Leadership In-chargeism in HEIs

In-charge is an interesting hyphenation, particularly when it comes designate positions. It says that the person concerned is in charge of a role or a responsibility but not exactly! In my part of the world it represents temporariness. A principal in-charge or a Department Head in-charge is a person who is temporarily assigned to hold that seat and the reasons may vary. Either because a better fit is on the way or the one given the 'charge' is too young to be anointed as the one to really take charge. Though at times there is a possibility in the air that the in-charge will be regularised removing the 'In-charge' tag, it is not always the case. Many put in diligent hours as they are supposedly on the way to 'full-charge' only to realise that the goalpost has been shifted when they got close enough. 

This tendency to put people 'in-charge' at the high leadership positions is done in many HEIs for monetary reasons. The idea is to pick a young person with some potential and give her/him the 'charge' of a leadership role. This will absolutely excite the person and she or he would prance around and try to deliver her/his best. In the bargain, the HEI owner will save big as what's offered in payment to the aspiring leader for the 'in-charge' leadership role will be way below what is paid to one who assumes real power. Often a pittance! Like the one who is happy for being given the in-charge, the HEI ownership too is happy as he can cut costs and save big. A win-win proposition it looks like for anyone who is not keen on realising what exactly is the role of capable leadership in HEIs. 

This leadership adhocism has its benefits occasionally for the in-chargers too. Some with true potential use it as a stepping stone to move higher, though it may not be in the same institution. But what it often does to the HEI is a worrisome. The adhocism at the top leaves it's residue and it seeps into the cogs of the administrative and academic wheels not as a lubricant but as an irritant. Rather than having someone at the core who can lead the team and the institution with a vision, supplying enthusiasm and passion, it puts in display a statusquoist who preserves and stabilizes. Often the in-charge will take care not to cross the bounds and push the envelope as there is a lurking apprehension  that it will jeopardize his chances of being elevated to be in real charge! There's also the fact that often the one in-charge may not draw the same kind of respect from the team as they too take the role as temporary. 

The phenomenon is prevalent in all varieties of HEIs: Government-run, Gove-aided, and  Self-financed. In Govt-run it is often an intentional forgetfulness as such a policy helps cut funds. The number of vacant positions in colleges and universities in the country will speak volumes about it. In Govt-aided institutions too it works in the same way but often the Management bodies of these institutions divert funds to have alternate arrangements made. In Self-financing institutions, we often see the worst case scenarios of the category. Not only is the in-chargeism practiced with blatant disregard for quality but also, there's relative permanence to it. I mean, from one in-charge the institution moves to another in-charge, as the one who held charge for long will slowly realise the permanence of the temporariness and may move out. Or the person will be moved out bringing another aspiring character is made to warm the chair for a while!

Though the practice can be a necessity in certain exigencies, it is contributing significantly to turn many HEIs into dwarfs which remain where they are and refuse to grow up. Being a leader is being in charge. To be a leader who is charged with a perspective and passion to transform, is to have ownership of the position assured and affirmed. The in-charge phenomenon often works against it, particularly when aimed at cutting costs and driving profits.

Babu. P. K, Ph D.