Learning Resources

Abstract: Georgia College & State University, a public liberal arts institution, began an integrated,
collaborative, and future-focused strategic planning process during a time of uncertainty (COVID-19, enrollment declines, financial shortfalls, etc.). This planning included shared leadership across campus to develop and implement the plan, data-informed decision-making by a diverse group of steering committee members representing all areas of campus, visits to strategically identified aspirant universities, and ongoing stakeholder engagement that included student input. These strategies leveraged the inherent qualities of a liberal arts institution while addressing the challenges and opportunities that exist in public higher education.

Abstract: Success in strategic planning requires decision-making that reflects the collective vision of diverse constituents. At California State University, Fullerton we leveraged data as the essential thread in engaging our community in an inclusive strategic planning process. Data played dual roles, serving as input and output, to provide a common framework through which the ideas and wisdom of our community are reflected and shared, anchoring the strategic plan firmly in the campus voices. Our engagement through data embodied our commitment to evidence-based decision-making and contributed to the success of our strategic planning process.

Abstract: A strategic plan is supposed to “bring the future into the present so that you can do something about it now.” Almost every college or university has such a plan because accreditors and governing boards require one. The question is: Why do so many higher education institutions seem to be unprepared when they take drastic actions (e.g., eliminating programs, cutting faculty and staff members, etc.) in uncertain times? The author studied more than 250 colleges and universities and suggests the answer in this article.

Abstract: Implementing Sustainable Change in Higher Education: Principles and Practices of Collaborative Leadership
by Brent D. Ruben
Stylus Publishing: Sterling, Virginia: 2022
229 pages
ISBN: 978-1642674415

How should higher education leaders take on the challenges of change? In Brent Ruben’s Implementing Sustainable Change in Higher Education: Principles and Practices of Collaborative Leadership, the author says there’s no simple approach. Instead, he encourages leaders to “understand and leverage the dynamics of change; lead collaboratively and meaningfully; engage one’s colleagues; and adopt and pursue a shared vision of organizational purpose and aspirations.”

Abstract: Shared Leadership in Higher Education: A Framework and Models for Responding to a Changing World
Edited by Elizabeth M. Holcombe, Adrianna J. Kezar, Susan L. Elrod, and Judith A. Ramaley
Stylus Publishing: Sterling, Virginia: 2021
256 pages
ISBN: 978-1642672251

Abstract: An agile mindset exercised by leadership and distilled down into organizational culture is the prerequisite for any higher education institution planning to transform itself in an age of constant disruption. The post-pandemic world will continue to present new challenges for colleges and universities as they seek innovative solutions to plan for an ever increasing volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA) environment. Higher education leaders would serve themselves and their institutions well by learning how to practice the six attributes of an agile leader in a volatile world.

Abstract: by Fred M. Hayward
State University of New York Press
Albany, NY
2020
292 Pages
ISBN-13: 978-1438478456

Abstract: Few studies have investigated how academic deans enact their authority in Responsibility Center Budgeting (RCB), despite its widespread adoption. In this article I explore findings from a study that investigated how deans crafted a confidential annual budget report at an American university. Ultimately, deans adopted one of three approaches to crafting the report: delegating, distributing, or dominating authorship. Deans who distributed authorship collaborated with their senior teams to establish a shared sense of priorities for their colleges. In contrast deans who delegated and dominated authorship ignored and alienated members of their senior team during the budget review, engendering confusion and frustration.