Over here at Wired, writer Ben Austen offers a trenchant analysis of reactions to the Steve Jobs biography by Walter Isaacson. Austen observes:
Jobs has been dead for nearly a year, but the biography about him is still a best seller. Indeed, his life story has emerged as an odd sort of holy scripture for entrepreneurs—a gospel and an antigospel at the same time. To some, Jobs’ life has revealed the importance of sticking firmly to one’s vision and goals, no matter the psychic toll on employees or business associates. To others, Jobs serves as a cautionary tale, a man who changed the world but at the price of alienating almost everyone around him.
Austen sorts readers of the bio into two categories: "acolytes" and "rejectors" -- in short, those who would emulate Jobs and those who "have recoiled from the total picture of the man—not just his treatment of employees but the dictatorial, uncompromising way that he approached life." Austen invites readers to take a "quiz" by reacting to vignettes from the biography. Based on one's responses, one can self-diagnose as a Jobs "acolyte" or a "rejector." Even folks who haven't read the biography know that Jobs had the reputation as a demanding boss, so the vignettes come as no surprise.
For law profs who came from (relatively) civilized law practice backgrounds and who now spend most of their time in (relatively) civilized academic halls, it may be difficult to imagine similar scenarios in their workplaces. Of course, every law school faculty experiences what my colleague Ann Bartow calls sphincter eruptions (although she uses a more colorful term, here), but that's different from having a Steve Jobs-type as an every-day colleague or even as a dean.
What if Steve Jobs had been a law school dean? Riffing on the vignettes from the bio and the Wired piece, I've imagined some scenarios involving my fictive Dean Steve Jobs. Then diagnose whether you are a Jobs "acolyte" or a "rejector."
|
|
The Acolyte’s Viewpoint
|
The Rejector’s Viewpoint |
|
1. |
Last summer, Dean Jobs refused to give Professor X a summer research grant to support yet another bar magazine publication. A fellow professor intervened, offering to match out of his own summer research grant whatever money Dean Jobs was willing to spare for Professor X. “Ok,” Dean Jobs replied. “I will give Professor X zero.”
|
|
|
|
Good deaning rewards serious scholarly work, even if that makes explicit distinctions among faculty members.
|
To foster loyalty in your faculty members, you have to be loyal to them. |
|
2. |
At the last faculty meeting, Dean Jobs reads out a list of ten faculty members and says, “I can’t fire you because you have tenure, but you are getting the worst teaching assignments for next year… too many professors here are B or C players.”
|
|
|
|
Tolerate only A players. |
Publicly embarrassing faculty members will backfire on the Dean.
|
|
3. |
Two years ago, the Dean asked the Admissions Office for a detailed analysis of the entering class. When the head of the office didn’t deliver enough detail quickly enough, Dean Jobs railed about that person’s incompetence.
|
|
|
|
Demand excellence always. |
You can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.
|
|
4. |
In the first year of his deanship, the school’s US News ranking went up. Dean Jobs promptly announced, “My deanship represents the beginning of an upward trajectory for the law school.”
|
|
|
|
The market will recognize excellence. |
Understand the limits of the rankings.
|
|
5. |
In the second year of his deanship, the school’s US News ranking went down. Dean Jobs promptly announced, “We are experiencing the negative repercussions of actions taken prior to my arrival.”
|
|
|
|
Understand the limits of the rankings. |
Understand the limits of a law school dean’s influence. |
Comments