The last few years at Queen's have been full of change. New facilities, building construction, street redesign and upgrading, new policies, faculty and staff retirements and new hires....the list is long.
The next few years must be seen as a period of "entrenchment." This isn't stagnation, not doing anything, standing pat. It is insuring that initiatives of the past few years are incorporated into the university's modus operandi.
It takes a particular kind of person to do this effectively, not "just anybody."
Let's hope that those who identify the criteria essential for the next Principal, take this into account.
Sunday, April 20, 2008
Friday, April 18, 2008
Queen's and It's Most Recent Principal
It's not easy for an organization to lose the person who holds the top position, particularly when the person is expected to continue in the job.
Until the AMS passed its resolution in March, there had only been rumblings and grapevine talk about the job that the principal was doing. The resolution forced, fortunately, the talk-over-coffee out into the open.
I was fortunate to be a part of a group called "The Group for Excellence." Its sole raison d'etre was to provide expert input into the physical activity component of the Queen's Centre. The group met for almost 3 years, developed a program for the facility, met with key persons on campus who were involved in the process, lobbied the trustees, and ultimately met with Principal Hitchcock to explain our suggestions, and try to have her understand the tremendous benefits of the university building a 50m swimming pool.
It was at this meeting (with one other graduate of Queen's, and the Principal) that I began to understand that she really didn't want to hear what we had to say, and really didn't care at all. Our meeting was half an hour. We had carefully planned the key points to make, the rationale, and the counter-arguments we expected her to make. We barely opened our mouths before SHE began to talk. She pretty well talked the whole time. We did make our key point, but it was quite clear that she had made up her mind and there was no point in our banging our heads against a concrete wall.
In all the years I have worked with others who are committed to a project, the "Group for Excellence" was the most satisfying, and the least satisfying. A group of about 15 people with wide sport interests agreed that the greater good would be served by our working together.
Never have I presented an idea to someone who not only refused to listen, but insisted in talking the whole time.
So the resolution that the AMS passed didn't surprise me, and it didn't surprise me to hear that students on campus think she doesn't connect with them. She doesn't.
Communication is a 2 way thing, and listening requires "hearing" what others are saying. One of the common techniques to effective listening is to concentrate on what is being said, and NOT getting ready to counter the arguments.
It has been said that her gender and American citizenship were the factors that did her in. It is more than that. She never really understood the "culture"of Queen's, the "Big Four" universities, or the traditions that (for good and bad) are entrenched in this institution. There's stuff at this university that creates the culture of this university; it has been here forever, and every year, it gets further entrenched.
Bill Leggett wasn't a Queen's grad, but he knew the MGill culture, not the same as Queen's, but a unique culture that differentiates it from every other university. And certainly differentiates it from any American university/college. And Leggett was liked by the students.
Principal Hitchcock never figured it out, didn't seem to be TRYING to figure it out.
We missed her at football games in the fall, except for the "command performance" at homecoming. Her presence there would have sent a positive message to students, and more importantly, to alumni who populate the west grandstand, and who cough up the bucks.
When the powers-that-be get down to deciding what the next principal needs, let's hope that they decide that being a Queen's grad is essential. The pieces need to be gathered up and put back together again, and only a Queen's grad can do that.
This is THE essential ingredient for the next principal.
Until the AMS passed its resolution in March, there had only been rumblings and grapevine talk about the job that the principal was doing. The resolution forced, fortunately, the talk-over-coffee out into the open.
I was fortunate to be a part of a group called "The Group for Excellence." Its sole raison d'etre was to provide expert input into the physical activity component of the Queen's Centre. The group met for almost 3 years, developed a program for the facility, met with key persons on campus who were involved in the process, lobbied the trustees, and ultimately met with Principal Hitchcock to explain our suggestions, and try to have her understand the tremendous benefits of the university building a 50m swimming pool.
It was at this meeting (with one other graduate of Queen's, and the Principal) that I began to understand that she really didn't want to hear what we had to say, and really didn't care at all. Our meeting was half an hour. We had carefully planned the key points to make, the rationale, and the counter-arguments we expected her to make. We barely opened our mouths before SHE began to talk. She pretty well talked the whole time. We did make our key point, but it was quite clear that she had made up her mind and there was no point in our banging our heads against a concrete wall.
In all the years I have worked with others who are committed to a project, the "Group for Excellence" was the most satisfying, and the least satisfying. A group of about 15 people with wide sport interests agreed that the greater good would be served by our working together.
Never have I presented an idea to someone who not only refused to listen, but insisted in talking the whole time.
So the resolution that the AMS passed didn't surprise me, and it didn't surprise me to hear that students on campus think she doesn't connect with them. She doesn't.
Communication is a 2 way thing, and listening requires "hearing" what others are saying. One of the common techniques to effective listening is to concentrate on what is being said, and NOT getting ready to counter the arguments.
It has been said that her gender and American citizenship were the factors that did her in. It is more than that. She never really understood the "culture"of Queen's, the "Big Four" universities, or the traditions that (for good and bad) are entrenched in this institution. There's stuff at this university that creates the culture of this university; it has been here forever, and every year, it gets further entrenched.
Bill Leggett wasn't a Queen's grad, but he knew the MGill culture, not the same as Queen's, but a unique culture that differentiates it from every other university. And certainly differentiates it from any American university/college. And Leggett was liked by the students.
Principal Hitchcock never figured it out, didn't seem to be TRYING to figure it out.
We missed her at football games in the fall, except for the "command performance" at homecoming. Her presence there would have sent a positive message to students, and more importantly, to alumni who populate the west grandstand, and who cough up the bucks.
When the powers-that-be get down to deciding what the next principal needs, let's hope that they decide that being a Queen's grad is essential. The pieces need to be gathered up and put back together again, and only a Queen's grad can do that.
This is THE essential ingredient for the next principal.
Thursday, April 17, 2008
It Matters A LOT
Patrons to the new arena in downtown Kingston have reported a lot of unfortunate things about the facility. The most recent, and perhaps the most irritating, is the fact that the Canadian flag is flying incorrectly.
Canadian flag protocol requires that when two flags are being flown, the Canadian flag is placed to the left of the other nation's flag. This is not quite written in (lime)stone, but almost.
In the new rink, the Canadian flag is being flown on the right of the USA flag.
Apparently, when this was brought to the attention (twice, at least) of the rink's management, the person who pointed this out, was told that it would require a cherry-picker -type of equipment to change it. The inference being that it would cost a lot of money to hire one, and it wasn't worth the cost.
Here's the news: it IS worth the cost of renting the necessary equipment.
In this town, there ARE a lot of people who think that it is important to fly the Canadian flag correctly. And, in fact, there are a lot of Canadians who think that too. And I am one. It is important to fly the flag correctly. Not just now, or in Kingston where the armed forces are constantly present, but in every town and hamlet in this country.
If this matters so little to the rink's management, is there anything that matters MORE? Oh yes. Selling tickets.
Speaking of which, in an unprompted conversation today, a woman told me of her recent visit to the rink to get tickets for some show. She was told that there were none there, but she could get them online.
"Online?" she said.
"Yes. They have them online."
Heavens....all those add-ons, coming to almost $15.00 per ticket! The management makes it so that if one wants tickets, they have to be bought online, even if the customer is standing right there at the ticket wicket. What a rip-off.
This is another example of the cavalier attitude demonstrated at the new rink.
Someone should tell Councillor Hector that the flags are being flown incorrectly. Then, get your stopwatch out, and see how long it takes to order up a cherry picker! Nanoseconds!!!!
Canadian flag protocol requires that when two flags are being flown, the Canadian flag is placed to the left of the other nation's flag. This is not quite written in (lime)stone, but almost.
In the new rink, the Canadian flag is being flown on the right of the USA flag.
Apparently, when this was brought to the attention (twice, at least) of the rink's management, the person who pointed this out, was told that it would require a cherry-picker -type of equipment to change it. The inference being that it would cost a lot of money to hire one, and it wasn't worth the cost.
Here's the news: it IS worth the cost of renting the necessary equipment.
In this town, there ARE a lot of people who think that it is important to fly the Canadian flag correctly. And, in fact, there are a lot of Canadians who think that too. And I am one. It is important to fly the flag correctly. Not just now, or in Kingston where the armed forces are constantly present, but in every town and hamlet in this country.
If this matters so little to the rink's management, is there anything that matters MORE? Oh yes. Selling tickets.
Speaking of which, in an unprompted conversation today, a woman told me of her recent visit to the rink to get tickets for some show. She was told that there were none there, but she could get them online.
"Online?" she said.
"Yes. They have them online."
Heavens....all those add-ons, coming to almost $15.00 per ticket! The management makes it so that if one wants tickets, they have to be bought online, even if the customer is standing right there at the ticket wicket. What a rip-off.
This is another example of the cavalier attitude demonstrated at the new rink.
Someone should tell Councillor Hector that the flags are being flown incorrectly. Then, get your stopwatch out, and see how long it takes to order up a cherry picker! Nanoseconds!!!!
Saturday, April 05, 2008
MEMO TO HARPER: Don't even think about a boycott.
THE CANADIAN PRESS, MONTREAL, April 4, 2008
Prime Minister Stephen Harper says it's too early to talk about any boycott of the 2008 Olympics, but most athletes would prefer to simply strike the dreaded b-word from the dictionary.
The thought of missing the Beijing Olympics weighs heavily on the minds of many Canadian athletes who have spent a lifetime training for the global athletic event. Politics and sports just don't mix, says Canadian swimming sensation Brent Hayden. "I'm an athlete, I'm not a politician and I'm going to compete at the Games no matter where they're held," Hayden said Friday during Olympic swimming trials in Montreal.
China's violent crackdown on riots in Tibet has prompted human rights groups to call for a boycott of the Games. Amnesty International has accused China of human rights abuses.
Harper won't attend the opening ceremony in August. Instead he will send a high-level delegation to represent Canada. The prime minister said his absence has nothing to do with a boycott and that he planned to skip the ceremonies long before the unrest in Tibet. The Canadian Olympic Committee would not comment on Harper skipping the ceremony. There is no set protocol on whether a prime minister or head of state should attend and rulers around the world are making different plans.
French President Nicolas Sarkozy has mused he and the entire French team might boycott the opening ceremonies while allowing athletes to take part in competition. German Chancellor Angela Merkel has said she will take a pass on the opening while U.S. President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown plan to attend.
Calgary swimmer Mike Brown says he won't boycott the Games, but he wouldn't hold it against any athlete who did. "I would have liked (Harper) to have been there," Brown said. But the 23-year-old Brown says the thought of missing the Games is unfathomable. "I would be very heartbroken if everything gets put on hold," Brown said. "For somebody else to decide that we're not allowed to compete at the Games? That doesn't seem right to me."
Most Canadians seem to be on the same page as the athletes. A survey by Harris-Decima conducted at the end of March found only 13 per cent of Canadians supported a boycott, though more than half wanted some form of protest that would still allow Canadian athletes to compete. Pierre Lafontaine, Swimming Canada's CEO and head coach, says his team likely won't take part in the opening ceremonies as his athletes' competition begins the following morning. "I don't think the swimming team has ever gone because it takes four or five days to recover," Lafontaine said. But any boycott talk irks Lafontaine, who said "boycotting the games has never worked, is never good." Boycotts only hurt the morale of young athletes who have spent a lifetime training for an Olympic spot, he said. "This is the one common denominator around the world that brings people together," Lafontaine said. "It's the one thing -- it's not religion, it's not politics -- it's sports."
First-time Olympian Tanya Hunks says she has sacrificed too much to even fathom the idea of not going to the Games. "It kind of breaks my heart," Hunks said of boycott talk. "I've put my life on hold for this and so many athletes have." Hunks says boycotting the games in the past has shown no benefits, referring to Canada's boycott of the 1980 Summer Olympics in Moscow. "Waking up at 5 a.m. is hard, so we deserve" to go, said the 27-year-old Vancouver native.
This week there were signs that tension is easing in Tibet as the Chinese government announced it would reopen the region to tourism by May. However, reports Friday said China's state media were reporting new violence had broken out in a volatile Tibetan region, leaving at least one government official seriously injured.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper says it's too early to talk about any boycott of the 2008 Olympics, but most athletes would prefer to simply strike the dreaded b-word from the dictionary.
The thought of missing the Beijing Olympics weighs heavily on the minds of many Canadian athletes who have spent a lifetime training for the global athletic event. Politics and sports just don't mix, says Canadian swimming sensation Brent Hayden. "I'm an athlete, I'm not a politician and I'm going to compete at the Games no matter where they're held," Hayden said Friday during Olympic swimming trials in Montreal.
China's violent crackdown on riots in Tibet has prompted human rights groups to call for a boycott of the Games. Amnesty International has accused China of human rights abuses.
Harper won't attend the opening ceremony in August. Instead he will send a high-level delegation to represent Canada. The prime minister said his absence has nothing to do with a boycott and that he planned to skip the ceremonies long before the unrest in Tibet. The Canadian Olympic Committee would not comment on Harper skipping the ceremony. There is no set protocol on whether a prime minister or head of state should attend and rulers around the world are making different plans.
French President Nicolas Sarkozy has mused he and the entire French team might boycott the opening ceremonies while allowing athletes to take part in competition. German Chancellor Angela Merkel has said she will take a pass on the opening while U.S. President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown plan to attend.
Calgary swimmer Mike Brown says he won't boycott the Games, but he wouldn't hold it against any athlete who did. "I would have liked (Harper) to have been there," Brown said. But the 23-year-old Brown says the thought of missing the Games is unfathomable. "I would be very heartbroken if everything gets put on hold," Brown said. "For somebody else to decide that we're not allowed to compete at the Games? That doesn't seem right to me."
Most Canadians seem to be on the same page as the athletes. A survey by Harris-Decima conducted at the end of March found only 13 per cent of Canadians supported a boycott, though more than half wanted some form of protest that would still allow Canadian athletes to compete. Pierre Lafontaine, Swimming Canada's CEO and head coach, says his team likely won't take part in the opening ceremonies as his athletes' competition begins the following morning. "I don't think the swimming team has ever gone because it takes four or five days to recover," Lafontaine said. But any boycott talk irks Lafontaine, who said "boycotting the games has never worked, is never good." Boycotts only hurt the morale of young athletes who have spent a lifetime training for an Olympic spot, he said. "This is the one common denominator around the world that brings people together," Lafontaine said. "It's the one thing -- it's not religion, it's not politics -- it's sports."
First-time Olympian Tanya Hunks says she has sacrificed too much to even fathom the idea of not going to the Games. "It kind of breaks my heart," Hunks said of boycott talk. "I've put my life on hold for this and so many athletes have." Hunks says boycotting the games in the past has shown no benefits, referring to Canada's boycott of the 1980 Summer Olympics in Moscow. "Waking up at 5 a.m. is hard, so we deserve" to go, said the 27-year-old Vancouver native.
This week there were signs that tension is easing in Tibet as the Chinese government announced it would reopen the region to tourism by May. However, reports Friday said China's state media were reporting new violence had broken out in a volatile Tibetan region, leaving at least one government official seriously injured.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)