Administrative Bloat in Higher Education: Is This Now a Higher Education Industrial Complex?

By Kristi Kanel, winner of 2019 Collegial Governance Award. Reviewed by the Senate Forum editorial board.

I was watching one of my favorite shows on TV the other night, Real Time with Bill Maher (April 21, 2023), and was pleasantly surprised to see two college professors as guests on his panel.  Just before Bill started in on his final segment, New Rules, he asked the professors about what was going on with higher education and the growing costs and amount of administrators.  I perked up and started taking notes.

They began by discussing recent data about Yale and Harvard having a 1:1 ratio of students to administrators and that administrators at those Ivy league Universities are more numerous than faculty.  How did this happen?  Why does this continue to happen?

Both Dr. Glenn Loury (Professor at Brown University) and Dr. Daniel Bressner (Association Professor at University of Washington) agree that it has to do with today’s students perceiving themselves as consumers of education.   They mentioned that Universities have become a capitalistic venture trying to please the consumers rather than keep the focus on education and learning.

They began by discussing recent data about Yale and Harvard having a 1:1 ratio of students to Administrators and that administrators at those Ivy league Universities are more numerous than faculty.  How did this happen? 

In an earlier time professors ran the Colleges.  That meant knowledge, skills, education and learning were the values of the institutions.  Now that Colleges have become consumer focused, the college experience takes a front seat to the actual education of students.  Administrators focus on giving the consumers what they want, namely, a college experience.  This keeps them coming, keeps the funds rolling, and keeps the administrators in place with exceedingly well paid jobs. Doing what exactly?  Dr. Loury answered this question with the following: “meetings, memos, overseeing regulations, and cow towing to consumers.”  They don’t educate, don’t write books, don’t do research, they just try to keep consumers coming to get more money.  Is what they do even necessary for student’s to learn?

The professors even mentioned the Prison Industrial Complex that now exists due to the corporatization of prisons.  I’m suggesting that due to the capitalistic nature of current higher education practices, namely to keep the consumer students happy and make a profit, and keep administrators in high paying jobs, that our country now is the proud owner of the Higher Education Industrial Complex.

At CSUF, we haven’t quite reached the 1:1 ratio we see at Yale and Harvard — yet.  But the reality is that most administrators make more money than professors, some of whom are internationally known for their research and who have mentored and educated tens of thousands of students.  Faculty have similar educational attainment as administrators, and many have many more years experience than them as well, yet are paid considerably less.  Why?  Dr. Bressner talked about the feminization of teaching in general, meaning that teaching is considered “feminine” work and thus doesn’t hold the same status as more “masculine” managerial positions.  This makes little sense when talking about an educational institution.  Shouldn’t educators be front and center when the entire purpose of the organization is to educate and award degrees?

Shouldn’t educators be front and center when the entire purpose of the organization is to educate and award degrees?

Sure, many faculty do eventually promote to become administrators here at CSUF, which is great, but why?  To push the capitalistic agenda to make a profit?  Or to enshrine additional retirement pension monies that automatically come when serving in the management position for at least three years?  I would suggest that if faculty were able to earn more money,  they wouldn’t have to serve as administrators just to get a raise. 

The idea that faculty need supervision from administrators is another thing that boggles the mind.  Faculty hold doctorates, are typically autonomous and independent with a good work ethic.  In fact many of long time faculty must actually train incoming administrators and guide them in their jobs.  That pattern has been very commonplace at CSUF in the past decade.  When new administrators are hired, they tend to make changes that affect faculty, who then must adjust, increasing their workload.  Once that new administrator then leaves (which they often do after 3-5 years), faculty (who typically stay for 20-40 years) are left to clean up the mess, go back to how things were when things worked, and carry on the actual teaching mission of CSUF.  But it does seem that administrators have to do something to justify their salaries, so they find things to change that have been working, task faculty to do things differently, thereby preserving their jobs.

Warta (2022) suggests that “over the years, American universities and colleges have slowly drifted away from their central concerns, teaching and learning. This shift is perhaps best seen in the increased number of administrators in higher education and the exponential growth in the portion of institutions’ budgets dedicated to administrative salaries. The educational data service IPEDS categorizes administrators as “management,” defined as “those staff whose job it is to plan, direct, or coordinate policies [and] programs, [tasks that] may include some supervision of other workers.” Though IPEDS further states that “Postsecondary Deans should be classified in this category as well,” the vast majority of administrators do no teaching or research. Their jobs are thus unrelated to the most crucial university functions.” 

She further asserts that the growing number of non-instructional jobs at universities and colleges can be linked to continuing rise in college tuition.  For example, at North Carolina State University, the average salary for administrative staff is $149,629, and for 287 staff the combined salary is $42,943,482!  She states that administrative bloat is a serious issue at universities not just because of related costs, but also because administrative roles are notoriously vague and confusing.  In short, she suggests that institutional funds are increasingly being allocated for non-instructional spending, and comparatively less funding is going toward teaching. Since these increases correlate with tuition costs, the funding of large administrations is directly contributing to the steady increase in the cost of a college degree.

over the years, American universities and colleges have slowly drifted away from their central concerns, teaching and learning. This shift is perhaps best seen in the increased number of administrators in higher education and the exponential growth in the portion of institutions’ budgets dedicated to administrative salaries

Warta, 2022

Warta (2022) concludes her report by suggesting that while the original intent behind college administration may have been to ease the workload of faculty, the large administrations most schools currently maintain can have the opposite impact. Bound to follow administrative diktats, faculty can find their working lives becoming more complicated, not less, as administrative ranks swell.

Tomar (2023) also discusses administrative bloat in higher education.  He shares ideas about how expensive college is and wonders who is benefitting from skyrocketing tuition.  He suggests it is not students nor the faculty, so who is left?  Those backstage, such as executives, consultants, bureaucrats and functionaries we call administration. He says that at the average non-profit college, half of all payroll expenses is toward the administrative structures. The statistics show that tuition in state schools is up 212% over the past 20 years.  His definition of administrative bloat relates directly to cost, “Administrative bloat is what occurs when the cost and scale of a university’s administrative structure either fails to contribute to the institution’s core educational mission or actually detracts from that educational mission.”  He does say that someone must fill out the infrastructure that provides a foundation for the experience of both educators and learners such as presidents and academic advisors, mental health support and registrars.  But when is it too much is the question.  His response is to points out that the essential mission of any university is teaching, and if administrative elements support this, then bloat is not present.

“Administrative bloat is what occurs when the cost and scale of a university’s administrative structure either fails to contribute to the institution’s core educational mission or actually detracts from that educational mission.”

Tomar 2023

Recent data shows that 75% of college classroom instructors are non-tenure track educators/adjunct faculty, while about 20% are taught by full time/tenure track faculty which is the exact reversal of ration in 1969.  This is not to suggest that our part time adjunct faculty do not contribute to students but it does mean that colleges can pay their instructors substantially less with educators who may have less experience, expertise and influence than from prior generations.  This means that students are paying more for a far lower likelihood of studying with a full time tenured professor.  This is most likely due to administrative payroll costs.

In her article related to administrative bloat, Rogers (2012) suggests that if an administrator disappeared, no one would notice for a year or two, whereas a missing professor is noticed right away.  Many times when administrators are away faculty take over and fulfill duties seamlessly here at CSUF.  In the past decade that has occurred numerous times, as interim administrative positions were a normal thing on this campus.  She references Richard Vedder, director of the Center for College Affordability and Productivity and professor of economics at Ohio University when he said that” shifting the balance back toward faculty is key to keeping universities’ missions focused on teaching, as opposed to becoming too focused on other activities, like business development or sustainability efforts.”  He suggests that we need to get back to basics which is teaching and research and need to incentivize leaders of universities to get rid of anything that’s outside that.

This is perhaps an outdated model as recent studies and models suggest more is needed to ensure equity and inclusiveness occur.  However, the bottom line is that the reason for ensuring diversity, equity and inclusion is so that all students have the same opportunities to learn and be educated equally.  So it is still all about learning in the end.

we need to get back to basics which is teaching and research and need to incentivize leaders of universities to get rid of anything that’s outside that.

So how do we manage this increasingly growing Administratively oriented Educational Industrial Complex?  How do we respect new generations who see themselves as consumers without diminishing the educational process?

Perhaps universities, especially those with larger administrative staffs, could take a close look at the roles they fill and the benefit gleaned from those roles. If the costs outweigh the benefits, perhaps some changes should be made. There is certainly a place for administrators in colleges and universities, but they should not exist to the detriment of teachers, learners, and the pursuit of academic freedom.

References

Rogers, J. (2012)  Retrieved 4/25/3023 at https://www.chronicle.com/article/3-to-1-thats-the-best-ratio-of-tenure-track-faculty-to-administrators-a-study-concludes/#:~:text=In%20the%20long%2Drunning%20debate,every%20one%20full%2Dtime%20administrator.

Tomar, D. (2023).  Overcoming Administrative bloat in higher education.  Retrieved 4/25/2023 from https://academicinfluence.com/inflection/college-life/overcoming-administrative-bloat

Warta, A. (2022). Administrative Bloat Harms Teaching and Learning. James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal. https://www.jamesgmartin.center/2022/08/administrative-bloat-harms-teaching-and-learning/