Reflections on Machiavelli’s Prince of Chapter 9 ‘Civil Principality’ for an academic that finds themself becoming a manager during a crisis

Abstract

University academics face distinctive challenges when becoming managers of other academics. The following reflection is on my experience of becoming the Academic Lead of our Research Group just before the outbreak of COVID-19. The position here is similar to Machiavelli's Prince of Chapter 9 ‘Civil Principality’, specifically the precarity of an academic of one contract type, being set between the ‘people’ of another contract type who had appointed him by common assent and the ‘nobles’ above who accepted this situation. The threats to the rule of this Prince noted by Machiavelli were revealed as the pandemic set in and its consequences became felt in lives and careers. Machiavelli's recommendation of encouragement, proved difficult to apply during the pandemic. This reflection might be useful for those who find themselves in a similar situation. This is also a unique autoethnographic account of an unusual route into higher education middle management during a global crisis. Currently, there are few firsthand accounts of academic management in higher education during COVID.

Me and the prince of chapter 9

In Machiavelli’s ‘The Prince’, a range of scenarios are presented whereby a person could find themselves in power. Machiavelli's (1998) work is often referred to as a management text. Some directly apply Machiavelli's writing to management in education (e.g. Julius et al., 1999; English, 1992), whereas Buttery and Richter (2002) claimed he is a poor guide for managers. Although indeed, application to management was never his intention, his centring around how power is gained or lost is based on timeless human behaviours. Therefore, his Princes can be analogical models of ways that managers can obtain power within an organisation and what might happen next. The Prince of Chapter 9 presents parallels for those who are chosen by the assent of their colleagues. This can seem ideal. However, advantages conceal complications.

The Prince of Chapter 9 ‘Civil Principality’ comes into power through:

The support of the common people … [who] select one of their number, praise him to the skies, make him a prince.

One moment I was a teaching-focussed Senior Lecturer, in a Research Group at a School of Engineering in Northern England, the next moment, I was the Academic Lead of our Research Group. This was entirely unintentional, what Machiavelli would refer to as ‘Fortuna’ (Harris, 2020) – obtained through unpredictable times and events rather than ingenuity and enterprise. On his way out, the previous Lead had polled my colleagues for who should be his successor. I won by quite a margin. I was briefly paired with a research-focused colleague as co-lead, but after they stepped down, I was solely responsible for a group of 27 full and part-time teaching-focused and research-focused academics. Conditions seemed ideal – common assent, no bloodshed, the people are happy, the Prince is happy (I saw the route to promotion to Reader), he knows the people are on his side, and the nobles allow it. Excitedly, I made a list of the changes I was going to make in my first year. However, by September that year rumours were circulating of people dying from a cough.

My experience relates to contemporary debates around teaching-focussed careers and status in Higher Education (e.g. Anderson and Mallanaphy, 2020), management in academic settings (e.g. Budjanovcanin and Denney, 2021; Schneijderberg and Merkator, 2013; Winter, 2009), hybrid managers and the clashing institutional logics of professionalism and managerialism (e.g. Malhotra and Reay, 2019) and education during Covid (e.g. Harvankova et al., 2024). I became co-lead in March 2019 and my 3 years as a manager were dominated by the progress of the pandemic and the return to ‘normal’. My managerial experience was ended with a sabbatical in September 2022, during which I realised that I was happier not being a Manager in Education.

Problems for the prince

The first may not seem immediately to be a problem:

Therefore, one who becomes a prince through the favour of the people ought to keep them friendly, and this he can easily do seeing they only ask not to be oppressed by him.

I suddenly found myself sitting between the ‘common people’ who had appointed me by assent and the ‘nobles’ who accepted this unconventional situation. The people appointed a friend, who they expected to behave as they had experienced. Their favour is contingent on lack of oppression, but management inevitably involves exertion of power, which can be perceived as unjust and oppressive by some (English, 1992), so an act of managing could reduce initial favour. I wondered – was I appointed so the people could have a friendly person that would leave them alone to get on with their research? Or had I proven my competence and care over the years and earned their assent? Was I permitted for the convenience of the nobles? Might I be some kind of useful idiot? Or was I seen as the right person to stand between them and an unconventional group of individuals?

Secondly;

Such a prince cannot rely upon what he observes in quiet times […] because then everyone agrees with him; they all promise, and when death is far distant they all wish to die for him; but in troubled times […] then he finds but few.

He is appointed at a time that is peaceful and in a positive spirit, loyalty is promised. However, with change, the Prince may find that the promises are worth less and those who promise the loudest can be non-deliverers and lukewarm defenders. Did the peoples’ promise rest on those initial circumstances of the easy pre-Covid times? We now had ‘troubled times’ and death was not ‘far distant’.

The problems manifest

Following the sudden decision to close the university several hours after an email saying it would be staying open, we were consumed with getting our behemoth Master's programme and 100 s of international students online, overnight. Covid unleashed unprecedented, drastic, urgent transitions in pedagogy (Pandya et al., 2022), family (Valsaraj et al. (2021), health, socioeconomics, routines and incomes (Filho, 2021). There were ‘minoritised academics’ (Lahiri-Roy and Whitburn, 2023) in my group, fractional workers and different levels of exposure to Covid threat. Research concerns became peripheral to me, meaning that to some I became a barrier to needed change, creating a perceived oppression through not acting (English, 1992). My concerns grew when I learned that the nobles were bypassing me to deal with people who reported to me, on some strategic matters for post-Covid life. Per Humphreys (2023), the consequential diminishing of the sense of well-being made it harder to put up with each another. Every managerial action was made harder and more likely misinterpreted as oppression, by being distant from those affected. Colleagues had their minds on their own precarity, not so much on how their manager was supporting them while dealing with their own problems (Slaymaker et al., 2023). I was interpreting contradictory senior decision making, incomplete information, conducting recruitment, PDRs and promotions, and negotiating teaching allocations, with uncertain futures. I said goodbye to a dying colleague over MSTeams. Nobody knew this.

Solutions for the prince

Machiavelli proposed a solution for this Prince;

But granted a prince … who, by his resolution and energy, keeps the whole people encouraged – such a one will never find himself deceived in them.

The OED defines encourage as ‘To inspire with courage sufficient for any undertaking’, something done to a person that makes them equal to their challenges. Encouragement is not widely studied in peer-reviewed management literature, mainly featuring in child development, education, counselling or being treated as synonymous with ‘motivation’. Erguner-Tekinalp and Watts (2017) describe it as, ‘a way of being with others that includes both attitudinal and relationship-building skills’. Eckstein et al. (2007) claim that it ‘non-verbally communicates caring and compassion’ and that it ‘activates the desire in others to be more’, but that is not easy when people are challenged by simply trying to be enough. Alternatively, Azoulay (1999) describes encouragement as useful to ‘evoke desired behaviors in the recipient’. Lists of techniques for this, such as Thomas (1995), Julius et al. (1999), and Eckstein et al. (2007) are easiest when in-person with the recipient.

Wong (2015) identifies that encouragement can either be challenge-focused or potential-focused but always has a present or future orientation. However, future orientation requires providing an optimistic vision and strategy rather than a focus on just surviving. Similarly, to be susceptible to encouragement requires an attitude of optimism (Eckstein et al., 2007), difficult when facing an existential crisis. Efforts to encourage can be negated by pessimism from other aspects of life spilling over into professional relationships. Also, during lockdown, people could easily hide from or ignore encouragement efforts, and those who really need it can become invisible.

The encourager

Our ability to encourage is influenced by how we talk to ourselves. My attitude towards myself tends towards ‘Just do your job’. In the voice of Machiavelli, Julius et al. (1999) recommended to ‘declare your program a success’. I successfully led the group and almost 1000 students through 3 years of pandemic, but the ‘just do your job’ mentality made me doubt why I should celebrate doing what I was supposed to do. Perhaps too often I had also extended that attitude towards others and their achievements. Cenkci and Bircan (2024) point out that leaders might play down their emotions and through denying themselves, become lonely leaders.

Something not considered in the literature is the perception others have of the encourager. I was dealing in confidence with colleagues. Eckstein et al. (2007) make the point that such encouragement tends to be private. Consequentially, other colleagues are not aware of the efforts. Vacuums can open up in a crisis and get filled with negative talk. I did not invite feedback. Perhaps that would have given an appropriate forum for feelings. In an informational vacuum, issues can be manipulated in a negative way (Julius et al. 1999) to dissipate a manager's influence, for example, suggesting that a teaching-focussed academic could not ‘understand’ what researchers were experiencing despite me having my own grants and distressed PhD students. Once, during a group meeting, I was drawn into defending the contribution of the teaching-focused academics and out of frustration reeled off a list of things I had done, possibly making others feel less than adequate and a colleague gently chided me. It was unintentionally oppressive.

Bryman (2007) recommends an academic manager to be proactive in advancing the causes of their people, which involves being connected to those who have real power (Samad and Muchiri, 2024) – the trait of a successful Chapter 9 Prince. For me, being outside conversations about the future indicated that my connection to the ‘nobles’ was weakened. Also, what if no one wants to tell the manager about their cause? My enquiries for information that I had a managerial right to became viewed by some with suspicion, even with refusal. I did not want to turn to the nobles because I remembered the assent and I felt sorry that it had to be this difficult. I was aware that as Julius et al. (1999) pointed out, ‘if you ever have to “invoke” your authority, you have, in effect, lost it’.

Conclusions

It is not likely that an academic who comes into management the way of Chapter 9 will reject the opportunity, but if it comes during a crisis, the success prescription for the Prince of Chapter 9 could become impossible, exposing them to threats of the people's changing perceptions and lukewarm defence. This Prince's best chances are in a time of stability. I would advise – crisis or not, to build a culture of encouragement. Keeping ‘the whole people encouraged’ involves creating direction, particularly change that helps the people obtain resources, which is proven to alleviate stress in academics (Chami-Malaeb et al., 2024). This requires knowing their challenge and potential and validating their goals. Do not set yourself as a comparator, instead remind the people of your vulnerability and encourage feedback with careful use of transparency and self-disclosure behaviours (Cenkci and Bircan, 2024). This gives people a reason to keep giving and receiving communication and can still function at a distance. Caring and encouragement is often invisible, so allowing for feedback creates opportunities for this to be heard about, which can remind the people why they agreed to appoint you. Be consistent with the culture – thank people even if you disagree with them, name and story people who have tried, overcome or succeeded, and dignify others, even if they are difficult. Control your reactions to information gathered informally (Julius et al., 1999) or presented unexpectedly and do not be quickly drawn into acting or saying what you are thinking. Celebrate your own wins. Be the source of encouragement.

Therefore a wise prince ought to adopt such a course that his citizens will always in every sort and kind of circumstance have need of the state and of him, and then he will always find them faithful.