I am certain that when law professors say this in this particular context they mean it, but, often, once a dean has been picked and things settle down, change is the very last thing they want. For the successful dean the choice of a school that truly wants to change and is capable of changing is crucial. Thus, it is essential that a would-be dean not simply accept the statements made by faculty and staff during the interview period, but, rather, make a thorough study of the institution and only then make an objective analysis of the institution s capacity to change. Failing to make this analysis can only lead to frustration and failure. Just as the bonsai master cannot shape a limb that will break off under the pressure of the training wire, a new dean cannot force an unwilling institution to make the necessary changes.
Collaboration is all-important.
The similarity between bonsai and deaning does not stop with the choice of a tree or a law school. Just as the bonsai master must study a tree to understand from the tree in what directions it wants to grow, so a law school dean should study the school and decide in which directions it may grow successfully. To take an oversimplified example, a dean of a school with few faculty interested in intellectual property and with a student body that has demonstrated no demand for intellectual property courses, would be ill-advised simply to charge ahead and hire three new professors in this field because intellectual property is the hot new field. To do this invites failure. Instead, the dean must understand that the school must want to grow in this direction and that the job of the dean is to help the school to desire such growth.