Few sectors carry as much structural complexity as post-secondary education. Faculty governance, tenure protections, collegial decision-making bodies, unionized staff, graduate student labour, and administrative hierarchies all coexist, often with overlapping and sometimes competing authority structures.
TNZ has worked extensively within this complexity, including institutions such as UBC, SFU, Langara College, Kwantlen Polytechnic University, and Royal Roads University. We understand the particular sensitivity of matters involving academic freedom, the distinct considerations that apply to faculty versus staff complaints, and the governance bodies, such as faculty senates and collegial committees, that may have a role alongside any formal HR process.
Psychological safety has become a particular focus across the sector, as institutions work to balance open academic discourse with genuinely respectful and inclusive workplace and learning environments. We design training and assessment work specifically for this tension, rather than applying a generic corporate psychological safety framework that does not account for academic culture.
What we address
Common challenges in post-secondary institutions
- Distinguishing protected academic freedom from disrespectful or harassing conduct
- Faculty-administration tension over governance, resourcing, or decision-making authority
- Graduate student and research lab power dynamics, an area of growing institutional concern
- Cross-departmental conflict following restructuring or budget pressures
- Psychological safety in environments built around rigorous critique and debate
- Complaints requiring coordination with faculty association or union processes
How we help
How TNZ supports post-secondary institutions
Workplace investigations
Independent investigation of harassment, bullying, or misconduct complaints involving faculty, staff, or graduate students, with appropriate attention to academic governance considerations.
Psychological safety training
Training tailored to academic culture, distinguishing rigorous intellectual challenge from disrespectful conduct, for departments, faculties, and leadership teams.
Leadership development for academic leaders
Coaching and training for deans, department chairs, and academic administrators navigating the particular leadership demands of collegial governance.
Mediation and conflict resolution
Facilitated resolution for faculty-faculty, faculty-administration, or supervisor-graduate student conflict before it escalates to formal process.
In practice
Anonymous case studies
All identifying details have been changed or removed. These examples illustrate the kinds of situations we work with in this sector.
Research University
Situation
A graduate student raised concerns about their supervisor's communication style, describing it as demeaning during lab meetings. The supervisor maintained their conduct reflected normal academic rigour. The department was uncertain whether this constituted a workplace complaint or an academic supervision matter.
Intervention
TNZ conducted an assessment distinguishing the specific behaviours described from legitimate academic critique, interviewing the student, the supervisor, and three lab colleagues. The assessment found a pattern of conduct that exceeded rigorous critique and crossed into personal disparagement.
Outcome
The supervisor participated in coaching focused on feedback delivery in high-power-differential relationships. The department also implemented a lab climate check-in process for all research groups, a recommendation that originated from this case but was applied more broadly.
Polytechnic Institution
Situation
A department had experienced significant tension following a restructuring that merged two previously separate units with different cultures and decision-making norms. Faculty in both legacy units reported feeling disrespected by the other group's communication style.
Intervention
TNZ facilitated a structured series of sessions, first with each legacy group separately, then jointly, to surface the specific cultural and procedural differences driving the friction, rather than treating it as a personality conflict.
Outcome
A joint set of departmental norms was co-developed by faculty from both legacy units. A follow-up session six months later confirmed the norms were being actively used in department meetings.
Common questions
Frequently asked questions
How does TNZ distinguish academic freedom from harassment?
We apply the same legal and evidentiary standards used across our investigation practice, focused on the impact of specific conduct rather than the topic being discussed. Rigorous, even sharp, intellectual critique of ideas is different from personal disparagement, and our investigators are trained to make that distinction carefully.
Can TNZ work alongside faculty association or union grievance processes?
Yes. We regularly coordinate with faculty associations and unions to ensure our process complements rather than conflicts with collective agreement obligations.
Do you have experience with research lab and graduate supervision dynamics?
Yes. The power differential in faculty-graduate student relationships requires particular care, and we have specific experience navigating these dynamics in both investigation and assessment work.
Can training be delivered to a single department or faculty?
Yes. We regularly deliver department- or faculty-specific training rather than only institution-wide sessions, allowing content to reflect the specific dynamics of that academic unit.
Ready to talk?
We offer a complimentary initial consultation to understand your situation and recommend the right approach. No obligation.
Get in touch
