INTRODUCTION 3 At some point, pressure from these multiple demands may build to a point that cracks appear in the existing structure forcing a dean to consider whether reorgani- zation is needed. As mid-level managers within the larger organization, deans would be well advised to ask whether their organizational structure is the most efficacious given this shifting context. From the perspective of an academic dean, there are three primary levels of orga- nizational structure to consider when examining reorganization. These levels are roughly ordered by the extent to which a dean has control over the change process: 1. Operation of their office a. Deploying associate deans, assistant deans, and directors to oversee academic and student-support functions b. Assigning the work of staff to support the management functions c. Using faculty fellows 2. Academic work of faculty (i.e., disciplines) a. Determining which disciplines best fit within the college (as opposed to another college in the institution) b. Deciding how to group disciplines (e.g., in departments, schools, or programs; which should be separated and which should be combined) 3. Organization of colleges within a university a. Determining how many colleges are needed to best fulfill the institution’s mission (e.g., whether all A&S colleges should be placed into a single college of Arts & Sciences or divided into multiple colleges) b. Deciding the geographic boundaries that represent an institution and its colleges (e.g., should a dean of A&S lead and manage academic programs on one or multiple campuses; would a consolidation of campuses be effective?) Relevant Literature Despite a fair number of books on the role of deans as managers and leaders, only a few reference organizational issues; we summarize their findings here. In Building the Academic Deanship, Krahenbuhl (2004) addresses “senior staff organization,” making the crucial point that one of the first considerations for a new dean is “the quality and character of the staff.” Almost any method of organizing a staff will work with good people, but no organizational arrangement will completely offset complications created by individuals who lack basic leadership attributes (com- petent, trustworthy, and see themselves as facilitators) (p 45). In the same text, Krahenbuhl further offers a distinction between using a sub- stantive arrangement (by academic cluster) or a functional one (by areas of respon- sibility) for how staff members are assigned to cover the work of the college. Bright