Organizations Don’t Like Experts
I’ve come to the conclusion that it is of little or no value to be an expert in something, within the context of an organization. Why? Because organizations don’t want experts. They say they do…and functionally they should because having the smart people work for you is how you ultimately create a competitive advantage…but practically ego gets in the way of this ideal.
It’s ironic - they seek out experts during the hiring process. To get in the door, you have to prove you’re intelligent, capable and motivated. But once you’re there, don’t kid yourself. All those hours you put into your craft mean nothing. Accolades from your colleagues outside your organization mean nothing. Unless you are at the senior level of your organization (or have just been there a really really long time and are “senior” by default), you are not allowed to be an expert.
Why? Because experts are threatening. If you’re an expert, that means you know something “they” don’t, which calls into question how many other things “they” don’t know (in their minds anyway). Now lets set aside reality for a second (reality being that EVERYONE knows something you don’t know, so its really unavoidable) and look at it through the eyes of an ambitious yet insecure manager. Typically people like this aren’t open to nuance. It’s black or white. Right or wrong. Either they are the ultimate supreme expert of everything, not only in their direct realm but also on its periphery, or they’re not. Any bit of expertise anyone else shows in any area that overlaps this realm is a threat to them and their domain.
Now here’s the kicker - the organization will act in direct adversity to its best interests by coddling the ambitious yet insecure manager because its the insecure manager that’s going to put up a fuss. The organization is going to sacrifice the better product (that will be achieved through listening to expert advice) in favor of making the insecure manager feel more comfortable. This is going to piss off the expert, but they’re probably not going to make the same fuss as the insecure manager at this point because it would look like they were just retaliating. So now the insecure manager is satisfied, the expert is pissed off and the organization produces a less-than-stellar product.
So what do you do? Some people would tell you to work within the culture of the organization, let the insecure manager think everything is their idea, blah blah blah. My advice comes from a different prospective - it’s all about the side projects baby. Make your day job just that - your day job. Do it to the best of your ability and meet the expectations they have for you but when you leave your office, leave the job there. Put your passion into your side projects. Start a professional blog. Start consulting. Start speaking at conferences. Do something to put your expert knowledge to good use (and, frankly, consulting usually pays more than your day job anyway). The culture of the organization is never going to change but putting your energy into something entirely under your domain can keep your passion alive. This is how you’re going to find professional fulfillment. This is what will keep you sane.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Like what you read here? Subscribe to this blog through RSS or sign up to receive email updates when new content is posted.






January 16th, 2009
Amen. And then start your own thing, hire some experts, and repeat the process for / to them.
In my experience, a motivated individual will outlearn any organization of size. This is especially painful / annoying in times of industry change. Or when, you know, a bunch of things change at once.
Just a little “smart” about a thing is helpful. If there’s too much distance between what you think and what the organization can swallow or change, then, as you point out, it’s obnoxious at best, a threat at worst.
So your other option is to stop thinking or learning and watch a lot more TV. It’s way less work and only gets frustrating a long time.
January 16th, 2009
. . . only gets frustrating a long time from now.
(silly slow coffee.)
January 16th, 2009
GREAT POST! One of your best.
Not sure if you’re a big @garyvee fan or not, but this video talks right along the same lines:
http://garyvaynerchuk.com/2008/08/21/you-can-have-bothjobs/
That video sealed the deal for me. It takes work. It takes time. But if you want it, TRULY want it, you can make it happen and keep both jobs until you’re ready to fully transition.
January 16th, 2009
Great post, Karlyn!
January 16th, 2009
You forgot the corollary where management hires consultants who charge big bucks to learn everything the in-house people already know and then tell top management what they want to hear (or said managers only hear what they want to). And then the plan, however unworkable it is, is turned over to the in-house people to execute, even if their expertise tells them it’s wrong.
Which is why it’s probably better to be a consultant. Especially if that means sleeping in on winter mornings.
January 16th, 2009
Karlyn, talk about pumping out GREAT content… Geesh, you are on fire in ‘09..
The key is to DO something about it..
Great post!!!!!
January 16th, 2009
Ok just to clarify something, THIS IS NOT ABOUT MY BOSS! She is not the insecure manager. I’m not nearly stupid enough to write about my boss in a derogatory manner on things I know she reads. I try to keep the content for this blog as far away from Dartmouth as humanly possible while still writing things that I think my audience will be interested in. Based on the response I’ve received so far to this post, I think its safe to say that I’m not the only one who has noticed this problem. So please don’t make assumptions about where his is coming from!
K
January 16th, 2009
@TimN - You’re absolutely right, that’s a really important point. And how do in-house experts feel when the organization ignores them and then brings in high-priced consultants who tell them the exact same thing? My guess would be a whole other level of pissed.
@Joe - Thanks
I had a lot of time over Christmas to get some ideas together and really pay attention to them. One of my resolutions was to start to take blogging more seriously, instead of just busting out posts at 5am.
January 16th, 2009
Great post!
It is ALL about the side projects. You have to keep punching to grow yourself on the side, so that one day, when one of the few brands/companies out there that respects and fosters growth of experts has an opening, you can make your move.
It’s the experts that get frustrated and allow themselves to be sucked into negativity that never get that chance to move forward.
Nice insight here Karlyn. I’ll be back
Dan | @danieleizans
January 16th, 2009
Hammer…..meet nail head! Nice post, Karlyn.
January 16th, 2009
Tim — you stole my thunder. *Exactly* what I was going to say. It absolutely kills me me when I see that done at organizations. We have to take charge of your own life - be the CEO of our own careers & make stuff happen for ourselves. It’s rare stuff is handed to us on a silver platter.
January 16th, 2009
Karyln,
WOW, just WOW. This post was like a breathe of fresh air. Amazingly true, and bold for saying what I’m sure many others are thinking. What saddens me is that when people in a department don’t treat you like the expert you are, how do you expect the clients you service to treat you like an expert.
You’re hired because you’re supposedly competent at your job, your boss and coworkers can’t turn your competence on and off to suit themselves or adjust a situation to their liking.
January 16th, 2009
Karlyn,
I would argue that everyone is an expert in something and to each individual it is in YOUR best interest to exploit that. Now the problem for so many people is their field of expertise might not have anything to do with their job. Like you mentioned it’s all about the side projects. Fire it up girl!
January 16th, 2009
Thanks, Karlyn. Great stuff. I can say that, even when I’ve been the “consultant,” I feel bad when I can see someone’s eyes in the room roll or glaze over. I know they already know what I’m talking about and are sitting there thinking “Yeah, I’ve brought this up 900 times — but now that she’s saying it…”
I used to think about this a lot when I worked as an Admissions Counselor, too. Though it crosses industries, higher ed in particular always leaves me asking: Why do they make it necessary for smart employees to leave in order to move up the ladder? As a result, offices lose great people — experts even — who oftentimes have a great affinity for the institution as well. They also lose the investment they’ve made in terms of that employee’s “learning curve.”
When we held our “iThink” event at least year’s NACAC, someone brought up an interesting point. “I think we’ll start to see more actual managers brought in to head up struggling institutions.”
But I wonder if even that would help what seems to be an endemic problem for any organization.
January 16th, 2009
Here, here, Karlyn! Great post. I was just discussing this same thing with a colleague.
And I can vouch, your boss is awesome at what she does!
Great post.
January 16th, 2009
So very true, Karlyn — both your post and TimN’s corollary.
I’ve managed to break out of the cycle by leaving the marketing/communications groups and going to work for a small student-service center with a big online presence. They NEED me to be the expert because I’m the only full-time tech person there; everyone else is an academic. I don’t threaten my boss because we’re not on the same career ladder.
It’s been fantastic so far. The projects are way more fun than the stuff I was doing when I was working in the Chancellor’s office.
That said… for me, there is no ladder. I can continue collecting pay raises and title upgrades and, to some extent, responsibilities (overseeing the part-time tech staff)… but there is no real advancement in this department. Right now, it’s exactly what I want — fun projects isolated from political bullshit! — but it might not work for a lot of people. Small Department X does not have the cachet of Big Marketing & Communications, even if the underlying technical work is the same.
January 16th, 2009
I know this sounds a little naive, but how does one start going the consulting route?
January 16th, 2009
WOW. Have you been following me around at work? LOL….
I agree and take it another step: those external accolades come around 180 degrees. If you truly are an ‘expert’ and others acknowledge this externally to the point of it becoming a ‘wow’ factor, then internally they could succumb. Or…you get a new even better job out of the external fanfare.
Either way, props to this post for telling it like it is with no ‘rah rah’ work arounds about it.
January 16th, 2009
So much of me wants to disagree with you, Karlyn. But deep down, I totally know it’s true.
In my experience, it comes down to two problems:
1. Experts inside organizations aren’t treated as “authorities” on their expertise. Thus, the necessity to hire consultants to provide the “authority” — for a price. This is a big problem in higher ed since so many managers are also faculty, the sort of people who look for letters after people’s names.
2. Higher ups, unfortunately, speak in their own languages, ones the experts don’t necessarily know. And this is a big frustration if you’re a geek trying to convince a dean that something should be done.
The side project is a great outlet, but over the long term it’s not the solution, unless the side project will never make you money. In the long term, experts should probably be consulting.
January 16th, 2009
Karlyn: That was exactly the story of my former life. Side projects were a great outlet when I was single and working my way up. But, have a family and there’s no time for the side projects. Plus as I became an expert, I started expecting more from my employer…and myself. Offering less than 100 percent of my expertise as a manager was fine to keep my insecure peers at bay, but it sold myself short of reaching my true potential…and having something to show for it. Some folks can be satisfied with that. I wasn’t. I was too young to wind-down my career and too old to deal with the petty politics.
It’s unfortunate that the scenario you painted is too often the reality. I do believe success can be found if colleges discover the value they have within. As a consultant now, I sometimes view what I do as more a political consultant, helping diverse constituencies establish a shared vision and communicate effectively with each other.
January 17th, 2009
[...] role requires different “specific qualities” in order to be effective. For example, you might need to have enough confidence to admit that you don’t know everything. Or you might need to ability to make hard decisions in short times. Or you might need to have [...]
January 17th, 2009
Jeez, I hate to break up the love-fest here, and I thought about just letting this sleeping dog lie. But I disagree with so much about the tenor of this post, as well as the commentary, that I feel compelled to respond. So, get your slings and arrows ready…
Disclaimer: I’m the director of a department. aka a boss. I supervise people. I’ve also been at the same institution since 1991, so I’m what you might call a company man. I’m not offended by Karlyn’s caricature of long-term staff because I know myself, and I’m none of those things. That doesn’t mean I’ve never felt threatened or insecure about the talents of staff who report to me. But I like to think I’ve matured somewhat, thanks to the help of some mentors and a lot of independent study on the subject of organizational leadership.
I for one thrive on working with a talented group of experts — from those who do the graphic design, web design and architecture, writing and editing, photography, video production and coding right down to those who keep the books, manage our projects, answer the phones, greet visitors and manage traffic. I strive to treat everyone by the Golden Rule, and with respect for their individual talents and worth. I try to reinforce that by what I say and do on a daily basis. I frequently miss the mark. I constantly take a self-inventory of my motivations as a director, and adjust my course when I find myself heading in the wrong direction.
Karlyn, maybe when you say that organizations don’t like experts, what you mean is that organizations don’t “respect” experts. I would agree with that as a general rule.
But I wonder: Could the reverse also be true? Could the experts not respect organizations as well? Maybe we should take a self-inventory and ask ourselves: Why are we in the business we’re in? Why am I working in higher education? Whenever I ask myself that question, I remind myself of a quote from William Butler Yeats, that “Education is not the filling of a bucket, but the lighting of a fire.” In my better moments, I remember that the reason I got into this business was because I wanted to be part of a movement that does just that. It’s the same reason I got involved in youth ministry long ago.
If you’re in it for the bandwidth to post updates on your blog, and the path to a lucrative consulting gig, I wish you well but I don’t think higher education needs you. You’re better off being a freelancer. Of course, then you’ll have to worry about things like health and dental coverage, but there are always trade-offs.
I’m certain none of you are as disgruntled with your jobs and your companies as I infer from your comments.
Finally, I detect a trace of hubris in the use of the term “experts.” My ears always tend to bristle whenever I see or hear that term bandied about. Whatever happened to good old-fashioned “competence”?
January 17th, 2009
Andew you’re more than welcome to disagree but based on the length of your reply, I feel as though I’ve struck a nerve here. And maybe managers who are feeling like this is striking a nerve have a reason to feel that way. If there was no truth in what I’m saying, then there’d be no need to have a reaction to it.
****
You say: ” I’m not offended by Karlyn’s caricature of long-term staff because I know myself, and I’m none of those things.”
My response: How dismissive to call it a caricature. Would you disagree that long-term staff get “seniority” based on the term of their service? Or that in many organizations (and I’m not just talking higher ed here), people move up the ladder based on that term of service rather than their actual qualifications?
****
You say: “I strive to treat everyone by the Golden Rule, and with respect for their individual talents and worth.”
My response: That’s YOU. Would you agree that not every director out there is like you? And what about people who DON’T report to you? This isn’t always a problem with direct reports - oftentimes the insecure manager will treat their direct reports better than the people who don’t report to them.
****
You say: “Karlyn, maybe when you say that organizations don’t like experts, what you mean is that organizations don’t “respect” experts. I would agree with that as a general rule.”
My response: No, I said exactly what I meant. I would agree that they don’t respect them, but it goes beyond that. They don’t like experts because experts oftentimes become too much of a pain by upsetting too many insecure managers.
****
You say: “Could the experts not respect organizations as well?”
My response: Sure. But oftentimes, that’s a result of how the organization treats them and happens over time. I can’t imagine the expert would have originally come to work for the organization if they didn’t respect the organization as.
****
You say: “If you’re in it for the bandwidth to post updates on your blog, and the path to a lucrative consulting gig, I wish you well but I don’t think higher education needs you. You’re better off being a freelancer. Of course, then you’ll have to worry about things like health and dental coverage, but there are always trade-offs.”
My response: I find this portion snippy at best. Many higher ed professionals already consult outside of their day job, including me. And thank you, Andrew, for letting me know that if I went out on my own full time I would have to worry about health and dental…you also left out a steady and predictable paycheck…I hadn’t considered those things at all…
*****
You say: “I’m certain none of you are as disgruntled with your jobs and your companies as I infer from your comments.”
My response: I can only speak for myself when I say that I’m not disgruntled at all. Lots of people will assume that this is based directly off of my day job, but those same people probably don’t have lives outside of their day job. I do. And am capable of original thought outside of what goes on in my workplace.
****
You say: “Finally, I detect a trace of hubris in the use of the term “experts.” My ears always tend to bristle whenever I see or hear that term bandied about. Whatever happened to good old-fashioned “competence”?”
My response: I would argue there is a very big difference between competence and expertise. Competence gets the job done. Experts get the job done with the highest possible result. I’m proud to say that I’ve finally reached a point in my life where I feel completely comfortable saying that I am an expert in certain areas. And I’m not going to apologize for it since I’ve worked very hard to get there.
January 17th, 2009
I thank Karlyn for being bold enough to state what many only grumble about behind closed doors. Although there’s quite a bit of truth in her posting, I want to add my own perspective, which differs somewhat. Specifically, Karlyn wrote, “The culture of the organization is never going to change…” In the short run this appears to be true, but in the long run it need not be true at all.
Next week I reach my 20th anniversary working in the alumni profession. I am pretty sure that people who have known me professionally and worked with me would not characterize me as someone who makes sure that things stay the same. You CAN change institutional culture, and you can do it from the inside. In fact, I would say you MUST change institutional culture - it’s an obligation. The world “out there” is changing and our job as administrators in higher ed is to drag the institution with it, while maintaining the foundation needed to support the changed organization.
Despite the fact that many will resist it, you change the organization by 1) setting an example at work that displays your expertise and 2) exerting leadership within the organization, not just on your blog or at a conference. It can be surprising to people who are relatively early on in their careers when, eventually, change comes about, and that it can even happen from the inside. (I don’t know very much at all about Karlyn’s career, so this is not directed specifically at her.)
To the extent Karlyn is right about uncooperative leaders, she is describing a self-fulfilling prophecy: dynamic, creative people get frustrated with senior managers, so they leave before becoming senior managers who would do things differently. QED.
I believe that gradual organic change from within, driven by people who are willing to experiment and who don’t fear failure, can be more lasting and can permeate an organization more fully. But it takes patience, and I don’t blame the many people I’ve known in higher ed who simply got frustrated waiting around and moved on to other challenges and other opportunities. I might yet do the same thing - and yes, I do have a blog, a small amount of consulting, speaking engagements too - and they help make the more routine aspects of daily work more enjoyable. But if in the end the blog, the consulting and the speaking become what “it’s all about,” I will likely be doing my employer (and, I guess, myself) a disservice by staying in a campus setting.
January 17th, 2009
Andy, I will say you hit on a point here where I shouldn’t have made such a pronunciation - you’re absolutely right that organizational culture can change. It just takes a really long time. And you’re right that it has to come from the inside, but I would say it also has to come from the top-down. I’d say that many people aren’t going to stick it out the 5-10 years it really takes to have meaningful and long-lasting organizational change and even if they do, the change will be so subtle and unless you’re having a really generous moment where you’re reminiscing, it’s usually going to seem like you’re nowhere.
January 18th, 2009
Especially in social media and working on the web, the idea of an expert is a threat. It’s viewed as someone who comes along to upset the natural order of things, rather than sitting back and paying their dues.
I think the problems are endemic mostly to the way things are structured and how institutions fail to adapt, than it does anything else.
Heck of a post.
January 19th, 2009
Karlyn - Yes, your post struck a responsive chord. That’s why I responded. And yes, there’s truth in your commentary. I suppose what bugged me the most is how you generalized organizational leaders as fearful of the expertise of those they are charged with leading. I know those managers are out there, and I’ve worked with a few (and at times, have been one myself). It’s also true that in organizations like ours — traditional, hierarchical, command-and-control — the reward structure has benefited those managers who have fallen in line with the organizational culture. Too often, that meant suppressing great ideas or letting them die on their way up the chain of command.
Thankfully, the times they have a-changed. Well, not everywhere. But I’m hopeful that the change in attitudes is coming to higher ed. The current budget crisis may force us to become less hierarchical, more decentralized and networked as organizations, and more welcoming to in-house experts just to survive.
I should consider myself fortunate to be working in a place where the expertise of my department is not only welcome, but sought out. It has taken some time for that to happen, but if good people stick it out long enough and fight hard enough, the day will come.
You’ve got to have the stomach for it, though. I hope some of your readers will stick it out, because academia needs in-house experts. According to some research I have back at the office, we take care of business for 40 percent of the cost of outsourced solutions and in 33 percent of the time — even when you tack on the necessary committee meetings. What bureaucrat can argue with that?
January 19th, 2009
@Andrew,
I think the problem with blogging is that you must generalize because people aren’t going to read a 4000 word post that covers all possibilities. I have no doubt that there are great managers out there - I happen to work for one. Where did that research come from? I think that’s really interesting. Would love to read a blog post by you on it sometime
January 19th, 2009
Karlyn - That research snippet came from an AMA webinar from a few years ago. I don’t have the source handy but will share later. Might even do a post about it, as it’s good fodder for people to use during times like these (when the threat of budget cuts loom).
July 10th, 2010
[...] to lose control. The fact that you are responsible does not mean that you have all the answers. Probably the opposite is true. Status and power, especially those based on past success should make a manager less confident in [...]