Our Mission
is to educate the overprivileged so they may better serve the affluent in order to maintain class distinction.

I have not seen this mission statement in any form or context, within any institution of higher learning; yet I believe it could be applied to some, and perhaps many. And if we changed "the overprivileged" to "everyone" it could also be applied to much of our primary and secondary education.

This is not a condemnation of our educational system. This is a condemnation of us. We have transformed education into a customer experience, and, as with any market transaction, the ability to pay and/or the confidence that one will add or create value that maximizes short-term profit, takes precedence over the risk associated with long-term investment in an unproven commodity. No matter the inclusion and equal opportunity rhetoric, the resources will follow the money; most specifically, the short-term return on investment.

So what can we do?

Say, for example, we are selecting candidates applying to a high-demand graduate program, and within our stated vision and objectives we include: consideration for the underserved, valuing diversity, lifelong learning, compassion, and leadership. How do we find candidates who can live up to these subjective expectations? We will learn nothing about compassion or leadership by looking at an individual's GPA, and we won't learn much more by tossing in # of volunteer hours or even # of applicable work hours. To more completely gauge these complex and personal characteristics requires a much greater depth of scrutiny; and to dig deeper requires a larger mechanical and logistical investment. So, to mitigate the risk of a long-term investment with an uncertain return, I believe we must invest more heavily in process and system. I believe this applies to any effort to increase productivity and prowess, but doubly so when the outcome of our effort is the selection and/or advancement of a person or people. Put another way, the process and system to sell six million burgers in a day does not need to account for the intellectual, emotional, or spiritual inclinations of each burger, thereby requiring less complexity.

Once started though, this effort to enhance outcomes, (considering or not the unpredictability of human behavior), becomes a never-ending cycle; beginning with A) identification of relevant data, which requires B) the recording/processing of that data, which requires C) creating a system for comparative measurement of all collected data, which encourages D) analyzing and interpreting the systematized data, which brings us full circle to begin again with A) identifying new relevant data brought to light by the analysis and interpretation.

If we are serious about our stated values and vision (especially as they involve people), whether we are a small business, an institution of higher learning, or a nation, I believe we must invest in and constantly refine process effectiveness and system efficiencies to maintain integrity and relevance.

Or, if we are okay with pampering the overprivileged, maintaining class distinction, and paying lip service to equal opportunity, then we can stop at Step C above and pretend to enjoy our bland, facile, prefab hamburgers.

I am happy to say, I work for an institution of higher learning that backs up their stated purpose with appropriate investment.