A Qualitative Case Study Exploring the Processes and Criteria for Presidential Leadership Selection in Three United States Higher Institutions of Learning
Background of the Problem Today, research on U.S. higher education presidential search processes is limited, and existing literature characterizes these searches as reactive postures that are secretive, closed-door practices that have not adapted to the early signals of external seismic change. According to Quincy Martin (2021), “the world has evolved (p. 99).” Therein lies the problem. Quincy Martin insists, “Higher education has entered a period of upheaval, aided by new technologies, but hampered by political and cultural shifts. These are only amplified by modern, warp-speed information-sharing practices. All of this has exacerbated the consequences of scandals that threaten the stability of even the most powerful and financially secure institutions” (p. 99). -- Modern change demands that both the selection processes and criteria in institutions of higher learning seriously look at new possibilities. There are pervasive issues within, primarily due to the role in perpetuating the exclusion of marginalized groups, and a continued preference for White male leaders. The old systemic barriers negatively affect numerous stakeholders, including faculty, staff, students, and families. Institutions must face the external realities and restrictions that have come with the upheaval of uncertainty, current innovation trends, shifting demographics, and shifts in the legal landscape. Yet, it is found in studies that search committees often rely on outdated information, processes, and criteria. As a result, presidential selection often fails to prioritize the complex, multifaceted competencies required for effective leadership. Critical information is frequently overlooked, leading to the appointment of leaders who lack political acumen, emotional intelligence, humility, and integrity. Furthermore, challenges are intensified by a shrinking and homogeneous candidate pool. Method This research employed a qualitative methodology using a case study approach. It addressed the questions: How do the presidential select committee chairpersons describe the impact of the selection processes and criteria for presidential candidates of their higher institutions of learning in this era of external seismic change, and how their understanding of the trends in the field that have brought uncertainty (increased institutional competition, duplication pandering, public distrust, political unpredictability, etc.,) and innovative disruption (generative AI), affected their decisions? This study will use raw data from semi-structured interviews. It is crucial to hear and listen carefully to the voices of the presidential selection committee chairpersons. Three individuals were purposefully selected based on their experience in the selection process to take part in this important qualitative study. The real-life social context was the focus, allowing the interpretation of rich, in-depth information gleaned from each participant. Data was analyzed by using matrix analysis and NVivo software to identify key themes and best practices. Every case was explored through the impact of the processes and criteria for search committees facing academic challenges and issues plaguing higher education. Results Research consistently highlights the profound impact of leadership on the success or failure of institutions and organizations. This study has identified best practices in presidential selection processes and the criteria used by higher education institutions. Doing so aims to provide insights to improve selection criteria and processes, ensuring that future leaders possess the necessary qualities for effective institutional leadership. Conclusion Currently, the literature suggests that universities of higher learning are now facing complex issues, must adapt, and take control of their pathways to an evolving future. To deliver their mission of high-quality education, they must be willing to take risks to contribute to progress within the United States society. Leadership is at the core of institutional success. Therefore, selecting leaders must be approached with the utmost seriousness and diligence to ensure that the right individuals are chosen to guide institutions toward growth and excellence.
University President, Leadership, Higher Institution, Selection Process, Educational Leadership, Higher Education Administration
Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations