Citation
Preparing the mind of the organization through leadership practice

Material Information

Title:
Preparing the mind of the organization through leadership practice
Creator:
Viveiros, Nelia ( author )
Place of Publication:
Denver, Colo.
Publisher:
University of Colorado Denver
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
1 electronic file : ;

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
School principals ( lcsh )
Educational leadership ( lcsh )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
theses ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Review:
This dissertation expands upon previous studies on the leadership practices of school principals leading successful schools, focusing on a leader in public higher education. This study follows the actions of Leader X, chosen as the case-study subject and who, through intentional leadership practice, is attempting to shift the course of a public higher education research organization. The conceptual framework for this study was constructed by former doctoral researchers and derived from the work of Spillane, Halverson & Diamond (2001; 2004) on the leadership practice triangle. A definition of a higher education leadership practice is thus constructed to provide an analytical framework that describes the leader’s practice within an higher education organization. A literature review provided the emergent body of research on higher education leadership practices, and the findings of this study were used to form member-check interview protocol questions. Member-check interviews were conducted with 40 organizational members. Additionally, emergent coding was conducted with 45 documents and 3.5 hours of video footage, supported by extensive field notes, collected through the period January 1, 2016, through August 1, 2017. This research yielded tone-setting themes, vision sharing, and goal setting, engaging the workforce through various tools and activities. Also shown was the importance of time-bounded leadership practices that helped Leader X prepare the mind of the organization for change.
Thesis:
Thesis (M.S.)--University of Colorado Denver
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references.
System Details:
System requirements: Adobe Reader.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Nelia Viveiros.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Colorado Denver
Holding Location:
Auraria Library
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
on10611 ( NOTIS )
1061150686 ( OCLC )
on1061150686

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text
PREPARING THE MIND OF THE ORGANIZATION THROUGH LEADERSHIP
PRACTICE
by
NELIA VIVEIROS B.S., Temple University, 2000
M.Sc., London School of Economics and Political Science, 2001 L.L.B., University of London, 2013
A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Colorado in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctorate of Education Leadership for Educational Equity Program
2018


2018
NELIA VIVEIROS ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
11


This thesis for the Doctor of Education degree by Nelia Viveiros has been approved for the Leadership for Educational Equity Program
by
Connie L. Fulmer, Chair Rodney Blunck Callie Rennison
Date: May 12, 2018
in


Viveiros, Nelia (Ed.D., Leadership for Educational Equity Program)
Preparing the Mind of the Organization Through Leadership Practice Thesis directed by Professor Connie L. Fulmer.
ABSTRACT
This dissertation expands upon previous studies on the leadership practices of school principals leading successful schools, focusing on a leader in public higher education. This study follows the actions of Leader X, chosen as the case-study subject and who, through intentional leadership practice, is attempting to shift the course of a public higher education research organization. The conceptual framework for this study was constructed by former doctoral researchers mid derived from the work of Spillane, Halverson & Diamond (2001; 2004) on the leadership practice triangle. A definition of a higher education leadership practice is thus constructed to provide an analytical framework that describes the leaders practice within an higher education organization. A literature review provided the emergent body of research on higher education leadership practices, mid the findings of this study were used to form member-check interview protocol questions. Member-check interviews were conducted with 40 organizational members. Additionally, emergent coding was conducted with 45 documents and 3.5 hours of video footage, supported by extensive field notes, collected through the period January 1, 2016, through August 1, 2017. This research yielded tone-setting themes, vision sharing, and goal setting, engaging the workforce through various tools and activities. Also shown was the importance of time-bounded leadership practices that helped Leader X prepare the mind of the organization for change.
The form and content of this abstract are approved. I recommend its publication.
Approved: Connie L. Fulmer
IV


DEDICATION
To Jose Da Ponte Viveiros, father, mentor, explorer, supporter and believer, and to Cesaltina de Limamother, contrarian and teacher. Because of you, I am here today. You have never beennor will you ever beforgotten.
v


ACKNOWLEDGEMENT S
The names of those to whom I am greatly appreciative would fill several pages. Thank you to my dissertation committee and especially to my chair, Dr. Connie Fulmer, mid to my cohort six doctoral family and to my extended family both at work and abroad. You know who you are. Thank you as well to the subject of, and inspiration for, this dissertation. That higher education leader allowed me to study, analyze mid dissect their leadership practice from beginning to end. I am very grateful to them and continually inspired by all they do! And to my immediate loved ones, without whose support all of this simply would not be possible, my heart mid my eternal gratitude are yours forever.
vi


CONTENTS
CHAPTER
I. INTRODUCTION 1
Purpose of Study 1
Research Questions 2
Conceptual Framework 2
Significance 3
Assumptions for This Research Study 4
Limitations 6
Operational Definitions 6
Summary 8
II. LITERATURE REVIEW 10
The Distributed Leadership Model Applied to Higher Education 10
What the Literature Tells Us About Leadership mid Leading 13
The Context of Leading a Public University 15
Defining a Leadership Practice Construct for Higher Education 21
A Proposed Conceptual Framework for Leading in Higher Education 23
Definition of a Leadership Practice in Higher Education 25
Summary 27
III. METHODOLOGY 29
Research Design 29
Description of the Study Site 30
Unit of Analysis 31
vii


Role of the Researcher
32
The Researcher as an Instrument 32
Data Collection 35
Description of Artifacts Collected and Categorized 35
Documents, Including Speeches, Conversations mid Minutes 36
Media and Video Files 36
Observations 37
Research Question 1 38
Research Question 2 38
Research Question 3 39
Research Question 4 39
Data Analysis 40
How the Data Were Grouped 40
Iterative Analysis 41
Coding Inventories 42
Analysis of Member Checking 43
Groups for Member Checking 44
Campus Xs Leader 44
Campus Xs Leadership Team 44
Campus X Teams 45
Member Check Protocol 46
Interview Questions 47
Issues of Privacy, Access and Transparency 48
viii


Definition of Leadership Practice Used 49
Trustworthiness of Data 49
Summary 50
IV. FINDINGS 52
Research Question 1 52
Research Question 2 55
A Leadership Practice Circle Uncovered 58
Work Focus of the Leadership Practice 60
Articulating a Campus-Specific, Unifying Direction mid Vision 61
Elevate Student Success 66
Advance Excellence in Teaching mid Research 71
Innovate for Long-Term Financial Stability and Sustainability 73
Strengthen Our Position as one of the Citys and Regions Vital Assets 75
Create a More Cohesive, Collaborative and Inclusive Campus Culture 77
Tools 79
Data 80
Embedding Mechanisms 82
External Facilitators 85
General Skills and Traits 86
Messaging mid Communication Plans 87
Policy and Procedure Changes 88
Sales mid Storytelling 91
Activities 96
IX


Events and Building Cultural Space
96
Leadership Meetings 100
Leadership Retreats, Member Checks mid Partnership Building 101
Use of Teams 103
Proximal Goals 107
Distal Goals 108
Research Question 3 109
The Phases of Change at Campus X: Phase I 112
Phase II at Campus X 113
Phase III at Campus X 114
Phase forward: Change Measurement 115
Member Checking with Leader X 116
An Applied Definition of Leadership Practice in Higher Education 117
Definition of a Leadership Practice in Higher Education 118
Research Question 4 119
Summary 127
V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 129
Summary of Research Study 129
Conclusions 132
Summary of Key findings 132
Relationship of Key findings to Literature 135
Implications of findings 139
Recommendations 141
x


Recommendations for Public Higher Education Leaders 141
Recommendations for Higher Education Leader Preparatory Programs 143
Recommendations for Future Research 144
Final Thoughts 145
REFERENCES 147
APPENDIX
A. Post Card Consent 153
B. Artifact/Document Review Questionnaire Adapted from Merriam (1998) 154
C. Campus Xs Leadership Practice Tools and Activities in Focus 156
D. Coding Table 158
E. Examples of Proximal and Distal Goal Setting at Campus X 163
xi


LIST OF TABLES
TABLE
1. A Proposed Leadership Practice Model at Campus X 26
2. Member Check Questions 48
3. Comparable IPEDS Student Common Data Set 53
4. A Derived Leadership Practice Logic Model for Campus X 61
5. Leadership Practice Model: Campus Vision Work Focus 61
6. Leadership Practice Model: Elevate Student Success Work Focus 67
7. Leadership Practice Model: Advance Excellence in Teaching and Research Work
Focus 72
8. Leadership Practice Model Table: Financial Sustainability Work Focus 74
9. Leadership Practice Model Table: City and Region Vital Asset Work Focus 76
10. Leadership Practice Model Table: Campus Culture Work Focus 78
11. A Monthly Example of Tools Used in January 2017 80
12. Summary Data of Member Checking 120
13. Member Check Results Data: Research Question 1 121
14. Member Check Results Data: Research Question 2 122
15. Member Check Results Data: Research Question 3 123
16. Member Check Results Data: Research Question 4 124
17. Before-and-After Employee Sentiments 126
xii


LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE
1. Components of a higher education strategic plan 22
2. Leadership practice conceptual framework 24
3. Pictures from a leadership retreat held March 23, 2016 64
4. Cover example with note from Campus Xs leader 90
5. A-cappella group at Campus X branding launch event 98
6. Students posing at Campus X branding launch event 98
7. Hip-hop dancers and Leader X at a branding launch event 99
8. Team-building night at a sports event, February 2017 100
9. Picture of Campus X strategic priorities at a leadership retreat, July 2016 102
10. Placard placed at a board roundtable retreat 103
11. Pictures taken at various leadership team retreats 104
12. Picture of a team member taken in July 2016 106
13. Campus X distal and proximal goals snapshot 109
14. Campus X leaders strategic prioritization timeline 112
15. New conceptual framework 118
xiii


CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
In a higher-education environment that has become crowded and capriciously funded, it is more imperative than ever for universities to differentiate themselves and invest in their strengths. That is the backdrop for a movement occurring across higher education.
Institutions are becoming more intentional, more focused on identifying the students they seek to serve, mid delivering the most relevant academic programs possible.
Purpose of Study
The purpose of this study was to investigate the specific and particularized leadership practice used by the leader of Campus X to prepare the mind of the organization for the change required to ensure success in a turnaround effort for Campus X. This study was also an opportunity to contribute to the literature on the leadership practice construct, with a specific higher-education focus on higher education that builds upon case studies focusing on leadership in K-12 educational organizations. Leadership is commonly seen as an important variable that affects organizational performance. While the concept of leadership has been extensively studied, there is still much to be discovered regarding how leadership directly affects organizational climate, culture and performance (Avey, Wemsing & Luthans, 2008; Eilers & Camacho, 2007; Judge & Piccolo, 2004; Schyns & Schilling, 2013). In early 2016, a new leader took the helm of Campus X. Very early on, this new leader was tagged as possessing the leadership qualities needed to move the campus forward in a way that had not yet been done. Leader Xs plan for change began the moment they set foot on Campus X.
Six months into this leaders tenure, a campus-wide revision strategy, including six strategic priorities, had been developed. This research identified the specific mid particularized
1


leadership practice used in an effort to achieve these goals.
Research Questions
The research questions that guide this study in identifying the particularized leadership practice used by a leader of a public higher-education campus are listed below.
1. What did Leader X find when they arrived at Campus X?
2. What did Leader X do to overcome the issues they found?
3. On the basis of a literature review mid the evidence of change effort gathered in this work, what is an applied definition of leadership practice in higher education?
4. How did Leader Xs leadership practice prepare the mind of the campus to achieve six strategic goals?
Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework that guides this study was derived from the literature mid enhanced by researchers Bishop (2013), Holloway (2013) and Rubin (2013), who examined the leadership practices of principals leading successful schools serving ELL (English Language Learner) students in low-performing schools. The conceptual framework was a leadership practice construct. These researchers traced the evolution of the term leadership practice from early mentions in the literature to its further development by Spillane, Halverson & Diamond (2004) and used it as a conceptual framework to unpack the work of successful principals. The development of how the conceptual framework was derived from this prior work, mid how it was built to examine this bounded case study, is detailed in chapter II. Prior doctoral researchers examined the work on the interactions between leader, followers and organizational context, as specified in the work of Spillane, Halverson & Diamond (2001; 2004); they found that the successful leaders they studied used tools and
2


activities as well as proximal goals to achieve a desired end, or distal goals. The researchers argued that these components needed to be added to the leadership practice construct that was used to study successful leaders in the K-12 arena (Bishop, 2013; Holloway, 2013; Rubin, 2013). This study used this conceptual framework to investigate the leadership practice used in higher education by Leader X.
Significance
This work charts, through a bounded case study, a campus leaders desire to reverse negative organizational outputs through an intentional leadership practice and shift the course of a public, urban, higher-education research organization. Tight (2004) has called the field of higher education an atheoretical community of practice. It has become even more complex as higher education organizations continue to respond to an ever-more-diverse student body and array of demands from its stakeholders. The natural shift has been from collegial decision-making toward managerial-corporate models. This move has not been welcomed in certain parts of the higher education sector and tends to be enacted with ideological expectations of collegiality, participation and collaborative decision-making (Bimbaum, 1988; Block, 2002; Bolden, 2004; 2011). And while inferences can be made, for example, about how current leadership models can be applied to higher education, a key problem is that little is known about what exactly makes an individual effective (or ineffective) as a higher education leader and what practices of that leader make it so. This is important to know in higher education. Higher education leaders run complex organizations; they face the complexity of operating according to market pressures, despite an ever-dwindling public purse, while also managing the differentness of the higher education space (Jones, Harvey, Lefoe & Ryland, 2014; Tight, 2004; van Ameijde, Nelson, Billsberry
3


& van Meurs, 2009; Ylijoki, 2003). Complexity and diversity are inherent in the higher education sector, making the leadership of it a complex, multifaceted process (Bimbaum, 1988).
While the reasons for such complexity may be many, it is clear that higher education has not traditionally been a go-to place for self-reflection on leadership practices and/or organizational change (Bimbaum, 1988; Kezar & Eckel, 2002). This study attempts to close this gap. This research looks at one particularized urban campus using a bounded case-study approach that prevents generalized findings; at the same time, the findings that do emerge may ultimately inform future research on intentional and particularized leadership practices, strategic decision-making, organizational change, and outcomes and effectiveness in higher education. Thus, two developments in this research could have important implications for further study. First, systematic research on leadership practice and outcomes in higher education is needed. Second, the research in this area can be used as a training tool to develop the principles of leadership practice effectiveness for higher education.
Assumptions for This Research Study
Setting goals, whether they are called plans, strategic plans, priorities or something else, suggests change for the organization. Change is, at its core, a people process, and people are creatures of habit, hardwired to resist adopting new mindsets, practices, and behaviors (Schneider, Ehrhart & Macey, 2013; Senge & Crainer, 2008; Sharma & Kirkman, 2015; Smith, 2001; Smollan, 2015; Wittig, 2012). To achieve strategic, systemic, sustainable, transformational change, organizations must embed these mindsets, practices, and behaviors at every level (Bamch & Lambert, 2007; Basham, 2012; Denison & Mishra, 1989). The elephant in the room when it comes to organizational change is this: most change initiatives
4


are done to employeesnot implemented with or £y them (Wittig, 2012). Having something one endures, versus something one buys into, changes the approach with which one views the task. An informal culture left to instinct and survival will likely dig in its heels mid resist change (Schein, 2010; Senge & Crainer, 2008). This means that effective change programs must include, along with strategy mid central planning, elements of the informal organization (Schein, 1993, 2010; Yukl, 2006).
Change, strategic prioritization/planning/re-visioning, and goal setting are different ways to describe the same thing. As with any management tool, goal settingsometimes called strategic planning or re-visioningis used to help chart a course so that the organization can do a better job of focusing its talents mid employees, and to adjust the organizational compass to a changing environment. Because strategic planning is about fundamental decisions and actions, the plan that accompanies it usually involves organizational discomfort (i.e., change). Prioritizing mi operational strategy is the fundamental concept that defines the organizations reason for existence. It represents the personality of the organizationits raison detre. In strategy prioritization, one always answers the following questions: (a) Why does the organization exist? (b) What business are we in? (c) What customers) do we serve? As such, this work is often synonymous with organizational change (Morgan, 1993). Strategic prioritization planning is synonymous with change because, by default, it encompasses the process by which mi organization changes its current or future structures, strategies, operational methods, technologies, or organizational culture(s) inorder to affect change within the organization (Kezar & Eckel, 2002; Kotter & Schlesinger, 1979; Morgan, 1993).
5


Limitations
This study is limited in scope, as it examines data from one participating public higher education institution (Campus X) undergoing change in the early stages of a new leaders tenure. The sample size is thus small mid limited to the campus boundaries.
Operational Definitions
The operational definitions for the scope of this study are listed below. This author recognizes the limitations and debate over terms and definitions.
Activities/Tools: Just as leadership happens in everyday practices, tools and activities are part of that practice. Tools and activities are enacted through formal routines mid informal interactions, and can include but are not limited to memos, scheduling procedures, agendas, policies, procedures mid evaluation protocols.
Change: Change is used synonymously with strategic planning, re-visioning, goal setting and prioritization in the case of Campus X; as with any management tool, Leader Xs strategic planning is recharting a course so that the organization can do a better job of focusing on its talents mid employees, and adjust the organizational compass to a changing environment (Hanover Research, 2014). The tools and activities as part of goal setting tell the story of Leader Xs particularized leadership practice and how this strategic planning is carried out.
Distal Goals: These are long-term or primary goals. In the case of Campus Xs leader, these were five stated priorities.
Leadership Context: In a recent survey of theory and practice in leadership, Northouse (2004) concluded that there are almost as many different definitions of leadership as there are people who have tried to define it (p. 2). Northouse defines leadership as a
6


process by which an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve common goals (p. 4). The term followers is used to describe those whom the leader is attempting to influence. The term subordinates is often used in organizational settings, but followers suggests that leaders can be in any role or position, and a bureaucratic hierarchy is not necessarily implied (Nussbaumer & Merkley, 2010).
Leadership Practice: The intentional mid particularized plan that a leader determines and implements (a) includes collaborative work by the leader mid followers within the context of the work environment, (b) is focused in specific work areas (which in this study are the five strategic goals), mid (c) uses tools and activities that result in the achievement of both proximal mid distal goals.
Navigator: In change management parlance, navigators generally hold a type of director role. The leader used a navigator on each initial work team ostensibly to help run through the right processes to navigate implementation of the work team product.
Organizational Culture: The term culture has a long history in anthropology. Pettigrew introduced the topic to organizational studies in 1979 and legitimized its use (Lok & Crawford, 1999; Yukl, 2006). According to Yukl (2006), the concept of belief, ideology, language, ritual and myth could be applied to the study of organizations. Schein (2010) built on this concept by proposing three levels of organizational culture: artifacts, espoused beliefs and values, and underlying assumptions. The idea of culture can describe how organizational members go about their day-to-day work lives; it cannot be easily articulated and requires in-depth interviewing to illuminate its attributes.
Proximal Goals: Proximal goals are best described as progress markers that provide specific performance or attainment information that is not available through distal goals
7


alone. The theory that proximal goal setting aids strategy better than distal goal setting alone is supported by research (Bandura & Schunk, 1981; Cato & Gordon, 2012). Proximal goals are said to help develop self-efficacy mid intrinsic motivation and can help produce more positive goal attainment over the course oftask engagement (Bandura & Schunk, 1981; Wigfield & Eccles, 1992).
Strategic Goals and/or Priorities: In March 2016, Leader X held an initial session with campus leadership before a spring board of trustees meeting to develop what would become five campus strategic priorities. These were intended to set the tone for a shared campus-specific vision.
Validator: In the words of Campus Xs leader, each working group was supported with validators to serve as subject matter consultants (Email from Leader X, July 14,
2016).
Work Groups/Action/Steering Teams: Work/action/steering teams played a particularly important part in this study as these tools were used by Campus Xs leader as the focus for realizing distal and proximal goals. Groups are essential management tools in any organization. Teams were brought together by Leader X to work on novel problems to deal with mission-critical decisions. Initially, this included five working groups, four action teams, a faculty/administrator student success partnership committee, campus leadership and Leader Xs cabinet.
Summary
As noted earlier, Campus Xs strategic prioritization first involved corralling people, listening, distilling, synthesizing mid then selling the need for change and a new direction. According to Schein (2010), the need for change must be grounded in data and sold to the
8


organization. This chapter began with a description of how a listening-distilling exercise began mid then described the purpose of this work: to contribute to the emergent literature on leadership practice and describe the significance of this bounded case study to the area of intentional leadership practice in higher education. This concept brings together disparate areas of research and includes the impact and importance of leadership practice on organizational change. Campus Xs new leader made deliberate choices regarding the strategy chosen to achieve stated priorities; put a certain leadership style in place; mid determined that the organization needed to changeall within the context of the existing Campus X culture. What intentional leadership practice did Leader X engage inwhat work foci, tools, activities, distal and proximal goalsdid Leader X use to refocus the mind of the organization toward change? Answering those questions is the primary focus of this work.
9


CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter presents a review of literature regarding leadership in higher education and the emergence of a leadership practice construct. The areas of research outlined include (a) the distributed leadership model applied to higher education, (b) what former leadership practice researchers found about leading, (c) what research tells us about leadership and leading, (d) the context of leading a public university, mid (e) a proposed conceptual framework of a leadership practice within the higher education sector.
The Distributed Leadership Model Applied to Higher Education The notion of the leader plus in defining leadership practice takes into account the fact that multiple individuals participate in formal and informal leadership roles within an organization, and that leadership happens through give mid take (Spillane, Halverson & Diamond, 2004). This is particularly true for higher education (Jones, 2014; Jones, Harvey, Lefoe & Ryland, 2014). Contextualizing leadership practice in such an analytical framework focuses attention on the practice of leadership rather than seeing it as a role or trait-based competency. If the role of the leader is to translate organizational wishes into the organizational performance of productivity, then the real question is, what management approach best fulfills what the leadership requires of it? This suggests we have no way of knowing what good management or leadership is until we know how well it produces the desired results. According to Bryman (2007), a central question in higher education and in the broader context of leadership and organizational performance has been, which leadership practices are best able to convert intentions into organizational performance? This question
10


takes us back to the over-arching question of this study: how did Leader Xs leadership practice prepare the mind of the organization to achieve six strategic goals?
Spillane, Halverson & Diamond (2001; 2004) would ask us to focus on the co-leading and co-performing aspects across roles mid responsibilities within Campus X rather than focus on formally designated positions. Followers in the distributed leadership model may not have leadership designations or certain positional authority; nonetheless, they fulfill a leadership responsibility (Jones, 2014). This could be done, for example, through the followers contribution to the practice of leadership within the interactions of the organizational work activity (Spillane, Halverson & Diamond, 2001; 2004). Together with this role is the context or situation in which the work is carried out.
The three types of distributed leadership styles are collaborated distribution, collective distribution and coordinated distribution. Collaborated distribution is defined as the work of multiple leaders who co-perform the same task at the same time and place. Collective distribution refers to multiple leaders working together, but separately, mid coordinated distribution occurs when activities of leadership must be carried out in a certain sequence.
Spillane, Halverson & Diamond (2001; 2004) distinguish between the identification and analysis of tasks and the enactment of those tasks, centering the study of school leadership on the how mid why of the leadership activity. Organizational leadership is a social construct that does not appear in nature, which means we infuse it with our subjective interpretation. Intuitively it makes sense. We all want to work for the best organizations. Every employee in Campus X, undoubtedly wants this, takes pride in purpose and craves self-fulfillment. In mi ideal world, any organizational leader wants to carve the path to this
11


desire mid wants to successfully translate mission into goodif not great or exemplary organizational performance. We infer from this a basic desire that the only justifiable reason for an organization to exist is to produce something worthwhile, mid worthwhile organizational results always relate to the satisfaction of human needs.
The principles of distributed leadership provide a means for overcoming some of the problems posed with theories that do not take into account the cultural uniqueness of higher education (Bimbaum, 1988; Jones, 2014; Middlehurst, 2012). At the conceptual level, distributed leadership is well aligned with the notions of professional autonomy, faculty governance, and collegiality in the academy, while also honoring the need to effectively chart courses in turbulent business environments. Higher educations reliance on teamwork to problem-solve in such environments is a case in point. Higher education institutions, especially those in the public space, have long conducted their knowledge work by becoming increasingly team based, pulling in the expertise and diversity of professionals from different practice fields (Middlehurst, 2012).
The mechanics of distributed leadership can be viewed as a concrete design for translating vision into successful practice productionthe conversion of conceptual design into an operating system (Jones, 2014). Campus Xs woes, broad vision for the greater organization, and a practice problem led Campus Xs new leader to find a solution. That solutiona leadership practice areabecame the conceptual framework Leader X used to reach identified goals.
The leader-to-follower framework, situated in the context, focuses on the dynamics of interactions between the individuals and within the situation. In Campus Xs example, the distributed leadership model fluidly and situationally adapts to the organizational needs in
12


question. The practice here promotes a broader view of leadership in higher education and affords a tool through which we can diagnose the gestalt of leadership practice.
What the Literature Tells Us About Leadership and Leading
The definition of a leadership practice supplied by Spillane, Halverson & Diamond (2001; 2004), relying on the interactions of leaders, followers, mid situation, framed the beginnings of a leadership practice definition for this study. As noted earlier, leadership practice could be described as lacking the depth of the specific leadership practice in the context. To that end, the conceptual framework being used in this study combined the work of Spillane, Halverson & Diamonds (2001; 2004) leadership practice triangle and also borrowed from the work of doctoral researchers who further distilled the framework to come up with a practice that moves beyond actions and behaviors, and provides a more robust, normative framework that includes the context of leaders setting goals and specifically how they construct pathways toward those goals (Bishop, 2013; Holloway, 2013; Rubin, 2013). To this definition was added the emergent body of literature on higher education leadership practice.
Despite the flurry of research activity surrounding leadershiphow to define it, nurture and shape it, there is no widely accepted definition of leadership, no consensus on how best to develop leaders, mid remarkably little evidence of the impact of leadership development on organizational performance mid productivity. Perhaps part of the problem with this definition is the conceptual ambiguity that surrounds the definition: is leadership a process? Does it involve influence? In what context or situation does it occur? To what end is it practiced? Most theories would point to the individual as the source of the leadership conundrum. But we know it is much more than that, mid we must in some way work to
13


influence followers in reaching a common goal. In short, leadership mid the practice of it is a complex phenomenon touching on many areas. That said, however, and to the extent that there is some degree of consistency and similarity in research on leadership practice, the following assumptions about leadership mid its practiceregardless of measurement strategy used, methodological variations or type of organization studiedhave been concluded.
On the topic of organizational culture, for example, Senge and Crainer (2008) have written extensively on the ability of organizations to learn and adapt to change and how the impact of leadership can be mediated by organizational culture (Lok & Crawford, 1999; Ogbonna & Harris, 1998). It has also been determined that the behaviors of leaders influence the perceptions of organizational culture among followers (Lok & Crawford, 1991; Spillane, Halverson & Diamond, 2001; 2004).
Regarding the literature that locates the individual at the nexus of leading, research concludes that (a) transformational leadership behaviors can help bring about powerful changes in mi organization (Avolio, Walumbwa & Weber, 2009; Basham, 2012; Bass, 1985; 1997); (b) leadership creates the environment in which organizational change occurs (Hennessey, 1998; Higgs & Rowland, 2011); (c) leadership behaviors are associated with cultural traits (Bass, 1985; 1997; 1999; Bass & Avolio, 2013); and (d) leaders use their knowledge of organizational culture to effect change (Kotter, 1990z).
Looking at leadership as a process, the research has generally concluded that leaders understand that external mid internal integration are key concepts tied to survival mid adaptation, and as groups develop around these areas, such elements become part of the cultures DNA (Schein, 2010). The next section will discuss how this leadership literature does or does not work in higher education.
14


The Context of Leading a Public University
This dominant paradigm in the literature on effective schools, especially those that focus on effective higher education institutions, tells one consistent story: there is no obvious, single way to summarize and capture the effectiveness of higher education leadership practice. At the heart of the emergent research in this field is the need for a leader to create an environment or context for academics and others to fulfill their potential and for the leader to take an interest in their work (Bolden, 2004; 2011; Bolden, Petrov & Gosling, 2009; Bryman, 2007; Middlehurst 2012). Also at the heart of this research is the significant differences in the higher education spacedifferent from its private counterparts and from the concerns that dominate the K-12 world. A recent report by the Chronicle of Higher Education (2017), titled Mindset of a president, examined leadership trends in higher education showing that by 2014, two-thirds of presidents at public institutions believed that higher education was headed in the right direction; but by 2015, two-thirds had reversed that opinion. Public higher education leaders now express grave concerns about the decline of state financial support and the intense competition for students. Unlike their K-12 counterparts, college and university presidents also have to deal with a different cadre of stakeholders that focus their concerns on issues such as college affordability, accreditation standards and external bodies, retention and persistence, Pell grants, engagement scores, alumni giving, employment and career readiness, equity attainment and public-private partnership development, to name a few. Other key differences between both market models relate to student age, course level, and funding streams, with these differences driving rates of technology product development and adoption.
15


The obvious difficulty in examining the public higher education space, in particular,
is, as noted, the very differentness of the organizational model. This differentness also helps
explain why discussions about higher education and access to it, often become vitriolic.
Emile Durkheim (2015) explained this uniqueness in his work.
It is rare to find an institution which is at once so uniform and so diverse; it is recognisable in all the guises which it takes, but in no one place is it identical with what it is in any other. This unity and diversity constitute the final proof of the extent to which the university was the spontaneous product of mediaeval life; for it is only living things which can in this way, while fully retaining their identity, bend and adapt themselves as a whole to the variety of circumstances and environments.
The significance of working in such a distinct climate speaks to the desired or
preferred state of fostering a collegial climate of mutual supportiveness mid the maintenance
of autonomy while also supporting mid working toward a values-oriented mission.
Leadership in such a system requires someone who is not driven by blind devotion to the
institution or by political ambition and ego, but rather by responsible stewardship while
considering the different and unique needs of higher education and the particular limitations
of the institution. This finding is consistent with what other researchers have found
regarding the differentness aspect of the higher education space (Jones, Harvey, Lefoe, &
Ryland, 2014; Tight, 2004; van Ameijde, Nelson, Billsberry & van Meurs, 2009; Ylijoki,
2003). Complexity and diversity are inherent in the higher education sector, making
leadership of it a complex, multifaceted process (Bimbaum, 1988). And while there is no
specific formula for the best way to lead a higher education institution, there are clear, fairly
consistent implications in the literature about how not to lead.
The following have been described by various researchers as likely to cause damage
to a higher education organization: (a) failing to consult, (b) not respecting existing values,
(c) actions that undermine collegiality, (d) not promoting the interests of those for whom the
16


leader is responsible, (e) being uninvolved in the life of the department/institution, (f) undermining autonomy, (g) leading with ego and ambition and (h) allowing the department/center/institution to drift (Block, 2002; Bolden, 2004; Bolden, Petrov & Gosling, 2009; Bryman, 2007).
The distributed leadership perspective alone cannot describe the dynamic; that is due to the existence of various levels of leaders and followers. With so many stakeholders to account for at varying levels of the campus, it is even more important to understand that there is no proscribed formula of leadership effectiveness in higher education. Bryman (2007), for example, points to the difficultly of contextualizing leadership when looking from the vantage point of chancellor, provost, department chair or center directorall of which are ostensibly leadership roles. Muddying the waters even more is the notion of shared governance, which is so prevalent in higher education. The shared governance model posits the need to foster collegiality through democratic decision-making and mutual cooperativeness, all of which are elements of the leadership desiderata model (Jones, 2014; Lambert, 2002). However, it is the intensity of these expectations among university employees that makes higher education distinctive (Bolden, Petrov & Gosling, 2009; Jones, Harvey, Lefoe, & Ryland, 2014; Lambert, 2002).
Brymans (2007) report on effective leadership in higher education describes key findings from a research project investigating the styles of and approaches to higher education leadership, and leadership behaviors, which are associated with effectiveness in higher education. The project consisted of two distinct tasks: the first was a systematic search of literature relating to leadership mid effectiveness in higher education studies; the second was a series of semi-structured interviews with academics who were involved in
17


researching leadership in higher education, or leadership more generally. The key research question directing the Bryman (2007) investigation was: What styles of or approaches to leadership are associated with effective leadership in higher education? Brymans (2007) research findings revealed a common narrative, but his research provides few guides for future action, and there is far too little research on the variety of leadership roles that exist in universities at departmental level or otherwise.
Additional research carried out by the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) presents a series of policy briefs based on in-depth examination of 20 Project DEEP schools that have higher-than-predieted graduation rates and have demonstrated, through NSSE, that they have effective policies and practices for working with students of different abilities and aspirations (NSSENational Survey of Student Engagement, 2017). The briefs are being used to provide useful suggestions for promoting student success to a wide range of audiences, including university administrators and leaders, faculty, students mid the general public. The DEEP practice briefs indicate that while there is no single blueprint for student success, six factors mid conditions appear to be common to those institutions considered most educationally effective: (a) a mission mid lived educational philosophy, (b) an unshakeable focus on student learning, (c) clem' pathways to student success, (d) environments adapted for educational enrichment, (e) improvement-oriented campus culture, mid (f) shared responsibility for educational quality mid student success.
The NSSE work indicated above was followed by work carried out by the American Council of Educations Center for Policy Research and Strategy (CPRS). Inspired in part by proceedings from a September 2015 American Council on Education/TIAA Institute convening of college mid university presidents, provosts, chief financial officers, mid higher
18


education thought leaders and researchers, this paper was further guided by the business model mid networked organization literature (Soares, Steel, & Way, 2016). CPRS's work examined thought-leadership at the intersection of public policy mid institutional strategy, with mi ancillary aim of providing senior postsecondary leaders and public policymakers with mi evidence base to promote emergent practices in higher education, with an emphasis on long-term and systemic solutions for mi evolving higher education landscape mid changing American demographic. In the words of Soares, Steels mid Way (2016): Higher education is more important than ever to both individual opportunity and national competitiveness and to that is tied the growing expectation that college and university presidents, provosts, and chief financial officers will use data to drive decisions' (p. iii). Soares, Steels and Way (2016) further proposed a network approach to leadershipone that creates transparency around institutional financial data using business model analysis mid empowers those on the front lines to make data-informed decisions to improve institutional practices aligned with performance outcomes.
The notion that higher education campus leaders operate in the dark, particularly when operating in the world of finance and big-data decision-making, was also discussed in a 2013 Witt Kieffer report examining leadership traits of college mid university leaders compared with their corporate colleagues. The Witt Kieffer study (2013) gave higher education leaders three separate proven personality assessments and plotted these against similarly situated business leaders (Leadership Traits and Success, 2013). The most noteworthy discrepancy between higher education leaders and their corporate counterparts were the scores on the commerce scale. The percentile difference was 23 percent, with higher education leaders scoring at only at the 30th percentile compared with the 53rd
19


percentile for the executives. The Witt Kieffer study (2013) described this difference as having significant implications. It suggests, for example, that higher education leaders are not predisposed to concern themselves with matters of finance, investment, profitability, mid so forth. In an era of increasingly greater public accountability, this may prove to be a red flag for higher education leaders and their funders.
In 2015, the Journal of Higher Education Management, published by the American Association of University Administrators (AAUA), produced a 216-page collection of varied works specific to the higher education space. Of note in that work were articles examining the development of deans as effective leaders for todays education challenges, lessons in university leadership, university presidents and competent leadership. Savior and Cooper (2015) examined the role senior leaders in higher education play with regard to effecting positive organizational change through visioning and strategic development. The Savior and Cooper (2015) study built on the work of Yukl (2006), who had earlier argued that motivating mid inspiring employees is something higher education leaders must get right through clem' visioning, imbuing a sense of collaboration and trust and motivating others to act. Savior and Cooper (2015) analyzed and measured senior leadership practices at private/secular and private/religious higher education institutions to identify leader differences through the Kouzes & Posner (2002) exemplary practices lens. Their findings show that the most important role for these leaders was to model the way forward for the organization.
Bauer (1993) examined whether leadership practices of presidents of higher educational institutions in the Northeast differed from those of leaders in business mid industry. Key findings in Bauers (1993) work through the LPI (Leadership Practices
20


Inventory)-self-score lens revealed that academic leaders rated themselves significantly higher than business leaders as did the LPI-Observer scores for Challenging, Inspiring, and Modeling. Enabling was ranked highest by college presidents (as was true for business leaders), followed by Inspiring (5th), Challenging (2nd), Modeling (3rd), and Encouraging (4th). The rank order on LPI-Observer scores for college presidents was the same. The rank order was identical between the LPI-Self and LPI-Observer when each sample was examined separately. The most substantive difference was in inspiring a shared vision by academic leaders (Bauer, 1993). Additional research by Cato and Gordon (2012) confirms the notion that aligning strategic vision at the very top of the organization is a key contributor to the success of a higher education organization. A common and shared purpose builds vision for the organization and in turn drives motivation and engagement in employees (Bauer, 1993; Bryman, 2007; Cato & Gordon 2012).
The notion of engagement and greater effectiveness driven by leadership in higher education is an ever-emerging theme in the literature. As Black (2015) points out, Higher Education leaders need a combination of leadership and management competencies on order to address the challenges in the sector.. .within a changing world an effective leader must be both student and teacher (p. 64).
What the literature on leadership in higher education is thus showing is that the best campus leaders emerge as those who help support the building of a shared, supportive school climate and culture that removes obstacles to productivity, mid sets the tone and vision for the path forward. And although this may appear obvious to many, an important part of what a higher education leader does is support the creation of a more cohesive, collaborative mid inclusive culture.
21


In 2014, Hanover Research produced a report examining strategic planning at higher institutions, all of which were public or public-associated organizations. The Hanover report examined best practices in strategic planning as well as common pitfalls. The key findings broadly matched the themes found in the emergent literature of leadership in higher education. The first of these findings was the planning process that included creating the need for change, engaging stakeholders, formulating goals and action steps, monitoring implementation, tracking progress and revising the plan. At several of these institutions, tools and activities such as benchmark (proximal) and longer-term (distal) goal setting, listening tours, town hall meetings and a regularly updated website promoted the messaging. The Hanover report (2014) also found that strategic planning cycles ranged from 11 years, based on planning that lasted eight to 16 months, and that aligning the budget with the plan helped increase the plans impact. The following Hanover Report (2014) figure presents the most common conceptual components of a typical strategic plan from that report.
Mission Statement Values
Institutional Goals Vision
Goals and Objectives Implementation Plan
Figure 1. Components of a higher education strategic plan.
So what does all of this mean for higher education leaders? The higher education space is complex and requires critical leadership attributes that help a leader respond to a changing landscape. While there is no defined blueprint for higher education organizational success, the literature does suggest that (a) context matters, (b) leadership matters, (c) followers matter, and that leadership practice occurs over a period of time and through a
22


multitude of factors not always easily disentangled from one another. That literature goes on to note that higher education institutions that are the most effective for staff, faculty and students, and have an unrelenting focus on a vision and mission that models the path forward with the student success squarely at the center of the equation. We can also infer from the literature attributes of student success integral to the most effective institutions, including (a) unshakeable focus on student learning, (b) defined, clear pathways to student success, (c) environments adapted for educational enrichment, (d) a continuous-improvement-oriented campus culture, and (e) shared responsibility for educational quality and student success, which require the use of work focisuch as strategic goal settingtools, activities, benchmarks and longer-term goals against which to report success. All of this suggests that leadership practice extends beyond the scope of one individual characteristic, such as only behavioral theory, mid is better described as a unique case configuration of a leader influencing followers within a situation, who defines work foci mid supports the tools and activities that work toward achieving a proximal and a longer-term (distal) desired end.
A Proposed Conceptual Framework for Leading in Higher Education In constructing the conceptual framework for this study, this research took the definition of a leadership practice supplied by Spillane, Halverson & Diamond (2001; 2004), relying on the interactions of leaders/followers and context, mid added to this practice triangle the work of doctoral researchers (Bishop, 2013; Holloway, 2013 mid Rubin, 2013), who further distilled the framework to come up with a practice that moves beyond actions and behaviors, mid provided for a more analytical framework that articulated the context of leaders setting goals and how they specifically constructed the pathways to achieve those goals. Added to these two components were the emergent findings from the body of literature
23


on leadership practice in higher education. Research on higher education, its context and leader behaviors in higher education provides further context and background to form the definition of leadership practice in this specific space. This helps create a practice construct that concisely speaks to how leaders in higher education do their job effectively. At the beginning of this research, the conceptual framework departed from previous work in the sense that the early picture emerging from the higher education literature suggested that leadership practice exists on a continuum, may change on the basis of context or situation, and is more circular than linear in nature.
/ \
Work Focus
v___________/

%
\
\

%
Distal
Goals
Leader(s)
A
%
\
%
A
\
Tools
Situation
Followers _____\
%
%
Proximal
Goals
Activities
Figure 2. Leadership practice conceptual framework.
The diagram in Figure 2 depicts how leadership practice occurs across the leader(s) and occurs on a continuum, followers and the situation and how tools and activities are used to solve an organizational directive, thereby deriving a leadership practice in higher
24


education. This conceptual framework is drawn from prior work emphasizing it is insufficient to study leadership by simply observing the leader mid that it must be studied from a distributed perspective (Spillane, Halverson, & Diamond, 2001; 2004).
Definition of a Leadership Practice in Higher Education As the review of literature demonstrates, there is an emergent body of work concerning leadership in higher education and organizational effectiveness. While there is no agreed format on the best way to lead in higher education, setting vision, aligning culture, and shared leadership are consistent themes that occur on a continuum of leader-follower interactions. The definition of a leadership practice supplied by Spillane, Halverson & Diamond (2001; 2004), relying on the interactions of leaders, followers, and situation, brought former leadership practice researchers closer to a definition of leadership practice. But it was construed as lacking the depth of a specific leadership practice in context. These researchers added to the distributed triangle the notion of an intentional mid particularized practice that moves beyond actions mid behaviors and includes the context of leaders setting goals and how they specifically construct the pathways to achieve those goals. The literature on higher education and leadership further refined that framework to suggest that leading in higher education occurs on a continuum, represented as a circle that encapsulates how higher education leaders particularize their practice of establishing strategic priorities and setting in motion various tools mid activities that help them realize the distal and proximal goals of those objectives. The table below, first used by researchers Bishop (2013), Holloway (2013), and Rubin (2013), was derived from the literature and enhanced by examining the leadership practices of successful principals in low-performing schools serving ELA students. They used this table as part of the framework to unpack the work of successful principals. These
25


components, the researchers argued, needed to be added to the leadership practice construct used to study successful leaders in the K-12 arena.
Table 1
A Proposed Leadership Practice Model at Campus X.
Work Focus Tools Activities Proximal Goals Distal Goals







Within any organizational situation, activities and tools, processes and procedures, and other aspects create further opportunity for leader-follower interaction in situ, thus contributing defining leadership practices (Spillane, Halverson & Diamond, 2001; 2004).
The same authors described this interrelated network as a web in which the driving force is the need for the leader to lead the school in the context of the given situation, support the creation of tools and activities in response to the work focus defined by the leader, and provide ways for followers to interact in the context of the specific situation (named as the work tools and activities), created by followers, to monitor and attain desired outcomes (goals).
Campus Xs leader reviewed the leadership practice framework and issued a set of desired work foci to the campus organization. Leader X then set about the important work of assessing the situation and bringing followers on board through influence (leaders and
26


followers) and through assessing where the organization needed to go mid how to get there (situation). How to get there, in the case of Campus X, involved capitalizing or modifying work mid performance routines, structures and even social practices (e.g., relations with unit leaders mid peers) on a work continuum that gave voice to the complexities and inherent uncertainties of leadership in higher education and in times of disruptive change. Baruch and Lambert (2007) identify the need for effective leaders to learn to shift their decision-making styles to match changing business environments. This could be applied to this case-bounded study and to Leader X. Accordingly, this is the definition of a leadership practice construct being used in this study: Leader X influenced followers to move together for more purposeful organizational action through the use of tools mid activities and through setting objectives (work foci) by determining an ultimate campus vision. To facilitate this practice, Leader X gave voice to the complexities and inherent uncertainties of higher education leadership in times of disruptive change and identified the need to shift the leadership practice to match changing environments.
Summary
The broad themes emerging from the literature review suggest that (a) organizational change or strategic planning is necessary for higher education organizations to survive mid prosper; (b) leading in a higher education context is complex mid works on a continuum of collaboration rather than on a linear trajectory; (c) there is no one ideal leadership type, system or method that works best; mid (d) at the heart of emergent research in the higher education leadership field is the need for the leader to assess, manage mid create the environment for followers to fulfill potential and interest in their work (Bolden, 2011;
Bolden, Petrov & Gosling, 2009; Bryman, 2007).
27


To mitigate tensions and facilitate effective performance in any organization, leaders must exhibit appropriate leadership behaviors. Those behaviors depend on the leader, the context, the followers and the problem(s) being faced. Effective leadership practice in higher education thus involves using existing, adapting or modifying work routines mid social practices (tools and activities) with an eye toward realizing work focus through proximal and distal goal setting. This can and usually does work on a circular continuum in higher education. Leaders in higher education who get this practice right have the added advantage of inspiring the organization to accomplish the challenging goal of firmly embedding change (Bass, 1997; 1999). Because this study bases its observations and measurements within the context surrounding Campus X and its new leader, the definition of leadership practice applied is specific to Campus X and its leader. The next chapter explains the methodology of this case study.
28


CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
This chapter explains and presents the methods and procedures used in the research process of this study. This chapter is divided into five sections. The first is research design, which includes a study site description, the unit of analysis and the role of the researcher in this research. The second section discusses data collection methods, including descriptions of the artifacts collected and how these data were applied to the research questions guiding this study. The third section discusses how the data analysis proceeded, including data grouping, iterative analysis, coding, mid member group description and interview protocol. This is followed by a section of privacy, access mid transparency. The chapter ends with a summary.
Research Design
This bounded case study examines the results of document collection and analysis through the eyes of a partic ip ant- observer to document mid determine the particularized leadership practice of Campus Xs leader. This study is particularly suitable for a case study design because the campus is a bounded system, it is contextual, mid it is a study of a leaders practice within that bounded system (Merriam, 1998). According to Creswell (2002), bounded means that the case is separated out for research in terms of time, place, or some physical boundaries (p. 485). In other words, it becomes possible to set the parameters around the object one intends to study (Merriam, 1998). Case studies feature thick descriptions offering an ability to achieve a complete and rich picture of the story (Merriam, 1998). Specifically, this study intends to tell the story of how Campus Xs leader determined
29


five strategic priorities and how that leader prepared the organization to meet those priorities. Accordingly, this study addresses the following research questions:
1. What did Leader X find when they arrived at Campus X?
2. What did Leader X do to overcome the issues they found?
3. On the basis of a review of the literature mid the evidence of change effort gathered in this work, what is an applied definition of leadership practice in higher education?
4. How did Leader Xs leadership practice prepare the mind of the campus to achieve six strategic goals?
Description of the Study Site
The period of the study was from January 1, 2016, to August 1, 2017. The focus of investigation is an individualCampus Xs new leader. The researcher and narrator of this investigation is an individual who has observed this leaders practice over the leaders entire tenure at Campus X. According to Creswell (2002), a case study could involve a program, events, or activities (p. 485). The bounded system in this study is Campus X, covers roughly 125 acres (870,000 assignable square feet), enrolls roughly 15,000 students (2016) 10,000 or so of whom are undergraduates, and employs about 5,000 faculty (across two campuses), 30 officers and 5,000 staff (University of ..., 2017). Campus X is a mix of traditional and commuter students and is situated within a major metropolis. It is a public institution, enshrined in law, mid delivers more than 100 bachelors, masters, doctoral mid professional degree programs. The university is reviewed by a major accrediting body and is subject to Carnegie Classification. The campus ultimate authority lies in a board of trustees. The leader referred to in this study represents the highest authority on Campus X.
30


Paralleling the surrounding metropolis growth, Campus X has grown in size and stature. It was founded as a university in the early 20th century and draws mainly from its own backyard (67% of its alum live in state). Campus X boasts a healthy international student population mid is home to an increasingly higher percentage of Latino/a students.
Campus X was chosen for this study because it, like many other public entities of its size, have not been excluded from the pressures to increase efficiency, improve overall fiscal health mid provide for an excellent return on investment to the public, parent and student purses. Four campus leaders have served Campus X in the last five years. The most recent began mid ended their tenure in the 2016 calendar year. The situation at the beginning of 2016 was that the university had developed a handful of broad-based strategic priorities mid was searching for a new mission that would make it able to zero in on those priorities in its search of differentiating mi identity and for a competitive foothold in an increasingly tight and competitive higher education market.
Campus Xs lack of a guiding North Star, its position in the city, direct and increasing competition, lackluster performance across several metrics, low student persistence scores and an unimpressive history of alumnus mid community giving had left Campus X disjointed and operating with a siloed approach. Added to this was a lower level of student engagement and a legacy financial mid business model that appeared to no longer serve its purpose. The situation was ripe for promotion of change or organizational redirection. Much of the on-campus talk when the new leader arrived surrounded this notion of our time and fulfilling our destiny. Campus X and its new leader appeared to have much untapped potential to fill.
Unit of Analysis
The unit of analysis for this study is the intentional leadership practice of
31


Leader X. The definition of leadership practices was derived from the literature review and a conceptual framework was created to help determine Campus Xs intentional mid particularized leadership practice.
Role of the Researcher
To conduct this research, the researcher functioned in a participant-observer role.
This role enables one to participate in the group activities as desired, yet maintain the role of the researcher and to collect data. As an employee at Campus X and someone involved in the campus change effort, the researcher has participated in several high-level meetings, has observed several leadership meetings, community meetings, campus conversations and speeches to several stakeholders, is on the receiving end of campus change-strategy efforts, and has given advice to leadership regarding the change initiative. As a participant-observer, the researcher has an established role in Campus X that is within the scope of the study and helps to validate the information through participation in activities and observations, mid has expertise in the area of change and strategic planning as well as professional learning team development (Spradley, 1979). In addition, and to remove any perceived, unintentional bias on the part of the researcher, member checking was used to triangulate findings. The process for triangulation is described later in this chapter.
The Researcher as an Instrument
This study is a clem" illustration of the researchers lived experiences as a higher education employee mid change agent. As the researcher is observing organizational change in action and commenting on it, it is essential to consider ethics and bias in the researchers role and the case study design. Specific attention was paid to objectivity, cultural sensitivity and inclusion. Being familiar with Campus X, the researcher did not interpret data from a
32


lack of understanding about the campus, its leadership, its goals, processes, and internal dialogingwhich could taint the inquiry of a researcher who is unfamiliar with the situation. From the conceptualization of this work, the researcher spoke to Leader X, informing them of the idea for the study and received human subject exemption approval from the Institutional Review Board on Monday, April 24, 2017.
Because of the proximity of the researcher to the heart of the campus change effort, there were many benefits of this study. From the work of Feldman (2003), Creswell (2002) and Shenton (2004) are five reasons for including participant observation in a study, all of which increase the studys validity: (a) it makes it possible to collect different types of data being on site over a period of time familiarizes the researcher with the community, thereby facilitating involvement in sensitive activities to which he/she generally would not be invited; (b) it reduces the incidence of reactivity or people acting in a certain way when they are aware of being observed; (c) it helps the researcher develop questions that make sense in the native language or are culturally relevant; (d) it gives the researcher a better understanding of what is happening in the culture, lends credence to interpretations of the observation, and enables the researcher to collect both quantitative and qualitative data through surveys and/or interviews; and (e) it is sometimes the only way to collect the right data for the researchers study (pp. 142-143). Since much of this study is about collecting and analyzing the artifacts of Leader Xs practice expressed through work focus, tools, and activities all leading to proximal and distal targets, being on the inside of this change effort was perhaps the only way to really understand the why, how, what, who and how of this leaders practice.
Angrosini (2007) notes that participant observation is the process of learning through exposure mid should not be thought of as a research method but rather as a strategy that
33


facilitates data collection in the field. Research does not identify the best practice with which an observer as participant should conduct research. DeWalt, DeWalt & Wayland (1998) advise researchers to take some of the field notes publicly to reinforce that what they are doing is collecting data for research purposes. Field notes have also helped researchers further interpret and provide meaning to the artifacts collected mid have helped provide a thick description for this narrative. Documents relating to Leader Xs prioritization have been collected mid date back to January 1, 2016. The majority of these documents are in the public domain and represent but are not limited to screenshots, media, website documents, newspaper clippings, online stories, leadership agendas, emails, speeches, videos, recorded/transcribed speeches, social media posts, flyers, leadership meeting notes, notes taken from specific strategic planning retreats and from the researcher's conversations with several campus stakeholders, including Leader X.
The task of observational research is suitable for specific settings, events, and demographic factors. In order to function as an observer, the following qualities were adhered to: (a) language skills, (b) explicit awareness, (c) good memory, (d) cultivated naivete, mid (e) writing skills (Angrosini, 2007). The process for the participant observational research and document gathering in this bounded case study was as follows:
1. On site selection was made of the study in question.
2. Following IRB (Institutional Review Board) clearance, approval was obtained from Leader X and the leadership team for the purposes of attending certain noncommunity meetings as part of the research portfolio for this study.
3. Document collection was done primarily in the public domain and dates back to September 2015. All documents were kept in a private Drop Box folder.
34


4. Recording observations in a journal began as early as possible. In accordance with Merriam (1998), the researcher paid attention to the shift from wide to narrow angles and looked for key words in conversations to trigger later recollection for content analysis. Images were captured and notes were transcribed as quickly as possible afterward.
5. As the research progressed, observations began to fall into discernible patterns. Spradley (1979) referred to the stages of observation as a funnel, and attention began to be directed to emergent elements.
6. Observations, analysis and writing continued until approximately December 2017.
Data Collection
This section outlines the type of artifacts collected, how they were categorized and then how, guided by the research questions, the data collection proceeded.
Description of Artifacts Collected and Categorized
By the end of the data collection period for this study, a private Drop Box account (in which all documents for this study were kept) had reached a size of nearly 2.0 gigabytes. By way of example, one gigabyte represents 10 yards of books on a shelf, two symphonies in high-fidelity sound, or two broadcast-quality movies. These artifacts are classified in the following sections.
35


Documents Including Speeches, Conversations and Minutes. Eight individual file folderscontaining meeting agendas, work group reports, pictures mid videos, minutes, tables, charts, campaign handouts, retreats, strategy work group reports, emails, communiques, speeches, conversations, cover stories, memos, dashboard and metric examples, campus newspaper articles and other ancillary documentsrepresent just under 1,000 8 V2 x 11-inch uploaded pages.
The researcher was fortunate enough to have direct access to leadership meetings and was able to draw on those experiences, after the fact, for this research. Also included in the observations about meetings are the results/reports and notes of a four-month campus community listening tour; a leadership advance retreat on March 23, 2016; a leadership working session on July 15, 2016; a special Leader X community meeting on October 3, 2016; more than 25 bi-monthly leadership meetings; notes from a strategy deep-dive lunch on February 23, 2017; over 37 ad hoc meeting notes, mid a Campus X in the Community event on February 20, 2017, which would be followed by various public town halls.
Media and Video Files. Roughly 31 hours of media files were collected as part of the analysis period. The criteria for including videos or other media in the analysis consisted of the following filters:
Sound: The video must contain intelligible audio.
Relevance: Content must be helpful or useful in supporting the research goals.
Human dimensions: A person or people in the video must be identifiable.
Efficiency: The information in the video should warrant the effort to code and
analyze it.
36


On the basis of these criteria, 13 hours of videos were reviewed for consideration, mid 3.5
hours were uploaded to Dedoose for analysis. A total of 3.5 hours of meaningful raw footage was analyzed; each video ranged from just under one to 90 minutes in length.
Observations. This researcher has had the distinct pleasure of taking self-reflective notes on one-on-one ad hoc interviews with Leader X, their partner and the immediate leadership and cabinet team, following interaction with various members of each, both on campus and at various events. Research indicates that self-reflection is a distinguishing factor between novice and expert clinician-student and demonstrates an improved ability to reflect through journaling (Angrosini, 2007).
As noted above, the researchers own observations in the field taken on March 9, 2017, were included in the data collected and analyzed. Other observations from the field not necessarily tied to a campus event were also collected to add richness to the data collection strategies. A total of 16 typed, single-spaced pages of field notes were assembled and organized for analysis in Dedoose. An example of one of these events analyzed occurred in early 2017. Leader X invited the entire leadership team to a sports event for which a private corporate box had been donated. The field researcher observed that Leader X appeared relaxed, was wearing jeans and campus spirit gear and proceeded to serve the campus team from behind the bar. The researcher also noted that many conversations between invitees openly referred to the event as a leadership bonding exercise within a context mid atmosphere that was jovial, fun, relaxed, lighthearted. Typical game-day finger food was served, such as nachos, hot dogs and pretzels.
The purpose of analyzing the artifacts related to Leader Xs efforts is to bring meaning, structure and order to the data collection. As Anfara, Brown & Mangione (2002)
37


note, The qualitative researcher faces the difficult task of making sense of what has been learned through the practices and politics of interpretation (p. 31) and documents can make up the tangible manifestation of an experience.
For purposes of confirming validity of this researchers conclusions, the documents collected and reviewed used an iterative analysis as outlined in Appendix B. This descriptive data from the analysis was coded for themes that were then used to triangulate the findings. Research Question 1
Research question 1 concerned what the new leader found when they arrived at Campus X. Accordingly, the answer to this question relies on the data points that describe the state of the campus.
Research Question 2
Research question 2 asks what Leader X did to overcome the issues they found. Accordingly, the answer to this question included the collection of the leadership practice picture, including determination of work foci, types of tools and activities chosen, the situation in which this was carried out and the determination of proximal and distal goals.
This collection happened over an exploratory phase mid on at least a weekly period, with document collection formally ending on August 1, 2017. All documents were date-stamped and catalogued by date and type and then placed against the leadership practice conceptual framework being evaluated in this study. Some of the collected material emerged from the researchers own observations. In terms of the collection and use of documents from a public higher education institution, the relevant state (C-State) Open Records Act (1969) states that all public records shall be open for inspection by any person at reasonable times, except as provided for or as otherwise specifically provided by law. The presumption is that the state
38


law stands in favor of disclosure and suggests that the burden of establishing confidential information rests with the party opposing disclosure. As such, nearly all of the documents collected were assumed available in the public domain mid not privileged by policy or law. Research Question 3
Research question 3 concerns a review of the literature supporting an applied definition of a leadership practice in higher education. Specifically, the question prompts were (a) what could have been added if we knew now what we did then mid (b) whether the conceptual framework presented in this study explained the leadership practice in higher education should be dismissed or enhanced.
Research Question 4
Research question 4 concerns how and whether Leader Xs leadership practice effectively prepared the mind of the campus followers to achieve the work focus. A useful question sub-prompt here was, Did the leaders plan work as intended? Interviews with members made up the primary data collection strategy for determining whether Leader Xs plan was perceived as effective in preparing the mind of the organization. By May 1, 2017, 88 individuals had been contacted via email for this research and by late July 2017, 40 interviews, plus one interview with Leader X, had been documented. At each scheduled interview, subjects were asked a series of questions related to the four research questions in this study and were asked to review a pre-populated work focus chart describing Leader Xs practice. Notes were taken by the researcher during each session. Interviews were not voice or camera recorded, nor were any other identifiers collected.
39


Data Analysis
Because of the varied nature of the artifacts collected, Dedoose was selected as the primary tool for organizing mid analyzing data. Dedoose is a cross-platform, Internet-based application useful for working with multimedia data such as videos, photos, mid text-based documents. Data analysis took place from May 2017 to October 2017.
How the Data Were Grouped
The first step in examining the collected research mlifacts was to organize them and prepare them for analysis as outlined by Creswell (2002) mid Creswell & Miller (2000). This involved physically grouping the documents in a way mid within a time/task frame that made sense and could be supported by the artifacts.
When data collection was complete, the researcher had amassed the following:
Roughly 2.0 gigabytes in a Drop Box file that included
Eight individual file folders representing just under 1,000 8 V2 x 11-inch documents;
Roughly 31 hours of media files that was whittled down on the basis of preselected criteria to a total of 3.5 hours of meaningful raw footage analyzed with each media file ranging from one to 90 minutes in length;
Sixteen single-spaced pages of field notes.
This study took 45 documents from the collected pool noted above mid supported these with nine pages of relevant field notes. In total, the sampling size consisted of 45 documents, 3.5 hours of footage of Campus Xs leader mid followers from January 1, 2016, through August of 2017.
40


Iterative Analysis
To answer research questions 1 and 2, the iterative review process began with a review of a subset of the data, which included small portions from each source. For example, the researcher watched 10 minutes of video, read through a sampling of communiques, two community speeches mid two sets of field notes. Next, the researcher got a general sense of the information mid then reflected on its meaning (Creswell, 2002) using the outline prepared in Appendix B by Merriam (1998) for all 45 documents. Documents with contents filling more than three (8 V2 x 11-inch) pages, such as five speeches and/or online interviews, were transcribed and were uploaded to a student Dedoose account and examined for emergent coding, later applied to the work-focus table. The use of Dedoose for this section of the analysis allowed the researcher to access and create a coding panel for the mapping mid printing of graphs and diagrams. After these steps were complete, the researcher followed through with a process to determine how the data were represented in this study to members and for triangulation purposes (Creswell, 2002).
Next, a coding structure was developed, mid decisions were made for coding purposes. After all data were coded in Dedoose, codes were reviewed and compared against the categories found across the data set. Finally, preliminary findings were brought to three representatives of the campus leadership team mid to the research dissertation committee to solicit feedback about the conclusions. This kind of respondent validation or cross-reference was valuable because it ruled out the possibility of misinterpreting perspectives and led to valuable insights about how the researcher was interpreting the data.
41


Answers to research questions 2 and 3 involved reviewing the literature, leading to a definition of leadership practice, the evidence of change effort leading to practice at Campus X and how that practice helped to prepare the mind of the campus to realize work goals. Coding Inventories
The coding process used to analyze the documents listed above initially followed Merriam (1998), outlined in Appendix B, to ensure the artifacts relevance to this study.
Next, the coding process for document review began with the creation of codes based on the six strategic objectives, the initial open coding during transcription, and the literature review. For example, codes related to an inclusive and collaborative culture were added to the master code of collective identity and shared purpose (also identified in the literature review). Similarly, the term type of leader was used as a primary code because of its relevance to research question 4. Also during the first round of coding, memos were attached to excerpts that might have more to offer than a code value. The first round of coding yielded 32 excerpts. Once the first round of review and coding was complete, two peer reviewers evaluated the coding for consistency in code application. Following the peer review, the researcher conducted a second review of the coding, which allowed for the combination of some codes mid clarity about other codes. As the analysis proceeded, the original coding structure was altered slightly to account for newly recognized themes. The resulting codes are presented in Appendix E.
Credibility of coding also was assessed via member checking, in which results of the analysis were returned to several key leadership members so they could examine inaccuracies in interpretation and ensure clarity of their original thoughts. Additionally, continuous
42


inspection of the original data occurred to determine whether coding and thematic analysis stayed true to original data collected during the interviews.
The final coding structure consisted of five tree codes with 24 sub-codes (see Appendix E). Initially, all phrases and statements relevant to the research questions were coded across the data; text that was not relevant was not coded. Once data were coded, the analysis focused on developing categories specific to answering a research question that guided the study. Themes and patterns were identified within the codes; then the researcher looked across the data to develop evidence to support the existence of categories. Variation within codes was considered, as was a systematic search for counter-narratives (Cresswell, 2007).
Analysis of Member Checking
To determine that Leader X was indeed positively influencing the mind of the organization, the researcher was looking for subject responses from followers that were homogeneously viewed. No concurrence from followers about the leaders practice would likely suggest that Campus Xs leadership practice was operating at the individual level of analysis, not at the organizational level needed to realize proximal or distal goals, mid thus not effectively preparing the mind of the organization. Moderate to strong concurrence would be evidence of impact.
Creswell (2002) and Shenton (2004) present several strategies for validation, three of which are used in this study: peer review or debriefing, clarifying research bias, and member checking (pp. 250-253). Creswell (2002) recommends using at least two of these. In this study, members consisted of Leader X, the Campus X leadership team mid Leader Xs working-to-action teams. The use of these peers served to keep the researcher honest: ask
43


hard questions about methods, meanings, and interpretations; and provides the researcher catharsis by sympathetically listening to the researchers feelings (Creswell, 2002, p. 251). Peers of the researcher discussed methodology and provided an outside perspective on the researchers thoughts throughout the writing process. Clarifying research bias was discussed earlier in this chapter and what follows is member-checking protocol, consent procedures and description of members.
Groups for Member Checking
Members for interviews were drawn from three groups: (a) Campus X leader, (b) Campus X leaders leadership team and (c) Campus Xs working-to-action teams, centering on the topics of academic advising, community college, the K-12 pipeline, and scholarships.
Campus Xs Leader. Leader X is the chief academic and administrative officer of the university. This leaders tenure began in 2015. Leader holds a PhD and is described as a recognized leader in higher education. Leader X has held gubernatorial appointments mid board chairships, including time as president of a large community college system and at a philanthropic foundation. This leaders community involvement has included serving as a founding and/or participating member of high schools, museums, education councils mid not-for-profit councils. Honors and distinctions have followed this leader throughout their career.
Campus Xs Leadership Team. Besides the leader, Campus Xs leadership team consists of 12 individuals who serve in the leaders immediate cabinet. This 11-member group are represented as follows: two white males mid five white females, two males of color and two females of color. This inner circle represents the heart of the campus leadership.
44


Campus X Tearns. Leader X established four working teams that later became action teams. The first of these working teams was named the Academic Advising Working Team, ostensibly focused on student advising and initially consisted of 19 members; 11 were direct team members, four held validator roles mid four held navigator roles. Of the 11 direct group members, all 11 held current full-time administrative appointments, with seven of them also holding joint faculty appointments. Of this same group, eight were female-identified and four were male-identified. The validators and navigators represented eight full-time staff members, with a gender ratio of 7:1 women to men. All but one of those staff members deal directly with the student population on a daily basis.
The community college pathways group consisted of 16 members: nine direct group members, four validators mid three navigators. Of the nine, all held administrative appointments, one was a duplicate from the advising group and five had concurrent or primary faculty appointments. The ratio of male to female was 2:9. The validators and navigators of the group totaled seven. Three were external to the campus (all female-identified) and of the rest, three held campus administrative appointments (all three female, with one overlap with academic advising) with one student.
The K-12 pipeline development team consisted of 17 members, nine of whom were direct team members, four validators mid three navigators. Of the nine direct members, seven were women and all but one were full-time current administrators, although two held concurrent faculty appointments. The validators and navigators consisted of seven people, with a female-to-male ratio of 3:7. Two students served as navigators and one validator was a duplicate from another team.
45


The scholarship team consisted of 13 members, 11 of whom were direct members, one student validator mid one staff navigator. Of the 11 direct team members, eight were women and four held administrative-only appointments, and four held both faculty mid administrative appointments.
Member Check Protocol
Postcard consent from the campus IRB office was used. On May 8, 2017, 88 members were recruited via email mid asked to consent to be interviewed for one hour. The initial request included 88 participants, with 44 responding and 40 being interviewed. Meetings were not video or voice recorded. No names were taken, nor was any identifying information used, as this was not needed for the study. All participants were advised that their participation was voluntary and that they could refuse to answer any questions and/or stop the interview at any time. During a pre-scheduled meeting, the researcher restated, summarized, or paraphrased the information received from the respondent to ensure that what was heard was in fact correct. During each meeting, subjects were asked specific proscribed questions, as outlined in the next section, and were given a copy of the populated leadership work focus mid asked if they agreed with the researchers analysis of the leaders practice. The questions were administered in the same order for each subject. Notes were taken, transcribed and entered into Dedoose to identify any additional emerging themes. To refine the analysis, each transcript was then reanalyzed by applying the overall coding framework.
This type of member checking allowed the researcher to (a) examine whether the perspectives relayed to the researcher were accurately documented, (b) learn whether there were any sections that could be problematic (personally or politically) to the participant if the
46


data were published, and (c) assist the researcher in helping with the development of new ideas mid interpretations (Glesne, 1999). These data then served to contribute to the findings and conclusions.
Interview Questions
The interview questions posed to members were derived from the research questions guiding this study. To validate the questions, the researcher conducted pilot interview protocols with non-target subject employees who had been indirectly involved with the campus prioritization effort; the researcher made modifications as necessary. The chart that follows depicts the four research questions and the subquestions that flow from each area.
47


Table 2
Member Check Questions.
Bounded Case Study Questions Research Question 1.
What did Leader X find when they arrived at Campus X?
Research Question 2.
What did Leader X do to overcome the issues they found?
Research Question 3.
Based on a review of die literature and evidence of the change effort gathered in this work, what is an applied definition of leadership practice in higher education?
Research Question 4.
How did Leader Xs leadership practice prepare die mind of the campus to achieve six strategic goals?
Member Questions____________________________________
What did you think when you heard about the leaders ideas for change (strategic priorities)? Did you think it (change) was needed?
Can you name at least two of those priorities?
Do you believe this leader had/has a plan?
Does that plan concur with the charts I have shown you? Would you change anything? Why?
Can you provide an example of a change effort (for
this leader) you have been involved in?_____________
Please describe the leaders plan, as you see it, for change.
Has your work area or practice changed as a result of this leaders efforts?
What do you see as next steps in this leaders
agenda for change? (You can use die diagrams you were provided if that helps.)_______________________
Do you think this leaders plan will work? Why?
Have you bought into the vision of this leader? Why?
What do you believe will be the impact of this
leaders priorities?________________________________
The process of member checking consisted of reporting preliminary findings to respondents or participants, asking for critical commentary on the findings, and may potentially add accuracy and richness to a final report, providing an opportunity to for the researcher to check aspects of their data interpretation. Members were given representative interpretations of the researchers findings mid were asked to edit, clarify, elaborate, and/or delete in their own words.
Issues of Privacy, Access and Transparency The researcher continued to directly mid indirectly participate in several leadership activities, such as three retreats, for the duration of this case study, and as a participant-observer, outlined by Spradley (1979). When necessary and when engaged in collecting
48


information for this study, the researchers role as partic ip ant- observer was made clear to current mid future team members to ensure the credibility of information without any perceived coercion or privacy threats (Angrosini, 2007; Creswell, 2002; Creswell & Miller, 2000; Spradley, 1979). When the researcher met community members they were informed of the purpose for being there and were given sufficient information about the research topic so that questions about the research and the researchers presence were put to rest. Another ethical responsibility was to preserve the anonymity of the participants, the campus and any other identifying information in the final write-up and in field notes to prevent identification, should the field notes be subpoenaed for inspection (Angrosini 2007; Creswell, 2002; Spradley 1979). Individual identities are described in ways that community members will not be able to identify the participants with other identifying information, removed.
Definition of Leadership Practice Used
This study uses the definition of leadership practices and results from leaders work focus activities to identify their leadership practice. The findings of this study intend to show how the following additional concepts are as fundamental to developing an applied definition of leadership practice within the context of a public higher education institution as they are to a K-12 school. They include the following: (a) work focus, (b) tools, (c) activities, (d) proximal and distal goals, mid (e) a change framework against which work focus is applied.
Trustworthiness of Data
Rigorous qualitative research normally includes multiple methods designed to evidence research integrity (Creswell, 2002). Spradley (1979) acknowledges the validity of research conducted as a p artic ip ant- observer. As outlined by Shenton (2004) mid Angrosini (2007), this qualitative bounded case study establishes credibility, transferability,
49


dependability mid confirmability to establish trustworthiness. The case study methodology provides a powerful means of communicating the process, perceptions, results, and training that provide outsiders with a depth of understanding for transferability mid dependability.
To provide evidence of research integrity for this work, trustworthiness was achieved using (a) descriptions of the re searcher-as-observer role, (b) creation of a self-reflective field journal, (c) triangulation through the use of mi identifiable scholarly expert, Dr. Connie Fulmer, mid (d) member checking. In addition, this bounded case studys integrity was established through triangulation, which involves using multiple sources of data to illuminate, corroborate, or elaborate the research in question (Creswell, 2002). Triangulation included member checking to validate the results of the researchers analysis. Tri angulation also included the checking mid rechecking of past interviews and discussions with the leader and others within the bounded case study in addition to a self-reflective journal, allowing for detailed researcher notes. The creation of a self-reflective journal provided further grounding of trustworthy, phenomenological research (Creswell, 2002).
Summary
This chapter discussed the methodology for this study. Bounded case study, document analysis with emergent coding, mid member checking were identified as the research methods to be used. Scientific methods are said to be applied in order to allow researchers (a) to move closer to the phenomenon of interest, (b) discover truths about the world, (c) produce research findings that are meaningful mid valuable to the social sciences, (d) provide findings that are believable and supportive of the research claims, and (e) instill self-confidence mid audience confidence when disseminating work products (Lieber, 2009).
A properly selected and systematically applied methodological approach will increase the
50


likelihood of delivering findings that are important, accessible and useful (Angrosini, 2007; Lieber, 2009). The triangulation of the interviews, observations, and document analysis, as well as triangulation of the member-checking sessions, renders a more complete picture of the leadership practice at the heart of this study. This provides for researcher accountability and provides a bounded case study framework.
51


CHAPTER IV
FINDINGS
This chapter presents findings derived from the bounded case study investigating the leadership practice of Campus Xs leader and is broken down by the four research questions guiding this study. The first question posed was What did Leader X find when they arrived at Campus X? The second research question was What did Leader X do to overcome the issues they found? The third question asked in this study was Based on a review of the literature and evidence of the change effort gathered in this work, what is an applied definition of leadership practice in higher education? The fourth research question was How did Leader Xs leadership practice prepare the mind of the campus to achieve six strategic goals? The chapter ends with a summary examining the usefulness of the leadership practice framework in describing Leader Xs efforts mid presents other evidence that tells a story of how higher education leaders organize their leadership practice.
Research Question 1
What did Leader X find when they arrived at Campus X?
In late 2015, Campus Xs newest leader and advocate-in-chief delivered a passionate speech in a final-candidate open forum. In that speech, this would-be campus leader called for Campus X to become the institution of choice and to live up to its potential of becoming a world-class public higher-education urban university. Specifically, for Leader X and for the institution followers that would eventually support Leader X, there was a collective feeling of this being our time. Table 3 shows the data points facing Campus Xs new leader in early 2016:
52


Table 3
Comparable IPEDS Student Common Data Set.
Retention Campus B Campus C Campus X Campus S Campus U
4 Year 47% 29% 16% 35% 27%
6 Year 71% 47% 41% 66% 47%
Note that data were pulled for the initial 2009 cohort of full-time, first-time baccalaureate (or equivalent) degree-seeking undergraduate students as identified by time to program completion.
The data revealed that Campus X had been lagging across its peers, vis a vis a comparison for the initial 2009 cohort of first-time, full-time bachelors degree (or equivalent) degree-seeking undergraduate students as defined by time to program completion. By several measures, Campus X was clearly not keeping pace with its counterparts. While some lag indicators could be explained away by situational differencesfor example, Campus Xs location in the urban city center, offering a less traditional four-year undergraduate experiencethe corollary could also be true; people could be described as intentionally choosing Campus X because it offered an alternative, unique urban experience. No matter the issue, the numbers clearly showed that Campus X needed to do better at attracting and keeping its students.
Added to this retention problem were the results of Leader Xs initial extensive focus group discussions with the student body, faculty and employees. Leader X was hearing from all university constituents a general feeling of dissatisfaction. The primary evaluation strategies used by this new leader included asking the difficult questions of how Campus X could improve and whether the data were helping to answer that question. The information collected by Leader X, in fact, proved to be the discontinuing data needed in order to begin a
53


strategic prioritization project. It has been said that your identity is based on your level of insulation from the outside world, and when a breach between that identity and the outside world happens, learning anxiety is created (Baruch & Lambert, 2007; Edmonson, 1999; Miller & Monge, 1985; Wittig, 2012). If that is the case, under the new leader, Campus X was about to usher in a period of great anxiety and change. Campus Xs leader would soon become engaged in a university campus turn-around effort.
Added to the student retention issues was the fact that the current budgeting model
was viewed as overly complicated mid non-transparent. The campuss financial well-being
eventually turned into another one of Leader Xs main strategic priorities. By early 2016, it
was clear the budget model had outlived its usefulness. In Leader Xs own words,
You may be aware that [Campus X] is facing a budget shortfall for FY 16-17. This is due to the prior year enrollments coming in below expectations (down 0.3% instead of a projected 1.9% increase). As a result, the campus has a revenue shortfall of $6.8 million. To offset this deficit, we will be using one-time funds of $4 million from a contingency reserve fund. To cover the remainder of the deficit, reductions in administrative and unit operating budgets may be required once we know the actual fall 2016 enrollment numbers. Should that be necessary, we will work closely with leadership across the campus to identify efficiencies mid areas where reductions can be managed with the least impact on instructional and support services for our students (Email from Leader X, February 13, 2016).
The other priorities espoused by Leader X grew from the notion of student success and financial sustainability and focused on support structures that were considered essential to delivering on student success and financial sustainabilitynamely, (a) advancing excellence and innovation in teaching, research and creative work; (b) strengthening the campus position as a vital community asset; and (c) creating a more cohesive and collaborative campus culture. Indeed, as Leader X observed at the beginning of their tenure, in early 2016, the campus brutal facts were as follows:
54


Organizational performance had waned; the organizations goals were not being met, as evidenced by statistics.
The university had not stayed relevant; in the face of new technology, new student demands, the rise of online education and fierce competition in the urban market, its brand was suffering.
The campus had a high turnover of students, suggesting a retention problem.
The budget model had outlived its usefulness and had placed the campus millions of dollars in debt.
The states restrictive public funding formula had meant less and less money for higher education institutions.
Compounding the problems for Leaders X were five years of revolving-do or leadership at the highest levels of the institution, state education policy-making interference, increased competition, dwindling governmental revenues mid other external pressures, all of which gave way to the distributive politics of scarcity. Rather than rely on short-term solutions, or allow retrenchment to undermine morale mid promote adversarial relations between faculty, staff and students, Campus Xs new leader decided to come up with a plan to revitalize the institution.
Research Question 2
What did Leader X do to overcome the issues they found?
Leader X began to create conditions for change the moment they set foot on Campus X and by doing so, began to construct their leadership practice. The primary early mechanisms at play were focus groups mid listening events, leadership meetings, surveys and one-on-one meetings, the data emanating from which were intended to influence followers to
55


buy in, engage and work toward a common vision by identifying problems they were also facing. Leader X realized there was dissatisfaction with the status quo and began setting the stage for change through a compelling vision for a new campus state of mind.
Leader Xs plan began with a massive data-gathering effort that included listening to those on the groundcalled a listening tour. A short four months into Leader Xs tenure, following extensive use of social media, a webcast and online questionnaire to engage the community, six general campus themes emerged: (a) articulate a shared vision/direction, (b) become a more student-centric organization, (c) strengthen support for faculty, including research and creative work, (d) increase and diversify sources of funding, (e) expand and deepen community partnerships, and (f) create a cohesive culture.
Toward the end of 2016, Leader X reiterated to the campus leadership the six identified strategic campus priorities: (a) identify a vision, (b) elevate student success, (c) advance excellence and innovation in teaching, research and creative work, (d) strengthen the campus' position as a vital community asset, (e) create a more cohesive, collaborative and inclusive university culture, and (f) achieve long-term stability and sustainability. Documentation mid discussion with Campus Xs leadership showed that if fixing issues was not on everyones mind, then it needed to be. A strategic visioning questionnaire was distributed to each campus leader and included seven broad questions along with subsidiary questions in the form of bullet points and an umbrella statement noting that the goal of this work was designed to help facilitate conversation among participants of the campus focus groups... sharing aspirations, vision, and perspective of the University (Email from leader X, March 3, 2016). Thus, Leader X began early to solidify a coalition of the willing, all in an effort to prepare the organizations mind for the adaptive challenge of organizational change.
56


At that initial campus leadership retreat, Leader X cemented the vision of the campusone that offered a high-quality public urban research education and confirmed one of the outcomes emerging from the listening tour. A strategic need remained of working on the other five foci.
About five months into 2016, this same leadership mid the board of trustees were told that our next steps going forward will be to create cross-functional action teams around the priorities that come out of this tour... [with] established] metric and timelines so we can chart our progress (Leadership retreat field notes, May 12, 2016). By July of that same year, Campus Xs leader had charged the top finance campus leader and several other leadership team members to focus on redesigning the budget. At the same time, Leader X had connected with more than 50 staff and faculty, asking them to serve on one of four work teams to lay the groundwork for focusing on a core change prioritystudent success. This stage set the bounds of Leader Xs leadership practicethe use of teams, tools, activities and benchmarking to turn the campus around.
The culmination of the significant efforts were discussed and elaborated on by Leader X during a September 20, 2017, State of the Campus address. Researcher field notes indicate that the address appeared to offer both reflection and inspiration; phrases such as our precious opportunity and profound obligation were meant to send a message to those in attendance. The idea of the criticality of this being the campus' time was also a theme found throughout the address and has been a hallmark of Leader Xs leadership practice. Signaling a new stage in their practice, designed to begin hardwiring some of the efforts made by followers working toward meeting the work foci, Leader X indicated having further tasked five campus leaders (called drivers) with developing a five-year strategic roadmap to
57


ensure intentional integration of the five work foci. Drivers, it was noted, would start with
cataloguing mid then ensure that each ongoing or future project would be weighted for
potential impact against effort mid investment required. The final roadmap is to be unveiled
in spring 2018. The State of the Campus session concluded with mi inspirational story of
campus accomplishments to-date mid then followed with a takeaway pamphlet titled On The
Rise: Year in Review 2016-2017, with pictures depicting significant milestones mid
celebratory campus facts. Attached to each pamphlet was a business card answering the
question, Who is Campus X? as follows:
As the states public urban research university, [Campus X] educates a diverse student body through quality academic, ambitious research mid creative work, and civic engagement in the city we call home. Graduates gain the powerful combination of immersive classroom mid real-world experiences that are in demand today, while the city benefits from well-educated, top talent and a new generation of knowledge that fuels the future of the city mid our region. Weare [X].
On the back of each card was a list of the five strategic priorities (work focus).
A Leadership Practice Circle Uncovered Earlier in this work, leadership practice was defined as having three components. In the case of this research, Leader Xs use of other leaders (followers) was in concert with this framework. Leader X interacted mid influenced organizational followers in the particular situation by focusing work efforts on certain areas (e.g., student success, budget, visioning, reputation and overall organizational well-being) in order to achieve organizational goals.
The first component, the leadership practice triangle, depicts how leadership practice is intentional and particularized across the leader(s), followers, and the situation and over time. In this case, the situation was a university campus that needed to redouble its efforts toward student success. The participants that took part in this model were Leader X, Campus X teams, and Leader Xs cabinet/leadership team.
58


Leader X was billed as a recognized leader in the world of higher education and the not-for-profit sector. Having deep roots in the state, this leader was described as someone with the necessary insight, expertise mid experience to build on success (Researcher field notes, September 28, 2015). Shortly after taking the campus helm, Leader X had this to tell the campus community:
I am a product of public education and Lve always had a passion for public education at all levels. Its been the difference-maker in my life. I believe strongly in its role in terms of creating opportunities, opening doors and making more possible for the people served by it. I believe my role is to help you, individually and collectively, fulfill the promise of what is possible.. .Im not much of a maintainer, mid maybe that speaks to a restless part of me. Ive found my niche in places where theres an opportunity to help mi organization move to the next level. I tend to be a weaverI believe thats a strength of mine. I see the pieces and parts mid imagine something greater (Researcher field notes, January 18, 2017).
In that same speech, when asked to describe their leadership style, Leader X responded as follows:
At heart, Im a collaborator.. .When you have people around a table who bring a diversity of thoughts, experiences and perspectives, its a gold mine.. .my style is one of bringing people together and using their collective intellect, creativity and passion to foster collaborative ideas mid solutions. There are times when, because of timing mid circumstances, its not possible to have everyone involved. In those cases, I will gather as much information as I can and trust my own experience and instincts in terms of determining what is in the best interests of the institution. As anyone who has been in a leadership role knows, there is not just one silver bullet or singular approach to decisionmaking. It really depends on the situation, but my preferred approach is engaging people mid using the richness of that interaction to emerge with the best decisions possible (Researcher field notes, January 18, 2017).
To facilitate the cultural shift needed to engage in strategic prioritize and to sell the
vision for doing so, Leader X began to identify and involve pertinent followers for specific
tasks and challenges. This leader understood the importance of skills-scanning mid
59


capitalizing on staff buy-in mid engagement as a leverage point to build leadership capacity (Buono & Kerber, 2010).
In the same way, Leader X used other high-level leaders to help influence followers toward a common goal. Leader X held several retreats and deep-dive discussions with cabinet and other leaders to implement the hardwiring, language and discussion regarding how to measure the change effort through specific discussions of a change website, a metrics dashboard, speeches and milestone celebrations; take, for example the new mention of Strategic Road Map Driversall of whom represent top campus leadership. Much thought was clearly being given to the current culture of the organization, specifically, as Schein (2010) suggests, in how to use other leaders and followers to help retool, unfreeze processes, change, and then refreeze them (processes) to or at the idealized mid desired state.
For Leader X, it seemed that engagement of followers in the practice triangle was an immediate, clear priority.
Work Focus of the Leadership Practice
From the beginning, Campus Xs new leader appeared to understand the criticality of incorporating a distributive leadership model into their leadership practice. This is a leader who understood the importance of faculty/staff buy-in to embrace the efforts that lay ahead and the need to build mid foster the leadership mid follower capacity among the staff and to work toward common goals using common, agreed-to processes and tools. In the words of several who spoke to this researcher, the campus was being re-cultured. Over the period of the strategic prioritization effort, various tools and activities were identified and used to help achieve the ultimate articulated goals of the work foci (see Table 4).
60


Table 4
A Derived Leadership Practice Logic Model for Campus X.
Work Focus Area Tools Activities Proximal Goals Distal Goals
.Articulate a campus-specific, unifying direction/vision
Elevate student success
Advance excellence in teaching and research
Innovate for long-term financial stability and sustainability
Strengthen our position as one of the citys and the regions vital assets
Create a more cohesive, collaborative and inclusive campus culture
These tools and activities also helped define the interactions through which proximal and distal goals would be measured. Findings for each are detailed below.
Articulating a Campus-Specific, Unifying Direction and Vision
The entire work foci began with a simple vision, articulated by Leader X in April 2016. During the first 80 days on the job, Leader X met with hundreds of people and gathered a significant amount of data seeking innovative ideas and thoughtful input to help identify what made the campus great, what made followers proud of the campus, and what could be donecollectivelyto make it even better. As the table below shows, by spring 2016, that vision was cemented, and the tools and activities that would help drive the
61


organization toward the same vision were being hardwired by the leader-follower collaborations.
Table 5
Leadership Practice Model: Campus Vision Work Focus.
Tools Activities Proximal Goals Distal Goals
Data Events and building Refine the aspirational and Market
Embedding cultural space strategic vision; continue differentiation
Mechanisms Leadership meetings telling the story about who and destination
External Facilitators Leadership retreats, we are and driving the as the only
General Skills and member checks, message home. Public, Urban
Traits partnership and Embed the message and Research
Policy and relationship building maximize input so Campus in the
Procedure Changes Sales and Storytelling Use of teams everyones voices are heardindividually and collectivelyto express what we hope for as an institution. City
Leader X wanted to hear thoughts on how to build on the fundamental mission of equipping and empowering Campus Xs students to succeed. Followers were asked to share these thoughts in person and in writing, confidentially or not, via an online questionnaire. Field notes taken at an open forum on January 27, 2016, also reveal that this leader wanted everyone to be heard. When asked what to look forward to during the upcoming listening tour, Leader X responded as follows:
It will be a chance for everyones voices to be heardindividually and collectively to express what we hope for as an institution. What is it we imagine that Campus X can bebased on a lot that is already in place, and inspired by the highest aspirations we have? What will it take for us to get there? In a focused, efficient way, the tour will allow the institution to hear feedback from a variety of other stakeholders as well. Well use the information collected to formulate an aspirational and strategic vision for [Campus X]. I sense that our university community is ready to coalesce around this important notion of Where are we going together? All of the input received through this process will help to gel that vision pretty quickly, I think. It will also be a chance to develop broad-based ownership and buy-in for that shared vision. I am eagerand I think a lot of people are eagerto put some things in
62


motion. I believe this process will begin to foreshadow the future of [Campus X] and how we will move forward in becoming even more distinctive mid successful as an extraordinary asset to [the city] mid beyond.
On March 23, 2016, Campus Xs new leader called an after-work-hours leadership advance (retreat) to discuss next steps in the strategic prioritization project. The retreat included the campus leader and the immediate campus university leadership teamabout 30 people in total. That retreat was described as a way to think collectively about the opportunities and challenges facing the campus. Over a three-hour period, Leader X told the story of a campus that had gotten lost and about a campus that had yet to realize its true potential. That campus, the leadership audience was told, was ready to position itself as a vibrant community on the move. This critical leadership advance was intended to be outcome-based and included facilitation by the new leader. Activities included exercises designed so that the team could think collectively about opportunities and challenges facing the campus. Other exercises were focused on identifying Campus Xs distinct competitive advantages, convergences mid creation of a case statement answering the question, What are we selling and to whom? (Researcher field notes, March 23, 2016). Pictures taken by the researcher during that retreat follow (see Figure 3).
63


Figure 3. Pictures from a leadership retreat held March 23,2016.
Campus Xs leader set out a vision for the campus for the first time to this team: to be the states Public Urban Research University. This vision was developed that night through specific, focused activities that helped the team drive forward a vision that allowed Leader X and other leaders to zero in on the campus distinct advantages. When leadership was done with most of the activities (which included, as the pictures above show, a weighted table for defining success and impact/significance, color-coded notes, group tasking, a proposed
64


mission statement and a proposed 20/20 actionable targets table), Leader X took this time to update leadership, in advance of a board of trustees visioning retreat, on the emergent themes from their recent listening tour. Those emergent themes were described as (a) a focus on student success, (b) a focus on and diversification of sources of funding, (c) a desire to become the citys vital asset and (d) to create a culture of teamwork.
Further undergirding these themes and the work of the leadership group was the expressed desire to answer these questions: Where are we going? What greater good do we serve? What is possible because we exist? What principles guide our decisions and actions as we go? This singular meeting would set the stage for how the campus change effort would move forward. A need was clearly identified; that need was change, which would later be expressed as five strategic priorities.
The research collected here, a mere few months into Leader Xs tenure, tells a compelling story how the why of change was being sold to followers. By April 2016, Leader X had also sold the vision to the governing hom'd through several policy and branding changes. Referring to his/her role at the board retreat as the Campus Advocate in Chief, Leader X noted that the next steps in moving the campus forward demonstrated strong alignment with the goals established by the board in 2015, and that these areas included student success, revenue classification (sponsored research mid philanthropy), enhanced reputation and financial aid. (Researcher field notes, April 7, 2016).
A significant aspect of this visioning step is that several followers believed that no prior campus leader had done this type of listening, engaging and visioning with followers. This was confirmed by feedback from member checks. There is nothing mystical about organizational vision. It is simply a picture reflecting what an organization could and should
65


be. Great leaders get people excited about their vision and this is what Campus Xs leader did with a listening tour. As early as one month into their tenure, Leader X gave this response to a question about the desired culture of the campus: I imagine a campus where every student, every faculty member, every staff member says, I belong here. So how do we create that kind of culture? (Transcribed public interview with Leader X, January 26, 2016).
Elevate Student Success
Unquestionably, the most important objective after Leader X articulated the collective vision was getting the student success campus recipe just right. Once the campus vision was set, Leader X used the criticality of the mission to sell the plan for change to engage followers in what would be termed a focus of elevating student success. Initially tagged as working groups, four appointed teams, each staffed with about a dozen employees and faculty, were asked to focus on and deliver recommendations exclusively on how to elevate student success. This collaboration with internal experts set the stage for how the particularized and intentional leadership practice would take shape with this work focus (see Table 6).
66


Table 6
Leadership Practice Model: Elevate Student Success Work Focus.
Tools Activities Proximal Goals Distal Goals
Data Events and 43 major goals with 75% freshmen
Embedding building cultural several sub-goals retention rate by
Mechanisms space and metrics against 2020 for first-time,
External Leadership which success (or full-time freshmen
Facilitators meetings not) is benchmarked only
General Skills Leadership 60% graduation
and Traits retreats, member rate by 2020 for
Policy and checks, six-year
Procedure partnership and undergraduates
Changes relationship who started as first-
Sales and building time, full-time
Storytelling Use of teams freshmen 45% increase in transfer students 15% increase in degrees awarded
Over an eight-week period, beginning in early July 2016, and under the leadership of a colleague who would serve as chair, the student success working group was asked to learn and apply design-thinking principles to create an action plan that would help define the desired future state for their respective focus area: (a) academic advising, (b) K-12 pipeline development, (c) community college pathways, and (d) strategic use of scholarship resources. Groups were asked to strive for an outcome that was bold, ambitious and boundary bustingin a word, transformative results that would accelerate new value creation for current and prospective Campus X students while simultaneously reducing the complexity of making that happen. Each working group would be supported with subject matter consultants, one validator and at least one navigator to assist with data and information gathering. Central guiding questions were offered to each focus group.
67


Examples of these included How do we become the campus of choice for high school graduates? What is needed to foster a welcoming, inclusive climate for transfer students? What would an ideal advising process look like at Campus X, and what will it take to bring that to fruition? (Email from Leader X, July 1, 2016.)
Each of these working groups were supported by an orientation session that began with the campus visionary statement and followed with a facilitated design-thinking session to help focus the coming work. This was to become a time-bounded activity. Campus Xs leader asked each group to over the next 8 weeks deliver transformative mid boundary-busting results intended to accelerate new value creation for current and prospective students while simultaneously reducing the complexity of making that happen (Email from Leader X, July 12, 2016). Those four working groups eventually delivered over 65 recommendations intended to create new value for the campus. The report-out event and closure of this stage was feted by Leader X at a special lunch session, media coverage and celebratory news articles about how Campus X was changing the very nature of its student success delivery model.
By fall 2016, several of the same working team members were asked to bring further depth to their earlier recommendations. Now called action teams, these groups, keeping the same focus as their predecessors, were provided with an orientation document mid meeting outlining their charge, and were asked to lead.. .through an inclusive process, to create timelines, work products, and measurable results based upon recommendations of the working group and to enlist the support of leadership when the team needs assistance in moving projects forward or in engaging leadership in policy-focused decisions (Email from Leader X, October 3, 2016). It appeared that the working-to-action groups were intended to
68


play a core learning role and reflected the leaders desire to develop a collaborative approach
and shared vision strategy and perhaps more importantly, stmt delivering metrics associated
with the work focus. Using in-house organizational talent allowed the leader to build a
relatively low-cost, broad-based action system that allowed multiple talents to be brought to
bear on the problems. Spreading the workload would always mean spreading the risk but
also spreading the collective responsibility; getting staff involved inevitably increased their
ownership of the results (Edmonson, 1999; Gladstein, 1984). By April 24, 2017, the work of
the action teams had come to a close, representing a time-bound period of roughly five
months, as evidenced by an email dated May 22, 2017:
Dear Action Team member, On behalf of [Leader X], please join us to present and discuss the Action Team reports on Monday, May 22 from 10:30 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. in the [Name Redacted], Room 2500. The report out portion of the retreat will be held from 10:30 a.m. to 12 noon, followed with a celebratory lunch from 12-1 p.m. with deans and cabinet members to thank you for your efforts and to engage in informal discussions about how we can continue to enhance the student experience.
On May 22, 2017, each team chair presented on the progress made by their teams in a special celebratory report-out event headed by Leader and several from Campus Xs leadership. A similar cabinet report-out session was held later that day. At this session, each of the four action teams detailed how the earlier recommendations made by the working teams had been put into practice. Each of the action teams reported having made significant progress. In closing remarks, Leader X spoke to the power of each of these groups and how they had created capacity and leveraged untapped potential on campus. Leader X also shared this with the groups: I am really hopeful. What we all want is shared. We want our campus to be looked at as everything we would want if we were students here mid operating at a level
69


of excellence where we take pride in our work; a place where we do great work and that
works well together (Researcher field notes, May 23, 2017).
The work of meeting the objectives of elevating student success now lie with a newly
created student success partnership committee. Action team recommendations that needed
further development and new ways of doing business have now become the articulated
mission of this new committee. In Leader Xs own words at a May 2017 report-out event:
The Student Success (SSC) effort launched in January to coalesce our many ongoing student success improvement efforts under one umbrella. The SSC effort builds on the recommendations of last summers working groups and the 2016-17 action teams, with assistance from the [Redacted name of Higher Ed Consulting Group]. The SSC effort steering committee, convened in mid-April, will develop the SSC teams goals and implementation plan. The work includes a technology platform to use student data for predictive analytics in order to provide appropriate interventions when students are identified as needing focused support. The committee mid units involved in SSC, particularly Information Technology and the academic advisors, will be working over the summer to enable faculty, advisors and others to begin using the new SSC technology platform by the fall semester. The broad participation in these efforts has been impressive; it is heartening to see people from across the campus sharing responsibility for improving student success.
The student success committee has created a structure against which the committees success
is to be determined. With 43-plus action items, the team has aligned its work mid mission to
develop a prioritization effort and is recommending the development of five implementation
teams (academic excellence, guided pathways, financial optimization, student
communications, and student success). Their work is being supported by higher education
consultant project managers who will ensure that each team is supported by project plans,
develops metrics, and is goal-focused.
As of September 20, 2017, the work of elevating student success has directly engaged more than 100 faculty, staff and students. While other tools and activities certainly have been used to achieve the goals of elevating student success as the table in this section shows,
70


arguably the most important activity was internally organizing teams that would be tasked with working toward a common purpose. Getting these people organized involved setting a tone mid vision, building trust, building cultural space, telling stories mid much more. Organizationally, thousands of other followers have likely been directly and indirectly affected by this practice, but teams were key in putting into operation the elevate-student-success work focus. The use of engaging followers so directly and centrally in the prioritization effort also ensured that employee feedback and corrective action were taken into account and greatly increased investment in the changes to come.
Advance Excellence in Teaching and Research Also termed a scholarly preeminence work focus, the driver for this focus was the campus chief academic officer, who is working in concert with the accreditation office to develop a list of metrics mid baselines against which success can be measured. The tools mid actives used to support this work focus are similar to others, but they emphasized data, leadership meetings, retreats, teams, and partnership building as the table below demonstrates.
71


Table 7
Leadership Practice Model: Advance Excellence in Teaching and Research Work
Focus.
Tools Activities Proximal Goals Distal Goals
Data Events and building 11 sub-goals or metrics $8.7 million
Embedding cultural space against which success (or increase in
Mechanisms Leadership meetings not) is benchmarked sponsored
External Leadership retreats, An important part of the research awards
Facilitators member checks, use of
General Skills and partnership and employee/faculty/student
Traits relationship building work teams was to
Policy and Procedure Changes Sales and Storytelling Use of teams engage them in the work of change and obtain their buy in and create influences, navigators, change champions or agents and supporters of Campus Xs leaders efforts.
As with the other work focus, teams have been a big part of working toward a common end. For example, Leader X put together a cabinet team that would focus on scholarly reputation and a Summer Enrollment Action Team, or SEAT. SEAT was created in response to Leader Xs request to increase summer session enrollments. Efforts emanating from this group have included a website redesign, a mini-marketing campaign to current campus and campus-enrolled college students and an advance grant program aimed to encourage on-time graduation for undergraduate students by providing financial assistance in the summer term for students to transition from freshman to sophomore or from sophomore to junior status. In a May 2017 communique to campus, the teams work was described by Leader X as already paying dividends with summer enrollment numbers up 8 percent over last year at this time (Email from Leader X, May 3, 2017).
72


More recently, work on this focus has included the use of the existing advancement office to develop a fundraising campaign for student scholarships, chaired by a scholarship campaign steering committee; bolstering faculty research mid creative work through increased seed grant giving; and providing funds to examine instructional quality, graduate student recruitment and the development of health science pathways programs with the health campus. All in all, its a work focus that is likely to be a future focus of Leader Xs work.
Innovate for Long-Term Financial Stability and Sustainability
By November 2016, the seeds of a campus budget redesign had been set. Owing in large part to an ineffective incremental model that had not kept pace with the changing higher education environment, Campus X worked to implement a new budget model tasked with increasing transparency, providing incentives for growth and better aligning resources to strategic priorities. A team of campus leaders was put togetherled by a vice president serving on the cabinetmid included school and college business officers, the provost mid deans. What this team referred to as phase I of this work was ostensibly a discovery phase designed to answer the questions of what model would work best for the campus mid to develop that model. From the work in that phase mid with the help of an external consulting group, the team delivered a vision for a new model for Campus X; one that would tap into and foster entrepreneurship. The tools and activities associated with this work focus included retreats, meetings, communication emails mid news releases mid several changes to the campus business processes. Table 8 articulates the determined goals mid the tools mid activates used to zero in on this work focus.
73


Table 8
Leadership Practice Model Table: Financial Sustainability Work Focus.
Tools Activities Proximal Goals Distal Goals
Data Embedding Mechanisms External Facilitators General Skills and Traits Policy and Procedure Changes Sales and Storytelling Events Leadership meetings Leadership retreats, member checks, partnership and relationship building Use of teams 15+ sub-goals or metrics against which success (or not) is benchmarked One of these major subgoals is the full implementation of a new hybrid budget model $42.7 million in nonstate funded revenues. Align resources with campus vision, mission and strategic priorities to ensure continuous improvement in academic quality, scholarship and student success while providing fiscal and financial responsibility that is transparent, entrepreneurial and reflects our shared commitment to the overall health of Campus X.
The move to the new budget model occurred in the later part of 2016 as phase I. The vision for this new incentive-based budget model was described as directly supporting] the fifth priority as the new approach gives the university more control and transparency around its resources to plan for the long term. A steering committee worked on the redesigned budget model over the course of a year along with a governance structure that was created with Leader Xs Advisory Committee on Budget, which included representation from the Faculty Assembly (including the Budget Priorities Committee), school and college deans, and the leaders cabinet.
Phase II of that budget redesign process began in May 2017 and included senior leadership and deans working together to develop a planning and budgeting process that would align with the newly redesigned model. This period has involved the old model
74


operating alongside the new one for a one-year shadow and trial period. The third phase (also called the final phase) is to begin in July 2018, when the new incentive-based model is scheduled to be implemented.
At the crux of the new budget incentive model is the potential for growth, providing incentives for the entire campus community to take advantage of new markets mid opportunities for growth in any kind of revenueincluding enrollment, research and donationsand ostensibly geared toward entrepreneurial thinking. As Leader X has made abundantly clear in several speeches and press releases (as late as September 2017), without a strong financial core, the campus cannot hope to meet the needs of its students, support its faculty mid staff or create a vibrant campus community.
Strengthen Our Position as One of the Citys and Regions Vital Assets
In connection to this work focus, perhaps the most well-known articulated distal goal was that of becoming, by 2023, one of the citys top five civic, cultural and economics assets. It was mi oft-repeated desire that would find itself into many of Leader Xs speeches. To work toward this focus, Leader X convened representatives from all schools mid colleges to make recommendations about how to better coordinate and leverage community engagement efforts. As Table 9 shows, several other tools and activates were also used to help drive work toward the goals of this work focus.
75


Table 9
Leadership Practice Model Table: City and Region Vital Asset Work Focus.
Tools Activities Proximal Goals Distal Goals
Data Embedding Mechanisms External Facilitators General Skills and T raits Policy and Procedure Changes Sales and Storytelling Events and building cultural space Leadership meetings Leadership retreats, member checks, partnership and relationship building Use of teams 15 sub-goals or metrics against which success (or not) is benchmarked By 2023, Campus X will be one of the citys top five civic, cultural and economic assets.
As an example of the policy and procedure changes, Leader X was able to convince the board to grant the campus an exception to a branding logo. Sales and story-telling were a big part of how the campus was going to articulate its new brand, both internally and externally. The campus communications department; a new branding campaign and logo; television spots; and several call-outs at community assemblies, city partnerships, conferences and other functions have served as key tools and activities in realizing this work focus. For example, Leader X ensured that the campus was at the table during the Coalition of Urban and Metropolitan Universities National Conference and tasked a number of panels on the role of higher education in a thriving metropolitan area. This same topic was addressed with city leaders at a Downtown Metropolitan Partnerships urban exploration summit. In Leader Xs own words:
By 2023 Campus X will be one of the citys top five civic, cultural and economic assets.. .A key component to accomplishing this strategy is setting measurable and actionable goals. At their retreat this summer, I reported to the board on how our campus is performing on a number of metrics related to the boards strategic
76


priorities, including student success measures such as graduation and retention rates. We have set goals for increases in these areas by 2020. Our goal is to improve to a 75% freshman retention rate mid a 50% [in September of 2017, changed to 60%] six-year graduation rate by 2020. I think its clear that elevating our students success and fixing our leaky pipelineare not only the right thing to do, they are the smart thing to do (Excerpt transcribed from Leader X public speech, September 26, 2016).
As of early October 2017, even more work was being done to coalesce and articulate
the identity of the downtown campus and its place in the city center. Leader X co-launched
(with Campus Xs health science arm) an effort to evaluate a path forward that allows the
campus to identify efficiencies and enhancements across both campuses. What Leader X has
articulated about this work is that, in real terms, it represents the beginning of a process to
identify the reorganization of some functional areas of campus operations, including an
evaluation of brand and identity and other elements that will support the distinctive needs and
opportunities for each campus.
Create a More Cohesive, Collaborative and Inclusive Campus Culture
Leader X has reiterated at several town halls and open forums a collective desire to break down organizational silos and increase collaboration and communication within and between units across the campus. In one famous speech, Leader X noted that they had grown up on a farm mid that silos belonged there and not on campus. Another theme mentioned when discussing this work focus has been the development and implementation of the five campus priorities mid how development in the other areas would help provide numerous opportunities for broad-based engagement mid to break down the silo mentality. In the table below, several tools and activities were used to help zero in on this work focus, but increasingly important are sales and storytelling, building cultural space and redirecting the embedding mechanisms to help cement the new cultural context.
77


Table 10
Leadership Practice Model Table: Campus Culture Work Focus.
Tools Activities Proximal Goals Distal Goals
Data Embedding Mechanisms General Skills and T raits Policy and Procedure Changes Sales and Storytelling Events and building cultural space Leadership meetings Leadership retreats, member checks, partnership and relationship building Use of teams 9 sub-goals or metrics against which success (or not) is benchmarked Create a more cohesive, collaborative and inclusive culture... underscor ed the collective desire to break down organizational silos and increase collaboration and communication within and between units across the campus.
As of September 20, 2017, Leader X described the progress on this work focus as follows: our students connection to campus culture was celebrated in September at the groundbreaking ceremony of the new Wellness Center and we conducted our first campuswide [redacted] Survey to help us better grasp the scope of experiences within our community. We are now analyzing the results, with the goal of improving our prevention of and response to these incidents.
Alongside the other efforts toward reaching this work focus are meetings, agendas and multiple communiques that have sought to reaffirm and articulate a commitment to fostering an environment of inclusiveness, understanding and mutual respect, as well as our support for those studentsincluding immigrants, religious minorities and otherswho may be subject to hate crimes or harassment. Resources have been identified to support students, faculty and staff during these times of uncertainty, including a new Teaching in Tumultuous Times web page for faculty. A side page off Leader Xs main website is also being created
78


that will ostensibly lay out resources and policies for supporting undocumented students. There is a concurrent desire to continue working with shared governance leaders to promote forums mid conversations about the issues that affect the campus. Story-telling is also an important component of how Leader X is trying to reengineer the mind of followers. Inspirational stories and celebratory wins are a cornerstone of their report-outs, as is transparency. All in all, while the work focus may differ from the other objectives, how to get there speaks to a leadership practice that has continued to use followers through influence and a coordinated and inspirational vision toward a common end.
Tools
In their work on distributed leadership, Spillane, Halverson & Diamond (2001; 2004) described how the distribution of leadership occurs among administrators, specialists, mid teachers in the school, and the way they use routines and tools of various sorts. Tools such as memos, scheduling procedures, and evaluation protocols were used to reach a common outcome. The tools found in this bounded case study served as mi example of how this practice may be carried out in higher education mid paints a clear picture of Leader Xs particularized leadership practice. Table 11 provides a glimpse of how those tools were used during a specific month of Leader Xs leadership.
79


Table 11
A Monthly Example of Tools Used in January 2017.
Context Rationale Number
Data Collection Ask staff/faculty to report back on specific concerns Website feedback
Leader Postings and Embedding Mechanisms Including a did you know and stories section 3 (new stories) including 3 new hires welcomes stories with one about a new Human Resources leader who is a specialist in talent acquisition)
Leadership Meeting(s) Agendas Leadership bi-monthly communication tool 2 meetings held
Communiques Report about prioritization effort 1 (16 efforts made toward goals noted)
Campus Today Online Story Geared toward alumni with focus to improve communications 3 released (mention of new arts collaborative; assisting veterans, and a new 5 million dollar partnership with donor)
Campus Forum Conversations Campus X leader, the provost and administration and budget head invite staff, faculty and students to a campus Q & A 1 (with 5 more scheduled through May 2017)
Data
Data collection and dissemination was used throughout each work focus area but often in different ways. For example, the use of disconfirming data to support the need for change both with student success and financial stability was used early on by Leader X. Examples follow.
January 28, 2016. The budget, which is largely based on tuition revenues, is tighter than planned because the campus didnt quite meet enrollment projections. It doesnt help that state money only accounts for 5 percent of the budget.
April 7, 2016. On the job for 98 days, [Leader X] has so far met with more than 1,000 people. [Leader X] has used social media, a webcast and an online questionnaire to further engage the community.
80


March 23, 2016. I have spent 12 weeks, have about ten sessions left mid my summary comes from 17 formal gatherings of folks. About 1700 people have attended these sessions mid over 100 surveys have been submitted and numerous individual conversations have reinforced, a lot. More than anything else that has come up, is a resounding desire for a shared vision. Where are we going? What greater good do we serve? What is possible because we exist? What principles guide our decisions and actions as we go?
May 2, 2016. You may be aware that [Campus X] is facing a budget shortfall for FY 16-17. This is due to the FY 15-16 enrollments coming in below expectations (down 0.3% instead of a projected 1.9% increase). As a result, the campus has a revenue shortfall of $6.8 million. To offset this deficit, we will be using onetime funds of $4 million from a contingency reserve fund. To cover the remainder of the deficit, reductions in administrative and unit operating budgets may be required once we know the actual fall 2016 enrollment numbers. Should that be necessary, we will work closely with leadership across the campus to identify efficiencies and areas where reductions can be managed with the least impact on instructional mid support services for our students.
September 26, 2016. Today, I want to talk with you about what I think lies ahead for usif we are to fully embrace the unique position we have in the states higher education landscape. Additionally, I will share some of what came out of the more than 5,000 comments and suggestions that were gleaned during my Reach Out mid Listen tour, including the priorities that emerged, mid the early work that began during the summer. I will also describe what I believe its going to take for us to
81


address a number of the challengesand opportunitieswe face.. .the graduation rate (40 percent to 46 percent over the last five years) requires improvement. Our goal is to improve to a 75 percent freshman retention rate and a 50 percent six-year graduation rate by 2020.
November 16, 2016. What metrics should we start looking at? The ultimate goal is a dashboard that is visually easy, with easy-to-read graphics.
April 14, 2017. We have already begun using these findings to inform and improve the universitys ongoing prevention, education and response efforts.
Embedding Mechanisms
Embedding mechanisms with regard to resources allocation and unit realignment were used to drive home the need to challenge the old way of doing business and to send a clem' message that Campus Xs leader was intent on doing what was needed to advance the strategic priorities. By roughly one year into their tenure, Leader X had announced the hire of a new campus finance chief position, a change in responsibilities for another cabinet member, the hire of a new leader for a satellite campus, a division of responsibilities in the role of finance chief, two streamlined processes bringing together three university units into one portfolio, mid a sepmate mid distinct success budget geared exclusively toward supporting further hardwiring measures to support students to the tune of $ 1.5 million.
Leader X has also managed to secure from the governing board an investment of $5 million per year, for ten years, with a goal of investment in the infrastructure to support campus change. Below me further details surrounding the above referenced efforts.
April 5, 2016. We me happy to announce that our national search for a [top campus leader] for budget and finance for [Campus X] has successfully been concluded.
82


[name redacted] major emphasis will be providing oversight on financial issues for [Campus X] in the areas of budget, finance, student financial services, and policy and fiscal analysis.
June 17, 2016. I am writing to let you know about a change in responsibilities for [Name Redacted], who has been with is since January as [role] for [Campus X].
October 10, 2016. Given that funding from the state continues to be tight and due to the need to improve the ongoing financial success of both campuses, we have asked our campus chief financial officers to consider the optimal structure for our administrative and financial functions. We are pleased to announce that [name redacted] will now focus her work on [Campus X] as its CFO and [redacted].
October 19, 2016. To provide enhanced customer service and streamlined processes for departments and faculty, we have made a strategic decision to consolidate three offices: the Offices of Grants and Contracts, Finances mid the Bursars Office. It has become clem" from a business process standpoint that these three units will benefit from structural alignment, including a centralized contracting unit, improved fiscal reporting, enhances compliance, and a workforce e with bench strength in critical positions.
By 2017 more embedding mechanisms were put in place. A new human resource departmental leader was brought on who was ostensibly chosen due to their background with talent acquisition and performance management. Field notes from January 2017 reveal that a cabinet member reported at a leadership meeting that .. .the new human resources hire was chosen due to their background in performance based management that could help advance [Leader Xs] prioritization effort with regard to culture.
83


This idea of building the platform and putting the right levers in place to facilitate change is in accordance with an earlier interview, dated April 8, 2016, with Leader X.
During this interview, Leader X outlined the vision for the effort to come. Field notes from an April 2016 personal meeting with Leader X reveal how this leader viewed the roadmap before them. They spoke broadly about how they would measure success, their immediate goals, mid how they would embed change for the long runall questions implied from the literature on successful culture change and change management. Leader X answered this section with a few simple sentences: I am beginning with the end in mind. I am building a sense of what is possible. I am getting to the bottom of the belief that the end will be worth it and at the end of the day, when I ask people, What would it take to make this university all it can be? I want people to be able to answer that question without hesitation., Leader Xs roadmap is being refined, and they have identified immediate goals of working on student support service areasthe biggest early-known problems. Leader X also spoke of using something similar to a measurement indicator. Here, we talked about goal theory mid incentivizing employees to meet targets. This discussion strongly suggests that Leader X is going to use mini-benchmarks as they work toward the bigger goals. Leader X also mentioned telling the progress story every chance they got and selling the success stories about change. Leader X also mentioned in this interview that they see this work taking about five to seven years to fully embed and that they fully expect that, over time, the change ideals and values will be incorporated into new staff hiring. Leader X also spoke of publicly recognizing key members of the original change coalition, and making sure the rest of the staffnew and oldremember their contributions.
84


External Facilitators
The use of external facilitators, such as consultants and subject matter experts, were another tool and activity used at Campus X. As of April 23, 2017, as the prioritization effort was entering the measurement phase, the following consultancy services helped in the strategic planning and execution of campus work foci:
The Master Planning Committee used three consultancy services including one very well-known national company, Brad & Dunleavy.
The Budget Planning and Steering Committee used a well-known national firm with experience across more than 200 universities.
At least one retreat included an executive coaching and retreat facilitation firm helping to support a leadership visioning session.
Blueprinting for Student Affairs involved work with a consulting firm known for developing integrated strategy mid a plan in human resources mid operational issues.
Student Success technology reform involved the use of two major vendors and an executive partnership.
Branding and Visioning used a marketing lab-firm team of forensic scientists who help organizations re-engage with their markets.
More recently, there have been campus discussions on a data warehousing platform and a classroom planning tool with two different external vendors. An April 2017 meeting with a prominent New York firm was held to offer a data strategy plan that would help deliver real-time data dashboards for planning mid budgeting purposes. The notion behind this, as presented to leadership in attendance, was the ability to extract data from the raw level, including human resources mid finance mid student systems; have created scripts in
85


place; crosswalk the data and clean holes; then create a data-quality audit with the stated purpose of providing campus leadership with a data-driven way to make real-time decisions. General Skills and Traits
Evidence from this research suggests that Leader X scored high on the spectrum of emotional intelligence. Leader X modeled this the moment they arrived on campus. There are examples of this motivational ability in each of Leader Xs speeches, field notes mid interviews. Words spoken by Leader X suggested a strong sense of purpose, passion mid urgency. This was also a leader who could sift through the noise to find the important elements. Witness Leader Xs Reach Out and Listen tours mid the transparency with which report-outs were being conducted. The evidence also strongly suggested that Leader X was a master collaborator, yet humble and willing to learn.
Perhaps it stands to reason that as a result of this high emotional intelligence, Leader X would be mi expert skill scanner. This tool allowed Leader X to break down silo thinking by recognizing the talents people could bring to the table and then capitalizing on them.
Very early on, for example, Leader X used their emotional intelligence skills-scanning to identify a cabinet, and chose advisors who would contribute to the success of the effort. It is important to note that no cabinet existed before. The cadre of advisors would eventually come to represent an impressive set of talent, with skills that spanned the upper echelons of education, business, government and health care. Campus leadership teams meet monthly and the cabinet meets bi-monthly. The cabinet leadership, which did not exist before Leader X came on board, now numbers just under a dozen. This team has become a sounding board for Leader X and has shared in the responsibilities of leading mid managing the campus change efforts. By way of example, this group has been the go-to body for working mid
86


action team report-outs, dashboard and metrics discussions and event and communications planning.
Messaging and Communication Plans
On January 27, 2016, less than a month after taking office, Leader X delivered a
speech to the campus community, outlining a vision for the partnership this leader and the
community had entered into. That initial effort set the stage for how this leader intended to
engage with followers and the community as a whole. Witness the words of Leader X in an
internal email sent to various campus stakeholders on January 27, 2016:
Over the next 80 days, I have 25 meetings planned (and more are being added to the calendar) with groups both inside and outside the university. There are sessions scheduled with each school and college, as well a session for all faculty, one for all staff, and one for all students. I encourage you to come to one of the listening tour stops and share your views.... After 80 days of listening and learning, well distill and analyze what weve heard. I hope to report on emerging themes before the semester is over, and share at least a preliminary plan of action by the fall.
Four months later, by April 28, 2016, again during a personal interview, Leader X
articulated the need to ensure that the campus moved beyond the initial period of learning
and to move into a growth and prosperity phase; reflecting what they referred to during an
interview with the researcher as a sort of sigmoid curve, as made famous by Charles Handy
in his seminal work, The Age of the Paradox (2003). The important point about this
concentration on messaging is how it would play out in Leader Xs messaging plan. It
seemed clear from the start that this leader was going to pay close attention to the message,
the audience and the desired outcome. That they began this effort with an 80-day Reach Out
and Listen tour was meant to show that communication and transparency were going to be
the hallmarks of this administration.
87


Full Text

PAGE 1

PREPARING THE MIND OF THE ORGANIZATION THROUGH LEADERSHIP PRACTICE by N LIA V IVEIROS B.S., Temple University, 2000 M.Sc., London School of Economics and Political Science, 2001 L.L.B., University of London, 2013 A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Colorado in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctorate of Education Leadership for Educational Equity Program 2018

PAGE 2

ii 2018 N LIA VIVEIROS ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

PAGE 3

iii This thesis for the Doctor of Education degree by N lia Viveiros has been approved for the Leadership for Educational Equity Program by Connie L. Fulmer, Chair Rodney Blunck Callie Rennison Date: May 12, 2018

PAGE 4

iv V iveiros N lia (Ed.D., Leadership for Educational Equity Program ) P reparing the Mind of the Organization Through Leadership Practice Thesis directed by Professor Connie L. Fulmer. ABSTRACT This dissertation expands upon previous studies on the leadership practices of school principals leading successful schools focus ing on a leader in public higher education. T his study follows the actions of L eader X chosen as the case study subject and who, through intentional leadership practice, is attempting to shift the course of a public higher education research organization. T he conceptual framework for this study was constructed by former doctoral researchers and derived from t he work of Spillane Halverson & Diamond ( 2001; 2004) on the leadership practice triangle. A definition of a higher education leadershi p practice is thus constructed t o provide an analytical framework that describes the leaders practice within an higher education organization. A literature review provided t he emergent body of research on higher education leadership practice s, and the findings of this study were used to form member check interview protocol questions Member check interviews were conducted with 40 organizational members Additionally, emergent coding was conducted with 45 documents and 3.5 hours of video footage, supported by extensive field notes, collected through the period Jan uary 1, 2016, through August 1, 2017. This research yielded tone setting themes vision sharing and goal setting, e ngaging the workforce through various tools and activities Also shown was the importance of time bounded leadership practices that hel ped L eader X prepare the mind of the organization for change. The form and content of this abstract are approved. I recommend its publication. Ap proved: Connie L. Fulmer

PAGE 5

v DEDICATION To Jos Da Ponte Viveiros, father, mentor, explorer, supporter and believer and to Cesltina de Lima mother, contrarian and teacher. Because of you, I am here today. You have never been nor will you ever be forgotten.

PAGE 6

vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The names of those to whom I am greatly appreciative would fill several pages Thank you to my dissertation committee and especially to my chair, Dr. Connie Fulmer, and to my cohort six doctoral family and to my extended family both at work and abroad. You know who you are. Thank you as well to the subject of and inspiration for this dissertation. That higher education leader allowed me to study, analyze and dissect their leadership pra c tice from beginning to end. I am very grateful to them and continually inspired by all they do! And to my immediate loved ones, without whose support all of this simply would not be possible, my heart and my eternal gratitude are yours forever.

PAGE 7

vii C ONTENTS CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION 1 Purpose of Study 1 Research Questions 2 Conceptual F ramework 2 Significance 3 Assumptions for T his Research Study 4 Limitations 6 Operational Definitions 6 Summary 8 II. LITERATURE REVIEW 10 The Distributed Leadership Model Applied to Higher Education 10 What the Literature T ells U s A bout Leadership and Leading 13 The Context of Leading a Public University 15 Defining a Leadership Practice Construct for Higher Education 21 A Proposed Conceptual Framework for Leading in Higher Education 23 Definition of a Leadership Practice in Higher Education 25 Summary 27 III. METHODOLOGY 29 Research Design 29 Description of the Study Site 30 Unit of Analysis 31

PAGE 8

viii Role of the Researcher 32 The Researcher as an Instrument 32 Data Collection 35 Description of Artifacts Collected and Categorized 35 Documents Including Speeches, Conversations and Minutes 36 Media and Video Files 36 Observations 37 Research Question 1 38 Research Question 2 38 Research Question 3 39 Research Question 4 39 Data Analysis 40 How the Data Were Grouped 40 Iterative Analysis 41 Coding Inventories 42 Analysis of Member Checking 43 Groups for Member C hecking 44 Campus X s Leader 44 C ampus Xs Leadership Team 44 Campus X Teams 45 Member Check Protocol 46 Interview Questions 47 Issues of Privacy, Access and Transparency 48

PAGE 9

ix Definition of Leadership Practice Used 49 Trustworthiness of Data 49 Summary 50 IV. FINDINGS 52 Research Question 1 52 Research Question 2 55 A Leadership Practice Circle Uncovered 58 Work Focus of the Leadership Practice 60 Articulating a Campus Specific, Unifying Direction and Vision 61 Elevate Student Success 66 Advance Excellence in Teaching and Research 71 Innovate for Long Term Financial Stability and Sustainability 73 Strengthen O ur Position as one of the Citys and Regions Vital Assets 75 Create a More Cohesive, Collaborative and Inclusive Campus Culture 77 Tools 79 Data 80 Embedding Mechanisms 82 External Facilitators 85 General Skills and Traits 86 Messaging and Communication Plans 87 Policy and Procedure Changes 88 Sales and Story t elling 91 Activities 96

PAGE 10

x Events and Building Cultural Space 96 Leadership Meetings 100 L eadership Retreats, Member Checks and Partnership Building 101 Use of Teams 103 Pr oximal Goals 107 Distal Goals 108 Research Question 3 109 The Phases of Change at Campus X: Phase I 112 Phase II at Campus X 113 Phase III at Campus X 114 Phase Forward: Change Measurement 115 Member Checking with Leader X 116 An Applied Definition of Leadershi p Practice in Higher Education 117 Definition of a Leadership Practice in Higher Education 118 Research Question 4 119 Summary 127 V. SUMMAR Y, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDA TIONS 129 Summary of Research Study 129 Conclusions 132 Summary of Key Findings 132 Relationship of Key Findings to Literature 135 Implications of Findings 139 R ecommendations 141

PAGE 11

xi Recommendations for Public Higher Education Leaders 141 Recommendations for Higher Education Leader Preparatory Programs 143 Recommendations for Future Research 144 Final Thoughts 145 R EFERENCES 147 APPENDIX A. Post Card Consent 153 B. Artifact/D oc ument Review Questionnaire Adapted from Merriam (1998) 154 C. Campus Xs Leadership Practice Tools and Activities in Focus 156 D. Coding Table 158 E. Examples of Proximal and Distal Goal Setting at Campus X 163

PAGE 12

xii LIST OF TABLES T ABLE 1. A Proposed Leadership Practice Model at Campus X 26 2. Member Check Questions 48 3. Comparable IPEDS Student Common Data Set 53 4. A Derived Leadership P ractice Logic Model for Campus X 61 5. Leadership Practice Model: Campus Vision Work Focus 61 6. Leadership Practice Model: Elevate Student Success Work Focus 67 7. Leadership Practice Model: Advance Excellence in Teaching and Research Work Focus 72 8. Leadership Practice Model Table: Financial Sustainability Work Focus 74 9. Leadership Practice Model Table: City and Region Vital Asset Work Focus 76 10. Leadership Practice Model Table: Campus Culture Work Focus 78 11. A Monthly Example of Tools U sed in January 2017 80 12. Summary Data of Memb er Check ing 120 13. Member Check Results Data: Research Question 1 121 14. Member Check Results Data: Research Question 2 122 15. Member Check Results Data: Research Question 3 123 16. Member Check Results Data: Research Question 4 124 17. Before and After Employee Sentiments 126

PAGE 13

xiii LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1. Components of a higher e ducation s trategic plan 22 2. Leadership practice c onceptual f ramework 24 3. Pictures from a l eadership r etreat held March 23, 2016 64 4. Cover example with note from Campus X s leader 90 5. A c ap p ella g roup at Campus X branding l aunch e vent 98 6. Students posing at Campus X branding launch event 98 7. Hip hop dancers and L eader X at a b randing launch event 99 8. Team building night at a sports event, February 2017 100 9. Picture of Campus X s trategic priorities at a l eadership r etreat July 2016 102 10. Placard placed at a board roundtable retreat 103 11. Pictures taken at various leadership t eam r etreats 104 12. Picture of a team member taken in July 2016 106 13. Campus X distal and proximal g oals s napshot 109 14. Campus X l eader s s trategic prioritization t imeline 112 15. New conceptual f ramework 118

PAGE 14

1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION In a higher education environment that has become crowded and capriciously funded, it is more imperative than ever for universities to differentiate themselves and invest in their strengths. That is the backdrop for a movement occurring across higher education. Institutions are becoming more intentional, more focused on identifying the students they seek to serve, and delivering the most relevant academic programs possible. Purpose of Study Th e purpose of this study was to investigate the specific and particularized leadership practice used by the leader of Campus X to prepare the mind of the organization for the change required to ensure success in a turnaround effort for Campus X This study was also an opportunity to contribute to the literature on the leadership practice construct with a specific higher education focu s on higher education that builds upon cas e studies focusing on leadership in K 12 educational organizations Leadership is commonly seen as an important variable that affect s organizational performance. While the concept of leadership has been extensively studie d, there is still much to be discovered regarding how leadership directly affects organizational climate, culture and performance ( Avey, Wernsi ng & Luthans, 2008; Eilers & Camacho, 2007; Judge & Piccolo, 2004; Schyns & Schilling, 2013) In early 2016, a new leader took the helm of Campus X. Very early on, t his new leader was tagged as possessing the leadership qualities needed to move the campus forward in a way that had not yet been done. L eader X s plan for change began the moment they set foot on C ampus X S ix months into th is leaders tenure, a campus wide revision strategy, including six strategic priorities had been developed. This research identified the specific and particularized

PAGE 15

2 leadership practice used in an effort to achieve these goals. Research Questions The research question s that guide this s t udy i n identifying the particularized leadership practice used by a leader of a public higher education campus are listed below. 1. What did Leader X find when they arrived at Campus X ? 2. What did Leader X do to overcome the issues they found? 3. On the basis of a literature review and the evidence of change effort gathered in this work, what is an applied definition of leadership practice in higher education? 4. How did Leader Xs leadership practice prepare the mind of the campus to achieve six strategic goals? Conceptual Framework The conceptual framework that guide s this study was derived from the literature and en hanced by researchers Bishop ( 2013), Holloway ( 2013) and Rubin ( 2013) who examined the leadership practices of principals leading successful schools serving EL L (English Language Learner ) students in low performing schools. The conceptual framework wa s a leadership practice construct The se researchers traced the evolution of the term leadership practice from early mentions in the literature to its further development by Spillane Halverson & Diamond (200 4) and used it as a conceptual framework to unpac k the work of successful principals. The development of how the conceptual framework was derived from this prior work, and how it was built to examine this bounded case study is detailed in c hapter II. Prior doctoral researchers examined the work on the interactions between leader, follower s and organizational context as specified in the work of Spillane Halverson & Diamond (2001; 2004) ; they found that the successful leaders they studie d used tools and

PAGE 16

3 activities as well as proximal goals to achieve a desired end, or distal goals. The researchers argue d that t hese components needed to be added to the leadership practice construct that was used to study successful leaders in the K 12 arena (Bishop, 2013; Holloway, 2013; Rubin, 2013). T his study used th is conceptual framework to investigate the leadership practice used in higher education by L eader X. Significance This work chart s through a bounded case study, a c ampus leaders desire to reverse negative organizational outputs through an intentional leadership practice and shift the course of a public, urban, higher education research organization. Tight (2004) has called the field of higher education an atheoretical community of practice. It has become even more complex as higher education organizations continue to respond to an ever more diverse student body and array of demands from its stakeholders. The natural shift has been from collegial decision making toward managerial corporate models. This move has not been welcomed in certain parts of the higher education sector and tends to be enacted with ideological expectations of collegiality, participation and collaborative decision making (Birnbaum, 1988; Block, 2002; Bolden, 2004; 2011) And while inferences can be made, for example, about how current leadership models can be applied to higher education, a key problem is that little is known about what exactly makes an individual effe ctive (or ineffective ) as a higher education leader and what practices of that leader make it so This is important to know in higher education. Higher education leaders run complex organizations ; they face the complexity of operat ing according to market pressures despite an ever dwindling public purse while also managing the differentness of the higher education space (Jones, Harvey, Lefoe & Ryland, 2014; Tight, 2004; van Ameijde, Nelson, Billsberry

PAGE 17

4 & van Meurs, 2009; Ylijoki, 2003) Complexity and diversity are inherent in the higher education sector making the leadership of it a complex, multifaceted process (Birnbaum, 1988) While the reasons for such complexity may be many, it is clear that higher education has not traditionally been a go to place for self reflection on leadership practices and/or organizational change (Birnbaum, 1988; Kezar & Eckel, 2002) This stud y attempts to close this gap. T his research looks at one particularized urban campus using a bounded case study approach that prevent s generali zed findings ; at the same time, the f indings that do emerge may ultimately inform future research on intentional and particularized leadership practices, strategic decision making, organizational change, and outcomes and effectiveness in higher education Thus, two developments in this research could have important implications for further study. First, systematic research on leaders hip practice and outcomes in higher education is needed. Second, the research in this area can be used as a training tool to develop the principles of leadership practice effectiveness for higher education. Assumptions for T his Research Study Setting goals whether they are called plans, strategic plan s, priorities or something else, suggests c hange for the organization. C hange is, at its core, a people process and people are creatures of habit, hardwired to resist adopting new mind sets practices, an d behaviors (Schneider Ehrhart & Macey 2013; Senge & Crainer, 2008; Sharma & Kirkman, 2015; Smith 2001; Smollan, 2015; Wittig, 2012) To achieve strategic, systemic, sustainable, transformational change, organizations must embed these mindsets, practices, and behaviors at every level (Baruch & Lambert, 2007; Basham, 2012; Denison & Mishra, 1989) The elephant in the room when it comes to organizational change is this: most change initiatives

PAGE 18

5 are done to employees not implemented with or by them (Wittig, 2012) Having something one endure s versus something one buy s into changes the approach with which one view s the task. An informal culture left to instinct and survival will likely dig in its heels and resist change ( Schein, 2010; Senge & Crainer, 2008) This means that effective change programs must include, along with strategy and central planning, elements of t he informal organization (Schein, 1993, 2010; Yukl, 2006) C hange, strategic prioritization/planning/re visioning and goal setting are different ways to describe the same thing. As with any management tool, goal setting sometimes called strategic planning or revisioning is used to help chart a course so that the organization can do a better job of focus ing its talents and employees, and to adj ust the organizational compass to a changing environment. Because strategic planning is about fundamental decisions and actions, the plan that accompanies it usually involves organizational discomfort ( i.e., change). Prioritizing an operational strategy is the fundamental concept that defin es the organization s reason for existence. It represents the personality of the organizationits raison detre. In strategy prioritization, one always answers the following questions: (a) Why do es the organization exist? (b) What business are we in? (c) W hat customer(s) do we serve? A s such, this work is often synonymous with organizational change (Morgan, 1993). Strategic prioritization planning is synonymous with change because, by default, it encompasses the process by which an organization changes its current or future structures, strategies, operational methods, technologies, or organizational culture(s) inorder to affect change within the organization (Kezar & Eckel, 2002; Kotter & Schlesin ger, 1979; Morgan, 1993).

PAGE 19

6 L imitations This study is limited in scope, as it examines data from one participating public higher education institution (Campus X) undergoing change in the early stages of a new leaders tenure. The sample size is thus small and limited to the campus boundaries. Operational Definitions The operational definitions for the scope of this study are listed below. This author recognizes the limitations and debate over terms and definitions. Activities /Tools : Just as leadership happens in everyday practices tools and activities are part of that practice. Tools and activities are enacted through formal routines and informal interactions and can include but are not limited to memos, scheduling procedures, agen das, policies, procedures and evaluation protocols. Change : Change is used synonymously with strategic planning, re visioning, goal setting and prioritization in the case of Campus X ; as w ith any management tool, L eader X s strategic planning is rechartin g a course so that the organization can do a better job of focus ing on its talents and employees, and adjust the organizational compass to a changing environment (Hanover Research, 2014) T he tools and activities as part of goal setting tell the story of Leader X s particularized leadership practice and how this strategic planning is carried out Distal Goals : These are long term or primary goals. In the case of Campus Xs leader these were five stated priorities. Leadership Context : In a recent survey of theory and practice in leadership, Northouse (2004) concluded that there are almost as many different definitions of leadership as there are people who have tried to define it (p. 2). Northouse defines leadership as a

PAGE 20

7 process by which an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve common goals (p. 4). The term followers is used to describe those whom the leader is attempting to influence. The term subordinates is often used in organizational settings, but followers s uggests that leaders can be in any role or position, and a bureaucratic hierarchy is not necessarily implied (Nussbaumer & Merkley, 2010) Leadership Practice: The intentional and particularized plan that a leader determines and implements (a) includes collaborative work by the leader and follower s within the context of the work environment, (b) is focused in specific work areas (which in this study are the five strategic goals), an d (c) use s tools and activities that result in the achievement of both proximal and distal goals. Navigator : In change management parlance, navigators generally hold a type of director role. The l eader used a navigator on each initial work team ostensibly to help run through the right processes to navigate implementation of the work team product. Organizational Culture : The term culture has a long history in anthropology. Pettigrew introduced the topic to organizational studies in 1979 and legitimized its use ( Lok & Crawford, 1999; Yukl, 2006) According to Yukl (2006), the concept of belief, ideology, language, ritual and myth could be applied to the study of organizations Schein (2010) built on this concept by proposing three levels of organizational culture : a rtifacts, espoused beliefs and values, and underlying assumptions. The idea of culture can describe how organizational members go about their day to day work lives ; it cannot be easily articulated and requires in depth interviewing to illuminate its attributes Proximal Goals : Pr oximal goals are best described as progress markers that provide specific performance or attainment information that is not available through distal goals

PAGE 21

8 alone. The theory that proximal goal setting aids strategy better than distal goal setting alone is supported by research ( Bandura & Schunk, 1981; Cato & Gor don, 2012). Proximal goals are said to help develop self efficacy and intrinsic motivation and can help produc e more positive goal attainment over the course of task engagement (Bandura & Schunk, 1981; Wigfield & Eccles, 1992 ). Strategic Goals and/or Pr iorities : In March 2016, L eader X held an initial session with campus leadership before a s pring board of t rustees meeting to develop what would become five c ampus strategic p riorities These were intended to set the tone for a shared campus specific vision Validator : In the words of Campus Xs leader each working group was supported with validators to serve as subject matter consultants ( E mail from Leader X, July 14, 2016). Work Groups / Action /Steering Teams : Work /action/steering teams play ed a particularly important part in this study as these tools were used by Campus Xs leader as the focus for realiz ing distal and proximal goals. Groups are essential management tools in any organizat ion. Teams were brought together by L eader X to work on novel problems to deal with mission critical decisions. Initially this included five working groups f our action teams, a faculty/administrator student success partnership committee, c ampus leaders hip and L eader Xs cabinet S ummary As noted earlier, Campus Xs strategic prioritization first involved corralling people listening, distilling, synthesizing and then selling the need for change and a new direction. According to Schein (2010), the need for change must be grounded in data and sold to the

PAGE 22

9 organization. This chapter began with a description of how a listening distilling exercise began and then described the purpose of this work : to contribute to the emergent literature on leadership practice and describe the significance of this bounded case study to the area of intentional leadership practice in higher education This concept brings together disparate areas of research and includes the impact and importance of leadership practice on organizational change. Campus Xs new leader made deliberate choices regarding the strategy chosen to achieve stated priorities ; put a certain leadership style in place; and determined that the organization needed to change all within the context of the existing Campus X culture. What intentional leadership practice did L eader X engage in what work foci, tools, activities, distal and proximal goals did Leader X use to refocus the mind of the organization toward change ? Answe ring those questions is the prim ary focus of this work.

PAGE 23

10 CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW This chapter presents a review of literature regarding leadership in higher education and the emergence of a leadership practice construct. The areas of research outlin ed include (a) the distributed leadership model applied to higher education, ( b) what former leadership practice researchers found about leading (c) what research tells us about leadership and leading, ( d) the context of leading a public university and (e) a proposed conceptual framework of a leadership practice within the higher education sector. The Distributed Leadership Model Applied to Higher Education The notion of the leader plus in defining leadership practice takes into account the fact that multiple individuals participate in formal and informal leadership roles within an organization, and that leadership happens through give and take (Spillane Hal verson & Diamond, 2004). This is particularly true for higher education (Jones, 2014; Jones, Harvey, Lefoe & Ryland, 2014). Contextualizing leadership practice in such an analytical framework focuses attention on the practice of leadership rather than seeing it as a role or trait based competency. If the role of the leader is to transla te organizational wishes into the organizational performance of productivity then the real question is what management approach best fulfills what the leadership requires of it? This suggests we have no way of knowing what good management or leadership is until we know how well it produces the desired results A ccording to Bryman (2007), a central question in higher education a nd in the broader context of l eadership and organizational performance has been, which leadership practices are best able to convert intentions into organizational performance? This question

PAGE 24

11 takes us back to the over arching question of this study : how did Leader X s leadership practice prepare the mind of the organization to achieve six strategic goals? Spillane Halverson & Diamond ( 2001; 2004) would ask us to focus on the coleading and co performing aspects across roles and responsibilities within Campus X rather than focus on formally designated positions. Followers in the distributed leadership model may not have leadership designations or certain positional authority ; nonetheless they fulfill a leadership responsibility (Jones, 2014) This could be done, for example, through the followers contribution to the practice of leadership within the interactions of the organizational work activity (Spillane Halverson & Diamond, 2001; 2004). Together with this role is the context or situation in w hich the work is carried out. The three types of distributed leadership styles are collaborated distribution, collective distribution and coordinated distribution. Collaborated distribution is defined as the work of multiple leaders who co perform the sam e task at the same time and place. Collective distribution refers to multiple leaders working together, but separately, and coordinated distribution occurs when activities of leadership must be carried out in a certain sequence. Spillane Halverson & Di amond (2001; 2004) distinguish between the identification and analysis of tasks and the enactment of those tasks, centering the study of school leadership on the how and why of the leadership activity. Organizational leadership is a social construct that does not appear in nature, which means we infuse it with our subjective interpretation. Intuitively it makes sense. We all want to work for the best organizations. Every employee in Campus X, undoubt edly wants this, takes pride in purpose and craves self fulfillment. I n an ideal world, any organizational leader wants to carve the path to this

PAGE 25

12 desire and wants to successfully translate mission into goodif not great or exemplary organizational performance. We infer from this a basic desire that the only justifiable reason for an organization to exist is to produce something worthwhile and w orthwhile organizational results always relate to the satisfaction of human needs. The principles of distributed leadership provide a means for overcoming some of the problems posed with theories that do not take into account the cultural uniqueness of higher education ( Birnbaum, 1988; Jones, 2014; Middlehurst, 2012). At the conceptual level, distributed leadership is well aligned with the notions of professional autonomy, faculty governance, and collegiality in the academy, while also honoring the need to effectively chart courses in turbulent business environments Higher educations reliance on teamwork to problem solve in such environments is a case in point. Higher education institutions, especially those in the public space, have long conducted their knowledge work by becoming increasingly team based, pulling in the expertise and diversity of professionals from different practice fields ( Middlehurst, 2012). The mechanics of distributed leadership can be viewed as a concrete design for translating vision into successful practice productionthe conversion of conceptual design into an operating system ( Jones, 2014) Campus Xs woes broad vision for the greater organization, and a practice problem led Campus Xs new leader to find a solution. That solutiona leadership practice areabecame the conceptual framework L eader X used to reach identified goals. The leader to follower framework situated in the context, focuses on the dynamics of interactions between the individuals and within the situation. In Campus Xs example, the distributed leadership model fluidly and situationally adapts to the organizational needs in

PAGE 26

13 question. The pra ctice here promotes a broader view of leadership in higher education and afford s a tool through which we can diagnose the gestalt of leadership practice. What the Literature T ells U s A bout Leadership and Leading The definition of a leadership practice su pplied by Spillane Halverson & Diamond (2001; 2004) relying on the interactions of leaders, followers, and situation, framed the beginnings of a leadership practice definition for this study As noted earlier, leadership practice could be described as lacking the depth of the specific leadership practice in the context. T o that end, the conceptual framework being used in this study combined the work of Spillane Halve r son & D iamonds (2001; 2004) leadership practice triangle and also borrowed from the work of doctoral researchers who further distilled the framework to come up with a practice that moves beyond actions and behaviors and provides a more robust normative framework that includes the context of leader s setting goals and specifically how the y construct pathways toward those goals ( Bishop, 2013; Holloway, 2013; Rubin, 2013) T o this definition was added the emergent body of literature on higher education leadership practice. Despite the flurry of research activity surrounding leadershiphow to define it, nurture and shape it, there is no widely accepted definition of leadership, no consensus on how best to develop leaders, and remarkably little evidence of the impact of leadership development on organizational performance and productivity. Perhaps part of the problem with this definition is the conceptual ambiguity that surrounds the definition: is leadership a process ? D oes it involve influence ? I n what context or situation does it occur ? T o what end is it practiced? Most theories would point to the individual as the source of the leadership conundrum B ut we know it is much more than that, and we must in some way work to

PAGE 27

14 influence followers in reaching a common goal. In short, leadership and the practice of it is a complex phenomenon touching on many areas. That said, however, and to the extent that there is some degree of consistency and similarity in research on leadership practice, the following assumptions about leadership and its practiceregardless of measurement strategy used, me thodological variations or type of organization studiedhave been concluded. On the topic of organizational culture, for example, Senge and Crainer (2008) have written extensively on the ability of organization s to learn and adapt to change and how the impact of leadership can be mediated by organizational culture ( Lok & Crawford, 1999; Ogbonna & Harris, 1998) It has also been determined that the behaviors of leaders influence the perceptions of organizational culture among followers ( Lok & Crawford, 1991; Spillane Halverson & Diamond, 2001; 2004). Regarding the literature that locat es the individual at the nexus of leading, research concludes that (a) transformational leadership behaviors can help bring about powerful changes in an organization ( Avolio, Walumbwa & W eber 2009; Basham, 2012; Bass, 1985; 1997); (b) leadership creates the environment in which organizational change occurs (Hennessey, 1998; Higgs & Rowland, 2011); (c) leadership behaviors are associated with cultural traits (Bass, 1985; 1997; 1999; Bass & Avolio, 2013) ; and (d) leader s use their knowledge of organizational culture to e ffect change (Kotter, 1990z) Looking at leadership as a process, the research has generally concluded that leaders understand that external and internal integration are key concepts tied to survival and adaptation and as groups develop around these areas, such elements become part of the cultur e s DNA (Schein, 2010) The next section will discuss how this leadership literature does or does not work in higher education.

PAGE 28

15 The Context of Leading a Public U niversity This dominant paradigm in the literature on effective schools, especially those that focus on effective higher education institutions tell s one consistent story : there is no obvious single way to summarize and capture the effectiveness of highe r education leadership practice. At the heart of the emergent research in this field is the need for a leader to create an environment or context for academics and others to fulfill their potential and for the leader to take an interest in their work (Bolden, 2004; 2011; Bolden, Petrov & Gosling, 2009; Bryman, 2007; Middlehurst 2012). Also at the heart of this research is the significant differen ces in the higher education space different from its private counterparts and from t he concerns that dominate the K 12 world. A recent report by the Chronicle of Higher Education (2017) titled Mindset of a president examin ed leadership t rends in higher e ducation show ing that by 2014, twothirds of presidents at public institutions believed that higher education was headed in the right direction; but by 2015, twothirds had reversed that opinion. Public higher education leaders now express grave concerns about the decline of state financial support and the intense competition for students. U nlike their K 12 counterparts, college and university presidents also have to deal with a different cadre of stakeholders that focus their concerns on issues such as college affordabi lity, accreditation standards and external bodies, retention and persistence, Pell grants, engagement scores, alumni giving, employment and career readiness, equity attainment and public private partnership development, to name a few. Other key differences between both market models relate to student age, course level, and funding streams with these differences driv ing rates of tech nology product development and adoption.

PAGE 29

16 The obvious difficulty in examining the public higher education space, in particular, is as noted, the very differentness of the organizational model. This differentness also helps explain why discussions about higher education and access to it, often become vitriolic. Emile Durkheim (2015) explained this uniqueness in his work. It is rare to find an institution which is at once so uniform and so diverse; it is recognisable in all the guises which it takes, but in no one place is it identical with what it is in any other. This unity and diversity constitute the final pr oof of the extent to which the university was the spontaneous product of mediaeval life; for it is only living things which can in this way, while fully retaining their identity, bend and adapt themselves as a whole to the variety of circumstances and envi ronments. The significance of working in such a distinct climate speaks to the desired or preferred state of fostering a collegial climate of mutual supportiveness and the maintenance of autonomy while also supporting and working toward a values oriented mission. Leadership in such a system requires someone who is not driven by blind devotion to the institution or by political ambition and ego but rather by responsible stewardship while considering the different and unique needs of higher education and the particular limitations of the institution. This finding is consistent with what other researchers have found regarding the differentness as pect of the higher education space (Jones, Harvey, Lefoe, & Ryland, 2014; Tight, 2004; van Ameijde, Nelson, Billsberry & van Meurs, 2009; Ylijoki, 2003) Complexity and diversity are inherent in the higher education sector, making leadership of it a complex, multifac eted process (Birnbaum, 1988) And while there is no specific formula for the best way to lead a higher education institution, there are clear, fairly consistent implications in the literature about how not to lead. The following have been described by various researchers as likely to cause damage to a higher education organization: (a) failing to consult, (b) not respecting existing values, (c) actions that undermine collegiality, (d) not promoting the interests of those for whom the

PAGE 30

17 leader is responsible, (e) being uninvolved in the life of the departm ent/institution, (f) undermining autonomy (g) leading with ego and ambition and (h) allowing the department/ center/ institution to drift (Block, 2002; Bol den, 2004; Bolden, Petrov & Gosling 2009; Bryman, 2007). The distributed leadership perspective alone cannot describe the dynamic; that is due to the existence of various levels of leader s and followers. With so many stakeholders to account for at varying levels of the campus, it is even more important to understand that there is no proscribed formula of leadership effectiveness in higher education. Bryman (2007), for example, points to the difficultly of contextualizing leadership when looking from the vantage point of c hancellor, provost, department c hair or c enter director all of which are ostensibl y leadership roles. Muddying the waters even more is the notion of shared governance, which is so prevalent in higher education. The shared governance model posits the need to foster collegiality through democratic decisionmaking and mutual cooperativen ess all of which are elements of the leadership desiderata model (Jones, 2014; Lambert, 2002) However, it is the intensity of these expectations among university employees that makes higher education distinctive (Bolden, Petrov & Gosling 2009; Jones, H arvey, Lefoe, & Ryland, 2014; Lambert, 2002). Brymans (2007) report on effective leadership in higher education describes key findings from a research project investigating the styles of and approaches to higher education leadership, and leadership behav iors, which are associated with effectiveness in higher education. The project consisted of two distinct tasks: the first was a systematic search of literature relating to leadership and effectiveness in higher education studies ; the second was a series o f semi structured interviews with academics who were involved in

PAGE 31

18 researching leadership in higher education, or leadership more generally. The key research question directing the Bryman (2007) investigation was: What styles of or approaches to leadership are associated with effective leadership in higher education? Brymans (2007) research findings revealed a common narrative, but his research provides few guides for future action, and there is far too little research on the variety of leadership roles that exist in universities at departmental level or otherwise. Additional research carried out by the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) presents a series of policy briefs based on indepth examination of 20 Project DEEP schools that have higher than predicted graduation rates and have demonstrated through NSSE, that they have effective policies and practices for working with students of different abilities and aspirations (NSSE National Survey of Student Engagement, 2017). The briefs are being used to provide useful suggestions for promoting student success to a wide range of audiences including university administrators and leaders, faculty, students and the general public. The DEEP practice briefs indicate that while there is no single blueprint for student success, six factors and conditions appear to be common to those institutions considered most educationally effective: (a) a mission and lived educational philosophy (b) an unshakeable focus on student learning, (c) clear pathways to student success (d) environments adapted for educational enrichment (e) improvement oriented campus culture and (f) shared responsibility for educational quality and student success. The NSSE work indicated above was followed by work carried out by the American Council of Educations Center for Policy Research and Strategy (CPRS). Inspired in part by proceedings from a September 2015 American Council on Education/TIAA Institute convening of college and university presidents, provosts, chief financi al officers, and higher

PAGE 32

19 education thought leaders and researchers, this paper was further guided by the business model and networked organization literature (Soares, Steel, & Way, 2016). CPRSs work examined thought leadership at the intersection of publi c policy and institutional strategy with an ancillary aim of providing senior postsecondary leaders and public policymakers with an evidence base to promote emergent practices in higher education with an emphasis on long term and systemic solutions for a n evolving higher education landscape and changing American demographic. In the words of Soares, Steels and Way (2016): H igher education is more important than ever to both individual opportunity and national competitiveness and to that is tied the growing expectation that college and university presidents, provosts, and chief financial officers will use data to drive decisions (p. iii). Soares, Steels and Way (2016) further proposed a network approach to leadershipone that creates transparency around institutional financial data using business model analysis and empowers those on the front lines to make data informed decisions to improve institutional practices aligned with performance outcomes. The notion that higher education campus leaders operate in the dark, particularly when operating in the world of finance and big data decision making, was also discussed in a 2013 Witt K i e ffer report examining leadership traits of college and university leaders compared with their corporate colleagues. The Wit t K i e ffer study (2013) gave higher education leaders three separate proven personality assessments and plotted these against similarly situated business leaders (Leadership Traits and Success 2013). The most noteworthy discrepancy between higher educat ion leaders and their corporate counterparts were the scores on the commerce scale. The percentile difference was 23 percent with higher education leaders scoring at only at the 30th percentile compared with the 53rd

PAGE 33

20 percentile for the executives. The W itt K i e ffer study (2013) described this difference as having significant implications. It suggests, for example, that higher education leaders are not predisposed to concern themselves with matters of finance, investment, profitability, and so forth. In an era of increasingly greater public accountability, this may prove to be a red flag for higher education leaders and their funders. In 2015, the Journal of Higher Education Management published by the American Association of University Administrators (AAUA) produced a 216page collection of varied works specific to the higher education space. Of note in that work w ere articles examining the development of deans as effective leaders for todays education challenges lessons in university leadership, university presidents and competent leadership. Savior and Cooper (2015) examined the role senior leaders in higher education play with regard to effecting positive organizational change through visioning and strategic development. The Savior and Cooper ( 2015) study built on the work of Yukl (2006) who had earlier argued that motivating and inspiring employees is something higher education leaders must get right through clear visioning, imbuing a sense of collaboration and trust and motivating others to a ct. Savior and Cooper (2015) analyzed and measured senior leadership practices at private/secular and private/religious higher education institutions to identify leader differences through the Kouzes & Posner (2002 ) exemplary practices lens. Their findin gs show that the most important role for these leaders was to model the way forward for the organization. Bauer (1993) examined whether leadership practices of presidents of higher educational institutions in the N ortheast differed from those of leaders in business and industry. Key findings in Bauers (1993) work through the LPI (Leadership Practices

PAGE 34

21 Inventory) self score lens revealed that academic leaders rated themselves significantly higher than business leaders as did the LPI Observer scores for Challenging, Inspiring, and Modeling. Enabling was ranked highest by college presidents (as was true for business leaders), followed by Inspiring (5th), Challenging (2nd), Modeling (3rd), and Encouraging (4th). The rank order on LPI Observer scores for college presidents was the same. The rank order was identical between the LPI Self and LPI Observer when each sample was examined separately. The most substantive difference was i n i nspiring a s hared vision by academic leaders (Bauer, 1993). Additional research by Cato and Gordon (2012) confirms the notion that aligning strategic vision at the very top of the organization is a key contributor to the success of a higher education organization. A common and shared purpose builds vi sion for the organization and in turn drives motivation and engagement in employees (Bauer, 1993; Bryman, 2007; Cato & Gordon 2012). The notion of engagement and greater effectiveness driven by leadership in higher education is an ever emerging theme in the literature. As Black (2015) points out Higher Education leaders need a combination of leadership and management competencies on order to address the challenges in the sectorwithin a changing world an effective leader must be both student and teache r (p. 64). What the literature on leadership in higher education is thus showing is that the best campus leaders emerge as those who help support the building of a shared, supportive school climate and culture that removes obstacles to productivity and s ets the tone and vision for the path forward. And although this may appear obvious to many, an important part of what a higher education leader does is support the creation of a more cohesive, collaborative and inclusive culture.

PAGE 35

22 In 2014, Hanover Research produced a report examining strategic planning at higher institutions all of which were public or public associated organizations. The Hanover report examined best practices in strategic planning as well as common pitfalls. The key findings broadly mat ched the themes found in the emergent literature of lea dership in higher education. The first of these findings was the planning process that included creating the need for change, engaging stakeholder s formulating goals and action steps, monitoring implementation, tracking progress and revising the plan. At several of these institutions, tools and activities such as benchmark (proximal) and longe r term (distal) goal setting, listening tours, town hall meetings and a regularly updated website promoted the messaging. The Hanover report (201 4) also found that strategic planning cycles ranged from 11 years, based on planning that lasted eight to 16 months and that aligning the budget with the plan helped increase the plans impact. The following Hanover R eport (2014) figure presents the most common conceptual components of a typical strategic plan from that report Figure 1. Components of a higher e ducation s trategic plan. So what does all of this mean for higher education leaders? The higher education space is complex and requires critical leadership attributes that help a leader respond to a changing landscape. While there is no defined blueprint for higher education organizational success the literature does suggest that (a) context matters, (b) leadership matters, (c) followers matter and that leadership practice occurs over a period of time and through a

PAGE 36

23 multitude of factors not always easily disentangled from one an other. That literature goes on to note that higher education institutions that are the most effective for staff, faculty and students, and have an unrelenting focus on a vision and mission that models the path forward with the student success squarely at the center of the equation. We can also infer from the literature attributes of student success integral to the most effective institutions including (a) unshakeable focus on student learning, (b) defined clear pathways to student success, (c) environments adapted for educational enrichment (d) a continuous improvement oriented campus culture and (e) shared responsibility for educational quality and student success which require the use of work foci such as strategic goal setting tools, activities, benchmarks and longer term goals against which to report success. All of this suggests that leadership practice extends beyond the scope of one individual characteristic, such as only behavioral theory, and is better described as a unique case configuration of a leader influencing follower s within a situation who defines work foci and supports the tools and activities that work toward achieving a proximal and a longer term (distal) desired end. A Proposed Conceptual Framework for Leading in Higher Education In constructing the conceptual framework for this study, this research took t he definition of a leadership practice supplied by Spillane Halverson & Diamond (2001; 2004) relying on the interactions of leaders / followers and context and added to this practice triangle the work of doctoral researchers ( Bishop, 2013; Holloway, 2013 and Rubin, 2013) who further distilled the framework to come up with a practice that moves beyond actions and behaviors and provided for a mor e analytical framework that articulated the context of leader s setting goals and how they specifically constructed the pathways to achieve those goals. Added to these two components were the emergent findings from the body of literature

PAGE 37

24 on leadership pract ice in higher education. Research on higher education, its context and leader behaviors in higher education provides further context and background to form the definition of leadership practice in this specific space. T his helps create a practice construct that concisely speaks to how leaders in higher education do their job effectively At the beginning of this research, the conceptual framework departed from previous work in the sense that the early picture emerging from the higher education literature suggested that leadership practice exists on a continuum, may change on the bas is of context or situation, and is more circular than linear in nature. Figure 2. Leadership practice c onceptual f ramework The diagram in F igure 2 depicts how leadership practice occurs across the leader(s) and occurs on a continuum followers and the situation and how tools and activities are used to solve an organizational directive, thereby deriving a leadership practice in higher Work Focus Tools Activities Proximal Goals Distal Goals Leader(s ) Follower s Situation

PAGE 38

25 education This conceptual framework i s drawn from prior work emphasiz ing it is insufficient to study leadership by simply observing the leader and that i t must be studied from a distributed perspective (Spillane, Halverson, & Diamond, 2001; 2004). Definition of a Leadership Practice i n Higher Education As the review of literature demonstrates, there is a n emergent body of work concerning leadership in higher education and organizational effectiveness. While there is no agreed format on the best way to lead in higher education, setting vision, aligning culture, and shared leadership are consistent themes that occur on a continuum of leader follower interactions The definition of a leadership practice supplied by Spillane Halverson & Diamond ( 2001; 2004) relying on the interactions of leaders, follower s, and situation, br ought former leadership practice researchers closer to a definition of leadership practice B ut it was construed as lacking the depth of a specific leadership practice in context. T hese researchers added to the distributed triangle the notion of a n intentional and particularized practice that moves beyond actions and behaviors and includes the context of leaders setting goals and how they specifically construct the pathways to achieve those goals. The literature on higher education and l ead ership further refined that framework to suggest that leading in higher education occurs on a continuum, represented as a circle that encapsulates how higher education leader s particularize their practice of establishing strategic priorities and setting in motion various tools and activities that help them realize the distal and proximal goals of those objectives. The table below first used by researchers Bishop ( 2013) Holloway ( 2013) and Rubin ( 2013) was derived from the literature and enhanced by examin ing t he leadership practices of successful principals in low performing schools serving ELA students. They used this table as part of the framework to unpack the work of successful principals. These

PAGE 39

26 components, the researchers argue d, needed to be ad ded to the leadership practice construct used to study successful leaders in the K 12 arena. Table 1 A Proposed Leadership Practice Model at Campus X Within any organizational situation, activities and tools, processes and procedures and other aspects create further opportunity for leader follower interaction in situ, thus contributing defining leadership practices (Spillane Halverson & Diamond, 2001; 2004). The same authors described this interrelated network as a web in which the driving fo rce is the need for the leader to lead the school in the context of the given situation, support the creation of tools and activities in response to the work focus defined by the leader and provide ways for followers to interact in the context of the specific situation (named as the work tools and activities) created by followers to monitor and attain desired outcomes (goals). Campus Xs leader re viewed the leadership practice framework and issued a set of desired work foci to the c ampus organization. Leader X then set about the important work of assessing the situation and bringing followers on board through influence (leader s and

PAGE 40

27 followers) and through assessing where the organization needed to go and how to get there (situation) How to get there, in the case of Campus X, involved capitalizing or modifying work and performance routines structures and even social practices (e.g., relations with unit leaders and peers) on a work continuum that gave voice to the complexities a nd inherent uncertainties of leadership in higher education and in times of disruptive change Bar uch and Lambert (2007) identify the need for effective leaders to learn to shift their decision making styles to match changing business environments. This could be applied to this case bounded study and to L eader X. Accordingly, this is the definition of a leadership practice construct being used in this study: L eader X influenced followers to move together for more purposeful organizational action through the use of tools and activities and through setting objective s (work foci) by determining an ultimate campus vision. To facilitate this practice, L eader X gave voice to the complexities and inherent uncertainties of higher education lead ership in times of disruptive change and identified the need to shift the leadership practice to match changing environments. Summary The broad themes emerg ing from the literature review suggest that (a) organizational change or strategic planning is necessary for higher ed ucation organizations to survive and prosper ; (b) leading in a higher education context is complex and works on a continuum of collaboration rather than on a linear trajectory ; ( c ) there is no one ideal leadership type, system or method th at works best ; and ( d) at the heart of emergent research in the higher education leadership field is the need for the leader to asses s manage and create the environment for followers to fulfil l potential and interest in their work (Bolden, 2011; Bolden, Petrov & Goslin g, 2009; Bryman, 2007).

PAGE 41

28 To mitigate tensions and facilitate effective performance in any organization, leaders must exhibit appropriate leadership behaviors Those behaviors depend on the leader, the context, the followers and the problem (s) being fac ed. Effective leadership practice in higher education thus involves using existing adapting or modifying work routines and social practices (tools and activities) with an eye toward realizing work focus through proximal and distal goal setting This can and usually does work on a circular continuum in higher education. Leaders in higher education who get this practice right have the added advantage of inspiring the organization to accomplish the challenging goal of firmly embedding change (Bass, 1997; 1999). Because this study bases its observations and measurements within the context surrounding Campus X and its new leader, t he definition of leadership practice applied is specific to Campus X and its leader. The next chapter explain s the methodology of this case study.

PAGE 42

29 CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY Th is chapter explain s and present s the methods and procedures used in the research process of this study. This chapter is divided into five sections The first is research design which includes a study site description, the unit of analysis a nd the role of the researcher in this research. The second section discusses data collection methods including descriptions of the artifacts collected and how these data w ere applied to the research questions guiding this study. The third section discusses how the data analysis proceeded including data grouping, iterative analysis, coding, and member group description and interview protocol This is followed by a section of privacy, access and transparency The chapter ends with a summary Research Design This bounded case study examines the results of document collection and analysis through the eyes of a participant observer to document and determine the particularized leadership practice of Campus Xs leader. This study is particularly suitable for a case study design because the campus is a bounded system, it is contextual, and it is a study of a leaders practice within that bounded system (Merriam, 1998). A ccording to Creswell (2002), bounded means that the case is separated out for research in terms of time, place, or some physical boundaries (p. 485). In other words, it becomes possible to set the parameters around the object one intends to study (Merriam, 1998). Case studies feature thick descriptions offering an ability to achieve a complete and rich picture of the story (Merriam, 1998). Specifically, this study intend s to tell the story of how Campus X s l eader determined

PAGE 43

30 five strategic priorities and how that leader prepared the organization to meet those priorities. Accordingly, this study address es the following research questions: 1. What did L eader X find when they arrived at Campus X? 2. What did Leader X do to overcome the issues they found? 3. On the bas is of a review of the literature and the evidence of change effort gathered in this w ork, what is an applied definition of leadership practice in higher education? 4. How did Leader Xs leadership practice prepare the mind of the campus to achieve six strategic goals? Description of the Study Site The period of the study was from January 1, 201 6, to August 1, 2017. The focus of investigation is an individual Campus Xs new leader The r esearcher and narrator of this investigation is an individual who has observed this leaders practice over the leaders entire tenure at Campus X According to Creswell (2002), a case study could involve a program, events, or activities (p. 485). The bounded system in this s tudy is Campus X covers roughly 125 acres (870,000 assignable square feet), enrolls roughly 15,000 students (2016) 10,000 or so of whom are undergraduates, and employs about 5,000 faculty (across two campuses), 30 officers and 5,000 staff (University of 2017). Campus X is a mix of traditional and commuter students and is situated within a major metropolis. It is a public institutio n, enshrined in law and delivers more than 100 bachelors masters, doctoral and professional degree programs. The university is reviewed by a major accrediting body and is subject to Carnegie Classification. The campus ultimate authority lies in a board of t rustees The leader referred to in this study represents the highest authority on Campus X.

PAGE 44

31 Paralleling the surrounding metropolis growth, Campus X has grown in size and stature. It was founded as a university in the early 20th c entury and dra ws mainly from its own backyard (67% of its alum live in state) Campus X boasts a health y international student population and is home to an increasingly higher percentage of Latino/a students Campus X was chosen for this study because it, like many other public entities of its size, have not been excluded from the pressures to increase efficiency, improve overall fiscal health and provide for an excellent return on investment to the public, par ent and student purse s Four campus leaders have served Campus X in the last five years. The most recent began and ended their tenure in the 2016 calendar year The situation at the beginning of 2016 was that the university had developed a handful of br oad based strategic priorities and was searching for a new mission that would make it able to zero in on those priorities in its search of differentiating an identity and for a competitive foothold in a n increasingly tight and competitive higher education m arket. Campus Xs lack of a guiding North Star, its position in the city, direct and increasing competition, lack luster performance across several metrics low student persistence scores and a n unimpressive history of alumnus and community giving had l eft Campus X disjointed and operating with a siloed approach. Added to this was a lower level of student engagement and a legacy financial and business model that appeared to no longer serve its purpose The situation was ripe for promoti on of change or organizational redirection. Much of the oncampus talk when the new leader arrived surrounded this notion of our time and fulfilling our destiny Campus X and its new leader appeared to have much untapped potential to fill. Unit of Analysis The unit of analysis for this study is the intentional leadership practice of

PAGE 45

32 L eader X T he definition of leadership practices was derived from the literature review and a conceptual framework was created to help determine Campus Xs intentional and part icularized leadership practice. Role of the Researcher To conduct this research, the researcher functioned in a participant observer role. This role enables one to participate in the group activities as desired, yet maintain the role of the researcher and to collect data. As a n employee at Campus X and someone involved in the campus change effort the researcher has participated in several high level meetings, ha s observed several leadership meetings community meetings, campus conversations and speeches to several stakeholders is on the receiving end of campus change strategy efforts and has given advice to leadership regarding the change initiative As a participant observer, the researcher has an established role in Campus X that is within the scope of the study and helps to validate the information through participation in activities and observations and has expertise in the area of change and strategic planning as well as professional learning team development (Spradley, 1979). In addition, and to remove any perceived, unintentional bias on the part of the researcher, member checking was used to triangulate findings. The process for triangula tion is described later in this chapter. The Researcher as an Instrument This study is a clear illustration of the researchers lived experiences as a higher education employee and change agent. As the researcher is observing organizational change in act ion and commenting on it, it is essential to consider ethics and bias in the researchers role and the case study design. Specific attention was paid to objectivity, cultural sensitiv ity and inclusion. B eing familiar with Campus X, the researcher did not i nterpret data from a

PAGE 46

33 lack of understanding about the campus, its leadership, its goals, processes, and internal dialog ing which could taint the inquiry of a researcher who is unfamiliar with the situation From the conceptualization of this work, the researcher spoke to Leader X, informing them of the idea for the study and received human subject exemption approval from the Institutional Review Board on Monday, April 24, 2017. Because of the proximity of the researcher to the heart of the campus change effort, there were many benefits of this study From the work of Feldman (2003) Creswell (200 2) and Shenton (2004) are five reasons for including participant observation in a study, all of which increase the study s validity: (a) it makes it possible to collect different types of data being on site over a period of time familiarizes the researcher with the community, thereby facilitating involvement in sensitive activities to which he/she generally would not be invited; (b) it reduces the incidence of reactivity or people acting in a certain way when they are aware of being observed ; (c) it helps the researcher develop questions that make sense in the native language or are culturally rel evant ; (d) it gives the researcher a better understanding of what is happening in the culture, lends credence to interpretations of the observation, and enables the researcher to collect both quantitative and qualitative data through surveys and/or intervi ews ; and (e) it is sometimes the only way to collect the right data for the researchers study (pp. 142143). Since much of this study is about collecting and analyzing the artifacts of L eader X s practice expressed through work focus, tools, and activities all leading to proximal and distal targets, being on the inside of this change effort wa s perhaps the only way to really understand the why, how, what, who and how of this leaders practice. Angrosini (2007) notes that participant observation is the process of learning thr ough exposure and should not be thought of as a research method but rather as a strategy that

PAGE 47

34 facilitates data collection in the field. Research does not identify the best practice with which an observer as participant should conduc t research. DeWalt, DeWalt & Wayland (1998) advise researcher s to take some of the field notes publicly to reinforce that what the y are doing is collecting data for research purposes. Fi e l d notes have also helped researcher s further interpret and provide meaning to the artifacts collected and have helped provide a thick description for this narrative. Documents relating to L eader X s prioritization have been collected and date back to January 1, 2016. The majority of these documents are in the public domain and represent but are not limited to screenshots, media, website documents newspaper clippings, online stories, leadership agendas, emails, speeches, videos, recorded/transcribed speeches, social media posts, flyers, leadership meeting notes, notes taken from specific strategic planning retreats and from the researchers conversation s with several campus stakeholders, including L eader X The task of observational research is suitable for specific settings, events, and demographic factors I n order t o function as an observer, the following qualities w ere adhered to: (a) language skills, (b) explicit awareness, (c) good memory, (d) cultivated naivet and (e) writing skills (Angrosini 2007). The process for the participant observational research and document gathering in this bounded case study was as follows: 1. O n site selection was made of the study in question. 2. Following IRB (Institutional Review Board) clearance, approval was obtained from L eade r X and the leadership team for the purposes of attending certain n oncommunity meetings as part of the research portfolio for this study 3. Document collection was done primarily in the public domain and dates back to September 2015. All documents were kept in a private Drop Box folder

PAGE 48

35 4. R eco rding observ ations in a journal began as early as possible In accordance with Merriam (1998), the researcher paid attention to the shift from wide to narrow angles and looked for key words in conversations to trigger later recollection for content analysis. Image s were captured and notes were transcribed as quickly as possible afterward. 5. As the research progressed, observations began to fall into discernible patterns. Spradley (1979) referred to the stages of observation as a funnel and attention began to be di rected to emergent elements 6. Observations, analysis and writing continue d until approximately December 2017. D ata Collection This section outlines the type of artifacts collected, how they were categorized and then how, guided by the research questions, the data collection proceeded. Description of Artifacts Collected and Categorized By the end of the data collection period f or this study, a private Drop Box account (in which all documents for this study were kept) had reached a size of near ly 2.0 gigabytes. By way of example, one gigabyte represents 10 yards of books on a shelf two symphonies in high fidelity sound, or two broadcast quality movies. These artifacts are classified in the following sections.

PAGE 49

36 Documents Including Speeches, Conversations and Minutes Eight individual file folders containing meeting agendas, work group reports, pictures and videos, minutes, tabl es, charts, campaign handouts, retreats, strategy work group reports, emails, communiqu s speeches, conversations, cover stories, memos, dashboard a nd metric examples, campus newspaper articles and other ancillary documents represent just under 1,000 8 11inch uploaded pages. The researcher was fortunate enough to have direct access to leadership meetings and was able to draw on those experiences, after the fact for this research. Also included in the observations about meetings are the results/reports and notes of a four month campus community listening tour; a leadership advance retreat on March 23, 2016; a leadership working session on July 15, 2016; a special Leader X community meeting on October 3, 2016; more than 25 bi monthly leadership meetings; notes from a strategy deep dive lunch on February 23, 2017; over 37 ad hoc meeting notes, and a Campus X in the Community event on February 20, 2017, which would be followed by various public town halls. Media and Video Files Roughly 31 hours of media files were collected as part of the analysis period. The criteria for including videos or other media in the analysis consisted of the following filters: Sound: The video must contain intelligible audio. Relevance: Content must be helpful or useful in supporting the research goals Human dimensions: A person or people in the video must be identifiable. Efficiency: The information in the video should warrant the effort to code and a nalyze it.

PAGE 50

37 On the basis of these criteria, 13 hours of videos were reviewed for consideration, and 3.5 hours were uploaded to Dedoose for analysis. A total of 3.5 hours of meaningful raw footage was analyzed; each video ranged from just under one to 90 minutes in length. Observati ons This researcher has had the distinct pleasure of taking self reflective notes on one onone ad hoc interviews with L eader X their partner and the immediate leadership and cabinet team, following interaction with various members of each, both on camp us and at various events. Research indicates that self reflection is a distinguishing factor between novice and expert clinician student and demonstrates an improved ability to reflect through journaling (Angrosini, 2007). As noted above, the researchers own observations in the field taken on March 9, 2017, were included in the data collected and analyzed. Other observations from the field not necessarily tied to a campus event were also collected to add richness to the data collection strategies. A total of 16 typed, single spaced pages of field notes were assembled and organized for analysis in Dedoose. An example of one of these events analyzed occurred in early 2017. L eader X invited the entire leadership team to a sports event for which a priv ate corporate box had been donated. The field researcher observed that L eader X appeared relaxed, was wearing jeans and campus spirit gear and proceeded to serve the campus team from behind the bar. The researcher also noted that many conversations between invitees openly referred to the event as a leadership bonding exercise within a context and atmosphere that was jovial, fun, relaxed, lighthearted. Typical game day finger food was served, such as nachos, hot dogs and pretzels. The purpose of analyz ing the artifacts related to L eader X s efforts is to bring meaning, structure and order to the data collection. As Anfara, Brown & Mangione (2002)

PAGE 51

38 note T he qualitative researcher faces the difficult task of making sense of what has been learned through the practices and politics of interpretation (p. 31) and documents can make up the tangible manifestation of an experience. For purposes of confirming validity of this researchers conclusions, the documents collected and reviewed us ed an iterative an alysis as outlined in Appendix B. This descriptive data from the analysis was coded for themes that were then used to triangulate the findings. Research Question 1 R esearch question 1 concerned what the new leader found when they arrived at Campus X Accordingly, the answer to this question relies on the data points that describe the state of the campus. Research Question 2 Research question 2 asks what L eader X did to overcome the issues they found. A ccordingly, the answer to this question include d the collection of the leadership practice picture including determination of work foci, types of tools and activities chosen, the situation in which this was carried out and the determination of proximal and distal goals. This collection happened over a n exploratory phase and on at least a weekly period, with document collection formally ending on August 1, 2017. All documents were datestamped and catalogued by date and type and then placed against the leadership practice conceptual framework being evaluated in this study. Some of the collected material emerged from the researchers own observations. In terms of the collection and use of documents from a public higher education institution, the relevant state (C State) Open Records Act (1969) states t hat all public records shall be open for inspection by any person at reasonable times, except as provided for or as otherwise specifically provided by law. The presumption is that the state

PAGE 52

39 law stands in favor of disclosure and suggests that the burden of establishing confidential information rests with the party opposing disclosure. As such, nearly all of the documents collected wer e assumed available in the public domain and not privileged by policy or law. Research Question 3 Research question 3 concerns a review of the literature supporting an applied definition of a leadership practice in higher education. Specifically, the question prompt s were (a) w hat could have been added if we knew now what we did then and (b) whether the conceptual framew ork presented in this study explained the leadership practice in higher education should be dismissed or enhanced. Research Question 4 Research question 4 concerns how and whether Leader Xs leadership practice effectively prepared the mi nd of the campus followers to achieve the work focus. A useful question subprompt here was D id the leaders plan work as intended? Interviews with members made up the primary data collection strategy for determining whether Leader X s plan was perceived as effective in preparing the mind of the organization. By May 1, 2017, 88 individuals had been conta cted via email for this research and by late July 2017, 40 interviews, plus one interview with Leader X had been documented. At each scheduled interview, subjects were asked a series of questions related to the four research questions in this study a nd were asked to review a prepopulated work focus chart describing Leader Xs practice. Notes were taken by the researcher during each session. Interviews were not voice or camera recorded nor were any other identifiers collected

PAGE 53

40 Data Analysis Because of the varied nature of the artifacts collected, Dedoose was selected as the primary tool for organizing and analyzing data. Dedoose is a cross platform, Internet based ap plication useful for working with multimedia data such as videos, photos, and text based documents. Data analysis took place from May 2017 to October 2017. How the Data Were Grouped The first step in examining the collected research art i facts was to organize them and prepare them for analysis as outlined by Creswell (2002) and Creswell & Miller (2000) This involve d physically grouping the documents in a way and within a time /task frame that ma d e sense and could be supported by the art i facts When data collection was complete, the researcher had amassed the following: R oughly 2.0 gigabytes in a Drop Box file that included Eight individual file folders representing just under 1,000 8 11inch documents ; Roughly 31 hours of media files that was whittled down on the bas is of pre selected criteria to a total of 3.5 hours of meaningful raw footage analyzed with each media file ranging from one to 90 minutes in length; Sixteen single spaced pages of field notes. T his study took 45 documents from the collected pool noted above and supported these with nine pages of relevant field notes. In total, the sampling size consisted of 45 documents, 3.5 hours of footage of Campus Xs leader and followers from Jan uary 1, 2016, through August of 2017.

PAGE 54

41 Iterative Analysis To answer research questions 1 and 2, the iterative review process began with a review of a subset of the data, which included small portions from each source. For example, the researcher watched 10 minutes of video, read through a sampl ing of communiqus two community speeches and two sets of field notes. Next, the researcher got a general sense of the information and then reflected on its meaning (Creswell, 2002) using the outline prepared in Appendix B by Merriam (1998) for all 45 documents. Documents with contents filling more than three (8 11 inch ) pages, such as five speeches and/or online interviews, were transcribed and were uploaded to a student Dedoose account and examined for emergent coding, later applied to the workfoc us table. The use of Dedoose for this section of the analysis allowed the researcher to access and create a coding panel for the mapping and printing of graphs and diagrams. After these steps were complete, the researcher followed through with a process to determine how the data were represented in this study to members and for triangulation purposes (Creswell, 2002). Next, a coding structure was developed, and decisions were made for coding purposes. After all data were coded in Dedoose, codes were re viewed and compared against the categories found across the data set. Finally, preliminary findings were brought to three representatives of the campus leadership team and to the research dissertation committee to solicit feedback about the conclusions. This kind of respondent validation or cross reference was valuable because it ruled out the possibility of misinterpreting perspectives and led to valuable insights about how the researcher was interpreting the data.

PAGE 55

42 Answers to research questions 2 and 3 i nvolved reviewing the literature leading to a definition of leadership practice, the evidence of change effort leading to practice at Campus X and how that practice helped to prepare the mind of the campus to realize work goals. Coding Inventories The coding process used to analyze the documents listed above initially followed Merriam (1998), outlined in Appendix B to ensure the artifact s relevance to this study. Next the coding process for document review began with the creation of codes based on the six strategic objectives, the initial open coding during transcription, and the literature review. For example, codes related to an inclusive and collaborative culture were added to the master code of collective identity and shared purpose (also identi fied in the literature review). Similarly, the term type of leader was used as a primary code because of its relevance to r esearch question 4. Also during the first round of coding, memos were attached to excerpts that might have more to offer than a code value. The first round of coding yielded 32 excerpts. Once the first round of review and coding was complete, two peer reviewers evaluated the coding for consistency in code application. Following the peer review, the researcher conducted a second review of the coding which allowed for the combination of some codes and clarity about other codes. As the analysis proceeded, the original coding structure was altered slightly to account for newly recognized themes. The resulting codes are presented i n Appendix E. Credibility of coding also was assessed via member checking, in which results of the analysis were returned to several key leadership members so they could examine inaccuracies in interpretation and ensure clarity of their original thoughts Additionally, continuous

PAGE 56

43 inspection of the original data occurred to determine whether coding and thematic analysis stayed true to original data collected during the interviews. The final coding structure consisted of five tree codes with 24 subcodes ( see Appendix E). Initially, all phrases and statements relevant to the research questions were coded across the data; text that was not relevant was not coded. Once data were coded, the analysis focused on developing categories specific to answering a re search question that guided the study. Themes and patterns were identified within the codes; then the researcher looked across the data to develop evidence to support the existence of categories. Variation within codes was considered, as was a systematic search for counter narratives (Cresswell, 2007). Analysis of Member Checking To determine that L eader X was indeed positively influencing the mind of the organization, the researcher was looking for subject responses from followers that were homogeneously viewed. No concurrence from followers about the leaders practice would likely suggest that Campus Xs leadership practice was operating at the individual level of analysis, not at the organizational level needed to realize proximal or distal goals, and thus not effectively preparing the mind of the organization. Moderate to strong concurrence would be evidence of impact. Creswell (200 2) and Shenton (2004) present several strategies for validation, three of which are used in this study: peer review or d ebriefing, clarifying research bias, and member checking (p p. 250253). Creswell (2002) recommends using at least two of these. In this study, members consisted of L eader X the Campus X leadership team and Leader Xs workingto action teams The use of these peers served to keep the researcher honest: ask

PAGE 57

44 hard questions about methods, meanings, and interpretations; and provides the researcher catharsis by sympathetically listening to the researchers feelings (Creswell, 20 02, p. 251). Peers of the researcher discussed methodology and provided an outside perspective on the researchers thoughts throughout the writing process. Clarifying research bias was discussed earlier in this chapter and what follows is member checking protocol, consent procedures and description of members. Groups for Member Checking Members for interviews were drawn from three groups: (a) Campus X leader, (b) Campus X leaders leadership t eam and (c) Campus Xs working to action teams, centering on the topics of academic advising, community college, the K 12 pipeline, and scholarships. Campus X s Leader. L eader X is the chief academic and administrative officer of the university. This le aders tenure began in 2015. L eader holds a PhD and is described as a recognized leader in higher education. L eader X has held gubernatorial appointments and board chairships, including time as president of a large community college system and at a phila nthropic foundation. This leaders community involvement has included serving as a founding and/or participating member of high schools, museums, education councils and not forprofit councils. Honors and distinctions have followed this leader throughout their career. Campus Xs Leadership Team Besides the leader, Campus Xs leadership team consists of 12 individuals who serve i n the leaders immediate c abinet. This 11member group are represented as follows: two white males and five white females, tw o males of color and two females of color. This inner circle represents the heart of the campus leadership.

PAGE 58

45 Campus X Teams L eader X established four working teams that later became action teams. The first of these working teams was named the Academic Advising Working Team, ostensibly focused on student advising and initially consisted of 19 members ; 11 were direct team members, four held validator roles and four held navigator roles. Of the 11 direct group members, all 11 held current full time administrative appointments with seven of them also holding joint faculty appointments. Of this same group, eight were female identified and four were male identified. The validators and navigators represented eight full time staff members with a gender ratio of 7:1 women to men All but one of those staff members deal directly with the student population on a daily basis. The c ommunity college pathways group consisted of 16 members : nine direct group members, four validators and three navigators. Of the nine, all held administrative appointments, one was a duplicate from the advising group and five had concurrent or primary faculty appointments. The ratio of male to female was 2:9. The validators and navigators of the group totaled s even. Three were external to the campus (all female identified) and of the rest, three held campus administrative appointments (all three female with one overlap with academic advising) with one student. The K 12 pipeline development team consisted of 17 members, nine of whom were direct team members, four validators and three navigators. Of the nine direct members, seven were women and all but one were full time current administrators although two held concurrent faculty appointments. The validators and navigators consisted of seven people, with a female to male ratio of 3:7. Two students served as navigators and one validator was a duplicate from another team.

PAGE 59

46 The scholarship team consisted of 13 members 11 of whom were direct members, one student validator and one staff navigator. Of the 11 direct team members, eight were women and four held administrative only appointments and four held both faculty and administrative appointments. Member Check Protocol Postcard consent from the campus IRB office was used. On May 8, 2017, 88 members were recruited via email and asked to consent to be interviewed for one hour. The initial request included 88 participants with 44 responding and 40 being interviewed. Meetings were not video or voice recorded. No names were taken nor was any identifying information used, as this was not needed for the study. All participants were advised that their participation was voluntary and that they could refuse to answer any questions and/or stop the interview at any time. During a pre scheduled meeting, the researcher restated, summarized, or paraphrased the information received from the respondent to ensure that what was heard was in fact correct. During each meeting, subjects were asked specific proscribed questions as outlined in the next section, and were given a copy of the populated leadership work focus and asked if they agreed with the researchers analysis of the leaders practice. The questions were administered in the same order for each subject. Notes were taken, transcribed and entered into Dedoose to identify any additional emerging themes. To refine the analysis, each transcript was then reanalyzed by applying the overall coding framework. This type of member checking allowed the research er to (a) examine whether the perspectives relayed to the researcher were accurately documented, (b) learn whether there were any sections that could be problematic (personally or politically) to the participant if the

PAGE 60

47 data were published, and (c) assist t he researcher in helping with the development of new ideas and interpretations (Glesne, 1999). These data then served to contribute to the findings and conclusions. Interview Questions The interview questions posed to members were derived from the rese arch questions guiding this study. To validate the questions the researcher conducted pilot interview protocols with nontarget subject employees who ha d been indirectly involved with the campus prioritization effort ; the researcher made modifications as necessary. The chart that follows depicts the four research questions and the subquestions that flow from each area

PAGE 61

48 Table 2 Member Check Questions Bounded Case Study Questions Member Questions Research Question 1. What did Leader X find when they arrived at Campus X? What did you think when you heard about the leaders ideas for change (strategic priorities)? Did you think it (change) was needed? Can you name at least two of those priorities? Research Question 2. What did Leader X do to overcome the issues they found? Do you believe this leader had/has a plan? Does that plan concur with the charts I have shown you? Would you change anything? Why? Can you provide an example of a change effort (for this leader) you have been involved in? Research Question 3. B ased on a review of the literature and evidence of the change effort gathered in this work, what is an applied definition of leadership pra ctice in higher education? Please describe the leaders plan, as you see it, for change Has your work area or practice changed as a result of this leaders efforts? What do you see as next steps in this leaders agenda for change? (You can use the diagr ams you were provided if that helps.) Research Question 4. How did Leader Xs leadership practice prepare the mind of the campus to achieve six strategic goals? Do you think this leaders plan will work? Why? Have you bought into the vision of this leader? Why? What do you believe will be the impact of this leaders priorities? The process of member checking consisted of reporting preliminary findings to respondents or participants, asking for critical commentary on the findings, and may potential ly add accuracy and richness to a final report, providing an opportunity to for the researcher to check aspects of their data interpretation. Members were given representative interpretations of the researchers findings and were asked to edit, clarify, e laborate, and/or delete in their own words. Issues of Privacy Access and Transparency The researcher continued to directly and indirectly participate in several leadership activities, such as three retreats, for the duration of this case study, and as a participant observer outlined by Spradley (1979). When necessary and when engaged in collecting

PAGE 62

49 information for this study, the researchers role as participant observer was made clear to current and future team members to ensure the credibility of in formation without any perceived coercion or privacy threats ( Angrosini, 2007; Creswell, 2002; Creswell & Miller, 2000; Spradley, 1979 ). W hen the researcher met community members they were informed of the purpose for being there and were given sufficient i nformation about the research topic so that questions about the research and the researcher s presence were put to rest. Another ethical responsibility was to preserve the anonymity of the participants, the campus and any other identifying information in the final write up and in field notes to prevent identification, should the field notes be subpoenaed for inspection (Angrosini 2007; Creswell, 2002; Spradley 1979). Individual identities are described in ways that community members will not be able to identify the participants with other identifying information, removed. Definition of L eadership P ractice Used This study uses the definition of leadership practices and results from leaders work focus activities to identify their leadership practice. The findings of this study intend to show how the following additional concepts are as fundamental to developing an applied definition of leadership practice within the context of a public higher education institution as they are to a K 12 school. They include the following : (a) work focus, (b) tools, (c) activities, (d) proximal and distal goals, and (e ) a change framework against which work focus i s applied. Trustworthiness of Data Ri gorous qualitative research normally includes multiple methods designed to evidence research integrity (Creswell, 200 2). Spradley (1979) acknowledges the validity of research conducted as a participant observer. As outlined by Shenton (2004) and Angrosini (2007), this qualitative bounded case study establishes credibility, t ransferability,

PAGE 63

50 dependability and confirmability to establish trustworthiness T he case study methodology provide s a powerful means of communicating the process, perceptions, results, and training that provide outsiders with a depth of understanding for tr ansferability and dependability. To provide evidence of research integrity for this work, trustworthiness was achieved using (a) descriptions of the researcher as observer role, (b) creation of a self reflective field journal, (c) triangulation through the use of an identifiable scholarly expert, Dr. Connie Fulmer, and (d) member checking. In addition, this bounded case study s integrity was established through triangulation, which involves using multiple sources of data to illuminate, corroborate, or elaborate the research in question (Creswell, 2002). Triangulation included member checking to validate the results of the researchers analysis Triangulation also included the checking and rechecking of past interviews and discussions with the leader and others within the bounded case study in addition to a self reflective journal allowing for detailed researcher notes The creation of a self reflective journal provided further grounding of trustworthy phenomenological research (Creswell, 2002). Summary This chapter discussed the methodology for this study. Bounded case study, document analysis with emergent coding and member checking were identified as the research methods to be used. Scientific methods are said to be applied in order to allow researchers (a) to move closer to the phenomenon of interest, (b) discover truths about the world, (c) produce research findings that are meaningful and valuable to the social sciences, (d) provide findings that are believable and supportive of the research claims, and (e) instill self confidence and audience confidence when disseminating work products (Lieber, 2009) A properly selected and systematical ly applied methodological approach will increase the

PAGE 64

51 likelihood of delivering findings that are important, accessible and useful (Angrosini, 2007; Lieber, 2009) The triangulation of the interviews, observations, and document analysis, as well as triangulation of the member checking sessions renders a more complete picture of the leadership practice at the heart of this study. This provides for researc her accountability and provides a bounded case study fram ework.

PAGE 65

52 CHAPTER IV FINDINGS This chapter presents findings derived from the bounded case study investigatin g the leadership practice of Campus Xs leader and is broken down by the four research ques tions guiding this study. The first question posed was What did Leader X find when they arrived at Campus X? The second research question was What did Leader X do to overcome the issues they found? The third question asked in this study was Based on a review of the literature and evidence of the change effort gathered in this work, what is an applied definition of leadership practice in higher education? The fourth r esearch question was How did Leader Xs leadership practice prepare the mind of the ca mpus to achieve six strategic goals? The chapter ends with a summary examining the usefulness of the leadership practice framework in describing Leader Xs efforts and present s other evidence that tells a story of how higher education leaders organize thei r leadership practice. Research Question 1 What did Leader X f ind when they arrived at Campus X ? In late 2015, Campus Xs newest leader and advocate in chief delivered a passionate speech in a final candidate open forum. In that speech, this wouldbe campus leader called for Campus X to become the institution of choice and to live up to its potential of becoming a world class public higher education urban university Specifically, for L eader X and for the institution followers that would eventually su pport L eader X there was a collective feeling of this being our time Table 3 shows the data points facing Campus Xs new leader i n early 2016:

PAGE 66

53 Table 3 Comparable IPEDS Student Common Data Set Retention Campus B Campus C Campus X Campus S Campus U 4 Year 47% 29% 16% 35% 27% 6 Year 71% 47% 41% 66% 47% Note that data were pulled for the initial 2009 cohort of full time, firsttime baccalaureate (or equivalent) degreeseeking undergraduate students as identified by time to program completion. The data reveal ed that Campus X ha d been lagging across its peers vis vis a comparison for the initial 2009 cohort of first time, fulltime bachelors degree (or equivalent) degree seeking undergraduate students as defined by time to program completion. B y several measures, C ampus X was clearly not keeping pace with its counterparts. While some lag indicators could be explained away by situational differences for example, Campus Xs location in the urban city center offering a less traditio nal four year undergraduate experiencethe corollary could also be true ; people could be described as intentionally choosing Campus X because it offered an alternative, unique urban experience. No matter the issue, the numbers clearly showed that Campus X needed to do better at attracting and keeping its students. Added to this retention problem were the results of L eader X s initial extensive focus group discussions with the student body, faculty and employees. L eader X was hearing from all university constituents a general feeling of dissatisfaction. The primary evaluation strategies used by this new leader included asking the difficult questions of how Campus X could improve and whether the data were help ing to answer that question The information collected by L eader X in fact, proved to be the disconfirming data needed in order to begin a

PAGE 67

54 strategic prioritization project. It has been said that your identity is based on your level of insulation from the outside world, and when a breach between that identity and the outside world happens, learning anxiety is created ( Baruch & Lambert, 2007; Edmonson, 1999; Miller & Monge, 1985; Wittig, 2012) If that is the case, under the new leader, Campus X was about to usher in a p eriod of great anxiety and change. Campus Xs leader would soon become engaged in a university campus turn around effort. Added to the student retention issues w as the fact that the current budgeting model was viewed as overly complicated and nontranspar ent. The campus s financial wellbeing eventually turned into another one of L eader X s main strategic priorities. By early 2016 it was clear the budget model had outlived its usefulness. In L eader X s own words You may be aware that [Campus X] is facing a budget shortfall for FY 1617. This is due to the prior year enrollments coming in below expectations (down 0.3% instead of a projected 1.9% increase). As a result, the campus has a revenue shortfall of $6.8 million. To offset this deficit, we wi ll be using one time funds of $4 million from a contingency reserve fund. To cover the remainder of the deficit, reductions in administrative and unit operating budgets may be required once we know the actual fall 2016 enrollment numbers. Should that be ne cessary, we will work closely with leadership across the campus to identify efficiencies and areas where reductions can be managed with the least impact on instructional and support services for our students ( Email from L eader X, February 13, 2016). The other priorities espoused by Leader X grew from the notion of student success and financial sustainability and focused on support structures that were considered essential to delivering on student success and financial sustainability namely (a) advancing excellence and innovation in teaching, research and creative work; (b) strengthening the campus position as a vital community asset; and (c) creating a more cohesive and collaborative campus culture. Indeed, as Leader X observed at the beginning of thei r tenure in early 2016, the campus brutal facts were as follows:

PAGE 68

55 Organizational performance had waned ; the organizations goals were not being met as evidenced by statistics The university had not stayed relevant ; in the face of new technology, new student demands, the rise of online education and fierce competition in the urban market its brand was suffering The campus had a high turnover of students, suggesting a retention problem The budget model had outlived its usefulness and had placed the campus millions of dollars in debt The states restrictive public funding formula had meant less and less money for higher education institutions. Compounding the problems for Leaders X were five years of revolving door leadership at the highest levels of the institution state education policy making interference, increased competition, dwindling governmental revenues and other external pressures all of which gave way to the distributive politics of scarcity. Rather t han rely on short term solutions, or allow retrenchment to undermine morale and promote adversarial relations between faculty, staff and students, Campus X s new leader decided to come up with a plan to revitalize the institution. Research Questio n 2 What did Leader X do to overcome the i ssues they f ound? L eader X began to create conditions for change the moment they set foot on C ampus X and by doing so, began to construct their leadership practice. The primary early mechanisms at play were focus groups and listening events, leadership meetings, surveys and one onone meetings th e data emanating from which were intended to influence followers to

PAGE 69

56 buy in, engage and work toward a common vision by identifying problem s they were also facing Leader X real ized there was dissatisfaction with the status quo and began setting the stage for change through a compelling vision for a new campus state of mind L eader X s plan began with a massive datagathering effort that included listening to those on the groundcalled a l istening t our. A short four months into L eader X s tenure, following extensive use of social media, a webcast and online questionnaire to engage the community, six general campus themes emerged: (a) articulate a shared vision/direction, ( b) become a more student centric organization, (c) strengthen support for faculty, including research and creative work, (d) increase and diversi f y sources of funding, (e) expand and deepen community partnerships and (f) create a cohesive culture. Toward the end of 2016, L eader X reiterated to the campus leadership the six identified strategic campus priorities: (a) identify a vision, (b) elevate student success, (c ) advance excellence and innovation in teaching, research and creative work, ( d) strengthen the campus position as a vital community asset, ( e ) create a more cohesive, collaborative and inclusive university culture, and ( f ) achieve long term stability and sustainability. Documentation and discussion with Campus Xs leadership showed that if fixing issues was not on everyones mind, then it needed to be A strategic visioning questionnaire was distributed to each campus leader and included seven broad que stions along with s ubsidiary questions in the form of bullet points and an umbrella st atement noting that the goal of this work was designed to help facilitate conversation among participants of the campus focus groupssharing aspirations, vision, and perspective of the University ( Email from leader X, March 3 2016). Thus, L eader X bega n early to solidify a coalition of the willing all in an effort to prepare the organization s mind for the adaptive challenge of organizational change.

PAGE 70

57 At that initial campus leadership retreat, Leader X c emented the vision of the campus one that offered a high quality public urban research education and confirmed one of the outcomes emerging from the l istening t our. A strategic need remained of working on the other five foci. About five months into 2016, this same leadership and the board of t rustees were told that our next steps going forward will be to create cross functional action teams around the priorities that come out of this tour [with] establish [ed] metric and timelines so we can chart our progress ( Leadership retreat field notes, May 12, 2016). By July of that same year, Campus X s leader had charged the top finance campus lead er and several other leadership team members to focus on redesigning the budget At the same time, Leader X ha d connect ed with more than 50 staff and faculty asking them to serve on one of four work teams to lay the groundwork for focusing on a core change priority student success. This stage set the bounds of Leader Xs leadership practicethe use of teams, tools, activities and benchmarking to turn the campus around. The culmination of the significant efforts were discussed and elaborated on by Leader X during a September 20, 2017, State of the Campus address. Researcher field notes indicate that the address appeared to offer both reflecti on and inspiration ; phrases such as our precious opportunity and profound obligation were meant to send a message to those in attendance. The idea of the criticality of this being the campus time was also a theme found throughout the address and has been a ha llmark of Leader Xs leadership practice. Signaling a new stage in their practice, designed to begin hardwiring some of the efforts made by followers working toward meeting the work foci, L eader X indicated having further tasked five campus leaders (called drivers) with developing a five year strategic roadmap to

PAGE 71

58 ensure intentional integration of the five work foci. Drivers, it was noted, would start with cataloguing and then ensure that each ongoing or future project would be weighted for potential imp act against eff ort and investment required. The final roadmap is to be unveiled in s pring 2018. The State of the Campus session concluded with an inspirational story of campus accomplishments to date and then followed with a takeaway pamphlet titled On The Rise: Year in R eview 20162017, with pictures depicting significant milestones and celebratory campus facts. A ttached to each pamphlet was a business card answer ing the question, Who is C ampus X ? as follows: A s the states public urban research university, [ Campus X ] educates a diverse student body through quality academic, ambitious research and creative work, and civic engagement in the city we call home. Graduates gain the powerful combination of immersive classroom and real world experiences t hat are in demand today, while the city benefits from welleducated, top talent and a new generation of knowledge that fuels the future of the city and our region. We are [ X ] O n the back of each card was a list of the five strategic priorities (work focus). A Leadership Practice Circle Uncovered Earlier in this work, leadership practice was defined as having three components In the case of this research Leader Xs use of other leaders (followers) was in concert w ith this framework. Leader X interacted and influenced organizational followers in the particular situation by focusing work efforts on certain areas (e.g., student success, budget, visioning, reputation and overall organizational well being) in order to achieve organizational goals. The first component, the leadership practice triangle depicts how leadership practice is intentional and particularized across the leader(s), followers, and the situation and over time In this case, the situation was a university campus that needed to redouble its efforts toward student success. The p articipants that took part in this model were Leader X, Campus X teams, and Leader Xs cabinet/leadership team

PAGE 72

59 Leader X was billed as a recognized leader in the world of higher education and the not forprofit sector. Having deep roots in the state, this leader was described as someone with the necessary insight, expertise and experience to build on success ( Researcher field notes, September 28, 2015). Shortly after taking the campus helm, L eader X had this to tell the campus community: I am a product of public education and Ive always had a passion for public education at all levels. Its been the differencemaker in my life. I believe strongly in its role in terms of creating opportunities, opening doors and making more possible for the people served by it. I believe my role is to help you, individually and collectively, fulfill the promise of what is possible Im not much of a maintainer, and maybe that speaks to a restless part of me. Ive fou nd my niche in places where theres an opportunity to help an organization move to the next level. I tend to be a weaver I believe thats a strength of mine. I see the pieces and parts and imagine something greater ( Researcher field notes, January 18, 2017) In that same speech, when asked to describe their leadership style, Leader X responded as follows: At heart, Im a collaborator When you have people around a table who bring a diversity of thoughts, experiences and perspectives, its a gold mine my s tyle is one of bringing people together and using their collective intellect, creativity and passion to foster collaborative ideas and solutions. There are times when, because of timing and circumstances, its not possible to have everyone involved. In t hose cases, I will gather as much information as I can and trust my own experience and instincts in terms of determining what is in the best interests of the institution. As anyone who has been in a leadership role knows, there is not just one silver bull et or singular approach to decisionmaking. It really depends on the situation, but my preferred approach is engaging people and using the richness of that interaction to emerge with the best decisions possible ( Researcher field notes, January 18, 2017) To facilitate the cultural shift needed to engage in strategic prioritize and to sell the vision for doing so, L eader X began to identify and involve pertinent followers for specific tasks and challenges. This leader understood the importance of skills s canning and

PAGE 73

60 capitalizing on staff buy in and engagement as a leverage point to build leadership capacity (Buono & Kerber, 2010) In the same way, L eader X used other high level leaders to help influence followers toward a common goal. Leader X held several retreats and deep dive discussions with c abinet and other leaders to implement the hardwiring, language and discussion regarding how to measure the change effort through specific discussions of a change website, a metrics dashboard, speeches a nd milestone c elebrations ; take for example the new mention of Strategic Road Map Drivers all of whom represent top campus leadership. M uch thought was clearly being given to the current culture of the organization, specifically, as Schein (2010) suggest s, in how to use other leaders and followers to help retool, unfreeze processes, change, and then refreeze them (processes) to or at the idealized and desired state. For L eader X it seemed that engagement of followers in the practice triangle was an immed iate, clear priority. Work Focus of the Leadership Practice From the beginning, Campus Xs new leader appeared to understand the criticality of incorporating a distributive leadership model into their leadership practice This is a leader who understood the importance of faculty/ st aff buy in to embrace the efforts that lay ahead a nd the need to build and foster the leadership and follower capacity among the staff and to work toward common goals using common, agreedto processes and tools In the words of several who spoke to this researcher, the campus was being re cultured Over the period of the strategic prioritization effort, various tools and activities were identified and used to help achieve the ultimate articulated goals of the work foci (see Table 4).

PAGE 74

61 Table 4 A Derived Leadership Practice Logic Model for Campus X. Work Focus Area Tools Activities Proximal Goals Distal Goals Articulate a campus specific, unifying direction/vision Elevate s tudent s uccess Advance e xcellence in t eaching and r esearch Innovate for long term f inancial s tability and s ustainability Strengthen our p osition as one of the c itys and the r egions vital a ssets Create a more cohesive, collaborative and inclusive campus culture These tools and activities also helped define th e interactions through which proximal and distal goals would be measured. Findings for each are detailed below. Articulating a Campus Specific, Unifying Direction and Vision The entire work foci began with a simple vision, articulated by L eader X in April 2016. During the first 80 days on the job, L eader X met with hundreds of people and gathered a significant amount of data seeking innovative ideas and thoughtful input to help identify what ma de the campus great what ma de followers proud of the campus and what could be done collectively to make it even better. As the table below shows, by spring 2016, that vision was cemented, and the tools and activities that woul d help drive the

PAGE 75

62 organization toward the same vision were being hardwired by the leader follower collaborations. Table 5 Leadership Practice Model: Campus Vision Work Focus Tools Activities Proximal Goals Distal Goals Data Embedding Mechanisms External Facilitators General Skills and Traits Policy and Procedure Changes Sales and Story t elling Events and building cultural space Leadership meetings Leadership retreats, member checks, partnership and relationship building Use of teams Refine the aspirational and strategic vision; continue telling the story about who we are and driving the message home. Embed the message and maximize input so everyones voices are heard individually and collectively to express what we hope for as an ins titution. Market d ifferentiation and destination as the only Public, Urban Research Campus in the City Leader X want ed to hear thoughts on how to build on the fundamental mission of equipping and empowering Campus Xs students to succeed. Followers were asked to share these thoughts in person and in writing, confidentially or not, via an online questionnaire Field notes taken at an open forum on Jan uary 27 2016, also reveal that this leader wanted everyone to be heard. When asked what t o look forward to during the upcoming l isten ing t our, L eader X responded as follows : It will be a chance for everyones voices to be heardindividually and collectively to express what we hope for as an institution. What is it we imagine that C ampus X can bebased on a lot that is already in place, and inspired by the highest aspirations we have? What will it take for us to get there? In a focused, efficient way, the tour will allow the institution to hear feedback from a variety of other stakeholders as well. Well use the information collected to formulate an aspirational and strategic vision for [ C ampus X ] I sense that our university community is ready to coalesce around this important notion of Where are we going together? All of the input re ceived through this process will help to gel that vision pretty quickly, I think. It will also be a chance to develop broad based ownership and buy in for that shared vision. I am eager and I think a lot of people are eager to put some things in

PAGE 76

63 motion. I believe this process will begin to foreshadow the future of [ C ampus X ] and how we will move forward in becoming even more distinctive and successful as an extraordinary asset to [the city] and beyond. On March 23, 2016, Campus Xs new leader called a n after work hours leadership advance (retreat) to discuss next steps in the strategic prioritization project. The retreat included the campus leader and the immediate campus university leadership team about 30 people in total. That retreat was described as a way to think collectively about the opportunities and challenges facing the campus. Over a threehour period, L eader X told the story of a campus that had gotten lost and about a campus that had yet to realize its true potential. That campus, the l eadership audience was told was ready to position itself as a vibrant community on the move. This critical leadership advance was intended to be outcome based and included facilitation by the new leader. Activities included exercises designed so that th e team could think collectively about opportunities and challenges facing the campus. Other exercises were focused on identifying C ampus Xs distinct competitive advantages, convergences and creation of a case statement answering the question, W hat are we selling and to whom? ( Researcher field notes March 23, 2016). Pictures taken by the researcher during that retreat follow (see Figure 3)

PAGE 77

64 Figure 3. Pictures from a l eadership r etreat held March 23, 2016. Campus Xs leader set out a vision for the campus for the first time to this team: to be the states Public Urban Research University. This vision was developed that night through specific, focused activities that helped the team drive forward a vision that allowed Leader X and other leader s to zero in on the campus distinct advantages. When leadership was done with most of the activities (which included as the pictures above show, a weig hted table for defining success and impact/significance, color coded notes, group tasking, a proposed

PAGE 78

65 mission statement and a proposed 20/20 actionable targets table) L eader X took this time to update leadership, in advance of a board of t rustees visioning retreat, on the emergent themes from their recent listening tour. Those emergent themes were described as ( a) a focus on student success, (b) a focus on and diversification of sources of funding, (c) a desire to become the citys vital asset and (d) to create a culture of teamwork. Further undergirding these themes and the work of the leadership group was the expressed desire to answer these questions: Where are we going? What greater good do we serve? What is possible because we exist? What principles guide our decisions and actions as we go? This singular meeting would set the stage for how the campus change effort would move forward. A need was c learly identified ; that need was change, which would later be expressed as five strategic priorities. The research collected here, a mere few months into Leader Xs tenure, tells a compelling story how the why of change was being sold to followers. By April 2016, Leader X had also sold the vision to the governing board through several policy and branding changes Referring to his/her role at the board retreat as the Campus Advocate in Chief L eader X noted that the next steps in moving the campus forward demonstrated strong alignment with the goals established by the board in 2015, and that t hese areas included student success, revenue classification (sponsored research and philanthropy), enhanced reputation and financial aid. ( Researcher field notes, April 7, 2016). A significant aspect of this visioning step is that several followers believed that no prior c ampus leader had done this type of listening, engaging and visioning with followers. This was confirmed by feedback from member checks. There is nothing mystical about organizational vision. It is simply a picture reflecting what an organization could and should

PAGE 79

66 be. Great leaders get people excited about their visio n and this is what Campus Xs leader did with a listening tour. As early as one month into their tenure, L eader X gave this response to a question about the desired culture of the campus: I imagine a campus where every student, every faculty member, every staff member says, I belong here. So how do we create that kind of culture? (Transcribed public interview with L eader X, Janua ry 26, 2016). Elevate Student Success Unquestionably, the most important objective after L eader X articulated the collective vision was getting the student success campus recipe just right. Once the campus vision was set, L eader X used the criticality o f the mission to sell the plan for change to engage followers in what would be termed a focus of elevating student success. Initially tagged as working groups, four appointed teams, each staffed with about a dozen employees and faculty were asked to focus on and deliver recommendations exclusively on how to elevate student success. This collaboration with internal experts set the stage for how the particularized and intentional leadership pra c tice would take shape with this work focus (see Table 6)

PAGE 80

67 Table 6 Leadership Practice Model: Elevate Student Success Work Focus Tools Activities Proximal Goals Distal Goals Data Embedding Mechanisms External Facilitators General Skills and Traits Policy and Procedure Changes Sales and Story t elling Events and building cultural space Leadership meetings Leadership retreats, member checks, partnership and relationship building Use of teams 43 major goals with several sub goals and metrics against which success (or not) is benchmarked 75% freshmen retention rate by 2020 for first time, full time freshmen only 60% graduation rate by 2020 for six year undergraduates who started as first time, full time freshmen 45% increase in transfer students 15% increase in degrees awarded Over an eight week period, beginning in early July 2016, and under the leadership of a colleague who would serve as chair, the student success working group was asked to learn and apply designthinking principles to create an action plan that would help de fine the desired future state f or their respective focus area: (a) academic advising, (b) K 12 pipeline development, (c) com munity college pathways, and (d) strategic use of scholarship resources. Groups were asked to strive for an outcome that was bold, ambitious and boundary busting in a word, transformative results that would accelerate new value creation for current and prospective Campus X students while simultaneously reducing the complexity of making that happen. Each working group would be suppor ted with subject matter consultants, one validator and at least one navigator to assist with data and information gathering. Central guiding questions were offered to each focus group.

PAGE 81

68 Examples of these included How do we become the campus of choice for high school graduates? What is needed to foster a welcoming, inclusive climate for transfer students? What would an ideal advising process look like at Campus X, and what will it take to bring that to fruition? ( Email from L eader X, July 1, 2016.) Each of these working groups were supported by an orientation session that began with the campus visionary statement and followed with a facilitated design thinking session to help focus the coming work. This was to become a time bounded activity. Campus Xs leader asked each group to over the next 8 weeks deliver transformative and boundary busting results intended to accelerate new value creation for current and prospective students while simultaneously reducing the complexity of making that happen ( Email from L eader X, July 12, 2016). Those four working groups eventually delivered over 65 recommendations intended to create new value for the campus. The report out event and closure of this stage was feted by Leader X at a special lunch session, media coverage and celebratory news articles about how Campus X was changing the very nature of its student success delivery model. By fall 2016, several of the same working team members were asked to bring further depth to their earlier recommendations. Now called action teams these groups, keeping the same focus as their predecessors, were provided with an o rientation document and meeting outlining their charge, and were asked to leadthrough an inclusive process, to create timelines, work products, and measurable results based upon recommendations of the working group and to enlist the support of leadership when the team needs assistance in moving projects forward or in engaging leadership in policy focused decisions ( Email from L eader X, October 3, 2016). It appeared that the workingto action groups were intended to

PAGE 82

69 play a core learning role and reflected the leader s desire to develop a collaborative approach and shared vision strategy and perhaps more imp ortantly, start delivering metr ics associated with the work focus. Using in house organizational talent allowed the leader to build a relatively low cost, broadbased action system that allowed multiple talents to be brought to bear on the problems. Spreading the workload would always mean sprea ding the risk but also spreading the collective responsibility ; getting staff involved inevitably increased their ownership of the results (Edmonson, 1999; Gladstein, 1984). By April 24, 2017, the work of the action t eams had come to a close, representing a time bound period of roughly five months as evidenced by an email dated May 22, 2017: Dear Action Team member, O n behalf of [Leader X ] please join us to present and discuss the Action Team reports on Monday, May 22 from 10:30 a .m to 1:00 p.m in the [Name Redacted] Room 2500. The report out portion of the retreat will be held from 10:30 a.m. to 12 noon, followed with a celebratory lunch from 121 p.m. with deans and cabinet members to thank you for your efforts and to engage in inform al discussions about how we can continue to enhance the student experience On May 22, 2017, each team chair presented on the progress made by their teams in a special celebratory report out event headed by L eader a nd several f rom C ampus Xs leadership A similar cabinet reportout session w as held later that day. At this session, each of the four action teams detailed how the earlier recommendations made by the working teams had been put into practice. Each of the action teams report ed having made significant progress. In closing remarks, L eader X spoke to the power of each of these groups and how they had created capacity and leveraged untapped potential on campus. Leader X also shared this with the groups: I am really hopeful. What we all want is shared. We want our campus to be looked at as everything we would want if we were students here and operating at a level

PAGE 83

70 of excellence where we take pride in our work; a place where we do great work and that works well together ( Researcher field notes May 23, 2017). The work of meeting the objectives of elevat ing student success now lie with a newly created student success partnership committee. Action team recommendations that needed further development and new ways of doing business have now b ecome the articulated mission of this new committee. In L eader X s own words at a May 2017 report out event : The Student Success (SS C ) effort launched in January to coalesce our many ongoing student success improvement efforts under one umbrella. The SS C effort builds on the recommendations of last summers working groups and the 201617 action teams, with assistance from the [ Redacted name of Higher Ed Consulting Group]. The SS C effort steering committee, convened in mid April, will develop the SS C teams goals and implementation plan. The work includes a technology platform to use student data for predictive analytics in order to provide appropriate interventions when students are identified as needing focused support. The committee and units involve d in SS C particularly Information Technology and the academic advisors, will be working over the summer to enable faculty, advisors and others to begin using the new SS C technology platform by the fall semester. The broad participation in these efforts h as been impressive; it is heartening to see people from across the campus sharing responsibility for improving student success. The student success committee has created a structure against which the committees success is to be determined. With 43plus action items, the team has aligned its work and mission to develop a prioritization effort and is recommending the development of five implementation teams (academic excellence, guided pathways, financial optimization, student communications, and student success). Their work is being supported by higher education consultant project managers who will ensure that each team is supported by project plans, develops metrics and is goal focused. As of September 20, 2017, the work of elevating student success has directly engaged more than 100 faculty, staff and students. While other tools and activiti es certainly have been used to achieve the goals of elevating student success as the table in this section shows,

PAGE 84

71 arguably the most important activity was internally organizing teams that would be tasked with working toward a common purpose. Getting these people organized involved setting a tone and vision, building trust, building cultural space, telling stories and much more. Organizationally, thousands of other followers have likely been directly and indirectly affected by this practice but t eams were key in putting into operation the elevatestudent success work focus The use of engaging followers so directly and centrally in the prioritization effort also en sured that employee f eedback and c orrective a ction were taken into account and greatly increased investment in the changes to come. Advance Excellence in Teaching and Research Also termed a scholarly preeminence work focus, the driver for this focus was the campus c hief a cademic o fficer who is working in concert with the accreditation office to develop a list of metrics and baselines against which success can be measured. The tools and actives used to support this work focus are similar to others but they emphasized data, leadership meetings, retreats, teams, and partnership building as the table below demonstrates

PAGE 85

72 Table 7 Leadership Practice Model: Advance Excellence in Teaching and Research Work Focus Tools Activities Proximal Goals Distal Goals Data Embedding Mechanisms External Facilitators General Skills and Traits Policy and Procedure Changes Sales and Story t elling Events and building cultural space Leadership meetings Leadership retreats, member checks, partnership and relationship building Use of teams 11 sub goals or metrics against which success (or not) is benchmarked An important part of the use of employee/faculty/st udent work teams was to engage them in the work of change and obtain their buy in and create influencers, navigators, change champions or agents and supporters of Campus Xs leaders efforts. $8.7 million increase in sponsored research awards As with the other work focus, teams have been a big part of working toward a common end. For example, Leader X put together a c abinet team that would focus on scholarly reputation and a Summer Enrollment Action Team or SEAT. SEAT was created in response to L eader Xs request to increase summer session enrollments. Efforts emanating from this group have included a website redesign, a minimarketing campaign to current campus and campus enrolled college students and an advance grant program aimed to encourage ontime graduation for undergraduate students by providing financial assistance in the summer term for students to transition from freshman to sophomore or from sophomore to junior status. In a May 2017 communiqu to campus, the teams work was described by L eader X as already paying dividends with summer e nrollment numbers up 8 percen t over last year at this time (Email from Leader X, May 3, 2017)

PAGE 86

73 More recently work on this focus has included the use of the ex isting advancement office to develop a fundraising campaign for student scholarships, chaired by a scholars hip campaign steering committee; bolstering faculty research and creative work through increased seed grant giving ; and providing funds to examine in structional quality graduate student recruitment and the development of health science pathways programs with the health campus. All in all, its a work focus that is likely to be a future focus of Leader Xs work. Innovate for LongTerm Financial Stabi lity and Sustainability By November 2016, the seeds of a campus budget redesign had been set Owing in large part to an ineffective incremental model that had not kept pace with the changing higher education environment, C ampus X worked to implement a new budget model tasked with increasing transparency, providing incentives for growth and better align ing resources to strategic priorities. A team of campus leaders was put together led by a vice president serving on the cabinet and included school and c ollege business officers, the provost and deans. What th is team referred to as phase I of this work was ostensibly a discovery phase designed to answer the questions of what model would work best for the campus and to develop that model. From the work in that phase and with the help of an external consulting group, the team delivered a vision for a new model for C ampus X ; one that would tap into and foster entrepreneurship. The tools and activities associated with this work focus included retreats, meeti ngs, communication emails and news releases and several changes to the campus business processes. Table 8 articulates the determined goals and the tools and activates used to zero in on this work focus.

PAGE 87

74 Table 8 Leadership Practice Model Table: Financi al Sustainability Work Focus. Tools Activities Proximal Goals Distal Goals Data Embedding Mechanisms External Facilitators General Skills and Traits Policy and Procedure Changes Sales and Story t elling Events Leadership meetings Leadership retreats, member checks, partnership and relationship building Use of teams 15+ sub goals or metrics against which success (or not) is benchmarked One of these major sub goals is the full implementation of a new hybrid budget model $42.7 million in non state funded revenues. Align resources with campus vision, mission and strategic priorities to ensure continuous improvement in academic quality, scholarship and student success while providing fiscal and financial responsibility that is tra nsparent, entrepreneurial and reflects our shared commitment to the overall health of Campus X. The move to the new budget model occurred in the l ater part of 2016 as phase I The vision for this new incentive based budget model was described as directly support [ing] the fifth priority as the new approach gives the university more control and transparency around its resources to plan for the long term. A steering committee worked on the redesigned budget model over the course of a year alon g with a governance structure that was created with Leader Xs A dvisory Committee on Budget which include d representation from the Faculty Assembly (including the Budget Priorities Committee), school and college deans, and the l eaders c abinet. Phase II of tha t budget redesign process began in May 2017 and included senior leadership and deans working together to develop a planning and budgeting process that would align with the newly redesigned model. This period has involved the old model

PAGE 88

75 operating alongside the new one for a one year shadow and trial period. The third phase (also called the final phase) is to begin in July 2018, when the new incentive ba sed model is scheduled to be implemented. At the crux of the new budget incentive mode l is the potential for growth providing incentives for the entire campus c ommunity to take advantage of new markets and opportunities for growth in any kind of revenue including enrollment, res earch and donations and ostensibly geared toward entrepreneuri al thinking. As L eader X has made abundantly clear in several speeches and press releases ( as late as September 2017 ) without a strong financial core, the campus cannot hope to meet the needs of its students, support its faculty and staff or create a vibrant campus community. Strengthen O ur Position as O ne of the Citys and Regions Vital Assets In connection to this work focus, perhaps the most well known articulated distal goal was that of becoming, by 2023, one of the citys top five civic, cultural and economics assets. It was an oft repeated desire that would find itself into many of L eader Xs speeches. To work toward this focus, L eader X convened representatives from all schools and colleges to make recommendations about how to better coordinat e and leverag e community engagement efforts. As Table 9 shows, several other tools and activates were also used to help drive work toward the goals of this work focus.

PAGE 89

76 Table 9 Leadership Practice Model Table: City and Region Vital Asset Work Focus Tools Activities Proximal Goals Distal Goals Data Embedding Mechanisms External Facilitators General Skills and Traits Policy and Procedure Changes Sales and Story t elling Events and building cultural space Leadership meetings Leadership retreats, member checks, partnership and relationship building Use of teams 15 sub goals or metrics against which success (or not) is benchmarked By 2023, Campus X will be one of the city s top five civic, cultural and economic assets. As an example of the policy and procedure changes, L eader X was able to convince the board to grant the campus an exception to a branding logo. Sales and story telling were a big part of how the campus was going to articulate its new brand, both internal ly and externally. The campus communications department ; a new branding campaign and logo ; tel evision spots ; and several call outs at community assemblies, city partnerships, conferences and other functions have served as key tools and activities in reali zing this work focus. For example, Leader X ensured that the campus was at the table during the Coalition of Urban and Metropolitan Universities N ational C onference and tasked a number of panels on the role of higher education in a thriving metropolitan area. This same topic was addressed with city leaders at a Downtown Metropolitan Partnerships urban exploration summit. In Leader Xs own words: By 2023 Campus X will be one of the citys top f ive civic, cultural and economic assets A key component to accomplishing this strategy is setting measurable and actionable goals. At their retreat this summer, I reported to the board on how our campus is performing on a number of metrics related to the boards strategic

PAGE 90

77 priorities, including student success measures such as graduation and retention rates. We have set goals for increases in these areas by 2020. Our goal is to improve to a 75% freshman retention rate and a 50% [ in September of 2017, chang ed to 60% ] six year graduation rate by 2020. I think its clear that elevating our students success and fixing our leaky pipeline are not only the right thing to do, they are the smart thing to do ( Excerpt transcribed from L eader X public speech, Septemb er 26, 2016). As of early October 2017 even more work was being done to coalesce and articulate the identity of the downtown campus and its place in the city center. Leader X co launched (with Campus Xs health science arm) an effort to evaluate a path forward that allows the campus to identify efficiencies and enhancements across both campuses. What L eader X has articulated about this work is that i n real terms i t represents the beginning of a process to identify the reorganization of some functional areas of campus operations including an evaluation of brand and identity and other elements that will support the distinctive needs and opportunities for each campus Create a More Cohesive, Collaborative and Inclusive Campus C ulture L eader X has reiterated at several town halls and open forums a collective desire to break down organizational silos and increase collaboration and communication within and between units across the campus. In one famous speech, L eader X noted that they had grown up on a farm and that silos belonged there and not on campus. Another theme mentioned when discussing this work focus has been the development and implementation of the five campus priorities and how development in the other areas would help provide numerous opportunities for broadbased engagement and to break down the silo mentality. In the table below, several tools and activities were used to help zero in on this work focus but increasingly important are sales and storytelling building cultural space and redirecting the embedding mechanisms to help cement the new cultural context.

PAGE 91

78 Table 10 Leadership Practice Model Table: Campus Culture Work Focus Tools Activities Proximal Goals Distal Goals Data Embedding Mechanisms General Skills and Traits Policy and Procedure Changes Sales and Story t elling Events and building cultural space Leadership meetings Leadership retreats, member checks, partnership and relationship building Use of teams 9 sub goals or metrics against which success (or not) is benchmarked Create a more cohesive, collaborative and inclusive cultureunderscor ed the collective desire to break down organizational silos and increase collaboration and communication within and between units across the campus As of September 20, 2017, Leader X describ ed the progress on this work focus as follows : o ur students connection to campus culture was celebrated in September at the groundbreaking ceremony of the new Wellness Center and we conducted our first campus wide [ r edacted] Survey to help us better grasp the scope of experiences within our community. We are now analyzing the results, with the goal of improving our prevention of and response to these incidents Alongs ide the other efforts toward reaching this work focus are meetings agendas a nd multiple communiqu s that have sought to reaffirm and articulate a commitment to fostering an environment of inclusiveness, understanding and mutual respect, as well as our support for those students including immigrants, religious minorities and others who may be subject to hate crimes or harassment. R esources have been identified to support students, faculty and staff during these times of uncertainty, including a new Teaching in Tumultuous Times web page for faculty. A side page off L eader X s main website is also being created

PAGE 92

79 that will ostensibly lay out resources and policies for supporting undocumented students. There is a concurrent desire to continue working with shared governance leaders to promote forums and conversations about the issues that affect the campus Story telling is also an important component of how Leader X is trying to reengineer the mind of followers. Inspirational stories and celebratory wins are a cornerstone of their report outs as is transparency. All in all, while the work focus may differ f rom the other objectives, how to get there speaks to a leadership practice that has continued to use followers through influence and a coordinate d and inspirational vision toward a common end. Tools In their work on distributed leadership, Spillane Halverson & Diamond (2001; 2004) described how the distribution of leadership occurs among administrators, specialists, and teachers in the school, a nd the way they use routines and tools of various sorts Tools such as memos, scheduling proce dures, and evaluation protocols were used to reach a common outcome. The tools found in this bounded case study served as an example of how this practice may be carried out in higher education and paints a clear picture of Leader Xs particularized leader ship practice. Table 11 provides a glimpse of how those tools were used during a specific month of Leader Xs leadership.

PAGE 93

80 Table 11 A Monthly Example of Tools U sed in January 2017. Context Rationale Number Data Collection Ask staff/faculty to report back on specific concerns Website feedback Leader Postings and Embedding Mechanisms Including a did you know and stories section 3 (new stories) including 3 new hires welcomes stories with one about a new Human Resources leader who is a specialist in talent acquisition) Leadership Meeting(s) Agendas Leadership bi monthly communication tool 2 meetings held Communiques Report about prioritization effort 1 (16 efforts made toward goals noted) Campus Today Online Story Geared toward a lumni with focus to improve communications 3 released (mention of new arts collaborative; assisting veterans, and a new 5 million dollar partnership with donor) Campus Forum Conversations Campus X leader, the p rovost and a dministration and b udget h ead invite staff, faculty and students to a campus Q & A 1 (with 5 more scheduled through May 2017) Data Data collection and dissemination was used throughout each work focus a rea but often in different ways. For example, the use of disconfirming data to support the need for change both with student success and financial stability was used early on b y L eader X Examples follow. January 28, 2016. The budget, which is largely based on tuition revenues, is tighter than planned because the campus didnt quite meet enrollment projections. It doesnt help that state money only accounts for 5 percent of the budget. April 7, 2016. On the job for 98 days, [ L eader X ] has so far met with more than 1,000 people. [ L eader X ] has used social media, a webcast and an online questionnaire to further engage the community.

PAGE 94

81 March 23, 2016. I have spent 12 weeks, have about ten sessions left and my summary comes from 17 formal gatherings of folks. About 1700 people have attended these sessions and over 100 surveys have been submitted and numerous individual conversations have reinforced, a lot. More than anything else that has come up, is a resounding desire for a shared vision. Where are we going? What greater good do we serve? What is possible because we exist? What principles guide our decisions and actions as we go? May 2, 2016. You may be aware that [ Campus X ] is facing a budget shortfall for FY 1617. This is due to the FY 1516 enroll ments coming in below expectations (down 0.3% instead of a projected 1.9% increase). As a result, the campus has a revenue shortfall of $6.8 million. To offset this deficit, we will be using onetime funds of $4 million from a contingency reserve fund. To c over the remainder of the deficit, reductions in administrative and unit operating budgets may be required once we know the actual fall 2016 enrollment numbers. Should that be necessary, we will work closely with leadership across the campus to identify ef ficiencies and areas where reductions can be managed with the least impact on instructional and support services for our students. September 26, 2016. Today, I want to talk with you about what I think lies ahead for us if we are to fully embrace the uni que position we have in the states higher education landscape. Additionally, I will share some of what came out of the more than 5,000 comments and suggestions that were gleaned during my Reach Out and Listen tour, including the priorities that emerged, and the early work that began during the summer. I will also describe what I believe its going to take for us to

PAGE 95

82 address a number of the challenges and opportunities we facethe graduation rate (40 percent to 46 percent over the last five years) requires improvement. Our goal is to improve to a 75 percent freshman retention rate and a 50 percent six year graduation rate by 2020. November 16, 2016. What metrics should we start looking at? The ultimate goal is a dashboard that is visually easy with easy to read graphics. April 14, 2017. We have already begun using these findings to inform and improve the universitys ongoing prevention, education and response efforts. Embedding Mechanisms Embedding mechanisms with regard to resources allocation and unit realignment were used to drive home the need to challenge the old way of doing business and to send a clear message that Campus Xs leader was intent on doing what was needed to advance the strategic priorities. By roughly one year into their tenure L eader X had announced the hire of a new campus finance chief position, a change in responsibilities for another cabinet member, the hire of a new leader for a satellite campus, a division of re sponsibilities in the role of finance chief, two streamlined process es bringing together three university units into one portfolio, and a separate and distinct success budget geared exclusively toward support ing further hardwiring measures to support stude nts to the tune of $1.5 million. Leader X has also managed to secure from the governing board an investment of $5 million per year, for ten years, with a goal of investment in the infrastructure to support campus change. Below are further details surroun ding the above referenced efforts. April 5, 2016. We are happy to announce that our national search for a [top campus leader] for budget and finance for [ Campus X ] has successfully been concluded.

PAGE 96

83 [ name redacted] major emphasis will be providing oversight on financial issues for [ Campus X ] in the areas of budget, finance, student financial services, and policy and fiscal analysis. June 17, 2016. I am writing to let you know about a change in responsibilities for [Name Redacted], who has been wit h is since January as [role] for [ Campus X ] October 10, 2016. Given that funding from the state continues to be tight and due to the need to improve the ongoing financial success of both campuses, we have asked our campus chief financial officers to co nsider the optimal structure for our administrative and financial functions. We are pleased to announce that [ name r edacted] will now focus her work on [ Campus X ] as its CFO and [redacted]. October 19, 2016. To provide enhanced customer service and streamlined processes for departments and faculty, we have made a strategic decision to consolidate three offices: the Offices of Grants and Contracts, Finances and the Bursars Office. It has become clear from a business process standpoint that these thr ee units will benefit from structural alignment, including a centralized contracting unit, improved fiscal reporting, enhances compliance, and a workforce e with bench strength in critical positions. By 2017 more embedding mechanisms were put in place. A new human resource depart mental leader was brought on who was ostensibly chosen due to their background with talent acquisition and performance management. Field notes from January 2017 reveal that a c abinet member reported at a leadership meeting that the new human resources hire was chosen due to their background in performance based management that could help advance [ L eader Xs] prioritization effort with regard to culture.

PAGE 97

84 This idea of building the platform and putting the right levers in pla ce to facilitate change is in accord ance with an earlier interview, dated April 8, 2016, with Leader X. During this interview, L eader X outlined the vision for the effort to come Field notes from an April 2016 personal meeting with L eader X reveal how th is leader viewed the roadmap before them. They spoke broadly about how they would measure success, their immediate goals, and how they would embed change for the long run all questions implied from the literature on successful culture change and change man agement. Leader X answered this section with a few simple sentences: I am beginning with the end in mind. I am building a sense of what is possible. I am getting to the bottom of the belief that the end will be worth it and at the end of the day, when I ask people W hat would it take to make this university all it can be? I want people to be able to answer that question without hesitation. Leader Xs roadmap is being refined, and they have identified immediate goals of working on student support servi ce areas the biggest early known problems. Leader X also spoke of using something similar to a measurement indicator. Here, we talked about goal theory and incentivizing employees to meet targets. This discussion strongly suggests that Leader X is going to use mini benchmarks as they work toward the bigger goals Leader X also mentioned telling the progress story every chance they got and selling the success stories about change. Leader X also mentioned in this interview that they see this work taking about five to seven years to fully embed and that they fully expect that, over time the change ideals and values will be incorporated into new staff hiring. Leader X also spoke of publicly recognizing key members of the or iginal change coalition, and making sure the rest of the staff new and oldremember their contributions

PAGE 98

85 External F acilitators The use of external facilitators, such as consultant s and subject matter experts were another tool and activity used at Campus X. As of April 23, 2017, as the prioritization effort was entering the measurement phase, the following consultancy services helped in the strategic planning and execution of campus work foci : The Master Planning Committee used three consultancy services including one very well known national company, Brad & Dunleavy. The Budget Planning and Steering Committee used a well known national firm with experience across more than 200 universities. At least one retreat included an executive coaching and retreat facilitation firm helping to support a leadership visioning session. Blueprinting for Student Affairs involved work with a consulting firm known for developing integrated strategy and a plan in human resources and operational issues. Student Success techn ology reform involved the use of two major vendors and an executive partnership. Branding and V isioning used a marketing lab firm team of forensic scientists who help organizations re engage with their markets. More recently, there have been campus discussions on a data warehousing platform and a classroom planning tool with two different external vendors An April 2017 meeting with a prominent New York firm w as held to offer a data strategy plan that would help deliver real time data dashboards for planning and budgeting purposes The notion behind this as presented to leadership in attendance was the ability to ex tract data from the raw level, including human resources and finance and student systems ; have created scripts in

PAGE 99

86 place; crosswalk the data and clean holes ; then c reate a dataquality audit with the state d purpose of providing campus leadership with a data driven way to make real time decisions. General S kills and T raits Evidence from this research suggests that L eader X scored high on the spectrum of emotional intelligence. Leader X modeled this the moment they arrived on campus. There are examples of this motivational ability in each of Leader Xs speeches, field notes and interviews. Words spoken by L eader X suggest ed a strong sense of purpose, passion and urgency. This was also a leader who could sift through the noise to find the i mportant elements. Witness L eader X s R each O ut and L isten tour s and the transparency with which report outs were being conducted. The evidence also strongly suggested that L eader X was a master collaborator, yet humble and willing to learn. Perhaps it stands to reason that as a result of this high emotional intelligence, L eader X would be an expert skill scanner. This tool allowed L eader X to br eak down silo thinking by recognizing the talents people could bring to the table and then capitalizing on them. V ery early on, for example, L eader X used their emotional intelligence skills scanning to identify a cabinet and chose advisors who would contribute to the success of the effort. It is important to note that no cabinet existed before. The cadre of advisors would eventually come to represent an impressive set of talent with skills that spanned the upper echelons of education, busines s, government and health care. Campus leadership teams meet monthly and the c abinet meets bi monthly. The c abinet leadership, which did not exist before Leader X c ame on board, now numbers just under a dozen. This team has become a sounding board for Le ader X and ha s shared in the responsibilities of leading and managing the campus change efforts. By way of example, this group has been the goto body for working and

PAGE 100

87 action team report outs, dashboard and metrics discussions and event and communications planning. Messaging and C ommunication P lans On January 27, 2016, less than a month after taking office, L eader X delivered a speech to the campus community outlining a vision for the partnership this leader and the community had entered into. That initial effort set the stage for how this leader intended to engage with followers and the community as a whole Witness the words of L eader X in an internal email sent to various campus stakeholders on J anuary 27, 2016: Over the next 80 days, I have 25 meetings planned (and more are being added to the calendar) with groups both inside and outside the university. There are sessions scheduled with each school and college, as well a session for all faculty, one for all staff, and one for all students. I e ncourage you to come to one of the listening tour stops and share your views. After 80 days of listening and learning, well distill and analyze what weve heard. I hope to report on emerging themes before the semester is over, and share at least a preli minary plan of action by the fall Four months later, by April 28, 2016, again during a personal interview, L eader X articulated the need to ensure that the campus moved beyond the initial period of learning and to move into a growth and prosperity phase; reflecting what they referred to during an interview with the researcher as a sort of s igmoid c urve as made famous by Char l es Handy in his seminal work, The Age of the Paradox ( 2003) The important point about this concentration on messaging is how it would play out in L eader X s messaging plan. It seemed clear from the start that t his leader was going to pay close attention to the message, the audience and the desired outcome. That they began this effort with an 80day R each O ut and L isten tour was meant to show that c ommunication and transparency were going to be the hallmarks of this administration.

PAGE 101

88 That initial messaging has been followed up with a dedicated website, videos, pa mphlets and various news stories where staff, faculty and students can access any number of data points on what has been done and what still needs doing. Policy and Procedure C hanges This tool was closely tied to embedding mechanism s but merited having its own category for the focus it w as given during the leadership practice. Implementing effective policy and procedure interventions wa s a process by whereby Campus Xs leader could assure that key aspects of promising approaches were put into practice as intended. Take for example, a sample of the interventions put into practice over the course of 18 months: January 13, 2017. A new human resources chief is hired and is touted for her forthcoming work consult[ing] on people strategies, highly diverse talent acquisition and engagement, total rewards, and performance and development issues, and will serve as H uman Resources institutional change liaison to the overall university. January 20, 2016. In the interests of efficiency and effective immediately two leadership group meetings are merged into one larger meeting. April 05, 2016. A new chief budget and finance office position is filled, with a goal of streamlining the financial house January 1, 2017. I will be convening representat ives from our colleges and schoolsand other campus units to make recommendations on who we can better coordinate and leverage our community engagement efforts (Leader X). March 2, 2017. A new multi campus online degree program is discussed. March 7, 2017. Campus X begins to grant early admission to local highschoolers with good grades mak ing it easier for them to continue their educational journey at a

PAGE 102

89 high caliber university right in the city. The first students accepted into the program, and who complete the requirements, will begin class at Campus X in fall 2018. March 13, 2017. A call goes out to volunteers to help shape a new scholarship campaign. April 10, 2017. A campus wide town hall is held to convey the new budget model. During this disc ussion, the model redesign is unveiled along with the new incentive structure designed to ( a ) make better decisions ( b ) have more robust methodology for doing business, ( c ) grow revenues, ( d) promote incentives of all types and ( e ) increase transparency

PAGE 103

90 Figure 4. Cover e xample with note from Campus X s leader. The picture a bove depicts the cover of a research booklet on best practices in higher education. Included in the bottom left hand corner is a note from Campus Xs leader to two followers, indicating that these are some of the ide a s being tried at peer institutions and that some of them may be worth exploring [at Campus X] The use of best practices was another tool under procedural changes that was used to achieve the specifi c work focus and one method particularly valued by Leader X When different followers engaged in best practices, they tended to prioritize and implement intervention strategies based on what had been learned through research and experience in

PAGE 104

91 community contexts. Implementing interventions with a focus to what had been done before and worked at different institutions, appeared to be a key process to he lp Campus X leadership target and work toward the realization of the articulated work focus Sales and Story t elling One of the most effective ways to communicate is storytelling Leader X was adept at this and was able to use stories, personal experiences about themselves, others, and about aspirational desires and goals to motivate followers to achieve m ore than they thought possible. Stories would often cast the leader and followers at Campus X as agents of change, rather than defenders of the status quo. As one example, note L eader X s transcribed words from a May 23, 2017, team event: I am going to close this session with a quote from John Schar, a scholar of system change at University of California. Schar noted that the future is not some place we are going, but one we are creating where the paths are not to be found, but made. And the activity of making them changes both the maker and the destination X seemed to understand that they could not eliminate fear of change or abolish uncertainty or avoid the prospect of change for Campus X but they did appear to be lever aging the emotional navigational stakes to their greatest advantage by telling a purposeful story. The following are examples taken from different points in time, since January 2016. A transcribed speech by L eader X delivered on January 27, 2016, indica tes that Leader X has been very impressed by the energy, momentum, desire and talent...Ive been inspired by our students who tell me that they love this place because of its rich diversity, its location in the heart of our vibrant city, and most especial ly,

PAGE 105

92 because of the quality of our academic programs. Ive met proud graduates across the city who describe how [this Campus] has changed their lives and positioned them for opportunities they could never have imagined. Ive visited with faculty members who tell me that they specifically choose to be here because of its nexus with the opportunities and challenges facing an urban environment. Ive heard from employers who say their first choice for employees are our graduates because of their strong prepara tion and readiness for the work place. And Ive been humbled by the number of people throughout our community who seek me out to tell me what a great asset [ Campus X ] is and go on to share their hopes for what it might yet become. Duri ng a March 15, 2016 meeting, Leader X discussed with staff as follows: While Im still relatively new on campus, the vast majority of what I have observed demonstrates a deep, shared commitment to [Campus X] being a place that values, welcomes and celebrates diversity in all its forms. Cultivating and sustaining such a climate depends on each of us. Thank you for what you are doing and will continue to do in this regard. On April 15, 2016, transcribed notes following Leader Xs c abinet debrief notes demonstrates how organizational minds were being shaped. The head of advancement (employee A) told those in attendance that we cant have leadership without a leader and we finally got one and that such leaders must set the tone for the place Employee A then went on to make an analogy of where the campus had been and where it was going. [Employee] A spoke of their time here, five years ago; when t old not to look to alumni for funds because they did not have a sense of engagement with [ Campus X ] Not true at all, A s ays. A noted that [L eader X ] has

PAGE 106

93 been talking about [ Campus X ] alum all over the place and that they are in great positions with 75% of alum remaining in state. A further noted that alum lives have been changed by this place in spite of this campus livin g in the shadows of others. Employee A and their team are now building the alumni piece. Relationships with corporations are also getting better. In a sense, A said W e are now figuring out how to tell our story better and we are all excited about tha t. On June 7, 2016, an e mail was sent to a select group of campus followers asking for their help. I am writing to request your participation in a Leadership Working SessionWe have now completed the compilation of results from my Reach Out and Listen tour. As was preliminarily reported and discussed at our March 23rd retreat, the articulation of a [ Ca mpus X ] specific, unifying aspirational direction that drives everything we do emerged as a top priority. On July 15th, we will work together utilizing the services of an external facilitator, to gain alignment around what could be referred to as the ess ential intent of [ Campus X ] We have engaged [ name r edacted]a unique outcome of their participative process and skilled facilitation will be the development of a highimpact visual that helps to translate our desired future into action. On July 12, 2016, in a follow up email to staff, Leader X notes Your working group will learn and apply design thinking principles to create an action plan that will define the desired future state for your respective focus area and identify what it will take to achieve it. I want the outcome of each groups work to be bold, ambitious and boundary busting; in a word, I look for transformative results that will accelerate new value creation for our current and prospective students while simultaneously reducing

PAGE 107

94 the complexity of making that happen. Each working group will be supported with validators to serve as subject matter consultants and navigators to assist with data and information gathering. On August 22, 2016 in a welcomeback email Leader X reports on several achieved milestones. Dear faculty, staff and students Welcome to a new academic year! The campus is already humming with the activity and promise that this time of year brings. In the past week, I have had the opportunity to meet a number of n ew members of our faculty and staff, as well as many of our new students at Campus Village and at the well attended new student convocation. The enthusiasm and sense of purpose among these new members of our diverse community inspire me, just as our conti nuing faculty, staff and students have done in my first seven months at [C ampus X ] In a September 19, 2016, email Leader X asks for more stories of success. Each year we seek new opportunities to tell the stories of our students, faculty and staff to communicate the impact of [ Campus X ] on the city, state and world. Please participate in the universitys campaign this year by sharing your story. Simply compl ete and online profile it will only take a few minutes. May 23, 2017. (Meeting) Thank you. This was tough work. There are good people working in a difficult system. There are many pockets of gold here but we need to turn those pockets into pathways of gold. People around this table; we have to be the visionary of keeping this work alive. Hopefulness here is a very strong theme. There are also Snapchat, YouT ube and Facebook campus account s outlining the leaders priorities and telling the story of th eir work in promoting the campus. L eader X s

PAGE 108

95 website, as of April 27, 207 included two E N ewsletters ; more than 30 communiqu s including a specific hyperlink to a newspaper interview ; and a listening tour and campus priorities page. The priorities hyper link leads t o the five strategic priorities and three actions associated actions related to student success working groups, act i on team and campus conversations report outs. Besides the website, internal emails and updates, social media was another important way L eader X engaged in storytelling. Pictures often accompanied the story telling for maximum impact. Take, for example, one university leader explaining the branding campaign launch: T he turnout showed the new brand already resonates with the [ Campus X ] C ommunity. The launch party got the brand off to a lively start. Students and staff and even faculty w ere posing in a social media photo booth and taking pictures with [ Campus Xs ] mascot. Guests held t shirts with the new [Campus X ] logo and we all ate so well. The food was great burritos and kebabs and DJ W ( a [ Campus X ] student) worked the stage in front of a backdrop of the city skyline like a pro ( Leader X Artifact, February 21 2017). Storytelling continues to form a cornerstone of this leaders practice. In May 2017, an email communiqu went out to the campus community informing them of the progress on the five strategic priorities: Im grateful to and humbled by our remarkable community for doing so much to ensure the ongoing succes s of our students and this institution I am confident our collective efforts are laying a solid foundation to propel the campus toward our shared goals. To paraphrase Abraham Lincoln, when were all moving forward together, success takes care of itself.

PAGE 109

96 Activities Over the period of the intentional and particularized leadership practice efforts various activities were identified and used to engage with followers and influence them to a common end. These activities, outlined in more depth in the followi ng sections, helped define the interactions through which the proximal and distal goals would be measured. E vents and Building Cultural Space Abraham Lincoln once said that public sentiment is everything and that with it nothing can fail but that without it, nothing can succeed. This sentiment seemed to drive the marketing and promotion of efforts underway at Campus X. One of Campus X leaders main work foci was to create a collaborative and inclusive culture. One way this was done was to use events to invite conversation, debate, information sharing, and feedback. The organizational campus culture was identified early on as central not peripheral to student success. T o have movement that make s strategic prioritization a success, cu lture must be aligned with vision. This is a premise that has been outlined by several leadership theorists, from Schein (2010) onward. Leader X understood this. Events appeared to be geared to ward hav ing as many participants as possible appreciate the personal benefit of being part of a more positive and productive culture of ownership s haring practical tools and skills to help people be more positive and productive and thus build capacity for change. Town halls, campus conversations, and a branding event were just some of the events offer ed L eader X s websi te offer ed specific pages on communications, office s taff bios, and strategic pri orities with several report out papers or articles More recently, L eader X and two other cabinet members have t aken the prioritization effort on the road in the form of campus conversations. These events are conve rsational in tone, featuring three leaders (finance,

PAGE 110

97 provost and Leader X) at the front of a big campus hall, one microphone between them, seated on black high chairs. For Leader X, these events satisfy many things but especially help build cultural capacity and create a greater bond and sense of belonging with staff and faculty and have become a space where Leader X tells the story of progress The other obvious strategy when it came to events was the targeted messaging. Events were tailored to the audience with much thought being given to the context. Take for exampl e a February 8, 2017, event titled A P enny (or E mpanada) for your T houghts geare d specifically toward students. The context of the invitation that went out on all forms of social media, including email, read [Campus Xs Leader] invites you to the R each O ut and L isten tour stop just for students. [Leader X ] is seeking your input to create a shared vision for [ Campus Xs ] future. Enjoy an empanada from [name redacted] while supplies last. If you are unable to attend, you may still provide feedback on our online questionnaire. While many town halls open to all were held, the majority of this tour was targeted as purposeful and was mean t to include as many specific student voices as possible, all while trying to make sure that every one of those voices felt heard. Another example of the use of events to build cultural capacity occurred on February 20, 2017. On this day, Leader X launched the campus re branding campaign a turning point in the campus trajectory. To mark the new brand launch, a major event was held to which the entire campus was invited. At the same time as the event, prominent airport, radio, web and television advertising slots were proliferating the new brand, regionwide. A YouTube channel launch also accompanied the timing of the campus event, including a behindthe scenes video runni ng 2.04 minutes in length. Words like energy, pulse, city and amplify were now describing the type of campus that Campus X wanted to

PAGE 111

98 become. Pictures of this day showcasing campus talent follow with digital alterations made as needed and to protect identities. Figure 5. A c a ppella g roup at C ampus X branding l aunch e vent. Figure 6. Students posing at C ampus X br anding l aunch e vent.

PAGE 112

99 Figure 7. Hip hop dancers and L eader X at a branding l a unch e vent. Events were also used for formal and informal team building. For example, dinners with people or groups from the leadership team on the evening before the event were had to review goals and process. This helped individuals get to know each other and make any appropriate last minute fine tuning adjustments to things such as agenda s At a n event on March 8, 2017, the cabinet/leadership team was invited to view a sports game from a suite (donated by an outside vendor for the night). A February 21, 2017, L eader X email artifact shows Leader Xs desire to team build and creat e community space. Leader X wrote to a select group of invitees as follows: [Redacted] Sports is providing a Stadium suite for use by [Campus X] for an upcoming game. Its a great opportunity for a fun night together for our campus leaders and I hope youll consider attending. Here are details Additional

PAGE 113

100 details will be provided closer to the date. Thanks, [ Leader X ]. Pictures taken at the event and supported by field notes demonst rate the casualness and camaraderie of the team that night. Leader X served drinks from behind the bar. Food included typical game food such as hot dogs and nachos. Nearly all those in attendance were in game spirit gear or dressed casually, and there w as a sense of laid back ease in the conversations. The event was followed by five emails thanking the leader for the wonderfulfunand great time had by all The picture, below, taken the night of the sports outing, has been digitally enhanced to preve nt any unintentional or unwanted identification of staff members. Figure 8. Team building ni ght at a s ports e vent, February 2017. Leadership M eetings The campus leadership meetings teams appear ed to serve a different purpose than the leaders cabinet. Part of this is explained by the fact that the leadership team is shared between different campus satellite locations and lead by two different leaders. This multicampus team meets every two weeks for about two hours and is consistently run by paper

PAGE 114

101 agenda. It is more informative in nature and a way for units to come together to provide report ins and report outs of campus events. Notwithstanding its scope, this team is strategically used by L eader X and other organizational followers for progress updates and reflection At an April 3, 2017, meeting, for example, there was extended discussion on updates of a proposed new school for Campus X, a roundtable discussion on a new position that would cross both campuses, a budget update and a picture of impending state budgeting impacts on the campus. Le adership R etreats, Member C hecks and Partnership B uilding Retreats and visioning sessions with followers were an important activity in this leadersh ip practice triangle and appeared to reflect L eader X s intent to get this effort right. For example, at an April 28, 2016, personal interview (and just four months into their tenure), Leader X noted the following: I can draw an analogy to this sense of humans needing and wanting stability in their lives. I u nderstand t hat no one wants to confront the anxiety of change unless they absolutely must but my role in leadership is to create a sense of safety and buy in. I am trying to be mindful about this important area of the human psyche. My goal in all of these efforts is to work one piece at a time and to really garner buy in to help al i eve [sic] some of the uncertainty the efforts may bring to the organization. Campus Xs leader is known to ask people, for example, to share in blue sky thinking: What would it take to be all we can be to be a great university ? and follows up with them to help solicit thoughts and ideas. In this sense, this leader is trying to get followers to make th e articulated vision their own and mitigate the anxiety that this is a vision that is out of sync with their assumptions, beliefs and values ( Baruch & Lambert, 2007; Schein 2010; Wittig, 2012) This idea of sharing and reciprocity comes straight out of the world of c ultural a nthropology and later m arketing psychology and the concept of

PAGE 115

102 the reciprocal web of indebtedness. The concept holds that reciprocity creates an interdependency and is a powerful method for gaining compliance with a later request. An example of how activities and tools dovetailed during the leadership practice ( retreats, events, meetings, data, partnership building) is shown below. Figure 9. Picture of Campus X s trategic priorities at a l eadership r etreat, July 2016. The relationship and partnership building went handin hand with the leadership practice and extended beyond followers and often to those who held authority over L eader X. So, this leadership activity was a way to manage downward and upward in the organization. On April 6, 2016, L eader X helped facilitate a focus session with the board. The room w as divided into roundtables representing (a) leveraging our compet iti ve advantages, ( b) doubling down on undergraduate student succ ess, ( c ) becoming one with the city, and ( d) innovating for the future. Aspirational questions such as W hat opportunities do you see for us in this area? W hat success would l ook like ? and W hat we might we want in the way of our success ? were asked a t each table. Moreover, each roundtable was tasked with identifying how the board could help advance this goal and what advice they would offer. A pictur e of the placard on a roundtable from this event follows.

PAGE 116

103 Figure 10. Placard placed at a boar d r oundtable r etreat. Use of T eams Using followers help drive strategic efforts related to work foci was an extremely important activity of this leaders practice. Four months into the process L eader X revealed that they were trying to be mindful about an important area of the human psyche and that their goal was to work one piece at a time, with intent to gain support to help allev iate some of the uncertainty their prioritization approach was bringing to the organization. A concerted effort was mounted to engage followers by including them in the problem solving paradigm in order to garner buy in, develop an internal external task force, provide a sense of an organizational culture safety net and clear direction, and allow ing followers to analyze proble m s and come up with creative solutions (Edmonson, 1999; Wigfield & Eccles, 1992)

PAGE 117

104 Figure 11. Pictures t aken at various l eadership t eam r etreats. Note : The top picture was taken at a July 2016 leadership retreat and the bottom picture at an action team report out on May 22, 2017.

PAGE 118

105 Engaging followers in problem solving began in earnest in mid2016. As noted, an initial broad based cadre of about 80 people was placed across four campus working teams. The se initial team members met througho ut summer and delivered over 65 recommendations, all of which were taken up and moved forward by a second iteration of follower teams, labeled actions teams who made their final report out (43 items) on May 22, 2017. Action team recommendations that co uld not be carried out are now being handled by a student success partnership steering committee, whose charge is to implement transformational student success initiatives, campus wide. Their role essentially is to hardwire success in the very fiber of th e campus. In L eader X s own words made at the May 2017 report out, The Student Success Collaborative (SS C ) effort launched in January to coalesce our many ongoing student success improvement efforts under one umbrella. The SS C effort builds on the recomm endations of last summers working groups and the 2016 17 action teams, with assistance from the [ r edacted name of Higher Ed ucation Consulting Group]. The SS C steering committee, convened in mid April, will develop the SS C teams goals and implementation plan. The work includes a technology platform to use student data for predictive analytics in order to provide appropriate interventions when students are identified as needing focused support. The committee and units involved in SS C parti cularly informa tion t echnology and the academic advisors, will be working over the summer to enable faculty, advisors and others to begin using the new SS C technology platform by the fall semester. The broad participation in these efforts has been impressive ; it is hear tening to see people from across the campus sharing responsibility for improving student success. The SSC has created a structure against which their success is to be determined. With the 43 action items, the success team has strategically aligned its work and mission to develop a prioritization effort and is recommending the development of five teams (academic excellence, guided pathways, financial optimization, student communications, and student success) to help shepherd the ongoing work. The SSC is supported by higher education consultant project managers (external facilitator tool) who will ensure that each team is supported by project plans and metrics and that each team is goal focused.

PAGE 119

106 All in all, the work to action to student success implemen tation teams have engaged more than 100 faculty, staff and students directly in the work. Organizationally, thousands of other followers have likely been directly or indirectly affected. Teams were key in operationalizing Leader Xs vision and the priori tization effort. E ngaging followers so directly and centrally in the prioritization effort also ensured that employee f eedback and c orrective a ction were taken into account Figure 12. Picture of a t eam m ember taken in July 2016. M anaging organizational change can never be a one way street; employee involvement is a necessary and integral part of managing change. F eedback from employees

PAGE 120

107 as work focus is being implemented wa s a key element of the prioritization process at C ampus X. These te ams understood the issues, worked collectively to solve the problems facing the campus and thus became part of the solution. Their recommendations for organizational change thus fed into the overall proximal and distal goals of the work focus Proximal G oals The proximal goals associated with the five work foci were considered milestones of benchmarks that could be measured and therefore achieved within short periods of time. This sort of accountability is compatible with L eader Xs leadership practice and allowed for a feedback loop of greater support ers and change champions where needed. By September 2017, proximal goals were tabulated as KPIs ( key performance indicators) with a common baseline agreed to as units were charged with working on a common and final goal. The idea of reporting immediate success outward to stakeholders has become a n important focus of Leader Xs leadership practice. Take, for example, a July 7, 2017, board of t rustees update on recent successes including conversations on recent successes; a September 20, 2017 State of the Campus address noting that Leader X and the organization w ere now delivering on a promise Appendix E includes several samples of proximal and distal goals as they are being measured against the work foc us.

PAGE 121

108 Distal Goals Distal goals are the ultimate measure of effectiveness of a leadership practice. As of May 2017, for student success, these goals include d ( a ) a 75% freshmen retention rate by 2020, representing a 4% increase in first time, fulltime freshmen (retention rate in this context is measured from one year to the next) ; (b ) a 60% graduation rate by 2020 of undergraduates who started at Campus X as first time, fulltime freshmen (within six years) ; (c ) a 45% in crease in transfer students ; (d ) a 15% increase in degrees awarded. For the other wo rk foci, these goals include (e ) by 2023 becoming one of the citys top five civic, cultural and economics assets (via community asset work focus) ; (f ) a n $8.7 million increase in sponsored research awards (advance teaching and excellence work focus) ; (g ) implementation of collective productivity and wellbeing (collaborative and inclusive culture work focus) ; and (h) a proposed $6.9 million increase in financial aid and adoption of a new entrepreneurial bud get model (financial stability work focus). These important distal goals will be realized by the levels of prior success of lead measures outlined in the many proximal goals outlined and described in detail in Appendix E such as the proportion of tuition allocated to institutional aid, the number and funds available for graduate student stipends, i mplementation of recommendations of the K 12 Pipeline and Community College Pathways Action Team, assessment of student engagement as measured by student satisf action surveys and expansion of highdemand educational offerings.

PAGE 122

109 Distal and Proximal Goals SnapshotWork Focus: Strengthen our position as a vital community asset Proximal goals : 15+ sub goals Distal goal(s): By 2023, Campus X will be one of the top 5 civic, cultural, and economic assets Work Focus: Elevate Student Success Proximal goals : 50+ sub goals or metrics against which success (or not) will be determined Distal goal(s) : 75 % freshman retention rate by 2020, 50% graduation rate for undergrads who started at first time, full time freshman, 45% increase transfer students and 15 % increase in degrees awarded at Campus X Work Focus: A more cohesive, collaborative and inclusive CUD culture Technology Proximal goals: 9 sub goals Distal goals : Identifying and implementing ways to enhance our collective productivity and wellbeing to bring new life to the adage together we are better. (Viveiros, Personal Communication, 9.26.2016) I know you are taking a leap of faith with me but I am hopeful and Ill go as far to say Im confident that together we can move our campus forward in ways that position it as one of this nations most respected public urban research universities. I absolutely believe it has that potential and I pledge to do everything I can, in partnership with each of you, to help fulfill the promise of all it can be Campus X Leader January 27, 2016 Work Focus: Advance Excellence & Innovation in Teaching, Research and Creative Work Proximal goals: 11 sub goals Distal goals : 8.7 million increase in sponsored research awards Work Focus: Achieve long term financial stability and sustainability Proximal goals : 15 sub goals Distal goal(s): By 2020, 6.9 million increase in financial aid & alternate sustainable financial model Figure 13. Campus X distal and proximal g oals s napshot Research Question 3 Based on a review of the literature and the evidence of the change effort gathered in this work, what is an applied definition of leadership practice in higher education? What could we have added if we knew now what we did then? Dismiss framework? Enhance framework? The purpose of this section is to discuss the literature eviden ce and research data collected from this investigation to test the validity of an applied definition of a leadership practice; t his section begins with a review of that definition. Next this section present s a new element of a leadership practice that emerged during the data analysis and as detailed in the findings related to work focus, tools, and activities, proximal and distal goals. With all of

PAGE 123

110 these elements present, the final section provide s an emergent and applied definition of a new leadership practice defined by L eader X. The definition of a leadership practice supplied by Spillane Halverson & Diamond (2001; 2004) relying upon the interactions leaders, followers and situation framed the beginnings of a definition of leadership practice for this research Added to this framework was the research carried out by three doctoral researchers Bishop (2013), Holloway (2013) and Rubin (2013) who built upon the framework to come up with an intentional practice that moves beyond actions and behaviors and a thus provides a more analytical framework that is normative and includes the context of leader s setting goals and how they specifically construct pathways to achieve those goals. F indings from the emergent body of literature were reviewed for a definition of a higher education leadership practice. As that literature review demonstrated, while there is no one agreed format on the best way to lead in higher education, setting a vision, aligning culture, and sha red leadership are consistent themes in higher education. This casebounded study found that Campus Xs leader structured their leadership practice similarly to the intentional practice that moved beyond actions and behaviors and took into consideration context and followers to work toward a mutually desired end. For example, L eader X certainly concerned themselves with setting tone, sharing vision and engaging the workforce from the time they set foot on campus and did so through a particularized practice of setting priorities (work foci) and setting in motion various tools and activities that would help realize the proximal and distal goals of those objectives. The leadership practice tested and outlined in this work, while consistent with much of Le ader Xs actions, does not however describe the full story. The findings of this research also

PAGE 124

111 confirmed that an additional leadershippractice intentional concept was in place and appears fundamental to the development of an applied definition of leadership practice in higher education. This additional concept was temporal pacing. The temporal or time bounded, nature of Leader Xs leaders hip practice prioritization effort was foundational to how this leader interacted with followers and eventually something many of the followers would mimic in their own work. It is common practice for organizations to construct time related goals for prod uctivity and growth, such as monthly or annual sales targets or five year plans, as well as possibly much longer term objectives for their ultimate growth schedules. In their seminal work Senge and Crainer (2008) showed that determining the pace of change is one of the key ingredients of managing change. If leaders move too slowly, they lead their teams into failure and thus into noncompetitiveness (Smith, 2001). Relevance is lost and the ability to grow is diminished. L eader Xs initial practice reve aled clearly self imposed temporal pacing for each period of the prioritization effort, down to proscribing time bounded assignments of how work teams and units would function and deliver a work product. For Campus Xs leader, timing was as important as the change delivery itself. The time bounds surrounding Leader X s change strategy are depicted in the following graph and thereafter analyzed in detail.

PAGE 125

112 Figure 14. Campus X l eader s s trategic prioritization t imeline The Phases of Change at Campus X: Phase I Phase I of this leaders time bound change process was focused on assessment and visioning through exploration and listening. Here, through listening tours and one onone conversations decisions were ultimately made about the vision, who could be tapped to help

PAGE 126

113 carry out the prioritization plan who would be involved and whether the project would have an adequate base of support. Early into phase I (January 2016), Campus X s leader was setting the stage for the period to come W i tness the words from an email sent to proposed team members by L eader X on January 4, 2016: I write to send warm greetings on my first day .I am pleased and honored to be here.I believe my role is to help you, individually and collectively, fulfill the promise of what is possible. To do that, I need to continue listening and learning. I want to hear your thoughts and ideas as I deepen my understanding of [redacted] challenges and potential. Please join me for a forum [redacted] as we formally launch the process o f working together to create a shared vision for the future Four months later (April 2016) the tone of email communiqus changed from listening to reporting: Through a reach out and listen tour thats involving faculty, staff, students and community members, [redacted] is honing in on a shared vision.Our next steps going forward will be to create cross functional action teams around the priorities that come out of this tour .We will establish metrics and timelines so we can chart our progre ss. By June 6, 2006, the visioning and assessment phase was finally complete as evidenced by this email from L eader X : I am writing to request your participation in a Leadership Working Session on July 15th, from 9 a.m. 2 p.m. As was preliminarily reported and discussed at our March 23rd retreat, the articulation of a [Campus X], unifying aspirational direction that drives everything we do emerged as a top priority .We will work togetherto gain alignment around what could be referred to as the es sential intent of [ Cam pus X ]. a unique outcome of [this] participative process and skilled facilitation will be the development of a highimpact visual that helps to translate our desired future into action Phase II at Campus X Once the assessment and visioning stage was complete, Leader X used the criticality of the mission to sell the plan for change to leadership and beyond. Phase II of this leaders

PAGE 127

114 time bound process began in July 2016 with an email inviting the participation of several staff a nd faculty to strategic working groups: Over the next 8 weeks, under the leadership of one of your colleagues who will serve as chair, your working group will learn and apply designthinking principles to create an action plan that will define the desired future state for your respective focus area and identify what it will take to achieve it ( Email from L eader X, July 12, 2016) Phase II concluded approximately toward the end of October 2016, coinciding with the formal report of out the recommendations made by the campus working groups. Phase III at Campus X This phase began approximately in November 2016 and had much to do with the noti on of executing change It is clear that during this execution phase, visioning and planning gave way to a sense of urgency to deliver on the promises made. In a midNovember 2016 email, the leaders c hief of s taff wrote in an email : Thanks to all of y ou for a smaller but mighty Cabinet meeting Monday. It was a great discussion about beginning to develop metrics to track our results for [ C ampus Xs ] 5 strategic priorities: 1. Elevate student success 2. Advance excellence and innovation in teaching, research and creative work 3. Strengthen our position as a vital community asset 4. Create a more cohesive, collaborative and inclusive culture 5. Achieve long term financial stability and sustainability The primary audience for our dashboard will be the Cabinet and Deans, with the intention of providing updated and consistent numbers for leadership as we communicate progress on our shared goals internally and externally. As some of you have shared below, there are many reasons to embark on this path: to motivate our teams, to help identify where things might be stuck and to track progress toward our goals. This is a good time to leverage the dashboards of Advancement, [ r edacted] Student Affairs and communications, and work with the Administration and Finance teams in synchronizing our work. We will all be gathering more statistics that feed into a handful of key metrics. Id like to enlist your help in modifying and annotating this attached list (no changes from the previous one, to minimize confusio n) with these questions in mind: Are we measuring the right things? Whats missing? Are they lagging or leading indicators? What are the top 1 2 elements we should be tracking in each of our 5 priority areas?

PAGE 128

115 Are there stats that we should keep for internal eyes only? Feel free to send me your handwritten note scratches, or schedule time to download your ideas, or leave a long voicemai l whatever gets your ideas on this before I start generating another draft. Im out next week, so Id appreci ate your thoughts before Nov 28. O nward! ( Email from Leader X cabinet member, November 16, 2016) Th is execution phase was further defined by the use of external facilitators, consultants and subject matter experts with a goal to help change business proce sses. By December 2016, Campus X had signed a contract with a prominent consulting firm to help deliver a single student portal and to partner with a sister campus to develop a best practices platform, termed a success partnership for moving forward tr ansformational change. Other consultants were also brought in to help redesign and implement a new budget model, design and work on a campus master plan, provide blue printing for hardwiring student success and to provide leadership coaching support. Phas e Forward: Change Measurement This final p hase has been characterized by much organizational change hardwiring. As noted earlier, L eader X had managed to garner an additional $5 million from the trustees for each year for a ten year period. The money is earmarked to help the campus extricate itself from a legacy budget model and to wean itself off from old systemthink. A campus wide budget steering committee has moved forward w ith a budget model redesign that will run one parallel year against the legacy model While each time bound phase might have focused on different priorities or goals, throughout the campus change effort there was a concurrent focus to provide greater tra nsparency and open communication with the organization about the undertaking In fact, as will be discussed later in the tools and activities section throughout the prioritization effort, the leaders efforts, communications about the stages of the prior itization, reports on progress and others matters appeared to be carried out with a predictable cadence The pace

PAGE 129

116 of change, imposed on the campus by L eader X provided the pathway against which a big project could be made more manageable for followers. It also provided a platform against which Campus Xs leader could use skills scanning to bring change agents into the efforts at strategically important times. M ember Checking w ith Leader X A meeting was held between the researcher and L eader X on July 26, 2017, and lasted approximately one hour. During that meeting, the researcher went over the purpose of the study, the methodology and the results of the member checks. Leader X agreed with this researchers analysis of their practice. When asked whet her this practice was intentional, Leader X responded that much of this work came to them naturally as part of past organizational know how but also that some of it came from their own observations of what the organization appeared to need to move forward. This is consistent with the conceptual framework laid out in this study. The way Leader X described it was as follows: I needed to be he re and see this through not just for the visioning but also for the hardwiring stages. A similar response was offered when Leader X was asked whether they had intentionally time bounded their practice: W hat weighs heavily on me is this sense that, just l ike in our personal lives, an organization can feel abandoned and rejected. I feel like part of what I set out to do was to not just begin this but to see it through to completion and to not abandon the organization. This feels like something I need to do. I wont be here forever. This idea of organizational abandonment engendered a robust discussion on leadership in higher education. Leader X likened this effect to parenting and setting the stage and expectations for what was expected of you r children. The metaphor is apt in this case. One of the recurring themes from the member checks and the documents analyzed was this idea of Leader Xs transformational capacity and the notion of a sense of organizational purpose and

PAGE 130

117 collective identity. In the humanpsyche sense, we know that abandonment may bring on a host of issues such as behavioral or psychological conditions with the issue of chronic loss serving to internalize a trauma of sorts. This is not an area of leadership study that has received any significant attention in management research The logical deduction here is that if organizations have a type of person hood, if organizations can be said to have a specific culture (and even micro cultures) as noted by Schein (2010) then logically speaking, organizations can be said to suffer the same effects of bad leadership pr actice on their psyche as do human beings. A n Applied Definition of Leadership Practice for Higher Education To construct the conceptual framework guiding t his study, this work adopted the foundational principles of distributed leadership supplied by Spillane Halverson & Diamond (2001; 2004) This study added to this triangle framework the work of doctoral researchers ( Bishop, 2013; Holloway, 2013; Rubin, 2013) who showed that leadership practice within that framework also included a practice that moved beyond actions and behaviors and provided a more robust framework that articulated the context of leader s setting goals and how they constructed pa thways to achieve them This work tested those two components in the public higher education space. That framework, shown in F igure 2 in this research depicted a circle of leadership practice surrounding the work of distributed leadership, represented b y a n intentional and particularized practice of a leader influencing followers, working collaboratively on work foci through the use of tools and activities, and setting proximal and distal goal s What this research found however is that the conceptual framework was missing one component temporal pacing of the leader to reach strategic objectives in the work foci

PAGE 131

118 areas. Accordingly, the new framework would appear as follows with the dark blue time bound line representing the new finding. Figure 15. New conceptual framework depicting how time bounding within the leadership practice determines how leaders and followers interact to reach common agreed to work foci. Definition of a Leadership Practice in Higher Education As the review of literature demonstrates, there is an emergent body of work concerning leadership in higher education and organizational effectiveness. While there is no agreed upon format for the best way to lead in higher education, setting a vision; aligning culture ; and shared time bounded leadership are consistent themes and happen on a continuum of leader follower interactions within context The definition of a leadership practice supplied by Spillane Halverson & Diamond, (2001; 2004) relying upon the Work Focus Tools Activities Proximal Goals Distal Goals Leader(s) Follower s Situation

PAGE 132

119 interactions of leader s, followers, and situation, br ought former leadership practice researchers nearer to a definition of leadership practice but was construed as lacking the depth of the specific leadership practice in the context. D octoral researchers added to the distribut ed triangle the notion of a n intentional and particularized practice that moves beyond actions and behaviors and includes the context of leaders setting goals and how they construct the pathways to achieve those goals. The literature on higher education f urther refined that framework to suggest that the continuum of leading in higher education happens on a continuum, represented as a circle that encapsulates how the higher education leader particularizes their practice of setting strategic priorities within time bounds Therefore, a defined leadership practice for higher education can be described as a process whereby the leader interacts and influences the followers in a particular situation through a clearly defined work focus that is time bounded; within the activity of the work focus, several relevant tools and activities, also time bounded, are created that drive the work of leader s and follower s in their efforts to meet pre defined and evolving proximal and distal goals. Re search Question 4 Ho w did Leader Xs leadership practice prepare the mind of the campus to achieve six strategic goals? Member checking allowed the researcher to gauge whether the data and findings in this work were an effective strategy in helping the organization to be propel led forward. To determine that the leader was indeed positively influencing the mind of the organization, the researcher was looking for subject responses from followers that were homogeneously viewed. No concurrence from followers about the leaders practice would likely suggest that Leader Xs leadership practice was operating at the individual level of analysis, not at the

PAGE 133

120 organizational level needed to realize proximal or distal goals, and thus not effectively preparing the mind of the organization. In this study, members consisted of L eader X, the Campus X leadership team and L eader Xs working to action to student success groups/teams. As noted earlier, m embers were drawn from three groups: (a) Campus X leader, (b) Campus X leaders campus leadership team and (c) Campus Xs working to action to student success teams, centering on the broad topics of student success as delineated by academic advising, community college, the K 12 pipeline, and scholarships. Specific demographics from that mem ber verification group that participated in this research appear below. Table 12 Summary Data of Member Checking Association n = 41 Campus X team member(s) 26 Campus X leadership team members 14 Campus X leader 1 Member checking occurred from April 12, 2017, through midJuly 2017. During a pre scheduled meeting, each subject was asked specific proscribed questions (see T able 3) and given a copy of the timebounding and populated leadership work focus charts. Each subject was given additional time to review the aforementioned charts and then asked if they agreed with the researchers analysis of Leader Xs leadership practice. The questions were administered in the same order for each subject. Notes were taken, transcribed and entered into De doose to identify any additional emerging themes. The table s below outline the results of those checks.

PAGE 134

121 Table 13 Member Check Results Data : Research Question 1 Bounded Case Study Question Related Member Questions Results n = 40 What did Leader X find when they arrived at Campus X ? 1. What did you think when you heard about the leaders ideas for change (strategic priorities)? Did you think it (change) was needed? 2. Can you name at least two of those priorities? 15 out of 40 (37%) identified at least one articulated goal. The remainder of the group identified a component of each goal, such as higher graduation rate, financial sustainability or student persistence 0 10 20 30 40 YES NO

PAGE 135

122 T able 14 Member Check Results Data : Research Question 2 Bounded Case Study Question Related Member Questions Results n = 40 What did Leader X do to overcome the issues they found? 3. Do you believe this leader had/has a plan? 4. Does that plan concur with the charts I have shown you? Would you change anything? Why? 5. Can you provide an example of a change effort (for this leader) you have been involved in? All 40 (100%) respondents indicated that they were or remain involve d in one or more efforts involving the campus change effort. 0 10 20 30 40 YES NO 0 10 20 30 40 YES NO

PAGE 136

123 Table 15 Member Check Results Data : Research Question 3 Bounded Case Study Question Related Member Questions Results n = 40 B ased on a review of the literature and the evidence of change effort gathered in this work, what is an applied definition of leadership practice in higher education? 6. Please describe the leaders plan, as you see it, for change. Thematic Ordering: 7. Has your work area or practice changed as a result of this leaders efforts? *Seven out of eight respondents citing no/not really as an answer identified as relative newcomers to the university a nd felt that they were hired to bring chan g e/new practices to campus. 8. What do you see as next steps in this leaders agenda for change? ( a ) 35 of 40 (87.5%) people spoke to the need for implementation, deliverables, solidifying the work that has been done and hardwiring ( b) 13 spoke to the need to engage in continued buy in/culture shaping ( c ) 5 people spoke to ongoing communication 21% 20% 15% 13% 10% 9% 6% 6% Maximize Potential Transformative Necessary Engaging Iterative 31 8 1 0 10 20 30 40 Yes No/not really with No/Not really with no

PAGE 137

124 Table 16 Member Check Results Data : Research Question 4 Bounded Case Study Question 4 Related Member Questions Results n = 40 How did Leader Xs leadership practice prepare the mind of the campus to achieve six strategic goals? 9. Do you think this leaders plan will work? Why? Yes = 42.5% Really good chance = 30.5% Cautiously optimistic/Not sure* = 27% *W hen asked why they answered this way, 10 out of 11 people cited culture as a potential issue. 10. Have you bought into the vision of this leader? Why? Yes = 39 (97.5%) Somewhat = 1 11. What do you believe will be the impact of this leaders priorities? By far, hope was the strongest theme running through these responses. All 40 respondents cited words such as foundation, infrastructure and insurance of the future in their answers. The member checks were focused on core components and key processes of leadership practice. The results of those checks support the findings of this work. The results from members confirmed that a leadership practice can be defined as the work a leader conducts and participates in through clearly defined work foci within the context of a given situation that inspires followers to create and evolve a set of tools and activities that drive the work and interactions (prepares the mind of the organization) among the leader and followers that eventually progress toward a nd meet both proximal and distal goals. The results also suggest that the closer those followers are to the practice of leadership, the stronger their connection to the work focus and the greater buy in to the outcome. In essence then, leadership practic e helps to prepare the mind of the organization (unit, department, subunit as may be the case) for a realized work focus.

PAGE 138

125 Findings that employee engagement and influencing the organization toward meeting common goals was key in this practice was further confirmed on May 31, 2017, via email from Leader Xs c hief of s taff. The following email was sent to the full leadership team following a final action team reportout in late May 2017. The May 31, 2017, email was meant to provide feedback based on this question asked to team participants: W rite or draw an image that best describes the beginning and the end of your team work. The answers collected were reported out as a major win for the campus.

PAGE 139

126 Table 17 BeforeandA fter E mployee Sentiments Feeli ng b efore teams were brought together Feeling a fter teams reported out their work Unsure if any major action will be accomplished from recommendations Ready to do more Fragmented Unified Who else is thinking about this stuff? We are all trying to move in the same direction Show me the money The answers are in the room Disjointed Collaboration Apologetic Inspired Skeptical Excited Hopeful Motivated Water drops sprinkled [image], connoting that we are all over the place Water drops in a bucket [image], connoting that we are coming together We are on a plateau [image], suggesting that we are stagnant We are moving exponentially upward [image], suggesting that we are getting better quickly Such a high number of fol lowers affirming the findings of this research paint s a story of positive change and confirms the authenticity of the researchers interpretations about Leader Xs leadership practice to the campus teams engaging in the work foci. Checking in with members (followers) engaging in the work of reaching work focus was critical to

PAGE 140

127 ensuring accuracy of interpretation and to eliminate researcher bias. Moreover, by a significant margin, the qualitative observations proffered by the members validated the coding th emes emerging in this work and documented in Appendix D S ummary This chapter distilled the findings of this bounded case study by first examining what Campus Xs leader found when arriving on campus and then examined what they did in deciding how to address what they found (the situation or context). To overcome the issues they found, Leader X effectuated their leadership practice through determination of work foci and then by influencing followers to work collaboratively to reach the articula ted goals of the work focus, using a temporally paced practice that included tools and activities to intentionally engage in meeting stated objectives. The work foci, tools and activities, distal and proximal goals used in this practice were examined in detail. The next section of this chapter then examined whether the research findings were supported by the leadership practice framework, largely confirming what other researchers had found about this practice but added one important organizational tactic uncovered in the research findings time bounding of practice. The existing structures and processes that together form ed Campus Xs operating system needed an additional element to address the challenges produced by this public higher education campus mounting complexity and need for rapid change. The solution was a leadership practice focused on and engaged in the implementation of work foci through a time bounded period involving the leader, followers and the situation, working in concert to meet proximal goals in order to realize the desired distal outcomes. This definition of leadership practic e was further validated by a member check with 40 individuals The overwhelming agreement with the findings demonstrate that L eader X has

PAGE 141

128 positively changed the mind of the organization through their particularized leadership practice.

PAGE 142

129 C HAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS This section is designed to provide a summary, conclusions and recommendations on the current research project and review s the research purpose, questions and conceptual framework ; the case study methodology ; and the data collection and analysis process. The conclusion section presents key findings from the study with the final section suggest ing recommendations for practice and future research Summary of Research Study This bounded case study was designed to investigate the specific and particularized leadership practice used by the leader of Campus X to prepare the mind of the organization for the change required to ensure a success ful turnaround effort. This study was also an opportunity to contribute to the literature on the leadership practice construct, with a specific higher edu cation focus and building upon multiple case studies focusing on leadership in K 12 educational organizations The research questions that guide d this study on identifying the particularized leadership practice used by a leader of a public, higher educati on campus are listed below. 1. What did Leader X find when they arrived at Campus X ? 2. What did L eader X do to overcome the issues they found? 3. On the bas is of a review of the literature and the evidence of change effort gathered in this work, what is an applied definition of leadership practice in higher education? 4. How did Leader Xs leadership practice prepare the mind of the campus to achieve six strategic goals?

PAGE 143

130 To guide the study, the conceptual framework used in this study was derived from the literature and enhanced by researchers (Bishop, 2013; Holloway, 2013; Rubin, 2013) who examined the leadership practices of principals leading successful schools serving ELA students in low performing schools. The conceptual framework is the construct that is titled a leadership practice. The researcher s traced the evolution of the ter m leadership practice from early mentions in the literature to its further development by Spillane Halverson & Diamond (2001; 2004) and used it as a conceptual framework to unpack the work of successful K 12 principals. The development of the conceptual f ramework used in this bounded case study is detailed in Chapter II. This work largely adopted the findings of those pr ior studies and focused its work on the interactions between leader, followers and organizational context and found, which concurred with prior findings, that leadership practice involves the practice of leaders and followers engaging with tools and activities as well as the use of proximal goals to achieve a desired end, or distal goals. These components, they argue d, needed to be added t o the leadership practice construct used to study successful leaders in the K 12 arena (Bishop, 2013; Holloway, 2013; Rubin, 2013). This study used this leadership practice conceptual framework to investigate the leadership practice used in higher educati on by Leader X and found one more important element to add to this leadership practice construct time bounding as a way the leader organizes themselves and the tools and activities in which they engage followers This was a bounded case study examining, through document collection and analysis member checks and through the eyes of a participant observer, the particularized leadership practice of Campus Xs new leader. This study was deemed particularly suitable for a case

PAGE 144

131 study design because the campu s is a bounded system, it is contextual, and it is a study of a leaders practice within that bounded system (Merriam, 1998). The unit of analysis for this study was the intentional leadership practice of Campus Xs leader. The definition of leadership practices was derived from the literature review and a conceptual framework was created to help determine Leader Xs practice. Research questions 1 and 2 focused on how the campus leader envisioned the problem before them and conversely how they engaged in intentionally practicing their leadership interventions. Accordingly, the instruments collected here included online media, online posts, articles, speeches, videos, meeting agendas, consultant reports, community forum handouts, leader communiqu s, reports or stories of the leader, and web downloads. This collection took place during an exploratory phase and on at least a weekly basis Research questions 3 and 4 concern ed respectively, a review of the literature supporting an applied definition of a leadership practice and how L eader Xs leadership practice prepared the mind of the organization to realize a work focus that included five goals. Special attention was paid to collecting leadership literature that was both qualitative and quantit ative in nature a nd concerned the higher education setting. Other broad leadership themes looked for were how leaders a ffect culture, leadership field studies, studies on the context and boundaries in which leadership is enacted, distributed leadership in education, and tools and/or activities used by organizational heads and organizational change. At the end of data collection, the research er had gathered the following : Roughly 2.0 gigabytes in a Drop Box file that included Eight individual file folders representing just un der 1 ,000 8 11inch documents;

PAGE 145

132 Roughly 31 hours of media files that w ere whittled down on the bas is of pre selected criteria to a total of 3.5 hours of meaningful raw footage analyzed, with each media file ranging from one to 90 minutes in length ; and Sixteen single spaced pages of field notes Member check i nterviews and results from 40 m embers made up the primary data collection strategy for determining whether L eader X s leadership practice was perceived as effective in preparing the mind of the organization. This study focused on 45 documents from the collected pool (noted above) and supported these with nine pages of relevant field notes. In total, the sampling siz e consisted of 45 documents, 3.5 hours of footage of Leader Xs leader ship practice beginning J an uary 1, 2016, through August 1, 2017. Conclusions Key findings from Chapter IV are discussed below and include references to the relevant literature in the leadership field in higher education and how these findings support, refute, or extend that literature. In addition, the relationship and implications drawn from these key findings are also discussed. Summary of Key Findings Key findings from eac h research question are outlined below. 1. Leadership practice exist s in context in higher education. The practice of leadership is an intentional and particularized practice in terms of work focus, tools activities, proximal goals and distal goals (o r outcomes) undertaken by the leader and followers working within a specific situation and the leader helps support this understanding of the complex level of interactions involved in a leadership practice

PAGE 146

133 2. In addition to researchbased frameworks of leadership practice, this study revealed that an applied definition of a leadership practice in higher education, much like in the K 12 framework, includes the desiderata of a leader who can model the vision; an understanding of the organizational context and situation; tools and activities including self pacing or time bounding practice ; proximal and distal goals that contribute to shaping the leadership practice. Notwithstanding the belief that higher educations different governance structure and stakeholders make it unique, w hat this bounded case study showed is that the leadership issues confronting K 12 are similar to those in higher education, despite the obvious differences E lements of the practice framework thus potentially help provide insight into how the work foc i inherent to leadership practice can be applied in contexts outside of K 12. 3. In this bounded case study, a new leader put time bounding into place as a way to move or ganizational change (work foci) forward To more fully understand leadership practice, then, how a leader decides to implement a work focus may ultimately be as important as what is implemented. There is a secondary question about how time bounding is used and helps support ( or not ) largescale change initiatives. In this study, phasing change appeared to bring stability to a very big and complex project. 4. Work foc i ensured that strategies were tailored to the organization and not simply grounded in best practice s, which is important to leadership practice. This was seen in the tools and activities used to engage with the work focus ; they were local to the organization. Followers were asked to help solve various dilemma s of Campus X, and while their suggestions may have been based on best practice s or common

PAGE 147

134 business know how, they were always ta ilored to the c ampus and w hat mattered most to people In this bounded case study the know was just as important and the why and the how. The import ance for p ublic colleges and universities is this : W hile these organizations often want to take their cues from other institutions that have fared well for example, by following other higher educa tion sites that have seen gains in student retention or more broadly, student success, t hey need to formulate their own plan based on their own dilemmas of practice. This idea of using followers to solve the dilemma brought intimate knowledge to work focus. 5. Messaging and storytelling are critical components of good leadership practice. Q ualitative and quantitative data sharing, often carried out with a predictable cadence, proved key to garnering buy in from followers to engage in the work needed and helped to ground the why and how of change It also appeared to help build organizational trust and foster transparency In this study, L eader Xs storytelling and visioning helped stir passion about the mission and the institution; the predictable cadence with which the messages were delivered helped create a safety net and helped ease employee anxiety regarding change Several organizational members commented on this during the member checks with the researcher It seems clear that Leader Xs foll owers, s tudents, alumni, and donors expect ed to be inspired by their campus leaders In practice, this suggests that c olleges and universities cannot afford to lose their emotional connection to stakeholders ; the y must continue to offer a value proposition and model the energy and enthusiasm they seek to generate allowing their marketing messages and outreach efforts to appear heartfelt and ring true.

PAGE 148

135 6. Tied to this idea of storytelling and messaging is the emotional intelligence of the leader S imply put, the higher the emotional intelligence the better the potential for a good outcome. Leader Xs high emotional intelligence helped set the stage for building capacity and creating a sense of collective identity and unity of purpose In this study, that high emotional intelligence appeared to be tieda ccording to members and the document analysis to personal storytelling, affability, personal rapport, friendliness and approachability. 7. Followers, beyond those in top leadership, reported more engagement when directly involved in organizational efforts for change and/or prioritization. Employees crave a sense of purpose and fulfilment; they want to know how they fit into the bigger picture. The concept of employee engagement has long played a central role in the landscape of business in which organizations attempt to optimize the intellectual power inherent in a diverse workforce. In this bounded case study looking at higher education, the engagement of followers in the tools and activities used to realize work focus, helped move the organizational needle toward building a sustainable resource capable of promoting organizational success and competitive advantage. These key findings emerged in the five tree codes for this research: perception of leader collective identity c ommunication, goal setting and timeline and task. Relationship of Key Findings to Literature Th e dominant paradigm in the literature on effective higher education institutions te lls one consistent story : there is no obvious single way to summarize and capture higher education leadership practice effectiveness. At the heart of the emergent research in this

PAGE 149

136 field is the need for the higher education leader to create an environment or context for academics and others to fulfill their potential and interest in their work (Bolden, 2011; Bolden, Petrov & Gosling 2009; Bryman, 2007). The literature also revealed that presidents at public institutions were pessimistic when asked quest ions about whether higher education was heading in the right direction. Concerns about the decline of state financial support and the intense competition for students continue to dominate the narrative And unlike their K 12 counterparts, it was revealed that college and university presidents also have to deal with a different cadre of stakeholders that focus their worries on issues of college affordability, accreditation standards and external bodies, retention and persistence, Pell grants engagement scores, alumni giving, employment and career readiness, equity attainment and public private partnership development, to name a few. The distributed leadership perspective alone does not fully describe the dynamic, and that is due to the exi stence of various levels of leader s and followers work focus and goals that exist within this space With so many stakeholders to account for at varying levels of the campus, it is even more important to understand that there is no proscribed formula of leadership effectiveness in higher education. Bryman (2007), for example, points to the difficultly of contextualizing leadership when looking from the vantage point of c hancellor, provost, department c hair or c enter director a ll of which ostensibly are leadership roles. So what does all of this mean for higher education leaders? The higher education space is complex and requires critical leadership attributes that respond to a changing landscape. While there is no defined blueprint for higher education organizational success what the literature does suggest is that (a) context matters, (b) leadership matters, (c)

PAGE 150

137 followers matter and (d) leadership practice occurs over a period of time and through a multitude of factors not always easily disentangled f ro m one another. That literature goes on to note that higher education institutions that are the most effective for staff, faculty and students, have an unrelenting focus on a vision and mission that models the path forward, with student success s quarely at the center of the equation. We can also infer from the literature attributes of student success that are integral to the most effective institutions including (a) unshakeable focus on student learning ; (b) defined clear pathways to student su ccess ; (c) environments adapted for educational enrichment; (d) a continuous improvement oriented campus culture; and (e) shared responsibility for educational quality and student success which require the use of work foci such as strategic goal setting t ools, activities, benchmarks and longer term goals against which to report success. All of this suggests that leadership practice must extend bey ond the scope of one individual ; it is better described as a unique configuration of a leader influencing foll ower s within a situation who define work foci, and supports the tools and activities that work toward achieving proximal and a longer term (distal) desired end To weave these e mergent ideas from the higher education literature this study sought to build on work that had been carried out on leaders in the K 12 space and translate that theory ( or not ) to the public higher education space. A strong connection to the leadership practice construct found in K 12 principals was reve aled Further relationships of the key findings to the literature reviewed in this study are discussed below. 1. The idea of a leadership practice exists in higher education. This case bounded study was purposeful in examining leadership from a distributive perspective by looking at the leader acting in their leadership capacity with others in context and within a

PAGE 151

138 framework (Spillane Halverson & Diamond, 2001; 2004). Th is approach presents an excellent understanding of the internal backand forth dynam ics of leadership practice. For this study, the context is found in a public institution of higher education that had lagged behind its peers and had suffered the effects of a legacy financial and student success model that no longer appeared to serv e its purpose. 2. The most effective higher education institutions are those with an unrelenting focus on vision and mission. Th e literature on higher education leadership goes on to note that those institutions that model the path forward with student success squarely at the center of the equation have the best outcomes We also infer from the literature that such institutions share (a) an unshakeable focus on student learning, (b) defined, clear pathways to student success, (c) environments adapted for e ducational enrichment; and (d) a continuous improvement oriented campus culture Such institutions also exhibit shar ed responsibility for educational quality and student success Moreover, they share this through the use of time bounded work foci such as strategic goal setting tools, activities, benchmarks and longer term goals against which to report success. Campus Xs vision and mission was set from the beginning of Leader Xs tenure and was essentially sold to the organization through various tools a nd activities. 3. An applied definition of a leadership practice has been created for this study. As the earlier K 12 researchers Bishop ( 2013), Holloway ( 2013) and Rubin (2013) showed, earlier definition s of leadership practiced lacked clarity and detail s of the complex interactions among the leader, the followers, and the situation. Having studied a public urban higher education campus that was in need of change, this study revealed

PAGE 152

139 that what exists with in a higher education leaders practice, similar to its K 12 counterpart are c omplex interactions that include: (a) determining work foc i (b) creation of tools and activities by the leaders and followers (with time associated bounding) (c) the monitoring and attainment of identified proximal and distal goals but also includes (d) time bounding as a way that practice is organized. Implications of Findings The implications of the findings for this research are listed below. 1. Much like prior research in this areas has found for K 12 leaders, proving the existence of leadership practice in public higher education is valuable and helpful in further leadership development. Alongside the personal strengths leaders bring to their roles is a toolbox of act ivities that must be deployed to move forward. Continued leadership growth and refinement can be instrumental to the continued success of an i nstitution and ultimately can aid in prepar ing the mind of an institution for success. 2. Transformational model s of change tend to dominate understanding s of leadership in higher education, but as this case study showed, methodological rigor timing on task planning and project planning are equally important approaches that facilitate effective leadership in higher education. 3. I n this bounded case study, team development and climate were crucial to leadership practice. The concept of follower engagement plays a central role in the global landscape of the organization Including other minds has allow ed individuals to be empowered, committed and to t ake appropriate risks (Middlehurst, 2012). In this case, C ampus X s leader wanted to engage in r apid and transformative change ;

PAGE 153

140 the use of follower teams help ed ( a ) identify, ( b ) blueprint and ( c ) solve the dilemmas o f practice. T hese were key to Leader Xs practice. This study suggests that e mployee engagement represents a critical and sustainable resource capable of promoting organizational success and competitive advantage and it gave Leader X the ability to leverage through leadership. 4. Professionals in 21st century public education must be aware of clarity and purpose. Bryman (2007) says the ability to articulate an educational vision is key to f ostering continuous improvement and that educational leaders must be the stewards of a vision of success for all to achieve. It is evident that to work in a student atmosphere with todays educational needs, it is important for university instructors leaders and administrators to be transp arent in expectations and visionbuilding in order to support change (Buono & Kerber, 2010) The Bolden, Petrov & Bryman ( 2009) study suggested that l eader s f ind the most success in acting as facilitators rather than authoritarians. Sharing a clear vision also leads to an understanding of how to properly determine and evaluate goals and outcomes (Bryman, 2007) 5. As higher education leaders continue to build on a clear and concise vision, t he extent to which they influence and collaborate can enhance teamwork processes leading to success in working toward a common goal. Mos t of the authors referenced in this research would argue that effective leadership is a partnership rather than a one person operation. Furthermore, as Tight (2004) obse rved, ef fective leaders in higher education lead via teams in web like theoretical communities of practice. In C ampus Xs case, in order to achieve a successful end product, the new leader needed t o look at the organizational minds and then pinpoint thos e who could bring expertise to the

PAGE 154

141 organizational table This takes a hefty amount of emotional intelligence to carry out. Leader X fostered a collaborative culture when they allow ed for an environment in which team building was fostered. Schein (1993) a nd Sharma & Kirkman (2015) would add that this practice further solidifies a professional learning community that not only pushes team building and relationships but encourages team individuals to collectively work toward a common goal. 6. Having an appl ied definition of leadership practice in a public higher education organization undergoing change may help advance the understanding and knowledge of what constitutes an intentional and particularized leadership practice across all areas of education With this definition, future higher education researchers have a new foundation on which to build a deeper and more comprehensive knowledge base of leadership practice in higher education. Recommendations This section will present several recommendations f or practice from the findings and implications of this investigation in three areas. First, r ecommendations will be provided for the benefit of public higher education leaders. Second, t his will be followed by recommendations for higher education leadershi p preparation programs. Finally, recommendations will be offered for future research studies. Recommendations for Public Higher Education Leaders Being a leader in public post secondary education can be complex. The following suggestions were synthesize d from the results of this study and stand out as worthy of consideration not just for their contribution to describing successful leadership practice but

PAGE 155

142 also how they are supported by the theoretical framework that forms the foundation of this study. 1. Focus relentlessly on an articulated vision for the campus as viewed and supported through the e yes of organizational followers and do not fail to consult and consistently check in with the organization on this vision. 2. Tap into organizational talent to the same extent that you look outside the organization for solutions or best practice models and respect existing values 3. Ensure that goals a re aligned with vision and clarity of purpose. 4. Communicate, communicate, and then communicate even more Tailor the messages to your audience through multiple platforms and ensure a predictable cadence of reporting on how the organizational efforts are faring with progress toward goals. 5. Publicly acknowledge other follower s and leaders and act to support their professional development and forward movement. This helps create champions for your leadership practice. 6. Consider tapping int o your other leadership strengths, such as i nterpersonal communication, creativity think ing and technology and storytelling To a large extent leadership is about acclimation, improvising and adapting to the various organizational personalities and characters It is not about ego and ambition. There are always going to be followers who ma y not bring forth ideal attitudes toward a collective vision. This is why interpersonal skills are significant when working with collegiate populations.

PAGE 156

143 Recommendations for Higher Education Leader Prepa rat ory Programs The professional learning i mplications of this study will be detailed below. This researcher knows of no formal program for developing a university or college president provost chancellor or dean. Often, at the highest levels of leadership, for example, the only requirement may appear to be a terminal degree, fundraising and political experience; for a provost, this may be time served as a department chair and then dean. It follows then that specific instruction and practice regarding an applied practice of distributed leaders hip appear to be a promising approach for developing higher education leaders. 1. Develop an understanding of the core characteristics affecting higher education leadership today and in the future 2. Develop an understanding of higher education governance and leadership in a diverse environment, especially around student success organizational culture and enhance understanding of financial data, funding and resource allocations 3. Increase awareness of the functions of leadership, communication s and government relations 4. Ensure that such a program teaches aspiring leaders to become effective agent s of change. 5. Support a mentoring program and support self reflection. The above recommendations appear to resonate with the popular advice in the field. Take, for example, work by Masket (2017) which calls for emergent department leaders to (a) focus on personnel (which is everything), (b) treat nontenure faculty like human beings, (c) not blow off the day to day schedules, (d) figh t, if necessary, (e) recognize that you cannot please everyone, (f) create social capital, (g) and set realistic goals for yourself H igher

PAGE 157

144 education leaders must be anticipatory in their thinking, risk tolerant and supportive of creativity and innovation effective conveners (of people and systems), courageous in their decision making and resilient, particularly post crisis or after a setback. Recommendations for Future Research This study was limited in scope as it examined data from one participating public higher education institution (Campus X) undergoing change at the early stages of a new leaders tenure. The sample size is thus small and limited to the campus boundaries. To remedy this limitation and advance this research the following recomme ndations should be considered: 1. Expand the scope of the investigation to include more case studies 2. Broaden the selection criteria for case selection to incorporate a case sample that is reflective of campuses that are not under g oing organizational change. T his expansion of the selection criteria would expand the case study pool and allow for further generalizability of the findings 3. Examine private higher education campuses to find similarities 4. Add to the methodology to include a longitudinal component to conduct the case study over a period extending to multiple years.

PAGE 158

145 Final Thoughts C ase descriptions such as this one help form a valuable bas is on which to build. Campus Xs new leader demonstrated one leaders way to design and implement a n organizational change program. The research did this through describing Leader Xs leadership practice within the context of significant organizational change. At the very least, the artifacts used by this leader in solving a leadership practice dilemma can serve as a starting program for other similarly situated institutions. I was fortunate. In fact, a ll doctoral candidates should be so fortunate. In early 2016, L eader X was in full reach out and listen mode an d was setting the stage for what was to come. This research opportunity thus emerged at a time when Campus Xs leader was propelled into action and had found an i nstitution in need of a change agent. The timing was fortuitous and this researcher pounced on the opportunity to demystify the idea of finding a leadership practice in public higher education. The research itself brought much clarity to this researcher and so did the rich analysis and reflection of the data collecte d along with the various member checks w ith organizational followers. The task facing this campus was monumental : Campus X needed to change or eventually be eaten by the old legacy model of just getting by. Studying Leader Xs interaction with followers and the work products that followed concretized the notion of leadership practice beyond the realm of K 12 and squarely laid it in the hands of higher education. Often described as more of a wholeocracy, higher education shares several leadership elements with its K 12 partners. All organizations have core needs that include strong leadership ; h igher education is no exception. The process itself of conducting this research has helped this writer define their own practice of leadership and it is hoped, by

PAGE 159

146 extension, that it helps articulate and define the same for those who may reference this work now and in the future

PAGE 160

147 R EFERENCES Anfara, A., Brown, K. M., & Mangione, T. L. (2002). Qualitative analysis on stage: M aking the research process more public. Educational Researcher 31(7), 2838. Angrosini, M. (2007). Doing e thnographic and observational r esearch Thousand Oaks CA : Sage. Avey, J. B., Wernsing, T. S., & Luthans, F. (2008). Can positive employees help positive organizational change? Impact of psychological capital and emotions on relevant attitudes and behaviors. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 44(1), 48 70. Avolio, B. J., Walumbwa, F. O., & W eber, T. J. (2009). Leadership: C urrent theories, research, and future directions. Annual Review of Psychology 60, 421449. Bandura, A., & Schunk, D. H. (1981). Cultivating competence, self efficacy and intrinsic interest through proximal self motivation Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 586598. Baruch, Y. & Lambert, R. (2007). Organizational anxiety: A pplying psychological concepts into organizational theory. Journal of Managerial Psychology 22(1), 84 99. Basham, L. M. (2012). Trans formational and transactional leaders in higher education. SAM Advanced Management Journal 77(2), 1523. Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectation. New York, NY: Free Press. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1987.4306754 Bass, B. M. (1997). Does the transactional transformational leadership paradigm transcend organizational and national boundaries? American Psychologist 52(2), 130 139. Bass, B. M. (1999). Two decades of research and development in transformational leadership. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 8(1), 9 32. Bass, B. M. & Avolio, B. J. (2013). Transformational leadership and organizational culture. International Journal of Public Administration, 17 (1), 112121. Bauer, M. (1993). Are the leadership practices of college presidents in the northeast distinct from those of le aders of business and industry? Unpublished doctoral dissertation. The University of New Haven, December 1993 Birnbaum, R. (1988). Problems of g overnance, m anagement, and l eadership in a cademic i nstitutions. In R. Birnbaum (Ed.), How Colleges work: The cybernetics of academic organization and leadership (pp. 329). New York, NY.

PAGE 161

148 Bishop, R. C. (2013). Using evidence based conceptual frameworks to identify leadership practices of principals of successful schools serving English learners (Retrieved from ProQu est Digital Dissertations (3562620) Black, S. A. (2015). Qualities of effective leadership in higher education. Open Journal of Leadership, 4, 5666. Block, L. A. M. (2002). The relationship between leadership and organizational culture: An exploratory investigation. Retrieved from ProQuest Digital Dissertations ( 10.1108/01437730310494293) Bolden, R. (2004). Leadership and performance. Leadership Matters 6(1)10 11. Bolden, R., Petrov, G., and Gosling, J. (2009). Distributed leadership i n higher education: rhetoric and reality. Educational Management, Administration and Leadership, 37, 257 277. Bolden, R. (2011). Distributed leadership in organizations: A review of theory and research. International Journal of Management Reviews 13, 251269. Bryman, A. (2007). Effective leadership in higher education: A literature review. Studies in Higher Education, 32(6), 693710. Buono, A. F., & Kerber, K. W. (2010). Intervention and organizational change: Building organizational change capacity. EBS Review (27), 921. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.library.capella.edu/login?url=http://search. ebscohost.com/login.aspx?dire ct=true&db=bth&AN=56948870&site=ehost live&scope=site Cato, S. T., & Gordon, J. (2012). Relationship of the strategic vision alignment to employee productivity and student enrollment. Research in Higher Education Journal, 15, 120. Retrieved February 28, 2017, from http://www.aabri.com/manuscripts/111057.pdf C State Open Records Act of 1969, Pub. SB 16037, Title 24 (enacted). Creswell, J. W. (2002). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall. Creswell, J. W. & Miller, D.L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into Practice 39( 3), 124 130. Denison, D. R., & Mishra, A. K. (1989). Organizational culture and organizational effectiveness: A theory and some preliminary empirical evidence. In Academy of Management Best Papers Proceedings (pp. 168172). Academy of Management.

PAGE 162

149 Dewalt, K. M., Dewalt, B. R., & Wayla nd, C. B. (1998). Participant observation. In R. H. Bernard & C.C. Gravlee ( E ds. ). Handbook of Methods in Cultural Anthropology (pp. 259299). Landham, MD: Roman and Littlefield. Durkheim, Emile. (2015). The evolution of educational thought: lectures on the formation and development of secondary education in France New York : Routledge Edmonson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly 44(2), 350383. Eilers, A. M., & Camacho, A. (2007). S chool c ulture c hange in the m aking. Urban Education, 42(6), 616637. Feldman, A. (2003). Validity and quality in s elf s tudy. Educational Researcher 32(3), 26 28. Gladstein, D. (1984). Groups in context: A model of task group effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29(4), 499517. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.2307/2392936 Glesne, C. (1999). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (2nd ed.). White Plains NY: Longman. Handy, C .B.(2003). The age of paradox. Boston, Mass: Harvard Business School. Hanover Research (2014). Strategic planning in higher educationbest practices and benchmarking. ( July 16, 2014). Retrieved from http://www.hanoverresearch.com/2014/07/16/strat egic planning in higher education best practices and benchmarking/ Hennessey, J. T. (1998). Reinventing g overnment: Does l eadership m ake the difference? Public Administration Review 58(6), 522532. Higgs, M., & Rowland, D. (2011). What does it take to implement change successfully? A study of the behavior of successful change leaders. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 47 (3), 309335. Holloway, S. (2013). Investigating leadership practices in successful schools serving ELA learners with a focus on mathematics achievement Retrieved from ProQuest Digital Dissertations. ( 3562662) Jones, S., Harvey, M., Lefoe, G., & Ryland, K. (2014). Synthesising theory and practice: Distributed leadership in higher education. Educational Management Admini stration & Leadership, 42(5), 603619. Jones, S. (2014). Distributed leadership: A critical analysis. Leadership 10(2), 129141. Retrieved from http://lea.sagepub.com/cgi/doi/10.1177/1742715011433525

PAGE 163

150 Judge, T. A. & Piccolo, R. F. (2004). Transformational and transactional leadership: A metaanalytic test of their relative validity. The Journal of Applied Psychology 89 (5), 755 68. Kezar, A. J. & Eckel, P. D. (2002). The effect of institutional culture on change s trategies in higher education: Universal principles or culturally responsive concepts? The Journal of Higher Education, 73(4), 435460. Kotter, J. (1990). A force for change: How leadership differs from management New York: The Free Press. Kotter, J. P., & Schlesinger, L. A. (1979). Choosing strategies for change. Harvard Business Review 57(2), 106114. Kouzes, J., & Posner, B. (2002). The leadership challenge (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey Bass. Lambert, L. (2002). A f ramework for s hared l eadership. Educational Leadership, 59(8), 37 40. Lieber, E. (2009). Mixed methods design and analysis issues. Journal of Ethnographic & Qualitative Research 3, 218227. Lok, P., & Crawford, J. (1999). The relationship between commitment and organizational culture, subculture, leadership style and job satisfaction in organizational change and development. Leadership & Organization Developmental Journal 20(7), 365374. Masket S. (2017, July 10). How to chair a university department and not be terrible at it. Pac ific Standard. Retrieved from : https://psmag.com/education/how to chair a university department and not be terrible at it Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco CA : Jossey Bass Pub lishers. Middlehurst, R. (2012). Leadership and management in higher education: a research perspective. Maastricht School of Management wo rking paper No. 2012/47. 112. Retrieved from: http://econpapers.repec.org/paper/msmwpaper/2012_2f47.htm Miller, K. I., & Monge, P. R. (1985). Social information and employee anxiety about organizational change. Human Communication Research, 11(3), 365386. Mindset of a president: How todays leaders view the direction of higher education. A Chronicle of Hi gher Education Report ( June 6, 2016) Retrieved: http://webmedia.jcu.edu/institutionaleffectiveness/files/2016/06/2016_Presidents_Trend s_v8_Interactive.pdf

PAGE 164

151 Morgan, M. J. (1993). How corporate culture drives strategy. Long Range Planning, 26(2), 110118. Northouse, P. (2004). Leadership: Theory and practice (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage. National Survey of Student Engagement NSSE ( 2017) Retrieved from : http://nsse.indiana.edu/html/projectdeep.cfm Nussbaumer, A., & Merkley, W. (2010). The path of transformational change. Library Management 31(8/9), 678689. Ogbonna, E., & Harris, L. C. (1998). Managing organizational c ulture: Compliance or g enuine c hange? British Journal of Management 9(4), 273288. Rubin, W. (2013). Investigating leadership practices in successful schools serving ELA learners: Telling the story Retrieved from ProQuest Digital Dissertations. (3562662) Savior and Cooper (2015) examined the role senior leaders in higher education play with regard to effecting positive organizational change through visioning and strategic development. The Savior and Cooper (2015) Schein, E. H. (1993). How c an organizations l earn f aster? The c hallenge of e ntering the g reen r oom. Sloan Management Review 34(2), 85 92. Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational c ulture and l eadership. San Francisco: Josey Bass. Schneider, B., Ehrhart, M. G., & Macey, W. H. (2013). Organizational climate and culture. Annual Review of Psychology 1(12), 36188. Schyns, B., & Schilling, J. (2013). How bad are the effects of bad leaders? A metaanalysis of destructive leadership and its outcomes. Leadership Quarterly 24(1), 138158. Senge, P., & Crainer, S. (2008). Senge and sensibility. Business Strategy Review 19(4), 71 75. Sharma, P. N., & Kirkman, B. L. (2015). Leveraging l eaders: A l iterature r eview and f uture l ines of i nquiry for e mpowering l eadership r esearch. Group & Organization Management 40(2), 193 237. Shenton (2004) Smith, M. K. (2001). Peter Senge and the learning organization. The Encyclopedia of Informal Education, (pp. 118). London: Educational Heretics Smollan, R. K. (2015). Causes of stress before, during and after organizational change: A qualitative study. Journal of Organizational Change Management 28(2), 301314.

PAGE 165

152 Soares, L., Steele, P., & Way, L. (2016 ). Evolving higher e ducation business m odels Retrieved from: http://www.acenet.edu/news room/Documents/Evolving Higher EducationBusinessModels.pdf Spillane, J. P., Halverson, R., & Diamond, J. B. (2004). Toward a theory of l eadership practice: A distributed p erspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies 36(1), 3 34. Spillane, J. P., Halverson, R., & Diamond, J. B. (2001). Investigating s chool l eadershi p practice: A distributed p erspective. Educational Researcher 36 (1), 2328. Spradley, J. P. (1979). The ethnographic interview Fort Worth, TX: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Tight, M. P. (2004). Higher e ducation r esearch: A n atheoretical community of practice? Higher Education Research & Development 23(4), 395411. van Ameijde, J. D. J., Nelson, P. C., Billsberry, J., & van Meurs, N. (2009). Improving leadership in higher e ducation institutions: A distributed perspective. Higher Education, 58(6), 763779. Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. (1992). The development of achievement task values: A theoretical analysis. Developmental Review 12(3), 265 310. Witt K i e ffer (2013). Leadership t raits and s uccess in higher e ducation: A Witt/K i e ffer Study Retrieved from http://www.aascu.org/corporatepartnership/WittKieffer/Leadership.pdf Wittig, B. C. (2012). Employees r eactions to organizat ional c hange. OD Practitioner 44(2), 2329. Ylijoki, O. H. (2003). Entangled in academic capitalism? A case study on changing ideals and practices of university research. Higher Education, 45(3), 307335. Yukl, G. (2006). Leadership in organizations Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

PAGE 166

153 APPENDIX A Post Card Consent Study Title: Preparing the Mind of the Organization Through Leadership Practice Principal Investigator: N lia Viveiros IRB Protocol No: 17 0651 Effective Date: 21Apr 2017 Exempt Category: 2 Submission ID: APP001 1 You are being asked to be in this research study because you have been identified as a key participant in Campus X leaders change effort. If you join the study, you will meet with me, the researcher, for roughl y one hour. This study is designed to learn more about Campus Xs leader leadership practice. During our time together, you will be shown a leadership practice work focus chart and will be asked questions based on my research questions to help guide discussion. You will also be asked if my leadership practice work focus chart comports with your understanding of the change effort currently underway at Campus X. Possible discomforts or risks include discomfort with the questions asked. There may be risks the researcher has not thought of I will not be collecting any names or other identifiers on you nor will the interview be recorded. Every effort will be made to protect your privacy. You have a choice about being in this study. You do not have to be in this study if you do not want to be. If you have questions, you can call me, Nelia Viveiros, at 7203023018. You can call and ask questions at any time. You may have questions about your rights as someone in this study. If you have questions, you can call the Institutional Review Board (IRB). Their number is (303) 7241055.

PAGE 167

154 APPENDIX B Artifact/Document R eview Q uestionnaire A dapted from Merriam (1998) Questions List of Artifacts 1. When was the artifact constructed or set up? 2. Why was the artifact constructed or set up? 3. What is the purpose of the art i fact? Who is it speaking to? 4. Who was responsible for the artifact? How did it all come about? 5. What are the documents that contain more information about the artifact? 6. Are there people who can be conta cted who can give more information about the artifact? 7. How is the artifact related to the study? 8. How is the art i fact linked to the data contained through the other sources? 9. What did the artifact tell me about the campus priorities? 10. How did the artifact mak e me feel? 1. January 4 Communiqu 2. January 11 Communiqu 3. January 27 Launch remarks /speech 4. January 20 Leadership 5. January 22 Video 6. Five s peech es regarding state of the campus 7. February 11 Email 8. February 15 Leadership Agenda 9. February 29 Leadership Agenda 10. March 17 Board Visioning Retreat 11. March 22, 2016 Leadership Advance/Retreat 12. April 7 Tour Update 13. April 11 Government Relations Update 14. April 11 Leadership Agenda 15. April 26 Board Roundtable 16. May 2 Communique /Speech 17. May 9 Leadership Agenda 18. May 23 Le adership Agenda 19. June 6 Leadership Agenda 20. June 7 Campus News Article 21. June 7 Change in Responsibilities note 22. June 914 Emails 23. July 18 Leadership Agenda 24. August 1 Leadership Agenda 25. August 11 Meeting Outline 26. September 7 From Listening to Action email 27. September 12 Email 28. September 18 Help Campus X Tell its Incredible Story 29. September 19 Dashboard Thoughts 30. September 26 Campus Forum: from Listening to Action Speech

PAGE 168

155 31. September 29 Now is our time Campus news article 32. October 7 Changes in finance leadership email 33. October 10 Campus X Leader Honored 34. October 20 Staff Appreciation event 35. October 21 Full working groups report 36. October 30 Working Groups Major Recommendations 37. November 4 Communiques 38. November 16 Dashboard Update 39. December 5 Email 40. January 1731 Ca mpus News Articles 41. March 13 DARS Subcommittee Report 42. March 16 Master Plan News 43. March 2 Master Planning report 44. April 6 Campus News Article 45. April 12 and May 22 Working/ Action Teams Report Out Events (transcribed speeches) Social m edia sites /videos reviewed: c ampus twitter, rebrand campaign videos (3) YouTube, Snapchat, News Archives and Facebook urls reviewed: Campus website, l eadership website(s) Pictures/jpegs reviewed: 27 Field notes reviewed: 16 transcribed single spaced 8/12 x 11 pages with nine deemed relevant

PAGE 169

156 A PPENDIX C Campus Xs Leadership Practice T ools and Activities in Focus DATA Data collection, surveys, questionnaires, interviews, and one to one meetings; use of data as lead indicator for change LEADERSHIP MEETINGS Leadership agendas and handouts, such as probability success charts would be used at meetings/retreats. Leadership and cabinet meetings were held with a predictable cadence, created structure, cohesion, force accountability and a sense of commu nity and force accountability. USE OF TEAMS A key mechanism for organizational re learning & re culturing Leader X used work and later action teams as an integral part of enabling project success and created the management strategy and plans. Teams sub mitted plans for own improvement projects and received feedback/suggestions from Cabinet. MESSAGING & COMMUNICATION PLAN The focus here was to capitalize on existing campus resources but also to effectively communicate. Leader X appeared to have used a rubric to determine messaging : (1) the audience, (2) what is communicated and (3) when communicated. MEMBER CHECKS PARTNERSHIPS & RELATIONSHIPS Personal relationships with champions and ambassadors helped spread the message Ideas member checked with cabinet and confidantes before implementation. Strategic partnerships with the board, city, and business community and state officials has become a big part of the initiative. EVENTS These happened throughout the leaders tenure and included free merchandise, snacks and a fairly informal atmosphere. EMBEDDING MECHANISMS This hardwiring phase included the allocation/redirection of resources.

PAGE 170

157 EXTERNAL FACILITATORS Master Planning, Budget Redesign, Service Blue Printing, Strategic Visioning and a rebranding campaign all involved the use of consultants/facilitators. POLICY & PROCEDURE CHANGES A rebranding exercise emerged from the bottom up allowing the campus to re claim a much loved tagline Campus X in the City A common thread foregrounding each teams concerns was the absence of a searchable, central, policy database that could provide the structure needed to embed change and foster consistency. GENERAL SKILLS & TRAITS Skills scanning. This tool allowed for recognition of the talents people bring to the table and to capitalize on them. Emotional Intelligence Political Acumen SALES AND STORYTELLING This leaders strength is in story telling and selling the urgency/need for change. At multiple early meetings, the articulation of a campusspecific, unifying aspirational direction that drives everything we do emerged as a top priority. The story telli ng tied to events helped to create calls to action and make the process engaging.

PAGE 171

158 A PPENDIX D Coding Table Tree Codes/Themes Type of Leader ~ facilitator ~ advocate ~ visionary ( modelling and selling vision) ~ inspiration al ~ transformational ~ humility ~ trust ~ acknowledgement ~ commitment (to us) Definition (s) Provide shape Change agent, initiate change, create environment for change Provide vision, shape direction, silobusting Facilitate knowledge creation, personal mastery, expertise, frequently asked or consulted because of expertise, other personal traits People trust or respect the leader Fulfilling mission of the campus, working for the good of the entire organization. Empower others, advocate for others, provide support, mentor, motivate others, role model, set example Quotes that illustrate this tree if you see me on campus, I hope you will feel free to introduce yourself and start a conversation. I am eager to get to work and to explore with you how together we can make [our campus] the very best it can be ( Leader X artifact, January 4, 2016) These are just a few of the many ongoing examples of people who are taking initiative and making a differ ence here. I know there are hundreds more stories like these ( Leader X artifact, Jan uary 27, 2016). That said, Ive heard from a number of you that whats lacking is a broader vision that provides a framework to ensure that our efforts are strategic, systemic and sustainable Its as if were an orchestra made up of individual musicians, each playing beautiful music but each playing his or her own tune. I see it as one of my primary responsibilities to marshal the energy and impact of our notable yet ofte ntimes disparate activities to give us a collective focus as a conductor, if you will ( Leader X artifact, January 27, 2016). The singlemost cited observation by students throughout my listening tour was the need to improve advising. Their comments focused on these perceptions of service: advising is inconsistent, inaccurate or incomplete, which often delays or discourages students in pursuing their degrees ( Leader X artifact July 12, 2017).

PAGE 172

159 Collective Identity and S hared P urpose ~ inclusive/collaborative culture ~ collective/shared purpose and emphasis on working together ~ individual contributions and acknowledgement ~ connectedness to the community, relationships Definition(s) As an institution and the contributions to be made to the city and beyond Working together to solve our collective problems On the cusp of greatness Differentiate who we are Engagement Part of solution/sense of purpose Capacity building Self fulfilment Quotes that illustrate this tree We will do what we need tobut the longer term solution and responsibility lie with every one of us, university wide ( Leader X artifact January 27, 2016). Together we can move Camus X forward ( Leader X artifact January 27, 2016). Right now, the convergence of some of these issues create such an opportunity for us to work together, across disciplines, departments, units, and functional areas ( Leader X artifact February 12, 2016). July 14, 2016 email: Certainly for our students, and also in the eyes of policy makers and the general public, access to higher education and persistence to and through graduation are key expectations of our institution. The focus of the working groups will be on distinct but complemen tary aspects of what must be our top priority: improving student success, including raising retention and graduation rates. Toward that end, weve identified the following working groups your working group will learn and apply design thinking principles to create an action plan that will define the desired future state for your respective focus area and identify what it will take to achieve it. I want the outcome of each groups work to be bold, ambitious and boundary busting; in a word, I look for tra nsformative results that will accelerate new value creation for our current and prospective students while simultaneously reducing the complexity of making that happen ( Leader X artifact July 12, 2016). Communication ~ retreats ~ venues ~ meetings ~ transparency Definition(s) Open dialogue that is transparent and externally focused including listening tours, campus town halls, a web site and social media along with a new brand identity

PAGE 173

160 ~ access ~ time: when? how? where? why? ~ stability Leadership/cabinet meetings were held with a predictable cadence. Regular meetings and check ins created structure, cohesion and a sense of community; a we are in this together mentality. Meetings were a venue for member checking and resonating with other leaders. Make data more available. Consistent messaging and updating Multiple communication venues Quotes that illustrate this tree On July 15th, we will work together utilizing the services of an external facilitator, to gain alignment around what could be referred to as the essential intent of our campus. We have engaged XYZ Strategy Group, a city based strategy, consulting and executive coaching firm to assist us in this work ( Leader X artifact June 17, 2016). As you may or may not be aware, our campuss enrollment this year did not meet projections, which means that our budget for next year largely based on revenues from tuition is lower than planned. The board has made a commitment to access so we will have a modest increase in tuition rates. As a result, we must do belt tightening all around, and all areas of the budget will have to be examined to assure that we are deploying our resources in the most efficient an d effective ways ( Leader X artifact January 27, 2016). Goal setting ~ performance ~ benchmarks and dashboards ~ accountability ~ hardwiring change Definition(s) A culture of accountability where systems are in line with goals and measure those priorities in a continuous improvement cycle. D iscussions about dashboards and metrics and how to know that we have gotten there. Included both benchmarks (proximal) and distal goals How to sell the success to the board How to tell the story of change Quotes that illustrate this tree

PAGE 174

161 We will do what we need to get to a balanced budget, but the longer term solution and responsibility lie not just with the Admissions Office or the Budget Office, but with every one of us, university wide ( Leader X artifa ct January 27, 2016). As of April 1, 2017, a new role was created in the Provost office (Asst Vice Chancellor) who would be charged with supporting certain central university services and also with the policy project. By January 1, 2017, Campus Xs leader reported as follows: Maintaining the high quality of our academic programs and scholarly activities is essential to our core mission. To ensure this quality, we have been working to identify and secure muchneeded resources. ( Leader X artifact November 11, 2016) Over the last year, weve become increasingly aware of our dependence on tuition as the primary source of our budgetIn November, we began the work of redesigning our budget model. As requested during the listening tour, this effort will result in increased transparency of our budget, while incentivizing outcomes that better align our resource allocation with our mission and strategic priorities. We have engaged XYZ Consulting to assist us with this redesign ( Leader X artifact January 17, 2017). Timeline and task ~ defined timelines, report backs, period of completion ~ urgency ~ time is of the essence ~ delivering on the promise Definition(s) Examining this leaders practice meant looking for patterns or methodological approaches to their practice. Quite apparent and separate from the significant artifacts collected is that this leader appeared to self pace and broke the change effort into phases. This phased approach and the tools and activities that followed, were then used to enact and nuance the work focus and to ultimately work toward proximal and distal goals. Deliverables from the prioritization project were assessed at three different time periods after the completion of different tasks related to strategic pr ioritization. The first task was the development of a unifying vision for Campus X. The outputs from this exercise were assessed, and a unifying vision was solidified. The second phase was change initiation. This phase was dominated by cementing the visio n,

PAGE 175

162 doing deeper dive, communicating the model and appointing campus working teams who were charged with providing direction for improving the current campus model. The third phase was characterized by change execution or logic model. Working teams were turned into action teams and implemented some of their priorities and/or deepdived into thornier problems. Quotes that illustrate this tree Phase I: After 80 days of listening and learning, well distill and analyze what weve heard. I hope to report on emerging themes before the semester is over, and share at least a preliminary plan of action by the fall ( Leader X artifact January 27, 2016) Phase II: [Campus Xs leader] will share next steps from the listening tour, updates on initiatives that began this summer, and strategic priorities for the coming year ( Leader X artifact September 7, 2016). Phase III: Revolutionizing the Role of the University. We need to look at some of the ideas being tried at peer institutions as they may be worth explori ng ( Leader X artifact 2.2.2017). Phase IV: (Forthcoming) Campus Leader X is now focused on setting goals for each of the strategic priorities and was going to begin by visioning with the Board. This is going to involve a strategic plan refresh in order to show how the campus is aligning to the five priorities ( Leader X artifact March 9, 2017)

PAGE 176

163 APPENDIX E Examples of Proximal and Distal Goal Setting at Campus X

PAGE 177

164

PAGE 178

165 Elevate student success Lead Indicators to Measure Specific sub measurement Current Baseline Measureable Relevance Time Bound Accountability Time Bound Specific Measureable (and Reportable) Proposed 2017 Gains Proposed 2018 Gains Proposed 2019 Gains Proposed 2020 Gains When measured? Who owns it? Improve academic advising Student to Advisor ratio Gain 1 Gain 2 Gain 3 Gain 4 (1) 75 % freshmen retention rate by 2020 (first time, full time freshman only) or 4% increase _________ (i i) 50 % graduation rate by 2020 (for undergradu ates who started at X as firsttime, full time freshmen) _________ (iii) 45% increase in transfer students _________ (iv) 15% increase in degrees awarded Improve academic advising Cont inued integration of HIPS Gain 1 Gain 2 Gain 3 Gain 4 Improve academic advising # majors with integrated HIP opportunities Gain 1 Gain 2 Gain 3 Gain 4 Enhanced Student Service Delivery [Redacted] Technology implement Initial technology implemented Gain 2 Gain 3 Gain 4 Increase funding for scholarships and graduate student stipends Funds for merit based and needs base scholarships Gain 1 Gain 2 Gain 3 Gain 4 Increase funding for scholarships and graduate student stipends Proportion of tuition allocated to institutional aid Gain 1 Gain 2 Gain 3 Gain 4 Increase funding for scholarships and graduate student stipends Number and funds available for graduate student stipends Gain 1 Gain 2 Gain 3 Gain 4 Enhance high school pipelines and community college pathways action team Implementation of recommendations of K 12 Pipeline and Community College Pathways Action Team Recomm endations Gain 1 Gain 2 Gain 3 Gain 4

PAGE 179

166 Survey students for satisfaction and engagement Assessment of student engagement as measured by NSSE Gain 1 Gain 2 Gain 3 Gain 4 Survey students for satisfaction and engagement Survey of student satisfaction Listenin g Tour baseline Gain 1 Gain 2 Gain 3 Gain 4 Survey students for satisfaction and engagement Expand high demand educational offerings Gai n 1 Gain 2 Gain 3 Gain 4 Develop and implement an academic offerings master plan Development and expansion of selected academic programs Research Center Gain 2 Gain 3 Gain 4 Develop and implement an academic offerings master plan Ensure quality learning and community spaces Gain 1 Gain 2 Gain 3 Gain 4 Improve existing/construct new academic student support and housing facilities Construct Student Wellness Center Ground breaking Gain 1 Gain 2 Gain 3 Gain 4 Improve existing/construct new academic student support and housing facilities Renovate N Classroom Gain 1 Gain 2 Gain 3 Gain 4 Improve existing/construct new academic student support and housing facilities Construct Engineering Building Gain 1 Gain 2 Gain 3 Gain 4 Improve existing/construct new academic student support and housing facilities Complete renovation of Business school Gain 1 Gain 2 Gain 3 Gain 4 Improve existing/construct new academic student support and housing facilities Classroom utilization rate Gain 1 Gain 2 Gain 3 Gain 4 Improve existing/construct new academic student support and housing facilities Operational and space efficiencies Gain 1 Gain 2 Gain 3 Gain 4

PAGE 180

167 Implement Academic Advising Acton Group Recommendations Fix leaky student return pipeline (6 year grad rate between 40 46% past five years) Gain 1 Phase I, II implemented by Steering Committee Phase III implemented Gain 4 Implement Scholarship Team Acton Grou p Recommendations Fix leaky student return pipeline (6 year grad rate between 40 46% past five years) Gain 1 Phase I, II implemented by Steering Committee Phase III implemented Gain 4 Other Faculty mentoring/Outreach for students identified as high risk for not returning after sophomore year Pilot program reach out 176 students with 27/176 participa ting Gain 1 Gain 2 Gain 3 Gain 4 Other L earning Assistants in L iberal Arts Gain 1 Gain 2 Gain 3 Gain 4 Other Evaluation Redesign Gain 1 Gain 2 Gain 3 Gain 4 Other Co requisite instruction in math Pilot program provides add ition al out of class time Gain 1 Gain 2 Gain 3 Gain 4 Other Partnership with sister campus S uccess Committ ee Named Policy and Procedures site Gain 2 Gain 3 Gain 4