Articles / Leadership Training in Higher Education: Building Academic Leaders
Development, Training & CoachingDiscover how leadership training in higher education develops deans, department heads, and academic administrators with the skills to navigate complex university challenges.
Written by Laura Bouttell • Thu 27th November 2025
Leadership training in higher education prepares academics and administrators to navigate the distinctive challenges of university governance, faculty development, and institutional strategy. Unlike corporate leadership programmes, academic leadership development must address the complexities of shared governance, tenure systems, research cultures, and the fundamental mission of creating and transmitting knowledge.
The stakes have never been higher. Universities face a confluence of pressures that some observers have termed a "perfect storm": shifting demographics, evolving funding models, technological disruption, and increasing scrutiny of higher education's value proposition. Yet despite these challenges, fewer than 16 per cent of institutions have formal succession plans in place. Among large institutions, this figure drops to a mere 3 per cent.
This leadership vacuum presents both peril and opportunity. The impending retirement of the baby boomer generation threatens significant loss of institutional memory and expertise. Simultaneously, it creates unprecedented openings for emerging leaders prepared to step into consequential roles. For those who invest in developing academic leadership capabilities, the pathway to deanships, provostships, and presidencies has perhaps never been more accessible.
Leading in higher education differs fundamentally from leadership in corporate or governmental settings. The university, as Cardinal Newman observed in his classic treatise, exists as a community of scholars pursuing truth—a mission that shapes every aspect of its governance.
Academic leaders must navigate tensions that would perplex their corporate counterparts:
These realities demand leadership approaches that balance vision with consultation, authority with collegiality, and efficiency with deliberation. The academic leader who attempts to impose corporate-style decisiveness typically encounters resistance that ranges from passive non-compliance to outright rebellion.
Research reveals that whilst leadership development activities are prevalent in higher education, few institutions maintain formal succession plans. Academic governance and culture may influence this pattern in several ways:
| Factor | Impact on Succession Planning |
|---|---|
| Search committee culture | External searches viewed as more legitimate |
| Faculty autonomy | Resistance to identifying "chosen successors" |
| Democratic traditions | Preference for open competition |
| Rotating chairs | Leadership seen as temporary duty, not career |
| Lack of HR infrastructure | Limited capacity for talent management |
This underdevelopment creates risk. When key leaders depart unexpectedly, institutions scramble to fill roles with interim appointments whilst conducting lengthy searches. The costs—in lost momentum, strategic drift, and institutional knowledge—accumulate invisibly but substantially.
Several organisations have developed programmes specifically addressing the unique demands of academic leadership. These offerings recognise that effective deans and department heads require capabilities beyond those developed through scholarly achievement.
Center for Creative Leadership (CCL) offers higher education leadership training designed for the unique environment and specific challenges of colleges and universities. Their programmes address building leadership capacity among deans, faculty, and senior academic leaders; developing emerging and mid-level leaders for large private and public university staff; and delivering multi-campus and system-wide leadership interventions.
AASCU (American Association of State Colleges and Universities) provides tailored leadership development programmes that equip college and university leaders to build the skillsets and mindsets required for today's complex higher education landscape. Their programmes serve leaders at all levels—from experienced and aspiring presidents to new provosts to rising stars among faculty and staff.
Big Ten Academic Alliance Leadership Institute houses a portfolio of academic leadership programmes:
Harvard Graduate School of Education offers a credential designed for academic and administrative leaders seeking to deepen their impact. By completing three targeted professional development programmes within 36 months, participants build insight, strategies, and networks to lead effectively.
Academic leadership programmes address distinctive challenges:
| Corporate Focus | Academic Focus |
|---|---|
| Profit maximisation | Mission advancement |
| Direct authority | Influence and persuasion |
| Efficiency metrics | Quality indicators |
| Employee management | Faculty development |
| Competitive strategy | Collaborative partnerships |
| Quarterly results | Generational impact |
The UC Berkeley Executive Leadership Academy, founded to prepare college and university administrators for executive roles, addresses topics including shifts in higher education and leadership, changing funding models, AI use in academia, risk management, fundraising, and governing board relations. These concerns reflect the multifaceted nature of academic leadership.
The department chair occupies perhaps the most demanding leadership role in academia. These individuals must balance scholarly productivity with administrative responsibility, manage colleagues who may have mentored them, and navigate between faculty expectations and institutional requirements.
Department chairs require a distinctive skill set:
Many chairs assume their roles with minimal preparation. The typical trajectory involves scholarly recognition leading to election or appointment, with little formal training for the administrative demands ahead. Leadership development programmes address this gap by providing frameworks, peer support, and practical skills.
Effective chair preparation combines multiple approaches:
The Council of Independent Colleges Senior Leadership Academy exemplifies this comprehensive approach. Since 2010, over 230 participants who completed the programme have experienced career advancement—evidence that structured development accelerates academic leadership trajectories.
Deanships represent a critical transition point in academic careers. The move from department leadership to school or college leadership demands fundamentally different capabilities—broader perspective, more complex stakeholder management, and increased responsibility for strategic direction.
Research into academic leadership identifies several competencies that distinguish effective deans:
"The dean occupies a peculiar position in academic governance—simultaneously the faculty's advocate to administration and administration's representative to faculty."
This dual accountability creates tension that effective deans learn to manage. They must earn faculty trust whilst advancing institutional priorities, often navigating between constituencies with conflicting interests.
The pathway to academic deanship typically unfolds over extended periods:
| Career Stage | Typical Duration | Development Focus |
|---|---|---|
| Faculty member | 5-10 years | Teaching, research, service |
| Senior faculty | 5-8 years | Programme leadership, committees |
| Associate dean | 2-5 years | Administrative exposure |
| Dean preparation | 1-2 years | Formal development programmes |
| New dean | 2-3 years | Role mastery |
Research describes this trajectory as "multi-stage," where progression to each subsequent stage is contingent on meeting certain requirements. The process is largely informal, partly "accidental," and often sponsored by existing leadership or colleagues who recognise potential.
Leadership development programmes can accelerate this journey by providing systematic skill-building that might otherwise emerge only through years of trial-and-error experience.
The university presidency represents the pinnacle of academic leadership—and increasingly, a role that few wish to pursue. The challenges of leading modern institutions have made the position less attractive, whilst the traditional pipeline has narrowed.
The Academy for Innovative Higher Education Leadership, a partnership between Arizona State University and Georgetown University, addresses the competencies required for senior academic leadership:
The UC Berkeley Executive Leadership Academy focuses specifically on preparing administrators to advance into executive roles such as dean, vice president, provost, president, or chancellor. Their curriculum addresses 26 core executive leadership skills, recognising the breadth required at senior levels.
Research suggests that in Western higher education, traditional pathways to the presidency are becoming unsustainable owing to rising demographic and financial challenges. Several factors contribute:
These challenges make leadership development more critical. Institutions must cultivate larger pools of potential leaders, whilst individuals must develop capabilities earlier in their careers to be prepared when opportunities arise.
Whilst some leadership capability develops through institutional experience, external programmes offer perspectives and relationships unavailable internally.
External leadership development offers several advantages:
Academic Impressions, with over 15 years of experience, has helped more institutions develop in-house leadership programmes than any other organisation. Their work reflects growing recognition that leadership development is now a top priority as institutions face increasing challenges and frequent turnover in leadership positions.
Effective institutional support includes:
Advance HE, a UK higher education body, emphasises that modern succession planning must be linked with institutional strategy to be valuable. The goal is a more diverse senior management group with a wider span of competencies and qualities—balancing internal expertise development with bringing fresh perspectives into the organisation.
Whilst external programmes provide valuable development, institutions must also cultivate leadership capacity internally. The most successful universities maintain robust pipelines that identify, develop, and advance potential leaders systematically.
Comprehensive internal programmes typically include:
The Big Ten Academic Alliance programmes exemplify the value of multi-institutional approaches to internal development. By bringing together emerging leaders from across member universities, these programmes create networks that enhance individual development whilst strengthening the broader academic leadership community.
Despite its importance, internal leadership development often encounters resistance:
| Resistance Source | Manifestation | Response Strategy |
|---|---|---|
| Faculty culture | "We hire stars, not grow them" | Demonstrate retention benefits |
| Search committees | Preference for external candidates | Include pipeline development in search criteria |
| Current leaders | Reluctance to share responsibilities | Tie succession planning to performance evaluation |
| HR capacity | Insufficient resources for talent management | Secure dedicated resources |
| Short-term focus | Immediate needs crowd out development | Frame as risk management |
Overcoming these obstacles requires sustained commitment from senior leadership, supported by governing boards who understand the risks of leadership vacuum.
The landscape of higher education leadership continues to evolve, with several trends shaping development approaches.
Contemporary programmes increasingly address:
These emerging priorities supplement rather than replace traditional competencies. Effective academic leaders must master both enduring skills and contemporary challenges.
Leadership development delivery continues to evolve:
These innovations expand access to leadership development whilst creating new possibilities for learning. However, the fundamentally relational nature of leadership means that technology supplements rather than replaces human connection.
Academic leaders typically hold terminal degrees in their disciplines and have established records of scholarly achievement. Beyond credentials, successful leaders demonstrate capabilities in communication, strategic thinking, conflict resolution, and relationship building. Formal leadership development programmes increasingly supplement academic qualifications, with many institutions expecting or requiring leadership training for senior appointments.
Academic leadership programmes range from intensive multi-day workshops to year-long developmental experiences. The Big Ten Academic Leadership Program runs for one academic year, whilst programmes like the Senior Leadership Academy span similar durations. Shorter programmes may address specific skills, whilst comprehensive programmes develop broader leadership capacity over extended periods.
Many successful academic administrators began as faculty members, suggesting that transition is possible with appropriate development. Key success factors include genuine interest in institutional leadership (rather than viewing administration as escape from scholarship), willingness to release faculty identity, and openness to developing new competencies. Leadership programmes help faculty navigate this transition by providing frameworks and peer support.
Mentorship plays a crucial role in academic leadership development, providing guidance that formal programmes cannot offer. Effective mentors help emerging leaders navigate institutional politics, interpret ambiguous situations, and develop their leadership identity. Research indicates that career progression in academia is often sponsored by existing leadership who recognise and nurture potential.
Institutions should invest strategically in leadership development by identifying high-potential individuals early, providing progressive development opportunities, supporting participation in external programmes, creating internal development experiences, and connecting development to succession planning. The investment should reflect leadership development's role as risk management—protecting institutions against the costs of leadership vacuum.
New academic leaders commonly struggle with transitioning from peer to supervisor, managing time across competing demands, navigating complex stakeholder relationships, understanding institutional budgets and resources, and developing appropriate decision-making approaches. Leadership programmes prepare individuals for these challenges, whilst coaching and mentoring support help navigate specific situations.
Ongoing development for academic leaders includes participation in professional organisations, executive education programmes, peer networks, executive coaching, reading and reflection, and seeking feedback. The most effective leaders maintain learning orientation throughout their careers, recognising that the evolving higher education landscape demands continuous capability development.