Search results

This paper seeks to address the question: should the world's top universities be led by top researchers, and are they?

The lifetime citations are counted by hand of the leaders of the world's top 100 universities identified in a global university ranking. These numbers are then normalised by adjusting for the different citation conventions across academic disciplines. Two statistical measures are used – Pearson's correlation coefficient and Spearman's ρ.

This study documents a positive correlation between the lifetime citations of a university's president and the position of that university in the global ranking. Better universities are run by better researchers. The results are not driven by outliers. That the top universities in the world – who have the widest choice of candidates – systematically appoint top researchers as their vice chancellors and presidents seems important to understand. This paper also shows that the pattern of presidents' life‐time citations follows a version of Lotka's power law.

There are two main areas of contribution. First, this paper attempts to use bibliometric data to address a performance‐related question of a type not seen before (to the author's knowledge). Second, despite the importance of research to research universities – as described in many mission‐statements – no studies currently exist that ask whether it matters if the head of a research university is himself or herself a committed researcher. Given the importance of universities in the world, and the difficulty that many have in appointing leaders, this question seems pertinent.

Many Black women continue to negotiate their way within higher education institutions, which are influenced by social class, race, and gender biases. Several scholars contend that Black women’s objectification as the “other” and “outsider within” (Collins, 2000; Fitzgerald, 2014; Jean-Marie, 2014) is still apparent in today’s institutions yet many persist to ascend to top leadership positions (Bates, 2007; Epps, 2008; Evans, 2007; Hamilton, 2004; Jean-Marie, 2006, 2008). In particular, the inroads made by Black women administrators in both predominantly white colleges (PWIs) as well as historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs) depict a rich and enduring history of providing leadership to effect social change in the African American community (i.e., uplift the race) and at large (Bates, 2007; Dede & Poats, 2008; Evans, 2007; Hine, 1994; Miller & Vaughn, 1997). There is a growing body of literature exploring Black women’s leadership in higher education, and most research have focused on their experiences in predominantly white institutions (Bower & Wolverton, 2009; Dixon, 2005; Harris, Wright, & Msengi, 2011; Jordan, 1994; Rusher, 1996; Turner, 2008). A review of the literature points to the paucity of research on their experiences and issues of race and gender continue to have an effect on the advancement of Black women in the academy. In this chapter, we examine factors that create hindrance to the transformation of the composition, structure, and power of leadership paradigm with a particular focus on Black women administrators and those at the presidency at HBCUs. From a review of the literature, our synthesis is based on major themes and subthemes that emerged and guide our analysis in this chapter. The chapter concludes with recommendations for identifying and developing Black women leaders to diversify the leadership pipeline at HBCUs and other institutions for the future.

This chapter outlines the academic training and career characteristics of institutional leaders (presidents) in three higher education systems in East Asia. These three systems have a large share of private universities, have experienced rapid massification during the last four decades, achieved a global reputation, and have experienced managerial governance since the 1990s. University presidents are elected through faculty voting in most national universities while it is optional for private universities. This chapter uncovers how these three countries differ and are similar in terms of their institutional leaders' training and career development before they were appointed as university president. We found that university presidents are “old” and “male” in these three countries. In addition, their academic disciplines are balanced between hard and soft disciplines. A large number of university presidents are drawn from alumni members in Korea and Japan while this is a relatively uncommon in Taiwan. Their international experience is relatively high in Korea and Taiwan while it is low in Japan. Most university presidents have prior experience in senior leadership positions in Taiwan but much less so in Japan and Korea. Faculty members in Taiwan perceive their senior managers to be more competent than faculty in Japan and Korea.

The purpose of the chapter is to develop a typology of bad behaviors characteristic of governing boards and to compare the bad behaviors identified in the typology to the governing boards’ expected roles and responsibilities. Several examples of bad governing board behaviors that have occurred at historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) are explored through the lens of the typology. The author argues that the bad behavior of governing boards responsible for the nations’ HBCUs inhibits strategic planning, undermines growth and development, and threatens the long-term viability of these institutions. Finally, recommendations intended to minimize the impact of bad board behaviors are proposed.

While there is research that has explored how institutions have responded to various crises, these are usually locally or regionally situated. However, no event has impacted higher education globally like COVID-19 and it will certainly alter the way top administrators lead and how institutions move forward. Thus, this chapter will explore how to better understand how presidents and top administrators navigate the (inter)national geopolitics as they move the institution forward. In addition, clear and up-to-date communication has proven to be important in battling this crisis. Thus, how presidents at national universities have communicated with students, faculty, staff, and various off-campus communities members regarding COVID-19 and how they have achieved is important to explore. Our findings suggest that presidents and top administrators need to build support to help them navigate the political roadblocks they may encounter. Findings also suggest that communication is the main role they play as leaders on their campus. On/off-campus community members see the presidents as the face of the university and key communicator as relates to communicating what the institutions is doing and how they are addressing the crisis. This chapter helps in better understanding the roles presidents and top administrators play during a global crisis.

Turnover of presidents in colleges and universities occurs frequently and new presidents are rarely trained to handle communication with the range of stakeholders involved in a campus community, which is one of the most complex tasks their job requires. New presidents need guidance and insight to prepare them for this vital aspect of campus leadership. The paper aims to discuss this issue.

This paper analyzes interviews with sitting presidents and vice presidents of communication at flagship universities in the USA to identify themes and best practices for presidential communication.

Analysis of interviews resulted in five consistent recommended practices: be informed about your issue and audience; utilize multiple communication channels; know when to speak; identify and use a communication team; and when you speak, use your own authentic voice.

Limited research exists on the communication process and skills needed to effectively lead colleges and universities. While incoming presidents often lack backgrounds and training in communication strategies, such strategies are required to effectively engage both internal and external audiences. The study provides new leaders with tips from seasoned leaders to enhance their communication strategies.