Universities are built for learning, yet they are notoriously resistant to learning from within. As external partners working to develop academic leaders, Dr. Jennifer Brown, the CEO and founder of Northstar Consulting, and I frequently observe a frustrating paradox:
Institutions of higher education are highly complex systems where contemporary leadership is not only in demand, but would thrive; yet, they mostly cling to outdated traditional leadership models that ultimately fall flat.
When I sat down with Jennifer on my podcast, Coaching in Higher Education, we explored why typical top-down change management fails. I often compare a university to a twenty-foot cotton ball: If you “punch” it with too much force – that is, push through aggressive, top-down decisions that others with little skin in the game must implement – your fist goes in, the ball, due to its inertia, absorbs most of the blow but ultimately doesn’t move.
To effect real change, leadership must shift from forced compliance to a process of relational trust that will allow leaders to “nudge” the system and create the desired change sustainably.
Relational Authority in the Shared Governance Maze
In a corporate environment, a clear hierarchy allows for more defined and largely accepted decision-making pathways. Higher education, however, is entirely different: Leaders must balance the competing expectations of students, faculty, staff, governing boards, legislators, alumni, and community partners and juggle the expectations of shared governance systems, including faculty senates, student voices, staff unions, and external accreditors.
For this reason, leaders cannot rely solely on positional authority. They must cultivate relational authority, which is earned by consistently showing up with transparency, listening deeply, and aligning words with actions.
As external coaches, we help university administrators slow down to map out where trust already exists and where it has been fractured. Jennifer and I focus on shifting campus cultures from simple compliance to true commitment.
This shift requires three core building blocks: consistency, competence, and care.
While many academic leaders have technical competence, they often struggle with relational competence, especially those who transitioned straight from a tenure-track career path without having received adequate (or any) leadership training. This often puts them in positions where demonstrating care via genuine concern for the well-being of staff and faculty and helping them feel that the institution has their back is far from their mind and outside their area of expertise.
Treating Resistance as Organizational Intelligence
One of the most profound mistakes new leader who join an institution from outside can make is comparing it to their previous campus and immediately launching change to conform the new environment to what they know from the old – an approach that will almost infallibly breed resistance.
Not all resistance is bad, however. In fact, as leadership coaches, we encourage administrators to view resistance not as an obstruction, but as vital information.
When faculty and staff resist change, they are often protecting core academic values, traditions, or their professional identity. People gravitate toward the status quo because it represents safety. To bridge these trust gaps, leaders must invite underappreciated voices to the table early on in a transformation, change, or wide-ranging decision-making process.
Jennifer shared a wonderful example of this during her time as vice provost and dean of undergraduate education at UC Riverside: Upon returning to campus during the pandemic, the university had to change learning management platforms while still teaching entirely online and modernize more than 100 general-assignment classrooms.
Instead of pushing this transition down from on high, however, they conducted active listening sessions to surface fears while the director of the Center for Teaching and Learning designed a graduate assistantship program that gave graduate students an opportunity to directly support faculty as they adjusted to the new technology. By co-creating solutions and showing active empathy, they transformed a potential crisis into a collaborative success.
Navigating the Layers of Loneliness
As I have noted before, academic leadership can be an incredibly isolating experience. Jennifer introduced a beautiful yet sobering term during our conversation that I would be remiss not to mention: the layers of loneliness, with university leaders frequently squeezed between governing boards, faculty senates, and external stakeholders, leaving them with very few places to be vulnerable.
This is precisely where professional executive trust coaching becomes an essential institutional investment. Coaching provides a safe, confidential space where leaders do not have to posture or feel alone. At the same time, we help them develop resilience by reframing setbacks as learning opportunities.
Change in higher education is rarely linear, and setbacks are inevitable. When administrators stay grounded in their core purpose, find commonalities and support within their broader professional communities, and communicate their “why” transparently, they are better equipped to signal steadiness and build systemic trust.
Partnering for Sustainable Campus Transformation
If we want more impactful and sustainable professional development on our campuses, institutions must move beyond quick-fix workshops for their established or burgeoning leaders. Instead, I urge them to invest in leadership development at all levels that addresses the institution’s underlying trust dynamics – or lack thereof.
If you are a university administrator looking to foster a more resilient, trust-filled culture, or an executive coach seeking to deepen your impact on campus, I invite you to explore my professional coaching and advisory services.
Together, we can help your leadership team move beyond firefighting, bridge institutional silos, and build a sustainable future for your campus.
You can find this and all other Coaching in Higher Education podcast episodes on:
| 
| 
| 
|
Frequently Asked Questions Trust Coaching in Higher Education Leadership
What is the meaning of the “cotton ball” metaphor for leadership in higher education?
A university is a giant cotton ball: aggressive top-down decisions to force change absorb the impact without creating real movement. Lasting change, in contrast, is built on relational trust coaching that allows leaders to “nudge” the system forward in subtle ways.
Why can’t higher education leaders rely on positional authority?
Higher education leaders are not functioning within a typical corporate hierarchy, but rather are responding to competing expectations of students, faculty, staff, governing boards, and shared governance systems. It means that relational authority, built on consistency and transparency, is more powerful than a formal title.
Why is it important for leaders to see resistance to change as useful information, not a barrier?
Sometimes faculty and staff resist a change in the name because they are defending core values, traditions or their professional identity. By learning what’s behind that resistance, leaders can bring underrepresented voices into the process early, turning the potential for conflict into collaboration.
How does loneliness affect academic leadership?
Academic leaders often have very few people with whom they can be vulnerable, as they sit between governing boards, faculty senates and external stakeholders. Professional coaching provides a safe space for leaders to let their hair down and this is where they develop real resilience.
What are three qualities that help leaders gain lasting trust on campus?
The article stresses consistency, competence and care. Many academic leaders have high technical competence but need support in developing relational competence, particularly if they transitioned into leadership without formal training.