Fostering Mutual Respect Between Staff and Faculty

Toey Andante/Shutterstock
Few would dispute that staff and faculty in the typical university setting each perform distinct functions. But are these distinctions the source of collaboration and respect or of discord and resentment? It depends on the relationship dynamics involved in a specific setting, such as an academic department, research facility, or administrative unit.
In this article, I reflect on these matters upon retiring from full-time work in higher education, which involved, in part, supporting staff-faculty intergroup relations. I hope these reflections may provide insights for leaders and professionals in navigating these relationships for the best outcomes and work experiences for staff and faculty alike.
How, Where, and Why We Work
Looking back at my first months in higher education, I think how confusing it must be for new staff beginning their first job in such an institution. Onboarding may cover the ins and outs of employment, employment policies, and so forth, but to what extent do they explain the unique duties, classifications, and basic ways of working that distinguish faculty and staff? I would have benefited from knowing more before I started.
New staff generally understand a job to involve a 9-to-5 or similar workday, arriving at a set location to sit at a desk in front of a computer, and engaging in general administrative duties (but hats off to facilities and other employees working in different settings). They may not initially understand this elusive creature called a "professor" who balances 四虎影视, research, and service obligations and may seemingly disappear for weeks on end. They may also be surprised to learn that faculty often than as independent actors with loyalties not just to their institution but to their academic discipline and broader professional community.
Perceptions of Inequity
Appropriately acclimated to staff-faculty intergroup relationship dynamics, staff generally perceive no overt inequities. Consider the office manager or administrative assistant working in a relatively quiet suite surrounded by sporadically occupied faculty offices. Their physical presence is required to respond to student inquiries and walk-ins, support the department chair and other office dwellers, and perform other administrative tasks. Their communication with faculty is often virtual (email, phone, etc.) as faculty scatter to perform their 四虎影视, research, and publication duties. This is standard for academia.
Perceptions of inequity arise when staff feel taken advantage of or for granted. Faculty in a positive work environment understand the time and work demands they place on staff, plan ahead as much as possible, and express appreciation. The staff member has discretion to set timeframes and deadlines, say "no" to untimely and unreasonable demands, and seek the help of their chair or other leader to balance expectations. In an unhealthy work environment, while service to faculty is expected, subservience is the norm where staff must be at faculty's beck and call -- with no respect for boundaries or sense of staff as contributing team members and partners in ensuring success.
Messages of Subservience
When faculty members fail to treat staff (and often junior faculty) as valued partners, it can be devastating to morale and mental health. How unfortunate when such attitudes permeate faculty ranks and, for example, become fodder for humor, sarcasm, and petty griping behind closed doors at faculty meetings where the chair lacks the courage or desire to step in.
Staff, and frankly anyone, entering the workspace, can perceive when their legitimate service, for which they take pride, is treated as subservience. One example -- sometimes subtly expressed, other times more pronounced -- is the .
Use of titles like "Doctor" and "Dean" internally among office colleagues is outdated. This is distinct from recognized times when titles and honorifics are appropriate, such as in formal introductions, convocations, or when referring to a faculty member before students. In informal settings, use of first names is the standard. Yet, if academic units are truly committed to formality, why do they expect faculty with terminal degrees to be called "Dr." and permit staff members to be called "Ted" or "Mary" instead of "Mrs.," "Ms.," "Mr.," etc.?
Perspective Taking
In my work as a conflict resolution specialist, I occasionally facilitated staff-faculty intergroup dialogues and learned how similarly both groups view matters involving status, respect, and the devaluing of their efforts. In one process, faculty listened to staff feelings of diminishment, then shared their own experiences. Many participants were junior faculty -- some of whom identified as members of traditionally marginalized groups -- who talked about the exclusion, isolation, and deliberate disrespect they felt at the hands of tenured and more senior faculty. This was eye-opening to staff, who came to realize that perhaps their feelings, though real, were misdirected. Some faculty members' treatment of staff, though not excused, comes from their own feelings of helplessness. It's a chain reaction: boss yells at employee, employee yells at child, child kicks dog.
Just as faculty need to understand and respect staff members' workloads and valuable contributions, staff would benefit from understanding the work demands placed on faculty, particularly when pursuing tenure or their next level of advancement (associate to full, etc.). In pondering their own evaluations, which is generally before one person (their supervisor), do they appreciate the daunting path faculty must take, involving endless expectations for establishing a record of 四虎影视, scholarship, and service, and subjecting themselves to multiple layers of review at the hands of multiple reviewers?
Bottom line: Staff and faculty each have unique responsibilities, work demands, and professional pressures. It does not help to draw comparisons and argue how one is more burdened and less appreciated than the other. But it may help to encourage staff-faculty teams to continually engage in perspective taking, review needs and expectations each has of the other, and identify ways to be mutually supportive, collaborative, and committed to common goals.
Leadership Capabilities
Facilitating productive staff-faculty relations requires effective leadership. A common deficit is the level of leadership preparation. For example, unlike most staff leadership roles, the faculty member serving as the next department chair was based on defined management and leadership capabilities.
Often in my work, I mediated a conflict or provided consultation to address issues that had escalated due to these leadership deficits. The chair was either uncaring, overwhelmed, or sincere but ill-equipped.
There are no easy solutions, but my hope would be that the institution and its academic leaders be ever mindful of the role staff play and the need to tend to their needs and concerns as much as those of faculty. For example, in my scenario involving a closed-door gripe session about staff, an effective leader would know to jump in, discontinue unproductive talk, and help reframe conversation to understand legitimate concerns of faculty and staff alike. They may then be able to transition the full team (including staff) to one that supports staff and benefits faculty more effectively through collaboration over discord.