Search results

The present study investigates the predicting role of institutional leadership competencies (namely, achieving goals and outcomes, leadership and leading change, and integrity and justice) in influencing job performance. It also seeks to examine whether proactive personality moderates the purported relationship.

Data were collected from 103 institutional leaders in various higher education institutions in Malaysia. Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) technique via Smart PLS 2.0 was used to analyze the data and test the hypotheses.

The findings indicate that competencies of leadership and leading change and integrity and justice significantly and positively influenced job performance. Proactive personality was found to significantly moderate the relationship between leadership and leading change dimension and job performance.

This study contributes to the literature by assessing leadership competencies as the predictors of job performance. The moderating role of proactive personality is also substantiated in the leadership and leading change dimension and job performance linkage.

The significant and positive impact of leadership and leading change as well as integrity and justice on job performance suggests the importance of these leadership competencies in promoting high level of job performance among institutional leaders. Furthermore, in ensuring high job performance among institutional leaders, proactive personality is a crucial attribute that is worth to be given attention by higher education institution (HEI) administrators.

This study aims to provide additional empirical evidence in the leadership competencies domain. The research framework of this study managed to substantiate empirical evidence in partial support on the importance of leadership competencies and proactive personality in predicting job performance.

The Food Systems Leadership Institute (FSLI) is a 2-year leadership development program consisting of 3 intensive in-person immersion retreats, and a robust and customizable distance-based program. Participants come primarily from land-grant and public universities and learn about personal, organizational and system leadership with a focus on food systems as an organizing theme. For this study, program graduates from FSLI Cohorts 4-6 (n=60) were asked to complete an online retrospective pre- and post-test of skill competency and skill use for 20 competencies addressed in the program, with 47 (78%) completing the survey. Data indicate participants’ ratings of skill competency increased significantly across all 20 targeted areas.Participants further noted that they used these skills more after completing the program as compared to prior to the Fellowship training. Data suggest the FSLI model of leadership development can have a significant impact on participants’ perceived skill level in and use of important skills in both personal and organizational leadership in academic and food system settings.

The purpose of this research is to set out to investigate the role of the Pro‐Vice‐Chancellor, Rector, or Principal of a university, and the competencies (attitudes, knowledge and behaviour) that are needed for effective leadership in higher education.

Semi‐structured interviews were held with Pro‐Vice‐Chancellors at ten UK universities representative of the sector.

Most respondents perceived that academic credibility and experience of university life were crucial for effective leadership in higher education, and continued with their research and teaching activities alongside their managerial roles. People skills, including the ability to communicate and negotiate with others, were also felt to be important. Most universities in the study had no systematic approach for either identifying or developing leadership skills.

Although this was a relatively small study, the research highlights the need for a more proactive approach to identifying leadership competencies and developing leadership throughout universities.

The effective leadership and management of universities is a crucial issue for policy makers, leaders themselves, and for university staff. The research shows that university leadership is fundamentally different from leadership in other contexts, and demands additional competencies. It adds to debates about whether leaders in higher education should be academics, or professional business administrators.

This chapter presents five differentiated models of curriculum, each designed with templates created from learning theories. The discipline of distributed leadership is chosen to develop a cognition-based curriculum, a behavior-based curriculum, a performance-based curriculum, a values-based curriculum, and collectively arranged into a competency-based curriculum. The research literature frames the attributes of a competency-based curriculum on psychological competence.

In this chapter, curricula are developed to demonstrate the process of adapting theories of learning, instruction, and environment into design templates with which to differentiate the dimensions and components of a curriculum. In these curricula, multiple conceptual frameworks are employed to translate the content and structure of the discipline into instructional objectives, instructional engagement, instructional experience, and instructional environment to align the instructional processes with the intended learning. For these demonstrations, the discipline of organizational leadership is chosen due to the multidimensional structure of this discipline and the opportunities it presents to differentiate the curriculum and learning. Each component of the curriculum adapts an appropriate framework to align and interconnect the instructional processes into an optimized learning experience. The result is curricula that have a coherent flow horizontally across the components for each outcome as well as interconnectedness vertically between the outcomes. This approach creates coherence, alignment, and interconnectedness to the curricula and order to the learning process for the learners.

This methodology is applied to design the curriculum for five instructional modules. Module 1 focuses on dualistic thinking developed through a cognition-based curriculum. Module 2 presents a multiplistic learning experience through a behavior-based curriculum. Module 3 presents relativistic learning through a performance-based curriculum. Module 4 delivers complex learning through a values-based curriculum. Module 5 compiles these four modules into a competency-based curriculum model.

Each of these modules employs a unique set of theories to configure the components of the curricula to reflect the structure of each discipline. The use of each theory is explained and demonstrated in the design process.

In this chapter, each of the completed models of curriculum is presented and evaluated using criteria from the attributes of effective curricula discussed in Chapter 1. Explanations of the design strategies that are used to demonstrate each attribute in a differentiated manner are included. The evaluation process provides an evaluation methodology to demonstrate the effectiveness of each model of a curriculum in a credible and trustworthy way.

In the previous chapters, the individual parts of the curricula were configured, aligned, and interconnected to deliver specific outcomes in each learning module. In this chapter, the components of each curriculum are assembled into one table to exhibit the order contained within each learning module within the overall curriculum. The standards for curricular attributes adopted at the beginning of the design process are the criteria for the evaluation of the completed curriculum. The strategies used to configure the components of each curriculum provide evidence of the curriculum’s characteristics, which demonstrate compliance with each criterion.

The evaluation of these attributes within a curriculum serves several purposes. First, they provide a checklist to guide the design process toward curricula that reflect these standards as developed by the profession of curriculum design in higher education. Second, they provide a measurement of the attributes of the curriculum to demonstrate the compliance of each curricular design with conventional standards. Third, these measurements can be compared with other institutional data to uncover correlations between the design assumptions and learner performance. These correlations often reveal unanticipated results, which inform the effectiveness of the instructional system.

These criteria are applied to the evaluation of the curriculum for each module to demonstrate the diverse manner in which each can be achieved in a discipline-specific manner. The compliance with these criteria is explained to be a matter of demonstration, as used in the discipline of qualitative research. These qualitative evaluations can then be compared with other operational data to understand the effectiveness of the design assumptions for each curriculum.

Superior leadership in higher education makes the difference between institutions that merely survive and those that can truly thrive in today's complex environment. At this time of significant transformation in higher education, academic leaders face intensifying institutional, environmental, and societal challenges, yet colleges and universities often devote limited attention to integrating their approaches to the selection, development, evaluation, and recognition of leaders. Moreover, traditional approaches and criteria used in the selection of academic leaders are often inadequate for predicting their success. Through the process of organizational and leader profiling, as described in this chapter, institutions can better understand the landscape in which the leader will be functioning, providing a more contextualized and useful approach to leader selection, development, evaluation, and recognition.

Problems of competence grow out of institutional culture and from the way these institutions shape the profession and its members. Toward that end, this chapter is organized around three general considerations. First, we discuss some general issues about leader quality. Second, the present shape of the leadership corps in higher education will be discussed. Finally, we introduce several 21st century leadership core competencies (Brooks & Normore, 2009) for consideration to hiring personnel so they do not repeatedly select and promote unqualified leaders who stifle creativity and encourage conformity.

The purpose of this study is to examine how the process of creating and implementing sustainability competencies across a university illuminate dynamics of organizational change. The push to advance education for sustainable development in higher education will likely require transformation of existing policies and practices. A set of shared sustainability competencies could guide the integration of sustainability throughout an institution.

This paper reports on a case study of one US university, the University of New Hampshire (UNH) that developed institutional-level sustainability competencies. The process used to create and implement sustainability competencies is outlined, and key factors that influenced the associated organizational change are identified.

Very few US universities have institutional-level sustainability competencies. At UNH, drivers of organizational change such as overcoming disciplinary boundaries, developing a common vision and working from the bottom-up enabled the creation of institutional sustainability competencies, but the same processes were not enough to drive deeper implementation of the competencies.

This paper not only identifies the context-specific drivers of the development of institutional sustainability competencies, but also identifies universal themes that can be applied to other institutions embarking on a similar process. Additionally, this paper serves as a foundation for future research exploring how the process of creating institutional sustainability competencies may be linked to how effective they are in shaping subsequent sustainability education.