Abstract
Anticipated retirements and relatively short tenure in office create a shortage of community college presidents in the United States. To fill the unprecedented number of vacancies requires a cadre of candidates well prepared for the demands of the position. Using Satir’s change model as a theoretical framework, this year-long reflective study examined eight first-time community college presidents in California. Satir’s model describes six stages of change; this article focuses on the third stage, one of chaos, or disequilibrium. Participants identified key professional experiences, the role of mentors, professional development activities, and doctoral studies as important strategies for navigating this professional disequilibrium and pursuing their career aspirations.
Keywords
In 1998, Vaughan and Weisman projected that approximately 45% of the then-community college presidents would retire within the next 6 years. This projection remained consistent in 2001, when Shults predicted that 45% of community college presidents planned to retire within 6 years and another 34% within 10 years. By 2012, this trend had not abated with Tekle describing another wave of presidential retirements: “About 75% of respondents expressed that they plan to retire within the next ten years” (p. 9); an additional 15% indicated they planned to retire in 11 to 15 years. In other words, according to Tekle’s projections, 90% of community college presidents expect to retire within 15 years.
Exacerbating these anticipated shortages from retirements is the brief tenure of many community college presidents. Cook and Kim (2012) reported that in the United States, the average age of presidents in public associate degree-granting institutions is 60 with fewer than 7 years in the current position. In California, where participants in this study serve, the mean years of service for chancellors and superintendent/presidents is just under 5 years (4.6); for presidents in multi-college districts, the mean average tenure from 2006 through 2010 was 3.3 years (Mize, 2011). In addition, in any given year, there are as many as 20 presidential openings in the state. Short tenure in California may be due to retirements or mobility in the position, that is, moving from one presidency to another, but short tenure, as with future retirements nationwide, creates a continuous need for candidates prepared to step into the role.
The skills and qualities necessary for community college leadership are described in several recent reports and studies. The American Association of Community Colleges (AACC, 2005) developed six competencies for effective leadership (organizational strategy, resource management, communication, collaboration, community college advocacy, and professionalism), whereas Eddy (2010) asserted that leadership is not necessarily based on a set of traits but is instead multi-dimensional “with the various dimensions existing on continua that reflect the evolution” of the leader (p. 2). In a report on the community college presidency, the Achieving the Dream and The Aspen Institute (2013) outlined the “five core qualities present in highly effective community college presidents” (p. 5): a commitment to student success and willingness to take risks as well as the ability to create lasting change, develop a strategic vision for the college, and manage financial resources. The report also suggests that future community college presidents will need to continue identifying ways to connect part-time faculty to college governance and students; create ways to balance reform and improvement; and integrate technology into teaching, learning, and college processes. The 2012 report, Reclaiming the American Dream: Community Colleges and the Nation’s Future, produced by the AACC 21st-Century Commission on the Future of Community Colleges, describes a need for visionary leaders to imagine a new future for community colleges and to lead change at both local and national levels. Strickland (2013) neatly summarized the tension represented in these reports when she noted that community college presidents are required to focus on internal leadership through strategic planning, resource management, governance, and student success while being increasingly obligated to focus on external relationships through fund-raising and political advocacy.
In spite of the complexity of the position and the breadth of skills required for leadership, previous studies indicate that not all aspiring presidents are intentional about identifying the competencies essential for presidential leadership and subsequently engaging in activities to develop these competencies. When Eddy (2010) studied professional preparation and leadership development of community college presidents, she found that “there was a lack of intentionality in planning to achieve the corner office” (p. 2). S. J. Jones and Warnick (2012) investigated first-time community college presidents in Texas with less than 5 years of experience in the position and indicated that only one participant in their study “had set a goal early in his professional career to become a community college president. The three remaining presidents entered upon their roles rather serendipitously” (p. 230).
However, there appear to be specific strategies that some aspiring presidents adopt to support their preparation. For example, Amey and VanDerLinden (2002) identified professional experiences, mentors, and professional development activities. They also noted that at the time of their study, an increasing number of community college presidents held a doctorate, thus suggesting the importance of the degree as a qualification for the office. Cejda and Jolley (2013) focused their work on presidents in rural community colleges. Their findings echoed Amey and VanDerLinden (2002) and added that “accepting additional responsibilities and serving the institution provides practical experience that contributes to the development of competencies for future positions” (p. 165). Similarly, S. J. Jones and Warnick’s (2012) study revealed that “holding terminal degrees, prior job experiences within higher education, participating in professional development within state and national organizations, experiences outside the academic environment, as well as having mentors, served the presidents well in preparing them for their roles” (p. 230). What may not be clear from these studies is how prior professional experiences help candidates prepare for the presidency, the ways that mentors work with aspiring presidents to support their career development, how participation in professional development activities shape their training, and the manner in which doctoral studies support their growth.
This study adds to extant research on presidential preparation by asking first-time, first-year community college presidents to identify the strategies they used to prepare for the position and to reflect on the ways different strategies supported their development personally and professionally. Studying first-time presidents early in their new roles allowed the participants to gauge the strength of their preparation as they assume office rather than after they gain additional experience on the job. Understanding the ways aspiring presidents intentionally prepare for the role can illuminate strategies for other aspirants who may be considering a presidency; such understanding can also help create a cadre of candidates ready to fill this role, head off anticipated shortages from retirements, and perhaps lengthen tenure in office.
Theoretical Framework
To understand participants’ path to the presidency, including the initial decision to pursue a presidency and the subsequent preparation strategies, Satir’s change model (Satir, Banmen, Gerber, & Gomori, 1991) was chosen as the theoretical framework. Typically used in family therapy but also applied in the areas of leadership development and organizational change (Demarco & Lister, 1999; Satir Systems, n.d.), Satir’s model identifies six stages of change: initial status quo, external influence, chaos or disequilibrium, integration of new learning, practice, and new status quo. In the model, a disruption to the status quo by an external influence leads to changes for an individual. For participants in this study, the status quo represents their career path prior to considering a presidency. During this period, they had no aspirations to become a college president; rather, their goal was to continue contributing to their college, organization, or educational system in their current position. When an external catalyst moved them out of their status quo, they altered their career goals to consider and subsequently prepare for a community college presidency (McNair, 2014). Once the status quo was disrupted, participants moved to the third stage in Satir’s model: disequilibrium. This article focuses on the period of disequilibrium where participants let go of old ways of thinking about their career aspirations, adopted strategies to learn new skills, and developed leadership competencies necessary for the presidency. Figure 1 offers an illustration of that change process.
Participants’ professional change process.
Research Design
This collective case study of eight first-time community college presidents offers an avenue for examining a specific phenomenon in depth and understanding how Satir’s change model (Satir, Banmen, Gerber, & Gormori, 1991) was chosen as the theoretical framework that applies to the participants’ experiences (Creswell, 2012; Yin, 2009). My role was to interpret and share participants’ experiences (Stake, 1995) rather than to advocate for a particular point of view or evaluate the preparation strategies the participants adopted. First-time, first-year presidents were selected because of their lack of experience in the position: The goal was to understand how well prepared they felt at the start of their presidency based on action taken before assuming office. First-time presidents in the second or third year benefit from on-the-job learning experiences that subsequently affect their sense of preparation; similarly, presidents in their second or third presidency have experience in the role that influences each successive presidency (McNair & Phelan, 2012).
California was chosen as the site for this study due to its size and the number of new presidents in any given year; furthermore, the role of the community college president in California is consistent with what has been described in the literature (Achieving the Dream & The Aspen Institute, 2013; Boggs, 2011; Eddy, 2010; S. J. Jones & Warnick, 2012). As a result, analytic generalizations (Yin, 2009) that result from this study can support the development of aspiring presidents in a variety of contexts. The California community colleges comprise the largest system of higher education in the United States, with more than 2 million students in 112 colleges (California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office, 2014). As with community colleges across the nation, California’s community colleges exhibit “diversity in student demographics, local and regional economies, and institutional histories [that] are reflected in distinctive missions and unique mixes of academic and vocational programs” (Achieving the Dream & The Aspen Institute, 2013, p. 5). Similarly, the experiences of presidents in California may well represent future national trends as leaders everywhere grapple with declining resources, increasing demand for courses, and threats to the community college mission (Fain, 2012).
The participants for this study were selected from 1 year’s group of first-time community college presidents in California. To protect confidentiality, the specific year they began their presidencies is not disclosed, but was later than 2010. The Community College League of California provided a list of new chief executive officers (CEOs), which included the names of all the presidents and chancellors appointed that year. The list also included each CEO’s prior position. Chancellors were excluded from the selection as were those who had previously served as a community college president. This resulted in a list of 11 potential participants (6 men and 5 women who were all first-time presidents); of these, 8 agreed to participate.
Participants are identified by pseudonyms. Of the eight participants, all hold a doctorate degree, and five are women. They represented colleges throughout the state; two reported directly to a board whereas six were in multi-college districts and reported to a chancellor. Their average age at the start of their presidency was 53. See Table 1 for additional demographics.
Participant Demographics.
Note. This table is included in a separate journal article (McNair, 2014) that explores a different aspect of this study. Two of the participants identified as gay or lesbian, five as heterosexual, and one declined to state a sexual orientation. Seven of the participants were married and one was in a long-term relationship with a partner. Six participants spent their educational careers in California community colleges. One participant had experience in two other states as a community college administrator before serving as a vice president in a California community college. One participant had experience in two other states in K-12 and higher education systems before coming to California to serve as president. Pseudonyms were initially assigned to each participant; Wura subsequently requested her current pseudonym.
Data were collected through two interviews with each participant. The interviews, which lasted 1 to 3 hours each, were held in a location of the participants’ choosing. When inclement weather affected travel, three interviews were held over the phone. The interviews were audio-recorded and the digital recordings were subsequently transcribed verbatim by a transcription service. In addition to the interviews, a biographical statement or résumé and a short questionnaire in which they described their social identities (i.e., age, race, sexual orientation, and marital status) were collected from the participants. The presidents’ statements on each college website also provided insights into their goals as they assumed office.
To ensure trustworthiness of the data and my interpretation of the findings, the data were analyzed first by reviewing each transcript in its entirety; the transcripts were then compared with the audio recording to ensure accuracy of the transcription. Using Satir’s change model (Satir et al., 1991), the data were subsequently analyzed to identify specific events and processes described in the model. The transcripts were further reviewed to identify data that connected participants’ experiences during their first year to specific preparation strategies they identified. Finally, member checking offered participants the opportunity to provide feedback, add comments, and clarify information (Stake, 1995).
Findings: Deliberate Disequilibrium
The findings presented here reflect one aspect of a study about first-time presidents. A separate article (McNair, 2014) focused on the second stage described in Satir’s model (Satir et al., 1991): the external catalyst that caused participants to alter their career path to seek a presidency. This article focuses on the third stage in Satir’s model, disequilibrium, where participants began intentionally preparing for a presidency. Entering into the stage of disequilibrium was deliberate for the participants as they let go of prior career expectations to re-shape their professional aspirations.
The presentation of the findings includes descriptive data and extensive quotes from participants to create personal accounts “so that judgments about the degree of fit or similarity may be made by others who may wish to apply all or part of the findings elsewhere” (Lincoln & Guba, 1986, p. 77). In addition, the findings provide “examples of quotes [that are] strong illustrations of the theme” (S. R. Jones, Torres, & Arminio, 2014, p. 159), thus offering deeper insights into the preparation strategies each of the participants used.
Participants adopted four strategies to identify, acquire, and develop the skills needed to become president: doctoral studies, professional experiences, mentors, and professional development activities. Three of these strategies, expanding professional experiences, working with mentors, and engaging in professional development activities, are consistent with those identified in previous research (Amey, VanDerLinden, & Brown, 2002; Cejda & Jolley, 2013). Although the importance of the doctorate as a credential for community college presidents has been described by others (Eddy & Rao, 2009; S. J. Jones & Warnick, 2012), participants in this study described doctoral studies as a professional but very personal transformative experience; thus, this is examined as a separate preparation strategy.
Doctoral Studies
In describing the importance of the doctorate in relation to a presidency, participants identified four major benefits. First, they all believed that without the doctorate, they would not have been invited for an interview. Second, the doctorate gave them credibility with the faculty and a certain status that community members expected of the position. Third, their studies filled gaps in their professional preparation. Finally, they described doctoral studies as personally enriching and transformative. These personal benefits are illustrated in their reflections below.
Although six of the participants initially sought an advanced degree to supplement their professional experiences, they all discussed doctoral studies in terms of personal satisfaction and development. During the stage of disequilibrium where participants were deliberately moving away from one of way viewing themselves and their career paths, doctoral studies provided a vehicle for exploring new areas and challenging their way of thinking. Several participants noted the importance of courses related to social justice that opened up their thinking about privilege and difference in the United States and on their own campuses. Other participants acknowledged that during this period of disequilibrium, their doctoral studies provided a means for understanding their professional aspirations, their values, and their potential for serving as president. Although their doctoral experiences challenged them, the experiences also enriched and re-energized them, helping them navigate and make sense of the period of disequilibrium.
Karen, who had become disillusioned with college administration, left an executive-level position to enroll as a full-time doctoral student. She stated with certainty that her doctoral studies re-invigorated her professionally and changed her life. Laura described enrolling in her doctoral program with equal enthusiasm: At the age of 50, I jumped into a doctoral program. Once I was in, it mattered not at all if I wanted to be a president. I just loved being at school, loved the learning, and loved creating knowledge.
For Martha, a key outcome of her doctoral studies was a better understanding of her personal leadership style. In addition, “spending time delving through the works of Paulo Freire and bell hooks enriched my life as a person. It made me stop and think about things differently.” Wura explained that she learned more about “listening without reacting” and noticed that in her classes she had more influence and power when she “dialed it back a bit.” Paula’s personal transformation began in one specific course in her doctoral program, a course that included a component on privilege and oppression. She acknowledged that “there were areas that we explored that I would have never explored on my own and would have never known I needed to explore.”
Professional Experiences
The presidents in this study came from a variety of professional backgrounds. As they navigated the period of disequilibrium, they intentionally sought additional professional experiences to support the development of the competencies required for the presidency. Their positions immediately prior to assuming the presidency varied: Three had served as vice president of instruction, one as vice president of student learning (a position that encompassed both academic affairs and student services), two as vice president of student services, one as vice chancellor of fiscal services in a district office, and one as vice chancellor in a state higher education office. Two became presidents at the institution where they had been vice president, whereas the others left one institution to become president at another. Most had professional experience in more than one community college, primarily in California, whereas one had experiences exclusively in system offices.
The participants all indicated they did not begin their careers with the intention of seeking a presidency. However, key professional experiences ultimately affirmed their decision to do so. For example, as vice president of instruction, Paula had the opportunity to serve as acting president on many occasions, which included attending public events, fundraisers, and board meetings. She observed, “When I was acting president at a board meeting, they had questions for the president. I found I could answer their questions. If I didn’t know the answer at that moment, I could give an answer, then follow up.” William described an experience when he was leading a shared governance committee and “really getting people to solve issues. I realized I could do this [on a larger scale] as a president.” While a vice president, Wura became proficient at resolving instructional-related issues, and in considering a presidency, she “saw a chance to shape the whole view and vision of the institution and shape the culture of the institution.” Laura had been serving as vice president of student services and had an opportunity to serve as interim vice president of instruction for a year, which she felt allowed her to round out her experiences. After the interim position, she asked herself, “Having been in the system for 30 years, if people like me aren’t going to [become a college president], then who is?”
Laura indicated she intentionally sought a presidency outside of her current institution, while George chose to stay in the same college where he had been vice president. He applied for only one presidency because he wanted to provide stability at the institution. Karen had been a community college administrator outside of California for most of her career. Because she knew she wanted to be a president in California, she sought specialized experiences that would prepare her for California, including collective bargaining and participatory governance.
Martha had been working in the private sector before becoming a part-time faculty member at a community college. To broaden her experiences, she accepted an interim position at a district office where she oversaw facilities. She later returned to this district as a vice chancellor, a position that allowed her to work with the board. She also gained experience working on six accreditation teams. Although Charles began his career teaching in high school, his path to the presidency once joining a community college would likely be described as typical: He taught full-time, then became a department chair, later an academic dean, and then vice president of instruction. Like other participants, he worked in more than one community college.
The professional experiences of each of the participants served as a step to the next position in the organization. As they gained experience as vice presidents and achieved their goals in that position, they became ready for new professional challenges and thus began applying for presidencies. George was the only participant who said he could have remained as vice president for the rest of his career; however, when the president left, he was not “willing to roll the dice on a new president” and applied for the position to help sustain college initiatives.
Mentors
Doctoral studies and professional experiences offered participants opportunities to develop a specific plan for reaching their goals. Mentors became important guides during the stage of disequilibrium because they often pushed participants further out of their comfort zones and, at times, even challenged their readiness for a presidency. Formal and informal mentors helped participants see the areas where they were well prepared for the presidency, identify gaps in their preparation, and design a plan to fill those gaps. In addition, mentors offered honest, direct feedback and additional suggestions to support the participants’ professional journeys. They also provided a safe place where participants could be vulnerable and share their hopes as well as their fears about seeking a presidency.
Mentors also created opportunities for participants to take risks and learn new skills. When she was an academic dean and considering her path to the presidency, Wura talked with the college president about her next professional goal, that of a vice president: He gave me a vice president announcement from another college and asked me to make a list of everything I didn’t have from that list [of qualifications]. I thought that was a good exercise, but then he proceeded to assign me to those things I didn’t have. He put me on everything that I hated because those things I didn’t have, were, of course, things I had avoided.
William said that “people in different organizations where I worked were willing to let me try something new.” He concluded, “I think about these mentors a lot and how they gave someone who is non-traditional a chance.”
When Paula became vice president at a large, metropolitan college after having served in a small, rural college, she said she was “up front that my goal was to stay 2 years, then apply for a presidency.” The president of the new college responded, “Okay, let’s get you ready.” Getting Paula ready involved assigning her to work with collective bargaining; to respond to grievances, lawsuits, and discrimination complaints; and to serve as acting president.
Laura, George, and Karen spoke of mentors who guided and encouraged them to pursue new opportunities without rushing ahead before they were ready. Laura’s mentor advised her: “At some point, you’re going to realize that you needed to have made this step—and you need to take it.” George readily conceded that “without good mentors I think I would have been coaxed to move on more quickly” and move into positions before he was prepared. Karen discussed mentors who gave her good advice, even challenging her when she disclosed she wanted to be a president in California. Charles explained that he really did not have formal mentors but watched others to observe what they were doing in their roles. In observing the presidents, he laughed: “I had two mental lists: one that when I’m president, I want to remember to do that, and the other one is when I’m a president, I want to remember not to do that.”
One common theme was the willingness of the mentors to give specific feedback, even when it was hard for participants to hear. Martha’s experience illustrates the importance of honest, open feedback: When I was negotiating my contract [for a vice chancellor position] with the chancellor of a multi-college district, I indicated my goal was to become a college president. I’ll have to tell you, the chancellor was very blunt and said, “Well, looking at your résumé I’d say okay, you might want to be a president but you’ve got a ways to go. I can help you get there, but you’re not going to get there from where you are right now.” After having people encourage me to become a college president, the chancellor’s comments caught my attention. Then I made it my business to make sure I really understood what I needed to know to be a college president.
For each of the participants, the relationship with a mentor played a key role in their professional development prior to assuming a presidency; however, for four participants, their relationship with a mentor appears to have played an important role in relation to their tenure in their first presidency. Only one participant, Charles, stated that he did not have a formal mentor. As noted above, he indicated that rather than working with formal mentors, he observed other presidents in action and developed his own sense of what he would or would not do as president. He left his position within 1 year and does not appear to have accepted a new presidency.
Karen, who spent the bulk of her career outside of California, was cautioned by mentors about seeking a presidency in California. From the mentors’ perspective, a presidency in a California community college was especially challenging due to the size of the system, collective bargaining, and mandated participatory governance. In spite of her mentors’ advice, Karen intentionally prepared for a position in California, including accepting a vice presidency in the state before seeking a presidency. Within 2 years of having become a president in California, she left to accept a position in a different state.
George had worked with multiple mentors whom he described as positive, supportive, and invested in his success. One of his reasons for accepting the presidency was to work with a supervisor that he described as a mentor and positive role model. Even so, in the second year of his presidency, he (involuntarily) left the position; he is currently employed at another community college but not as president.
Like the other participants, William’s first year was filled with historic budget reductions. As someone who had come to his presidency from another state, he was familiar with the requirements of participatory governance even though he was less familiar with some of its nuances. Early in his presidency, he made a decision to deviate from an established hiring procedure in a way that he considered more inclusive. The president of the academic senate, however, was displeased with the decision not because it was a bad decision but because the senate president had not been consulted. Precisely because William did not see this as a major decision he did not consult a mentor. The consequences of this early decision echoed throughout his first year as he was required to make increasingly difficult decisions related to employee reductions and program eliminations, which, however transparent, continued to put him at odds with the campus community until he moved to a new presidency at a different college.
Professional Development
One of the preparation strategies participants used included professional development activities, ranging from a focus on leadership development to the mechanics of applying for a presidency. Participants attended professional development activities for different reasons and each gained something specific to his or her own goals: Wura, who attended the Thomas Lakin Institute for Mentored Leadership and the Harvard Institute for Management and Leadership in Education, used the opportunities to network with other aspiring presidents and to complement her doctoral studies. Charles, Laura, Paula, and William attended short, 1- to 2-day activities focusing on preparing for the search process rather than the position itself. Attending these activities, which included mock interviews, reinforced their confidence in their ability to lead a college and affirmed that they were ready to assume a presidency.
Karen attended the Executive Leadership Institute sponsored by the League for Innovation, which she described as “a combination of how to apply for a presidency and here’s what you need to know if you really want to be a president and then we covered everything from budget to governance to planning.” The positive feedback she received gave her confidence and she learned how to “hold her own” when institute participants were asked to give an extemporaneous presentation on an unanticipated topic. While a dean, George attended the Future Leaders Institute sponsored by AACC. Even though he was not considering a presidency at the time, he found the institute had “a high ratio of valuable information to time spent.”
Martha did not attend specific professional development institutes or multi-day workshops related to preparing for a presidency; instead, her doctoral studies became a long-term professional development experience: “I focused on my doctorate, which is in organizational leadership. It took me 5 years to complete; when I finished, I started applying for presidencies so I haven’t had much time to think about [other professional development activities].”
Implications
Not all presidents know early in their careers that they are headed for that role. For participants in this study, the path to the presidency began when outside influences disrupted their career status quo, serving as a catalyst for reframing their professional future. Once they made the decision to seek a presidency, participants entered into the third stage of change described by Satir (Satir et al., 1991): disequilibrium. In this period of disequilibrium, people move away from their prior identity or self toward a new one. The study participants adopted four strategies as they altered their career goals: pursuing a doctorate, gaining new professional experiences, working with a mentor, and engaging in professional development activities. The implications of the participants’ experiences and the ways their experiences can support the development of other aspiring presidents are described below.
Because each participant acknowledged the doctorate as a “credential” for aspiring presidents, those considering a presidency—and those mentoring future leaders—will want to consider the importance of a doctorate in relation to their goals. Participants echoed Laura’s sentiments when she said, “I knew I wouldn’t be competitive for a presidency without the doctorate,” or Martha’s experience of not being invited for an interview before she had her doctorate. The selection of a specific doctoral program was intentional for the participants, reflecting their need for congruence between the program and their professional needs.
The extent to which the participants spoke of their doctoral education as a transformative experience was surprising. Their doctoral experience went well beyond a professional development activity or administrative credential. Specific components of their programs, such as courses on personal leadership, community college history, and social justice—as well as internships and interactions with sitting community college presidents—fundamentally changed who they were and how they approached leadership. Those who undertook their doctoral studies later in their careers were truly inspired by the experience. For Karen, it became a turning point that brought her from contemplating leaving community college leadership to pursuing a presidency. Such experiences can also inspire doctoral program faculty and affirm the importance of courses that focus on leadership competencies and social justice as well as courses and experiences that develop a leader as a person.
Community college educators may hear from outside influences that they would make good presidents. This informal process of identifying future leaders has been referred to as “a tap on the shoulder” or “tapping” (Marshall & Kasten, 1994; McNair, 2014; Myung, Loeb, & Horng, 2011). For participants in this study, the tap on the shoulder became a catalyst for seriously considering a presidency. The findings from this study indicate that once a person decides to pursue a presidency, he or she should make a deliberate plan to prepare for the new role and build on previous professional experiences. Because there is no single defined path to the presidency or one type of preparation that will fit all needs, aspiring presidents can consider multiple avenues for broadening their professional experiences, including moving into new positions, seeking internships, taking on responsibilities outside the scope of their current position, working in interim administrative positions, and serving as acting president.
Each of the participants in this study worked in more than one college or educational organization. This speaks to the importance of working in different environments to gain a broad perspective and experience that may not be available in the current setting. Only two of the presidents were promoted from vice president at the same college, which illustrates the need to remain flexible and willing to move to find the right institutional fit. Both Karen and William came to California from other states and needed to frame their prior professional experiences to make clear to search committees that they understood specific aspects of working in California. The participants’ experiences highlight the importance of strategically identifying the broad environment (state and region) and specific type of institution (urban, rural, suburban, single-, and multi-college district) that best matches personal interests.
A common theme among the participants was that mentors provided frank feedback and direction to help them develop their skills. Participants’ experiences suggest that aspiring presidents would be well served by identifying mentors early in the preparation process. It is important to note that the participants did not rely on only one mentor. Instead, they identified multiple mentors who were in positions to assist them or who had a reputation for helping others and selected those they determined could be most helpful in their professional development. Although participants may have known that they needed to develop additional skills to become presidents, mentors were able to identify the specific skills required of a president that were underdeveloped in the participants. The mentors also helped the aspirants recognize gaps in their preparation and provided opportunities to fill those gaps. In addition, mentors provided opportunities for the then-aspiring presidents to try out the position. When she was a vice president, Paula’s president asked her to serve as acting president on many occasions. Such experience proved vital to helping Paula believe in her ability to serve as president. Mentors also advised participants during the search process. They offered feedback on participants’ application packets, suggested ways to improve their presentation skills, and gave background information about a specific college that helped participants focus their searches. As an added benefit, some participants continued to work with mentors as they navigated the first year of their presidency. The mentors helped participants understand the complexity and ramifications of decisions presidents make. As Wura noted, her mentor was available for conversations on a variety of topics, not just when a problem arose. In turn, these experiences influenced the way participants began mentoring others who were seeking a presidency.
The participants’ experiences with mentors also reflect the importance of mentoring in navigating the first year of a presidency. The four participants who did not have a mentor, who had a mentor who was also a supervisor, who did not always seek advice from mentors, or who thought the mentors were being overly cautious left their presidency within 2 years. The findings from this study suggest that mentors are essential prior to assuming a presidency and once in office as new presidents transition into their new role. Maintaining close relationships with mentors after assuming the presidency may help new presidents avoid some common first-year missteps and develop strategies to exit the college gracefully if it becomes necessary to leave the position.
As reflected in earlier research (Hull & Keim, 2007), participants were aware of the myriad professional development programs available for aspiring presidents. Their knowledge of the programs resulted from their own experiences with community college professional associations, colleagues, and mentors. Although not all participants engaged in the same professional development activities, they participated in various state and national programs, suggesting that those activities aligned with their needs and interests. This speaks to the importance of strategically identifying those professional development activities that will help aspiring presidents meet their professional goals. From webinars and a 1-day state conference program to the national 2-day and week-long programs, participants spoke well of the experiences. At the same time, participants described facing severe budget cuts during their first year as president when professional development funds were often sacrificed in an effort to reduce administrative costs. These findings point to the importance of continuing to provide multiple avenues for professional development that include flexibility in the delivery of programs. Webinars can decrease the overall cost of participation by eliminating the need for travel, 1- or 2-day programs provide a low-cost avenue for face-to-face engagement, and week-long programs create opportunities to delve more deeply into topics. Similarly, locally based “grow your own” leadership programs can offer lower cost professional development opportunities at a college or within a specific region (Reille & Kezar, 2010).
Areas for Further Study
Participants’ experiences suggest three areas for further study: the role of search consultants, navigating the first year of the presidency, and attrition among first-time presidents. Participants discussed their experiences preparing for the presidency and offered insights into the ways they managed the search process. Each college where they applied used search consultants. With one exception, participants applied for more than one presidency, often encountering the same search consultant. Examining the role of consultants and the search process itself can illuminate the skills candidates need to navigate the process from preparing the application to leading public forums to meeting with board members. In addition, such a study could uncover promising practices that lead to successful matches between a candidate and a college community.
The first year of a new president, as Karen noted, can be “a bit scary.” The presidents may feel confident before arriving on campus but even as early as their first day, they may begin to doubt their preparation. New presidents must be prepared to lead a series of transitions for the organization, for themselves, and for their families. Satir’s model (Satir et al., 1991) illustrates that new presidents become the outside influence that creates disequilibrium in the organization they are joining. Understanding how new presidents navigate the first year can identify key transition moments and suggest ways to increase tenure in the position.
Although all of the presidents in this study indicated that organizational fit was critical to a president’s success and that they felt they were in the “right organization,” half of the participants left their positions within 2 years of their appointment. While two left to assume other presidencies, the other two did not. Regardless of the reasons for leaving the presidency after such a short time, their departures were unexpected and resulted in additional upheaval for the participant as well as the college. Studying those who leave the presidency may identify common events that disrupt a new presidency and suggest ways presidents might anticipate and alleviate these events.
Conclusion
It is not easy to prepare for a community college presidency. The demands on a president are increasingly complex and the job, although rewarding, is challenging. Due to projected retirements, it is imperative to identify future leaders who can invest the time, effort, and energy into intentionally preparing for the role. Furthermore, such preparation may help lengthen tenure in office, thus supporting organizational stability. Satir’s model (Satir et al., 1991) offers aspiring leaders, mentors, and current presidents one means for understanding change and development, which can support leadership development in a variety of contexts. Colleagues and presidents can help identify candidates who, like the participants in this study, are not currently considering a presidency but have the potential to serve in the position. Such identification, or tap on the shoulder, can become the catalyst for altering potential leaders’ career path and lead them into a period of deliberate disequilibrium where they re-define themselves and re-shape their career goals. This, in turn, can support intentional, rather than serendipitous, preparation for the presidency. Satir’s model helps make sense of the disequilibrium one might experience when embarking on a new career path and offers hope that the chaos will lead to personal as well as professional development when entering the next stage, namely, integration of new learning.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.