On campus, though, we tend not to think about service (as a category of faculty work) in this way. Instead, service is both a sacrifice and a demonstration of skill. To be asked to sit on a search committee, for example, implies both that you will give up your time and/or that you have very particular skills to contribute to the committee.
This assumption about service to the college has important implications for the role of the dean, who is often the assigner of tasks like committee service. It is nearly always the case that when I assemble a committee, i am seeking the most highly qualified people to serve there. (I am not alone in choosing in such a way. Every administrator I know does the same.) I have realized in the past couple of weeks that in doing so I am both impeding faculty from learning about the workings of the college and from improving their own set of skills.
This is a particularly troublesome mistake to have made, since our college offers very few systematic opportunities for development. There are lots of opportunities to get involved in the life of the campus, to be sure, but they are nearly all based on interest and by extension expertise. So, if I have interest in sustainability I am a prime candidate for service on the sustainability task force. But we do not have a system by which all faculty and staff face tasks that fall in the "service" category for which they are underprepared. As a resultthe institution fails to help faculty and staff develop the campus-wide perspectives, new sets of skills and the humility that comes from such service.
(The final irony in my oversight is that in serving as Interim Dean of the Bill and Vieve Gore School of Business I am in the midst of one of the rare cases of service as an opportunity for growth available on our campus...)