Now, there are those who complain that very little is written in The Cavalier Daily on what is done right at The University. \nPerhaps these critics have a point. Yet, I wonder. Celebratory articles or columns certainly make us feel good, but they ultimately don't identify means for us or for the University to improve. If change is a constant, shouldn't we be thinking about how change might be for the better? Shouldn't we be proactive instead of reactive or, worse, simply passive?
Perhaps a more valid criticism is that the critical columns proposing reform do not adequately flesh out their ideas, or rather that these columns only raise interesting suggestions, but rarely result in actual change. At best these columns incite a flurry of back-and-forth commentary on The Cavalier Daily's online comment section for a few days only to eventually be replaced by more popular pieces. In rarer circumstances, a column may actually provoke a response piece. Depending on your vantage point, this can either be entirely satisfactory or deeply annoying.
Many would say that the main, perhaps only, purpose of columns in The Cavalier Daily is to promote discussion, and any action beyond that discussion is merely a bonus. Others would dismiss the whole thing as a flash in the pan, and a waste of time, paper and ink.
I agree that a primary purpose of Cavalier Daily columns is simply to get more ideas out in the open for discussion; that being said, well-thought-out solutions can also be advanced. These solutions deserve to be pursued, not just idly perused between coffee breaks in the morning. This is even more so the case when one takes into account that columns are usually the product of research, and so represent more than just the musings of a writer with a deadline to meet.
Indeed, whenever I read columns in The Cavalier Daily I almost invariably run across an article suggesting a change or refinement from which I would think the University would benefit. And almost invariably, I find out these ideas simply faded away a day or so after the relevant column ran.
Of course, the tricky question is how do you actually turn these suggestions into reality, or at least ensure they receive appropriate consideration by relevant administrators or organizations? Possibly one could assign that task to the columnists themselves, but that would seem to place an extraordinary burden on these individuals. Certainly, if an individual feels so compelled, he ought to pursue an initiative beyond merely writing a column about it. In all likelihood, though, many ideas raised will never go beyond the column stage; it seems unrealistic to assume columnists themselves would be able to follow up on every idea they propose.
So, here is another suggestion on how to address the challenge of change. I would like to propose that each major student organization, particularly those with Grounds-wide constituencies - such as The Cavalier Daily, Student Council, etc. - establish a position of Chief Innovation Officer. Depending on the nature of the organization, this person would be either elected or appointed.
To make a quick disclaimer: I've actually found all the student organizations I've worked with to be both responsive and willing to consider change. The model I suggest, however, would allow all major organizations to streamline their approach to considering changes or ideas, such as those raised in The Cavalier Daily's columns. Indeed, I'm somewhat inspired in this suggestion by the role of the Administrative Conference of the United States, an administrative agency whose role is purely to ensure the government operates efficiently and, where necessary, adopts new changes.
The Chief Innovation Officer for the student organization would be a focal point for reviewing and assessing various proposals for change with respect to the organization. This person would identify a shortlist of ideas which would be explored in detail and discussed with an appropriate committee. \nThis individual would be responsible for steering the approved proposal to implementation. Change, if it is not to be haphazard and erratic, requires a disciplined process to vet ideas and organized management for successful implementation.
The Chief Innovation Officer for an organization is not necessarily the person who may come up with fresh ideas for the organization - anyone can propose suggestions, including a columnist for The Cavalier Daily. Further, the explicit goal of the CI Officer would be to examine areas of his organization for improvement; so even if there are no suggestions from outside the organization, he would actively brainstorm ways to reform or refine the organization. The CI Officer would help navigate the gap between aspiration and reality.
Does this model fully address my concern that good ideas raised in columns tend to go to waste? Frankly no, but it is a step in the right direction. In particular, this model doesn't address how ideas which are relevant to the administration can be more efficiently acted upon. My hope, though, is that implementation of this model will give some perspective on what an appropriate analogue could be for the administration.
As a columnist for The Cavalier Daily, I've always believed this newspaper offers a platform for introducing, advocating and debating ideas for making the University better and stronger. The Cavalier Daily is the University's premier catalyst for change, not simply its newspaper of record. But if change is to be implemented it needs dedicated agents of change. We need chief innovation officers for the University's major student organizations. And, all things considered, perhaps the best institution to show the way is The Cavalier Daily itself.
Sanjiv Tata's column usually appears Mondays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at s.tata@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
EDITORIAL: U.Va. Health lets fear trump its mission to do no harm
By Editorial Board | 8 hours agoIt is high time to resist these authoritative and dangerous actions before there are no federal avenues left for resistance.
CARTER: U.Va. Health owes clarity to transplant patients
By Nathaniel Carter | 3 days agoUnfortunately, this negative press is fully the fault of U.Va. Health — it failed to address significant stakeholder concerns when crafting its justification.
EDITORIAL: Upholding medical amnesty is a collective effort
By Editorial Board | 4 days agoUniversity leadership, Greek life organizations and students themselves must recommit to the safety provided by an effective and knowledgeable use of medical amnesty.
