout ceremonies, etc.). (I have a 1/4-time graduate research assistant, whose primary responsibility is to write first drafts of these letters, as well as to maintain the President's speech book.) I also am involved in the editing of the University President's Annual Report (produced by University Relations) and our annual strategic planning report (managed by the Provost's Office, produced by University Relations). I maintain a lot of conceptual oversight of the President's web page, help produce audio-visual presentations to accompany some of the President's remarks, respond to e-mail inquiries of the President, and draft and/or approve quotations from the President from offices all over campus. I serve on several committees--most notably the President's calendar committee, the President's Council for Strategic Implementation, and the Issues Management Group (a committee of the top University communicators that works to anticipate and/or respond to matters of public import in the area of communications). Of course there are many "other duties as assigned" that crop up.
As you can probably gather from the variety of duties, there is no such thing as a typical day. I may be holed up for 8 hours working on a commencement speech all by myself. I may spend a lot of my day managing a flurry of quotation requests that have inundated me (of course, everyone needs it yesterday!). I may be churning out a bunch of little introductions and welcomes. I may be spending a good chunk of the day with folks from University Relations as we work on the annual report. I may be sitting in an emergency meeting with campus leadership as we decide what needs to happen on campus, and who should say what, on a day when terrorists fly airplanes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. I may be answering a myriad of e-mails from angry parents, high school students requesting admissions information, faculty or staff members concerned about our budget cuts, or citizens looking for a research report on hog lot aroma. I may be accompanying the President to the Storm Lake Rotary Club to run the Power Point presentation for her address. What ties all this together, though, and what makes this type of job relevant to this week's discussion, is that I help the President manage her public persona in her role as a major figure in the cultural landscape of the state of Iowa and a well-regarded chief executive of a national Research I institution.
Although this position was never on my radar screen before I stepped into it, and although I have altered course from my original dream of becoming a tenured professor of English, I have never been so content and happy in a position. Oh, sure, there are bothersome things--the pace can get hectic, and sometimes my brain hurts figuring out yet another way to say how much we appreciate our retiring professors, and sometimes picking away at dozens of congratulatory letters can get boring. But those are all minor annoyances. I am doing things I love to do--I love to write, and I love to write about and for the University of Iowa, the state of Iowa, and higher education. I am privileged to see how our institution works from the top and inside, without most of the responsibilities (I admit it!). (However, one of the frustrations is also not always being in the loop on things--although I am a close staff member to the President, I am not a Vice President privy to everything that's going on.) I report directly to the President, who is so busy that she needs someone who can work independently and cannot look over my shoulder--so I work with much of the flexibility and freedom of a faculty member. The President wants the person in this position to maintain academic credibility with the faculty on this campus, hence her interest in hiring someone with an academic background, and hence her support of my teaching a course occasionally (I could not imagine not ever teaching again!), and hence her support of sending me to a conference of my choosing once a year, and hence her support of my continuing scholarly activity.
Another great thing about this position is that I am unleashed from the shackles of tenure expectations. I am currently working on a literary history of Iowa, which probably wouldn't have sparked many tenure committee fires. I can write scholarly work in a way that will appeal to the general public, and I can write things on my own FOR the general public without worrying about it eating into time I "should" be spending on scholarship. I have always had an interest in creative writing, and now I can pursue that. I can organize a public cultural festival just as readily as a scholarly conference academic panel. I can work on organizing a group of people within the university into a project, and maybe ultimately a center or institute, on place studies. I can pursue my interests in the movement toward reconceiving service and outreach for institutions like ours, which dovetails perfectly with part of the President's own agenda.
I know--one big question looms large over all of this. Time. One of the great advantages of a professorial position is the time flexibility. I haven't fully analyzed the why's and how's of this, but, honestly, I feel that I have more time for non-scholarly pursuits as outlined above, and more time for my family, now that I am not suffering under the crush of open-ended professorial and scholarly expectations. I do have to, more or less, be in the office from 8:30-5:00, five days a week, but mostly my evenings and weekends are my own. (I am fortunate that I work for a President who understands the need for a personal life among her staff, and I am fortunate that I work efficiently and can manage my duties from 9-5). I am on a 12-month contract, not 9 months like faculty. But I have 5 weeks' annual vacation available to me (yes, generous, for which I am enormously grateful), and I take much of that time for exactly what it is--vacation. More than I felt I was able to as a professor, I can turn off my professional duties and my professional mindset for some uninterrupted family vacation time.
There is a lot more I'd love to tell you about my job and what I do when NOT on the job, but I've gone on long enough. There will be plenty of opportunity to explore the ins and outs of what I do in this next week in the areas you many be interested in. Please feel free to ask me anything about my current or past positions, as well as how my current position articulates with my avocational pursuits and my personal life. I know that much anxiety about leaving the academy, or leaving the professoriate, centers on not being sure what "life will be like" doing something different. But my own experience has taught me that, indeed, life can sometimes be even better!
Roger L. Williams
Associate Vice Chancellor for University Relations, University of Arkansas
Hello, everyone, and I do apologize for the late entrance. I have been away this weekend in northern Virginia, watching my 27-year old son get his Ph.D. in clinical psychology from George Mason University, and returning late Monday night.
My name is Roger Williams. For the last four years, I have been gainfully employed as the associate vice chancellor for university relations at the University of Arkansas, which is the major land-grant and state university--and only major research university--in this economically challenged state of nearly 3 million citizens. I have been working in the university relations field--which involves public relations,communications, and marketing--for 24 years, at Penn State, Georgetown, as a consultant, and now here. I am also an adjunct assistant/associate professor of higher education at both Penn State and at Arkansas.
I earned my B.A. in history from Penn State in 1973. I had flirted with the idea of law school or graduate school to pursue a Ph.D. and become a college professor, but remained place-bound and worked in a department store for a couple of months. Then I decided to go for an M.A. in journalism, also at Penn State, and got the degree in 1975. I worked as a reporter for three years, got my wages up to $3.75 an hour, and then procured a job as a writer-editor in the Department of Public Information at Penn State, with what to me was a princely salary of $11,200. This was wonderful, as I had wanted a career that would allow me to combine journalism and academe. Fortunately, I was hired by the legendary Art Ciervo, arguably the best in this business at the time, and learned at his feet.
I worked my way upward in his organization, but in the early '80s began to think, if I wanted to continue moving upward in this profession, I wanted a doctorate, for two reasons: First, the credential; if I were going to be a spokesperson for a college or university, I wanted the union card. Second, and more important, I wanted breadth and depth of knowledge in my field of endeavor--higher education. I wanted to know something of its history, philosophy, curricula, administration, and clientele. One of the enduring criticisms of people in the public relations field is that they do a great job in terms of media relations but they know precious little about the "industry" in which they work; hence they are marginalized as people who "do" the job of communicating; the powers-that-be, by contrast, do the "thinking" and tell the pr people what to write. I wanted to function at a higher level and be a player in the institutional policy arena.
And so the mid-80s were a real push time for me: moving upward in the organization, to become the chief pr officer at Penn State at age 35 and then, two years later, to becoming assistant vice president and executive director of university relations. Raising two young children, the elder of whom just received his Ph.D. in clinical psychology from George Mason University this past weekend. Also, from 1982 to 1988, I worked part-time on my doctorate in higher ed, dropping out for a year here and there as life and work intervened. In 1988, I received my doctor of education degree in higher education (at the time I started, Penn State offered only the D.Ed. in higher ed, not the Ph.D. as it does now.) I had a great experience and did my dissertation under the legendary Roger Geiger, the best higher education historian in America. In 1989, my dissertation, "The Origins of Federal Support for Higher Education: George W. Atherton and the Land-Grant College Movement," won the dissertation of the year award from the Association for the Study of Higher Education. Shortly after, I was accepted as an affiliate assistant professor in the same program, teaching courses in institutional advancement and higher education history in addition to continuing my university relations work. Roger Geiger also asked me to serve as associate editor of the History of Higher Education Annual; I continue to serve as an editorial board member to this today.
I left Penn State for Georgetown in 1995, where I served as associate vp for communcations, stayed only a year (again, life intervened; loved Georgetown but suffered through a bad, messy divorce) and returned to State College, Pa.. There I got a job as executive director of consulting services with Dick Jones Communications, a national media and public relations firm that had just relocated to State College. I worked with Dick for two years, consulting at a wide diversity of institutions, from Winston-Salem State University to Minnesota State Colleges and Universities (MnSCU) to Lebanon Valley College. I came to the University of Arkansas in July 1998 on a three-month consulting contract, and liked the place and the challenge so much (i.e., how do you build a world-class research university in the nation's poorest state?) that I have been here since.
So, as you see, I am a more a professor manque than a professor real. But I love what I do in University Relations and regard my work not as a job or career but as service in a noble cause. Corny as it may sound, I firmly believe that higher education is the "last, best hope" to change our world for the better. I believe the opportunity for growth and development it provides to millions of men and women enrolled as students every year, the new products, processes, inventions, interpretations and insights it yields through research and scholarship, the outreach and service it provides to so many people, constitute both a fundamental underpinning of American society and the "last, best hope" to a world under stress.
Now, imagine what a thrill it is to represent an institution of higher learning that makes a real difference in making life better in its sponsoring state, the nation, and the world, as the University of Arkansas does.
My fundamental concern is using programs of public relations, communications and marketing to advance the vision, mission and goals of the University. Here, our task is to quickly build image and reputation as a world-class public research university. Thus we work hard to "position" the university as a first-rate major research university, mainly by communicating the intellectual accomplishments of our faculty (through research and expertise) and our students (through their achievements) to statewide, national and international audiences. Our tools for this task include media relations (newspapers, magazines, television, radio, the web); publications (both print and electronic); magazines (we do a research magazine twice a year and an alumni magazine four times a year); special events; lots of issues management and crisis management (crises present an opportunity to showcase certain aspects of the institution and position it in certain ways...they aren't always "bad"). We also support admissions, development (fund-raising), and the various schools and colleges of the university in their efforts to build image and reputation.
The work is fast-paced, often interrupted by the crisis-du-jour, stimulating, action-packed, and at times, highly gratifying. Just one recent example: We have worked very hard to gain entry and upward mobility in The Princeton Review, which I would argue is the second most visible college guide in the nation, behind only U.S. News. A couple of years ago we got inclusion for the first time in the guide, which includes only 330 or so of the 2,000+ four-year schools in America. Then we worked hard to get our academic quality rating as high as possible (a 78, it is the third highest in the Southeastern conference, behind only Vanderbilt and Florida). This year, it is being moved higher, to an 80, which will qualify us as a three-of-four stars institution academically. We use this ranking to position ourselves with key audiences as being a rising star academic institution. This is just one of myriad projects, programs, activities and initiatives we have going on at any one time.
The moral? I never became a full-time professor, and professorial posts, especially this year because of budget problems across the country, are damnably hard to land. But there are some incredibly exciting careers on the staff side of our more than 4,000 institutions of higher learning. I am lucky enough to have held one of the most exciting such such jobs imaginable over most of my professional life. And, take my word, the demand for talented university relations professionals will continue to increase unabated in the years ahead.
I look forward to answering your questions. Fire away.
POSSIBLE TITLES AND PLACES FOR "OFFICES OF PUBLICATIONS:"
Question for Laura Barlament:
Couple of questions about this job:
- Do most large universities have an "office of publications" of the sort you describe, through which a melange of pubs are routed; and if so, what sorts of names do they usually have?
- Do you believe that you were hired mainly because of the department's being understaffed; relatedly, what sorts of gossip do you hear about applicants to your departments, in terms of what makes a bad or good applicant?
Thanks,
C.J.
Answer by Laura Barlament:
Here's a stab at C.J.'s questions...
- My sense is that most large universities do have an "office of publications" like the one in which I work. Last month, I attended the CASE (Council for Advancement and Support of Education; www.case.org) Editors' Forum, and scanning the registration list, I see names such as Media Relations/Communications, Research Information, Publications, University Relations, Marketing and Creative Media, Communications and Alumni Relations, Public Affairs, and External Relations. Most of the participants at that particular event, however, were editors of alumni magazines, which are often published by schools' alumni associations (which are sometimes part of the university, sometimes independent organizations).
- Why was I hired ... No, it wasn't JUST because the office was understaffed--I had relevant experience (such as a copy editing internship with USA Today), I had clips of stories I had had published (alumni magazine, newspaper), I had relevant education (English); and also, I was able to do the job on the trial project that they initially gave me (editing an annual report). Also, in this university environment, they are used to hiring graduate assistant-type people and know that they can be a great resource.
I have been involved in the hiring of two other editors in my office. What makes them good candidates is, first, that we see by their resume and publication samples that they have experience with writing and editing and that they have produced good work. If any of their materials (especially the resume and cover letters) have mistakes--that's not acceptable. When we bring them in for an interview, we can tell more about their experience (have they worked in a situation with multiple-deadline pressure, for instance, and how did they handle it) and their personality--whether they would fit into this office environment. Thirdly, if things go this far, they get an editing test. If they are no good on the test, we don't hire them.
Answer by Thomas Dean:
Although this question wasn't addressed to me specifically, perhaps my clocking in will help expand the field of response a little. In general, yes, most large universities have some sort of external relations/publications office. Most small institutions do as well, though certainly not as elaborate. But it seems to me the external communications function is common to almost any institution of higher education.
Here at The University of Iowa, we have a large unit called "University Relations." Under this umbrella sits our news service and general University publications (a research magazine, a parents newsletter, an internal faculty/staff bi-weekly newspaper, admissions and recruitment materials, President's annual report, annual strategic plan report, etc.).
Iowa has a major teaching hospital and medical college, so the college and the hospitals and clinics have their own "PR shops." The College of Medicine's shop is actually part of University Relations and is called Health Science Relations. The hospitals and clinics are a separate entity and have their own shop, called the "University of Iowa Health Care Joint Office for Planning, Marketing and Communications" (yes, that's a mouthful). Each of these units has its own set of publications and communications tools that they produce.
Our University alumni association is a large organization unto itself and does its own communications and publications. The same for our Foundation. And the same for our athletic programs.
Almost all of our colleges now employ their own external relations directors. The colleges themselves often produce their own publications, for their alumni as well as other external and internal audiences.
As you can see, a large institution can have *many* communications/publication outlets, and thus many opportunities.
RECOMMENDED EXPERIENCES FOR JOB CANDIDATES:
Question for Laura Barlament and Thomas Dean:
Dear Laura and Tom,
Thanks for the very interesting details of your jobs and your experiences. In hiring, do University Communications offices look for candidates with knowledge of or previous association with the university or college? I would think to work in communications or information requires strong respect and support for the institution. When applying for a job it would seem important to make sure it would be the kind of environment a person would feel comfortable promoting. Do you recommend having worked previously in some capacity at the institution?
E.W.
Answer by Laura Barlament:
Hi E.W.,
From what I have seen of the hiring in my office, not much emphasis is placed on candidates' having worked previously in a university environment, much less having any particular loyalty to or previous experience with Purdue. The candidate's writing, editing, and project management skills are considered much, much more important. Maybe that seems counterintuitive--but my office hires communications specialists, not Purdue specialists. Perhaps the unspoken assumption is that people will only apply to or accept jobs at places that they feel comfortable promoting. That's the candidate's decision. On the other hand, it also doesn't look good for a candidate to come in and know absolutely nothing about Purdue. As with any job, the candidate should seek out some basic knowledge about the place.
That's what I've observed--perhaps Tom has a different perspective?
Answer by Thomas Dean:
E.W.,
Well, this is kind of a hard question to answer. Here at Iowa, I would agree that the candidate's writing, editing, and project management skills are paramount. But certainly familiarity with the institution can be a plus, and perhaps a little more than that. I wouldn't say it's a necessity, but it can be a big component. I believe that a fairly common "preferred qualification"--not just for publications/communications jobs, but many administrative-type positions--is familiarity with the institution itself. (In purely practical terms, there's much less training involved with someone who has familiarity with the institution.) I served on the search committee for our Director of Publications for University Relations last year, and this bore out--the person we hired was unquestionably the most experienced in the skills we were looking for, but she was also a long-time University Relations employee--that didn't totally tip the scales her way, but it made the decision a little easier. (Actually, it's even more than this--she served as interim in this position as well. So, in that sense, once you're in an institution, there are such interim possibilities available to you, which obviously will help your case for the permanent nod.)
I do know that in the search for the position I hold now, there were external as well as internal candidates among the five finalists.
As far as the question of "respect and support for" the institution, I think that can't really enter into the equation, at least overtly. It's so subjective and ephemeral, and anything that verges on trying to sniff out one's "loyalty" would be out of line. I think that question can be answered by default, as Laura suggests--if you don't respect and support the institution, you probably wouldn't be applying in the first place. If you have a history of lack of respect and support for the institution as a previous employee, that will be known one way or another, and it will come out in work performance.
So in answer to the upshot of the question--I think previous experience with the institution can be a big advantage. It won't guarantee you a job, and it certainly doesn't mean that an outside candidate couldn't be hired. Skills and experience are #1. But, perhaps still somewhat high on the list, I'd say that, yes, I'd recommend getting experience at the institution.
Question for Laura Barlament and Thomas Dean:
Hello Laura and Thomas,
Thank you for taking the time to explain how you got to your current positions.
I'm wondering if you would mind talking about the salary ranges for these positions perhaps in comparison to what an assistant professor of English would make at the same institution.
I'm asking because at the large, research university in the city where I live, salaries for various university communications positions seem to be substantially below what someone with the same credentials and job description would make in private industry downtown (although not that far off what a starting assistant professor of English or History would make at that university).
Sounds like you both have found great jobs -- and you can't put a price tag on that. This is largely a curiosity question.
Thanks,
A.M.
Answer by Laura Barlament:
Hi A.M.,
Salaries for editors in my office start at about $30K; salary depends on experience and education and years with the University. I'm not sure how high it goes--at least into the lower $40Ks, I expect. I also don't know how that compares with assistant professors of English at Purdue.
Looking at the area that universities commonly call "advancement" (which includes development and communications), the money and the jobs are currently in development. This is true of Purdue and many other universities, I believe.
Answer by Thomas Dean:
A. M.,
I really couldn't answer precisely, but my sense is that entry-level editorial positions in University Relations here at The University of Iowa pay less than beginning assistant professor of English positions. Editorial probably pays in the 30s, beginning assistant prof's (in something like English) in the 40s. A presidential assistant position could be all over the map (especially since, generically, "presidential assistant" can mean innumerable things). Of course, there are opportunities to advance within University Relations to administrative levels within the unit, which would ultimately pay more. Proportionally, there may even be more such opportunities for a U.R. employee than a departmental faculty member.
Answer by Roger Williams:
A.M.:
Let me chime in with some national statistics for salaries in University Relations. This comes from the August 31, 2002, almanac edition of The Chronicle of Higher Education and is found on page. 26. The salaries averages are for the 2000-01 year, so they'd be slightly higher now.
The average salary for the chief public relations officer for all institutions, regardless of type, was $61,706.
When you factor institutional type into the equation, there is wide
variation: $101,200 at doctoral universities: $61,529 at comprehensive universities; $51,000 at baccaluareate institutions; and $53,283 at two-year institutions.
The average salary for the director of publications is $50,000 across all institutions. Breaking that down, it averages $61,991 at doctoral institutions; $48,444 at comprehensives; $43,691 at baccalaureates; and $50,462 at two-years.
The average salary for an associate director of publications is $40,142. At doctoral institutions, it is $46,668; at comprehensives, $35,627; at baccalaureates, $35.320; at two-years, $40,827.
The average salary for a director of the information office is $49,430. At doctorals, $69,039; at comprehensives, $49,017; at baccalaureates, $40,000; at two-years, $45,979
The average salary for a director of the news bureau is $44,074. At doctorals, $61,282; at comprehensives, $42,000; at baccalaureates, $37,295; at two-years, $33,252.
If you want to put these salaries in perspective with other positions across colleges and universities, the aforesaid page 26 will tell the tale.
Question by Paula Foster:
Dear Speakers,
How would you describe the overall workload that your jobs give you? In other words, how much free time do you have as a general rule (meaning time away from work) and how much energy do you have left over with which to enjoy the time?
Answer by Laura Barlament:
Workload... Great question--it's a perennial topic of discussion around my office. For me, I've found the workload to be quite manageable within a 8-to-9-hour workday. From 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., I'm always busy; but then I have my evenings and weekends to myself, almost always. I also get 21 vacation days per year, plus the major holidays. I do have energy left at the end of my workday--but my struggle is that, since I've just spent most of the day at the computer, I don't generally find myself wanting to sit there any longer when I'm at home. So, I haven't done much in the way of scholarly productivity since I finished my dissertation a year ago. I do, however, enjoy my free time!
Answer by Roger Williams:
Dear Paula:
Generally, I find my workweeks average about 55-65 hours, sometimes more, seldom less. I tend toward workaholism, so it doesn't bother me to be on the job to that degree. Even when I'm not on the job, I'm carrying a cell phone.
One of the things I try to do faithfully is to exercise, and have found it a real stress buster. In the late 1970s, when I was working as a not-yet-thirtysomething writer-editor at Penn State, smoking about two packs a day and weighting about 15 more pounds than I should, my boss told me I needed to quite smoking and get in shape or I wouldn't live past age 40. In 1982, I quit smoking and started running, and have been doing it for 20 years now; I also took up strength training about 10 years ago and do it two to three times a week. To me exercise is as important as sleeping and eating, and you have to make time for it. It provides more energy to get through the day and, as noted earlier, buffers you against stress.
Aside from exercise, I read a fair amount, mainly history, politics, and current events, watch some TV (an NYPD Blue junkie) and do the things everyone else does in their down time. As noted in my introduction, I view my work as service in a noble cause and do not mind the more-than-40-hour workweeks (and workweekends). When I see what my chancellor does, my time on the job pales by comparison.
Answer by Thomas Dean:
Yes, time/workload is always a concern. I've addressed this a bit in my introduction. I'd have to say that the workload for my particular position varies quite a bit. Indeed, T. S. Eliot was right: April is the cruellest month. Well, so are September, October, and May. These are the months when President Coleman tends to have the most public appearances, so therefore are the months I am most busy. When there's down time on the speechifying front, there's always plenty more to do--catching up on letters, etc. There have been times when the days go past 5:00 or I have to do something on the weekend, but those have been infrequent.
On the whole, though, as I've said, I manage to keep my workload pretty much within the confines of 8:00/8:30 to 5:00, five days a week. My predecessor warned me that this was the type of job that would consume my life, and she rarely got out of the office before 7:00. Yet I have not found that to be the case for me. Much of it is working style, I think. I work intensively and efficiently, and I am determined NOT to let this job consume my life in that way. I think that, to some extent, you can ALLOW a job consume you. I won't allow that. (I know that some positions--particularly administrative positions--will NOT give you this
choice.) As I also said before, I have a boss who understands the need for her staff to have a personal life. I know there are many administrators on our campus who expect their staff members to be working 60 hours a week. Fortunately for me, our own President does not feel that way. This could change depending on who's in the big chair--legend has it that one of the candidates during the presidential search that brought us President Coleman, during his interview announced that, of course, he expected his staff would be there on Saturdays. (He also announced that, of course, the University would be buying an airplane for his use.)
I often think about whether I would want to stay in this position until retirement (as my predecessor did) or move "upward." There are possibilities, I think, that I could apply for the directorship of University Relations if that becomes vacant, or some sort of assistant/associate vp position. But I look at my colleagues in those positions. They make more money and have more responsibility, but their lives are much more captive to their jobs. I have small children and other outside interests. Honestly, at this point, I'm not willing to give up my time with my wife and kids and my other interests for my job. I very much enjoy what I'm doing now, and it carries with it its own element of prestige. These are personal choices, and I do not intend my comments to reflect positively or negatively on anyone else who makes other choices.
I also said in my intro that, in many ways, I find my time much more manageable now than I did when I was a professor, and I feel much readily able to take "time off"--REALLY time OFF--than even when I had long breaks in winter and summer.
In terms of free time, yes, it can be a challenge to gear up to do something--like scholarship or creative writing--after work or on the weekends, but I manage. Early morning is available, too, of course. Having said that, I must say that I also found it difficult to find time to do those things while I was a professor, too!
A LIST MEMBER'S EXPERIENCE & TIME MANAGEMENT:
Comment by a List Member:
I'm finding this a fascinating discussion since I came from the direction of university pr towards the phd program I'm in now. I worked for seven years at Ben Gurion University in Beer Sheva Israel; 3 years in the public relations department and four in the office of the president as the liasion to the board of governors. (during which I was able to finish my MA and have two children, very flexible positions they were indeed!). Looking back, I sense that, for me, I really wanted to be on the academic side of the fence, and so, when my husband finished his phd and we no longer needed me to be working full-time, it was my opportunity to go back to finish.
I remember esp the "crisis-de-jour" atmosphere in the president's office, and the progressively longer work weeks as the annual board meeting approached (40-50-60-70-80 hours in the month before!). But it was a very exciting place to work. I certainly learned how to write under deadlines and very diplomatically.
The downside for me, and I had an MA then, was the desire to be in on the discussions, and to nonetheless remember that I was a facilitator and not a participant; that is, I was to be thinking about how to get some prima donna board member a taxi to the Dead Sea because she was bored right while I was fascinated by the discussion of academic directions, etc!
I think it would be even harder to do this after completing a phd.
But it is an interesting direction to contemplate. It is certainly a different pace than what I've encountered in grad school. This dissertation, under my former boss, would have been done 6 months ago!
Cheers!
M.P.
Reply by Thomas Dean:
Thanks for sharing your own background, M.P. It is quite interesting, and shows the many directions, curves, and turns our lives in academia can take!
I had mentioned in an earlier post that there are many types of presidential assistant positions. Your experience illustrates this. Some PA's can be "chiefs of staff," serving almost a vice presidential function. Some can be high-level clerical positions. Some can be social directors. In our own office, we have three "Special Assistants to the President"--me (writing, research, reports), an administrative assistant (keeper-of-the-calendar, office traffic manager, etc.), and a social director. We come from entirely different backgrounds and do entirely different things. Since my job is very specifically focused on communications, I don't do a lot of the board meeting management that you describe, for example. While we do have a very lean staff for an institution our size, smaller schools have to do with even less; I know many PA's who serve several functions--administrative assisting, chief-of-staffing, communications, etc. I do feel fortunate!
The downside for me, and I had an MA then, was the desire to be in on the discussions, and to nonetheless remember that I was a facilitator and not a participant; that is, I was to be thinking about how to get some prima donna board member a taxi to the Dead Sea because she was bored right while I was fascinated by the discussion of academic directions, etc!
I think it would be even harder to do this after completing a phd.
Yes, this can be a problem with the types of positions we're talking about, whether in the president's office or in a communications office. I think I had mentioned this in my intro--I'm not always in the loop on everything (I often read about what the President or University is doing in the newspaper, like everyone else), and I'm not a major "player" in many major discussions. I feel conflicted about that. Sometimes I wish I could jump into the fray and be part of things. Sometimes I say, "Whoa, Tom! Be glad you don't have to do that!" As I suggested in my earlier post about time and workload, if I were involved in figuring out whether or not we have to manage our state budget cuts by deciding whether we can manage it through attrition or if we have to go to layoffs and furloughs, I wouldn't be able to go home at 5:00 and play with my kids or work on my book on Iowa literature or watch "The West Wing" (like Roger, I admit it--I watch some TV!). On the other hand, I do often play a significant role in deciding how University communications will proceed. And even though any and all speeches and writings by the President are ultimately her own, my own writing, advice, beliefs inevitably work their way into what she says, and in that way, I do have a subtle but profound affect on what this institution does.
Reply by Roger Williams:
M.P.,
Sounds like you are tracking in a most interesting direction. I do quite a bit of work for the chancellor of our university and am in frequent communication with his executive assistant, who works in a "constant whitewater" environment and is always trying to contain the torrent of crises and problems that emerge, it sometimes seems, by the hour. Nevertheless, it is stimulating and exciting work.
One of the topics that continues to fascinate (and sometimes distress) me is "length of time toward dissertation," particularly in the humanities and social sciences. I was fortunate enough to find my topic and write a brief description of what I wanted to do to my desired dissertation direction in August 1987, work on that proposal in my spare time during the fall of 1987 while working full time as head of the PR shop at Penn State. I had the formal proposal done by November, defended the proposal in late December 1987, took a three month "administrative leave" with full pay from December 15, 1987, to March 15, 1988, by which time I had completed the "D", writing and still researching as needed to plug the holes. I turned the dissertation in, went back to work full-time, continued to respond to my adviser's recommendations for improvement (which were not too time-consuming), defended on June 21, 1988, and graduated on August 13, 1988. The process took almost exactly one year to the day, from conception of dissertation to graduation.
I do not say this to "brag" but only to prove a point: I believe I was able to move quickly because of the several advantages my career as a pr director provided. For one thing, I was a professional writer, with many years under my belt of being able to gather, analyze and present information quickly. This helps enormously. Secondly, time management skills were paramount. I was blessed to get an administrative leave for three months so I could focus, but was still juggling parenthood and other responsibilities as well, and had to do work on the "D" when I was putting in a lot of hours on the job before and after the three-month leave. I simply had to get the project done quickly.
In any event, pardon the digression. I do admire the the course you have set for yourself and wish you all the best.
Reply by Thomas Dean:
I would like to reiterate what Roger has said below. I suggested something similar in an earlier post. Much of what we do is about time *management.* A lot of successful time management involves learning to work with intensity and efficiency, as Roger has intimated below. Working in positions like this, you learn what "deadline" really means. My experience as a professor tells me that for many academics, "deadline" is an amorphous, negotiable, or disposable concept. While a professor, when I would get something in on time--to a journal, to the departmental office, whatever--invariably the folks involved would express surprise. Even if it were two weeks late, it was still considered early. The culture seems to expect that academics won't get things in on time. I don't have that luxury now. If President Coleman isn't able to walk out the door with her speech for a scheduled event, I'm toast.
I also think that time management has a lot to do with knowing when to quit. You have to learn not only how to write and work quickly, but also you have to learn where the point of diminishing returns is. Oh, sure, you can ALWAYS futz and fuss more with a piece of writing. But at some point, doing so simply consumes too much time for the tiny extra little return you'll get. You need to learn to put something to bed and move on. We aren't taught how to do this or even encouraged to do it when we're working on our dissertations. Some of this fussiness is self-inflicted, and our professors often don't do enough to jar us out of it. Look how quickly Roger did his dissertation--and he did it by "just doing it" (and doing it well, of course) and turning it in, and it turned out fine. I took 2 1/2 years to do my dissertation--I know I could have done it in less time, and, even so, I was seen as someone who finished my diss. "quickly." I am not at all advocating sloppiness or slipshod work. You have to achieve excellence, whether you're working on a dissertation, a speech for a president, or an admissions brochure. But you need to learn to cut yourself off when you've reached "excellent enough" and move on to the next thing.
Reply by Laura Barlament:
Not to beat a dead horse, but I also say "hear! hear!" to what Tom and Roger have said about time management. Working at Marketing Communications at Purdue has also taught me to manage my time better, to meet deadlines, and to leave well enough alone (which, as Tom said, is not to advocate slipshod work, but only to acknowledge that part of excellence is getting a piece out there on time--and there's only so much you can do with it in order to meet that deadline). It was a very healthy perspective for me to have as I simultaneously finished my dissertation.
CAREER PROSPECTS IN UNIVERSITY RELATIONS & A DISCUSSION ON THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN FACULTY AND RELATIONS PROFESSIONALS:
Question by Paula Foster:
Dear Speakers,
Thanks so much for the excellent information you have shared with us so far. Now I have a new question for you. How would you describe the overall career prospects for a person in university relations today? In other words,
* What might be a generic "career arc" for someone with a PhD starting out in an entry level position today? What type(s) of position(s) might they hold three, five, ten, and twenty years from now, if they stay in university relations? (Generally speaking of course.)
* Is that career arc any different today from how it would have been, say, 10-20 years ago? Are there, for example, more different ways to go within the field today? Or is the field, overall, contracting? Is it harder, or easier, to enter and advance in that career today than it was in the past?
* Let's say a PhD person gets into university relations and enjoys it for a while, but then after five years, wants to leave the world of higher education altogether and strike out for the great unknown. What career directions might that person be qualified to take, based on his or her five years of experience in university relations?
Answer by Thomas Dean:
Thanks for some more excellent questions, Paula. Since I'm relatively new to this biz, I can't speak with special authority. I suspect Roger, especially, will be able to more readily. But I'll offer my impressions.
In our University Relations division, there are a few administrative positions one could aspire to. We have a Director of Publications, Director of News Services, and Director of Health Science Relations. Overseeing the entire unit is the Director of University Relations; the person currently in that job also serves as University spokesperson. There may be a search commencing for an Associate/Assistant Director of University Relations. Within other areas of the U (alumni association, hospitals and clinics, foundation), there are similar possible trajectories--writer to editor to director of some sort.
University Relations is overseen administratively by our Vice President for Research and External Relations (this is a long story that I won't go into in detail, but we used to have a VP for University Relations; a search was begun for a replacement, name to be changed to VP for External Relations, but budget cuts forced the elimination of that position, and the responsibilities divided up among other VP's and higher administrators; our VP for Research had also been serving as interim VP for Ext. Rel., and he now holds the dual role permanently). I imagine that a next step for a high level person within a Univ. Relations unit could be a VP position somewhere. I think the field is changing, though. At least here at the UI, the aborted search for a VP for External Relations was looking outside the U. for a very high level pr/communications professional. I doubt that most, if not all, of our current Univ. Relations employees would have met that threshold. Our previous VP for University Relations worked her way up from inside the U.--she started as a nurse at the hospital, actually, got a law degree here, became involved in some high-profile athletics committees, and so on and so on, and eventually made it to a VP position. That kind of story is pretty much a thing of the past, I'm sure--the high level executive positions here at the UI have become incredibly professionalized. I think a high level Univ. Relations person here could move to another, perhaps smaller, institution into a VP position, though.
In terms of the specific job I hold as assistant to the president, a similar tale could be told. I already suggested this in another post, but I could see myself moving into a high-level Univ. Relations position here at the UI, or possibly an assistant dean or VP position of some sort. I would hit the wall there, however--I know I could not rise to a full VP position at the UI. I could imagine that ultimately moving into a VP position of some sort at a small college or small regional university might be possible.
In terms of the expansion/contraction question--both. In the short term, public institutions of higher education, at least, are under the budget cut gun, and opportunities are shrinking. On the other hand, higher education institutions are coming more and more to the realization that external relations, pr, "marketing," etc. are becoming increasingly critical. So I think in the most general sense, universities would LIKE to see the field expand if they can manage it.
Let's say a PhD person gets into university relations and enjoys it for a while, but then after five years, wants to leave the world of higher education altogether and strike out for the great unknown. What career directions might that person be qualified to take, based on his or her five years of experience in university relations?
I'm even less able to speak to this, but I think the general principle I outlined above applies in the private sector as well--communications and external relations are becoming only more and more crucial. Tight budgets may make work in this area harder to find at certain times, but overall, I would say that the corporate world is hungry for communications professionals. At the same time, a lot of this work is being increasingly "outsourced," so there are also opportunities for the entrepreneurial among us to set up independent shops.
Well, that's my slightly-less-than-two-years'-experience perspective--I invite Laura and Roger--and anyone else--to confirm or deny.
Answer by Laura Barlament:
Here's my stab at Paula's questions as well. Like Tom, I am a newcomer to this business and am looking forward to what those with more experience have to say on these subjects.
Tom reviewed possibilities at his institution, and I can comment on what would be available at Purdue. Here, it seems that people in communications tend to get mobility by moving from area to area or school to school. For example, I recently met a woman who has served in communications, alumni relations, and that sort of thing for several areas and schools for many years at Purdue; most recently, she moved from communications for one of the engineering schools to become an associate VP for communications under the VP for information technology and chief information officer (a new position at Purdue). People move from the news service to development and back to news service or whatever in positions of increasing responsibility. Upper-level positions at the university include director of marketing communications (that's my boss) or news service. Above them is the vice president for university relations--I don't know his background, but he is a good writer and the university's t! op! spokesman. I believe that I have many possibilities for moving into positions of increasing responsibility, especially by acquiring people-management experience.
I don't know how things have changed over the years--but I do agree that universities are placing more emphasis on marketing themselves and thus I would think the field is growing, perhaps especially in the realm of consulting, because of the budget problems that Tom mentioned. For example, a new position for which a search is now going on at Purdue is a development communications coordinator.
Like Tom, I think there would be many opportunities to work in communications in the business world. To give an example of moving in the opposite direction, my boss worked for IBM for quite a few years (in design) before coming to Purdue to be director of the Office of Publications. Other editors in my office have worked, or have moved on to work, as editors for non-profit organizations, for greeting card companies, for newspapers, for publishing houses, for ad agencies, for magazines--that's what I can think of off the top of my head.
Reply by Thomas Dean:
Just to follow-up on what Laura said above--I did not say this in my original post, but, yes, there does seem to be a lot shifting around among the various communications units here at Iowa, too, as people move up the ladder. Our new annual report editor in University Relations, for example, just came over to U.R. from a lower position in the Alumni Association. He very well could go to the Foundation next, just as a theoretical example. This "pinball effect" may be due more to timing than an inherent, systemic pattern. That is, opportunities for advancement in all the different communications units don't happen simultaneously. So when the next generic rung opens up in another unit (or perhaps even outside the institution), someone will obviously go for it rather than wait around for a similar position to open up in the unit where s/he is currently employed. I think, in the end, this cross-fertilization is very healthy for ALL the units.
Answer by Roger Williams:
Paula:
The generic career arc for someone with a Ph.D. starting out in an entry level position today would depend, in large part, on what the Ph.D. can bring to the table in terms of academic expertise and career background. Generally, the areas from which University Relations come from academically are journalism, public relations, art, graphic design, marketing, but more frequently in my experience, broad liberal arts fields such as history, English, political science, and even education and social science. Often, the practical working backgrounds are from the communications fields. Generally, what will drive the Ph.D. forward in this field is related more to the background and motivation of the individual rather than academic expertise in a particular field. Occasionally, I do see Ph.D.s in the mix of applicants for jobs, such as one we are currently trying to fill, director of communications for the School of Law. If the Ph.D. has relevant experience, he or she is in the mix; if not, it's a hard sell.
One of the best saleable skills a Ph.D. can offer to people in the university relations fields, in my estimation, would be in social science/marketing research. The future of our profession lies more in more in the measurement of public opinion....doing things like pre- and post-testing of public sentiment. The classical public relations or marketing methodology to solve a problem is to 1) measure public awareness or sentiment toward a problem or issue; 2) devise a communications or marketing plan for turning opinion or sentiment in the desired direction;
3) implement the plan; and 4) measure the results. That's the theory. In the real world, the pre- and post-testing of public opinion does not happen often, mainly because of the expense and time involved. But more and more, Ph.D.s with those kinds of social science skills will work their way into positions of power and influence in our organizations.
Of course, the basic communications skills -- written and oral -- are the sine qua non of the university relations profession. People who can think strategically, figure out how to use communications programs and initiatives to advance institutional goals, devise message points (in speeches, news releases, publications, websites, etc.) and clever ways of illustrating strategic messages, will rise to the highest levels of the profession.
If the career arc is different today, and I believe it is, it is in this fundamentally important way: University relations administrators are looked at less as "doers" and more as "thinkers." Because the issues in which colleges and universities have been enmeshed these last 15 years are so complex and problematic, you need people who can think creatively about how institutions can position themselves advantageously, even in an ostensibly negative situations. So strategic thinking skills are at a premium for people like us, and increasingly we are involved in policy discussions and decisions. Anybody at the institutional leadership level who is making decisions without thinking about the public relations implications (and there are many, especially on the business and finance side) is just plain crazy. Many presidents and chancellors are, thankfully, placing increased value on effective public relations counsel, whereas 15 years ago, this strategic management function was often ignored or underappreciated.
What are the career prospects? It is true that, right now, many public institutions are faced with wrenching budget cuts. I just read that Virginia Tech is about to cut 200 positions. Notwithstanding these financial challenges, my experice has been that the cuts tend not to appear in university relations. Indeed, at a time when the economy sags and budgets are threatened, people like us are valued and relied upon more than ever because of our skill in making the institutional case and getting the word out to target audiences. And, at least in the public university setting, so much of what institutions, faculty and students do is dependent upon public funding, that you need skilled communicators more rather than less in times of financial crisis.
I think the opportunities will continue to grow for public relations professionals in higher education. Having worked as a consultant, and having been in this business for nearly 25 years, I have seen profound changes in the value placed on public relations skills. American higher education is extremely competitive by nature, with institutions constantly bumping against each other for position, prestige, resources, and market share, that people who do what we do will be sought even more. Just as institutions go out on big-time fund drives, the smart ones also mount comcomitant "reputation drives." Think about it. What is the most valuable asset an institution has. Is it students? Faculty? Physical Plant? Location? Endowment? Alumni? While all of those factors contribute heavily to it, it is none of them alone. The most important asset is reputation. That is so because resources hinge on reputation. An institution's ability to attract great students, faculty, grants, private gifts, and so forth, all depends on reputation.
That's why people like us -- who can help to shape and communicate institutional aspirations and messages, who know how to build image and reputation, who know how to increase market share, will be increasingly valued in the years to come.
Reply by Thomas Dean:
I agree wholeheartedly with what Roger said in his very articulate and insightful previous post. Our types of jobs will become only more critical in the coming years. I would like to comment briefly on Roger's paragraph above, though. I cannot argue with Roger's extensive experience, and admittedly my own is much briefer. But I would think that the logic he outlines above, while impeccable, would not necessarily obtain everywhere, uniformly. In theory, yes, people who are able to strategize and articulate the right messages are MOST critical when times are tough. I agree 100%. But that doesn't mean that an institution will follow that logic. There are lots of reasons for this. One is that many institutions probably aren't up to speed with this type of thinking. But there are two other more complicated problems, and I see these happening here at Iowa:
1) Academia traditionally has been seen as an egalitarian institution (I know, I know--that's not fully the reality, but it's the theoretical tradition). I am proud to say that, among the various institutions that I have studied and worked in, Iowa does a pretty good job, relatively, of being egalitarian. We are being cut to the bone by the state. Both internally and externally, it would be a really hard sell to say we are going to cut faculty, nurses, and clerical staff and NOT cut communicators--let alone INCREASE their numbers. Everyone must suffer equally. For the most part, we have avoided layoffs these past two years (even with $38 million in cuts this past year alone), but with the state facing a nearly a half-billion shortfall in the remainder of this year and next fiscal year, it's only a matter of time before layoffs and/or furloughs start happening. No area will be spared at the expense of others. And, as I said earlier, one of the first things our president did when the cuts started hitting was suspend--and then abandon--the search for a full-time VP for External Relations.
2) Unfortunately, "PR people" aren't seen positively across the board, especially in academia. Academic faculty, in the conglomerate, especially have a monstrous distrust of PR and "marketing." Rightly or wrongly, many faculty see these concepts as antithetical to the intellectual foundations of the institution's mission--"spinning" and "selling" may be how they see our jobs, and those things are reductive and deceptive in their minds. Administrators may not see it this way, but if your faculty is not behind you, you've got a really tough row to hoe. I can't imagine our president going to the faculty and telling them she is cutting them by 10% and maintaining the communications staff at current levels, let alone increasing it. Likewise, many in the general public are actually hostile toward what they see as "spinning" and "selling." "Gee whiz," they may think; "the universities are crying so much that they're broke and need more tax dollars, but they seem to have enough dough to employ plenty of spin doctors and produce glitzy slogans and advertisements!" Again, I can't imagine our institution going to the state taxpayers and saying, "We're cutting the number of teachers available to your kids, we're raising tuition, and we're protecting our communicators." Same goes for the legislature, who holds the purse strings in the first place.
I don't mean at all to contradict Roger's sub-point, and I agree with it in theory. I'm just saying the practicalities of manifesting that theory in reality would be extremely tough, and in the current climate here in Iowa, perhaps insurmountable, at least in the short run.
Reply by Roger Williams:
Hey, gang;, me again:
From my own experience, I disagree strongly that academic folk look at pr people with suspicion and distrust. That may have been the case 30 years ago, but I have seen them warming to people like us in ever increasing numbers. They know how important communications, visibility, and prestige are to their collective fate, and they know public relations people can engineer such outcomes. Sorry, I just don't see the mistrust. In fact, I just came from a retreat today with 65 academic department heads and deans and cannot tell you how many requests I got from them to help them solve a particular communications or marketing issue.
Also, while I understand the egalitarian approach to budget cutting, I don't agree with it, and deem it a recipe for mediocrity. While it may solve the obvious political problem, it is inimical to the tenets of good strategic planning--which promulgates selectivity in funding the various units and programs based upon their value for accomplishing institutional goals. Certain institutions do in fact use state budget cuts as a pretext for getting rid of weak units and programs. I do agree that it is easy and smart to suspend searches or eliminate unfilled positions in times of financial crises.
But, again, some institutions find ways to make tough decisions in times of financial stress that enable them to move forward relative to the competition.
Reply by Thomas Dean:
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this, to some extent. I agree that faculty, as a whole, are "warming" to the idea of academic pr and marketing. But I cannot agree that a significant amount of skepticism still does not exist within the rank and file faculty. Yes, generally, most people in administration have come around--and your own statement above cites a retreat of academic department heads and deans. (And my experience as a faculty member also tells me that many, if not most, faculty members would not be caught dead being a department head or dean. Administrators tend to be very very different, in a lot of ways, from what one might call "hard core" faculty.) In my career as a faculty member over the last ten years, I have sat on several strategic planning and, for lack of a better term, "academic marketing" committees in a number of institutions in a number of states. Universally, I have seen tremendous resistance to the ideas among many of my colleagues, for the reasons I cited in my earlier post. I still see some of it now in my current job at Iowa--again, among a lot of the non-administrative faculty. These faculty agree that visibility and prestige are crucial to our collective fates, but their belief is that their work will speak for itself, and attempts to "market" what the University does only trivializes it. Faculty also tend to be a highly independent lot, and attempts to strategize and "brand" their work collectively often go against many professors' basic natures as independent thinkers and scholars, let alone their objections to what they say is absurdly reductive sloganeering. Yes, more and more are coming around to understanding the value of what folks like us do, but I cannot say that what we do is yet universally accepted among rank and file faculty. I would still advise anyone going into this field that s/he needs to realize that wading into the faculty waters will bring him/her up against hidden rocks and logs, and challenging rapids.
But, again, some institutions find ways to make tough decisions in times of financial stress that enable them to move forward relative to the competition.
And all of this is exactly what The University of Iowa is doing right now as our budgets are gutted. We have closed marginal and non-performing programs. We have increased efficiencies (and workloads). We have been *the* leader in strategic planning in our state, and it has made our budget cutting job a lot easier than some other institutions in our state. Quality and accessibility have been the guiding principles that not only have steered our institution, but have steered our budget cutting. Everything possible has been done to avoid mediocrity here, yet maintain as much fairness, equity, and egalitarianism as possible. We have not abandoned our strategic aspiration to be among the top ten public universities in the nation, and we are embarking on the most ambitious capital campaign in our institution's--and our state's--history. In order to do all this, the University is also sharpening its communications with great intensity, and raising its understanding of communications to the next level. But we're doing all of this with fewer people.
I'm simply trying to return to the original point here, which was about job opportunities in the field. If we're simply talking about raw numbers of employees, and whether there will be more or fewer positions in the field, I would still maintain that in the short term, with severe budget cuts hitting public institutions, anyway, all across the country, the field will remain stagnant at best, in the public sector at least. We are bettering our communications by bettering our people we have now and the work we do. That's what's strategic and smart. And amongst all this, the academic core of the institution is still the most important thing that this institution does--it indeed defines who and what we are. So, again, it would be unthinkable for our president to cut the number of faculty and increase the number of communicators, which was my original point. At least in times of financial exigency, we all have to do more with less.
Reply by Roger Williams:
Tom:
My experience among rank and file faculty is equally encouraging. I have not met one yet (well maybe one or two) who did not appreciate having his or her research noticed, promoted and made visible nationally. When it happens they are astounded at the response they get, even from colleagues at points distant; often, their remarks are along the line of "I can't believe the attention and calls and emails I've been getting; usually I'm used to writing for an audience of 400, with little or no response." Indeed, many faculty are simply overwhelmed by the attention that can accrue from having a story about their research go nationally, as happens all the time here and at the other institutions for which I've worked.
Institutional marketing plans may be another story, but even there, I've seen faculty more than willing to jump in and help. My sense is that most faculty are aware that their institutions exist in a competitive environment, and that increased prestige, visibility, and market share are very much in their own interest, as well as that of the larger institution.
Reply by Thomas Dean:
Roger,
I am encouraged as well. I agree that once a faculty member understands what we're about, and sees the kinds of specific results that you articulate, s/he will quickly come around. I think the real key is how we approach the kind of faculty member I'm talking about (who I still maintain are out there in large numbers). Your message below says you've worked to help faculty get their research "noticed, promoted, and made visible nationally." Clearly you have expert diplomatic skills in communicating with faculty. If you approach faculty with that kind of attitude and rhetoric, you will get much more acceptance than if you come at them with the jargon of the profession, I think--words and phrases like "integrated marketing," "pr," "branding," "positioning" will often send up red flags with them. The last thing a faculty member wants is to be "branded." (Ironically, while faculty often exult in the jargon of their own discipline and specialty, they have contempt for jargon in other fields.)
My ultimate point, simply, is that people in our business should be aware of prejudices and attitudes among the faculty. I'm not saying they won't come around, or even that they won't come around easily. But many are not predisposed, given their assumptions. I think higher ed communicators, when they're dealing with their faculty, need to enter the fray with that understanding as they develop their rhetoric for "selling" the faculty. The most successful university communicators will bring the faculty on board the most easily if they approach faculty on their own turf, know how they think, and interact rhetorically in terms they will appreciate, not in terms that will raise hackles. I think this is one of the major reasons President Coleman wanted someone for my position who had faculty experience--because that person would understand how faculty think (including the diversity of thought, not just monolithically), and therefore that person would better understand what the President needs to say to them and how to say it. It's really the simple rhetorical principle of knowing your audience. So, therefore, I also think that the academic background of PhD's trying to enter the field of university relations can be a tremendous asset, since they have been steeped in the nuances, foibles, prejudices, peculiarities, pride, etc. of the academic end of academia.
Reply by Roger Williams:
Tom:
Again at the risk of self-aggrandizement, I think a fair proportion of my success in dealing with faculty stems from the fact that I am one, sort of, and also have a doctorate. In short, I have walked the walk as well as talked the talk, and I think faculty respect the fact that I have gone through the advanced degree process as they have. I often talk in terms of saying to faculty that we want to help their work or expertise get the attention it deserves, and I actually mean it. They love that. In my experience, university relations folk are generally perceived by the faculty as being an arm of the administration, particularly an arm of the CEO. Right now, we have a chancellor who is transforming this place into a top-tier public research university, and quickly so. The fact that our office proactively goes around to faculty, offering to promote their work, plays very well, and is seen as a much-appreciated reification of the rhetoric about moving the university into a new status as a research university. Again, I think you are right: philosophy, but also style and approach (sometimes taken for granted) have a lot to do with instilling confidence in our mission among faculty. I do agree that some words like branding rub the wrong way, but again it depends: business faculty have no problem with it, nor do deans. I have been using the word positioning a lot these last few years, and it has caught on as faculty realize how important it is to position this institution in certain ways so as to achieve institutional goals. Often in my work, I will bring in aspects of communications theory, which makes it clearer to them why we are doing the things we are doing in order to cut through the communications clutter and establish an identity and reputation that will serve the ends of our university and make it easier to attract the resources we need.
Question by Paula Foster:
Wow, such interesting answers to my question about career prospects in university relations. New subject: resumes. Imagine you are advising a PhD student in humanities or social science who has not yet completed the diss but who wants to apply for an entry-level job somewhere in university relations at his or her university. Based on your knowledge of what ABD folks have generally done and your experience reading resumes of job applicants, what suggestions would you have for this hypothetical person regarding how to construct his or her resume?
Paula Foster
Answer by Roger Williams:
Paula:
I like resumes that begin by listing competencies (e.g., "demonstrated competencies include speechwriting, survey research design and implementation, marketing research and communications, crisis management, special events production, etc.). I think this approach is especially useful for Ph.D.s, especially the newly minted ones who believe that the mere listing of this degree at the top of their vita under "education" will open doors. In my experience, Ph.D.s looking for employment outside their natural area of expertise are at something of a disadvantage, because the potential employer may assume that this person 1) is looking for a stopgap position until something better comes along; 2) is overeducated and overqualified for this career field and will be less than satisfied with this position; 3) is assuming that the Ph.D. will put her automatically "over the top" relative to other competitors.
Educational attainment is of course an essential part of the resume, but my preferred organizational scheme is:
- brief statement about desired career or job aspirations, as specific as you can make it
- statement of proven competencies
- employment experience
- degrees
- references
Answer by Laura Barlament:
Unfortunately, I don't have anything to add on the subject of how to write a resume. I really don't have any experience seeing what other ABD folks have done, because none of the applicants whose resumes I have seen since working here have been ABD. I readily admit that I printed out what Roger had to say on the subject so that I can use it next time I work on mine!
Answer by Thomas Dean:
Like Laura, I will second (third?) what Roger has succinctly and expertly said about resumes. I don't have extensive experience in searches in our area--so far, I have just served last year (my first year on the job) on our search for a Director of Publications.
One sub-point I would add, which is really already implied in Roger's response: Pretty much think resume and not curriculum vitae. I believe there was a fairly extensive discussion of the difference on WRK4US a few months ago. My own job was an exception--the President was indeed looking for someone with an academic background, so I sent a c.v., though I refined it to reflect my competencies and experience pertinent to the job in somewhat similar fashion to what Roger outlined.
My own experience on the pub. dir. search committee--all of us immediately went to the relevant experience first. That is, we were first interested in what relevant positions the applicant had held. Then we were interested in the applicant's interpretation of those positions (their statements on competencies and responsibilities).
I'd also just add that while none of us on the committee were at the time on the faculty, we still were operating in an academic environment. I think academia, even on the non-academic ends, is less tolerant of "bells and whistles" on resumes than non-academic organizations may (or may not) be. That is, fancy papers, clever statements, unique formats did absolutely nothing to "capture our attention." Well, correct that--if anything, it caught our attention negatively. We were most pleased with a "just the facts, ma'am" approach. (I can't speak authoritatively about the corporate world, but I have seen resume advice that urges people to make their resumes "stand out" in ways I've described. I suspect that's actually not very good advice in the corporate world, either.)
Reply by Laura Barlament:
Paula asked me to expand on my experience with looking at resumes:
OK Laura, but of the resumes you have seen (and liked), what skills or resume features have contributed the most towards the decision to hire the person? In other words, do you (or Thomas) have any nuances you might add to what Roger said?
Alternative question: for those on the list who are still early in their programs and are not yet ABD, what types of appointments or assignments should they gravitate towards--and away from--if they think they may one day want to apply for a university relations position? I think that the kind of position I am in--as an editor in a fairly good-sized University publications shop--is probably a good option as an entry-level position for PhDs/ABDs who are wanting to steer their careers in this direction. This position requires in-depth writing and editing skills--that is the baseline requirement and the nitty-gritty of my workday. So, when we're looking at resumes for editorial positions, we look for people who have demonstrated experience with writing and editing--not just managing the process of shepherding a publication to print (although that is also important), but line-by-line, word-by-word editing (copy editing and even proofreading--I do it all), following a style guide (we use Chicago Manual of Style and an in-house style guide; the AP Style Guide is also commonly used in university communications, but Chicago seems to be the most widespread). If you are interested in this kind of job, then, and you are currently working on your Ph.D., the following would be possible resume-builders: doing some sort of internship with the publications office at your university; taking an editing course through an organization such as EEI Communications ( http://www.eeicommunications.com/ ); or taking on freelance writing and editing jobs, especially for university publications. You need to get some experience with line-by-line editing and with writing for a variety of audiences. Writing for the Web is also an area of need, and you can take courses on how to do that also (check this Web site: http://useit.com/papers/webwriting/ ). Another resource that helps me in my work is the newsletter Copy Editor ( www.copyeditor.com ); it might be worth your checking out if you're interested in what kinds of conversations and questions editors deal with and get excited about. In your doctoral work, you are also building skills and experiences that are valuable for a University relations job of this type. You are engaged in project management (your dissertation or thesis); time management (balancing multiple tasks and demands as you take and teach several courses simultaneously); client relations (managing relationships with advisors, students, and others); and following a style guide (whether MLA or whatever your discipline uses). These are some types of experiences that you could point out on your resume.
Roger pointed out that the demand for marketing and quantitative skills is high and is growing at universities, and that is certainly true at Purdue. If you can crunch numbers and create and conduct surveys and focus groups to test opinions and impressions, you have some very valuable skills for University relations these days. As you have seen, my emphasis and expertise is more on wordsmithing; but since I've worked here, I've had an opportunity to take a workshop on writing marketing plans and I have written a marketing/communications plan for a division of the University and am currently helping them to carry it out.
I'm not sure how to state this on a resume, but people have commented to me that I have a certain breadth and sophistication that differentiates me from other editors in this office--something like vision: seeing a publication in its context and envisioning how it can work better. I'm good at conceptualizing new ideas and expressing them. I think this can be attributed at least in part to my education, especially my doctoral training, in which I did so much reading and analysis of texts, presentations at conferences, and original intellectual work.
Additional Comment by Laura Barlament:
More on universities' involvement in marketing:
I have contributed this resource to this list before, but I get an e-mail newsletter from Stamats, a higher-education consulting company, that always has a lot of interesting info about what's going on in that arena. Go to http://www.stamats.com/ to see for yourself. Stamats is a big promoter of the gospel of marketing/branding to universities and seems to work with a wide variety of institutions all over the country. I can also comment on what I've seen at Purdue: A new president arrived in August 2000, and he brought with him this marketing- and strategic-planning-oriented mindset (in fact, I believe he was hired to do this work at Purdue), so it has really taken hold of the campus since then. As of last November, Purdue has a university-level strategic plan, and all of the schools and departments must now write their own to support it. Yesterday I was at a strategic planning workshop--these have been offered to support the writing of strategic plans throughout the campus. I don't know what faculty members' private opinions are, but generally the response to the idea of strategic planning has been positive, and these workshops have been well-attended. Even if people don't like the idea, they are either conforming to it--or leaving.
Purdue hired a company called Juhl Advertising to help test public opinion of the University within the state and create an ad campaign to raise public awareness of Purdue. My office is working with Juhl to create a Purdue identity or brand, defining fonts, colors, and so on in the use of the words "Purdue University." I don't know how faculty feel about all of this, but with the president behind it, it's happening! Even in a tight budget year.
Closing Remarks by Paula Foster:
Dear WRK4US subscribers,
Well, it's Friday, and we've had a very informative week! On behalf of all WRK4US subscribers, I'd like to extend a hearty collective "THANK YOU" to our three Guest Speakers--Roger Williams, Laura Barlament, and Thomas K. Dean. They gave of their time and careful thought to share some great information with us. We are in their debt.
Thanks as well to those subscribers who contributed by asking questions, and even to those who just listened. Everyone matters, so thanks to all of you for being here and making this discussion happen.
The next Guest Speaker Discussion will take place sometime in June or July, in which speakers will describe the field of "Academic Editing & Publishing."
Take care, everyone, and once again, high praise to us all for making this discussion so fruitful.
Paula Foster
WRK4US list manager
Thomas Dean:
My great thanks to Paula for hosting not only this discussion, but this list. Thanks as well to my colleagues Roger and Laura--I very much enjoyed our stimulating conversation, and learning much from them myself. I hope I've been able to be helpful to folks thinking of going into this line of work. And, of course, thanks to all who asked questions and those who just observed. I would be more than happy to answer any questions or follow through on anything that I've said this week privately now that the discussion is closed.
Good luck to everyone in their careers,
Tom
Roger Williams:
I will add my thanks and kudos as well to Paula, Tom and Laura. This has been a most stimulating discussion for me as well, and I appreciate the insights you brought to our profession. I too would be happy to respond to any follow up questions.
Thanks very much,
Roger
Laura Barlament:
I "third" the round of thanks! Anyone who would like to contact me may feel free: lbarlament@pmc.purdue.edu .
Laura Barlament