Networking to Leadership in Higher Education

Women Advancing Into Leadership Positions

The large majority of Americans are now comfortable with women serving in top leadership positions. In fact, “Much of the general public believes that women’s fight for parity in the workplace has already been won” (The White House Project, 2009, p. 5). In a 2007 GfK/Roper Public Opinion Poll, the public rated women above men in five of eight character traits they value highly in their leaders (The White House Project, 2009). Women were rated higher for honesty, intelligence, creativity, outgoingness, and compassion. They were ranked equal to men for being hardworking and having ambition. Men were rated higher than women only in the category of decisiveness. In fact, “Overall 69 percent of those surveyed thought women and men would make equally good leaders” (The White House Project, 2009, p. 8). The reality, however, is much different from the public’s perception.

Although women now comprise the majority of the workforce, only 39% of females 16 and older work in management or professional occupations (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010). Across the 10 industry sectors studied in 2009 as part of The White House Project, women held an average of 18% of the top leadership positions within each sector. Overall, women are still paid less for their work than their male counterparts. The median annual earnings for women 15 and older working full-time is US$36,278 which is only 77% of men’s median annual earnings (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010). Across the sectors studied, women equal or outnumber men in entry-level jobs, yet they fall substantially behind in moving up into management and leadership positions.

Today, more women than men attend college and graduate. Women hold a larger share of high school diplomas, associate, bachelor’s, and master’s degrees (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010). Although more men than women in total hold professional and doctoral degrees, enrollments in recent years in professional and doctoral degree-granting programs indicate that as many or more women are now seeking and completing those degrees (National Center for Education Statistics, 2011a, 2011b). As a result, women are well represented in entry-level positions in most sectors. Over the past four decades, women have made progress in moving into positions of leadership. However, that progress has stalled over the past decade. The reasons behind the lack of progress in areas of leadership are nuanced.

Discrimination during the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s was blatant and overt. Today, many of the issues women face in attaining an administrative position in higher education are more likely to be the result of gender-based preferences in hiring decisions and work assignments, lack of effective mentorships, and insufficient self-promotion (Cortina, Malley, Settles, & Stewart, 2006; Farmer, 2007; Padilla, 2007). To be sure, discriminatory acts can still be found in the workplace but not with the same frequency and openness. In addition, women considering moves to higher level positions often face an additional hurdle: They must be willing to relocate, and mobility is more challenging for women with professional spouses and children (Padilla, 2007). Other changes also have affected the opportunities for women in higher education. In tough budgetary times, efforts to correct inequities in hiring have taken a back seat. Glaser-Raymo (1999) explains that “social justice is no longer a priority as institutions attempt to cope with more immediate problems related to restructuring, resource allocation, public negativism, and technological opportunities” (p. 200).

Considering the currently stalled progress in moving more qualified and deserving women into positions of leadership, combined with the critical need for creative and innovative leadership in higher education, the call for women’s leadership development programs for women faculty, administrators, and staff in higher education is imperative. The ACE, its OWHE, and its unique system of state-based networks reach thousands of women interested in leadership in higher education and collectively offer an example of one of the most successful, at least anecdotally, solutions to this problem.

The History of OWHE

Historically, women have faced significant barriers to advancement into leadership positions within higher education (Brown, Van Ummersen, & Phair, 2001) and ACE has been involved in the issues roughly since its founding in 1918. ACE now serves as the major coordinating body for the nation’s higher education institutions: community colleges and 4-year institutions, private and public universities, and nonprofit and for-profit colleges. It offers leadership on key higher education issues and policy (ACE, 2011).

After ACE’s establishment in 1918, many reports and commissions were created to address the needs and concerns of women within the field of higher education (Elliott, 2011). Increased activity was evidenced from 1953 to 1961, as ACE sponsored national conferences and established the Commission on Women (Burns Phillips, 2008). In September 1970, an ACE Special Report, Discrimination Against Women in Colleges, was issued. Shortly after, in 1972, three women on the ACE Board of Directors (Martha Peterson, Sr. Ann Ida Gannon, and Rosemary Parks) proposed to ACE’s seventh president, Roger W. Heyns, and other members of the board of directors that ACE reestablish the already lapsed Commission on Women in Higher Education and create an OWHE (Elliott, 2011).

In 1973, under the leadership of Nancy Schlossberg (director of OWHE) and Donna Shavlik (associate director), the office formulated its primary mission: to identify and encourage women who were ready for administrative leadership. ¹ However, given the political and cultural environment during its first year of operation, OWHE’s work was broadened to address issues of gender equity within a variety of educational venues and to provide professional leadership training for women in higher education. Involvement at the state level came shortly thereafter with the support of external funding. In 1976-1977, the Carnegie Corporation of New York helped to fund the creation of the National Identification Program for the Advancement of Women in Higher Education, and this project, which remains central to the current culture of OWHE, was later renamed the ACE State Network.

In the last decade, OWHE has focused its efforts on reenergizing the state networks, cosponsoring women of color summits, developing the national and regional leadership forums, and garnering an Alfred P. Sloan Foundation award for its project, Creating Options: Models for Flexible Faculty Career Pathways (Elliott, 2011). The following sections will describe the first three: (a) the ACE State Network, (b) Women of Color Summits and Leadership Training, and (c) National and Regional Leadership Forums. As previously outlined, a primary purpose of this article is to highlight the structure of the core leadership development programs created and supported by the OWHE. Evidence of the success and effectiveness of these programs are, unfortunately, more anecdotal than they are rigorously evaluated. However, even with this limitation, highlighting the OWHE and some of its core programs can provide readers with helpful insights for future research and practice.

ACE State Network

The national ACE Network is supported by the OWHE director and her staff and by the ACE network executive board. This board ensures that each state has a presidential sponsor, state co-coordinator(s), a liaison who serves on the ACE network executive board, and institutional representatives for institutions of higher education. This network reaches about 8,000 women per year and continues to help promote women to administrative positions, from dean to president. This is also done by supporting women in taking on leadership positions such as department chair and committee chair. Each state has developed a customized organization that fits the needs of its institutions and the women therein. The variety in these networks can be studied by reviewing individual state web pages (see tables in Madsen, Longman, & Daniels, 2012, p. x). To provide insight into the types of initiatives and programming states might implement and offer, two case studies are offered which are discussed in the following sections:

Women of Color Summits and Leadership Training

Designing and offering national and state-based leadership training and summits specifically for women of color administrators in higher education has been another important initiative for the OWHE. OWHE first sponsored summits for women of color in partnership with other corporate and institutional organizations. The OWHE summits have provided forums through which women of color in higher education can reflect on the complex roles and broad scope of leadership responsibilities they face. The participants—from emerging leaders to chief executive officers—discuss the special challenges encountered by women of color in the academy.

The goals of the OWHE summits are to (a) advance and sustain women of color into higher education leadership positions, from the dean’s level and above, (b) highlight the cultural diversity and strength of women of color, and (c) establish meaningful coalitions allowing women to build strategic alliances across cultural and racial groups. Through sessions designed to meet these goals, OWHE assists women of color administrators in achieving their professional and leadership goals. According to a OWHE summary of the 2008 Women of Color Summit,

Participants engaged in candid discussions about different paths to the presidency. In the summits women learned to manage the expectations of others and to balance work and family obligations. In addition, this opportunity assisted women by promoting professional fulfillment and personal satisfaction in their lives. Women in academia shared and captured experiences and strategies that successfully moved women of color into senior administrative positions. (ACE, OWHE, 2008)

Diana Cordova, acting director of OWHE, reflected on ways in which the summits have measured effectiveness, leading to improved future programming (Cordova, 2011). For example, she noted that the 2006 Women of Color Summit opened with a panel of executive male leaders moderated by a former woman president. The participants completed evaluations and the session received low marks. Participants noted their dismay with an all-male panel. As a result, only women speakers were featured at the next summit. Evaluations of the 2006 Summit also revealed that the participants wanted to have more networking opportunities. When the summit was next held in Atlanta in 2008, a hospitality suite was set up so that the women could network throughout the day and evening. The suite was well used and attendees appreciated this initiative. Third, in analyzing the 2006 Summit evaluations it also became apparent that the media training session was extremely popular; however, it appeared that women wanted even more time devoted to media training. Thus a 75-min session was offered at the following summit and was again expanded the following year to 120 min. All of these changes were well received, according to the evaluations of the subsequent sessions and conference.

In part, based on the success of the national summits, several state networks designed their own more localized events for women of color. For example, the Virginia Network introduced the Women of Color Conference in April 2003 offering strategies for the participants to acquire or hone their skills in critical areas such as fundraising, crisis management, working with the media, and managing multiple constituencies. More than 200 individuals registered for this Thriving! Not Just Surviving conference, which offered keynote addresses, presentations, networking, and workshops. Connie Gores (personal interview, April 12, 2011), Vice president for Student Life and Development at Winona State College and former chair of the Virginia Network stated, “It was a wonderful opportunity for women of all backgrounds and expertise to gather together to focus on issues directed at women of color. Participants gained new insights, learned new skills, and made important connections that enhanced their professional and personal lives.”

Attendees benefited from discussions on dialogue across difference, resume preparation, career paths for midlevel administrators, and managing change. Graduate students were offered a unique opportunity to meet and hear from extraordinary, strong women professionals who shared their experiences and offered insights into the world of higher education. Elsie Stephens Weatherington, dean of University Library at Virginia State University, recognized that

the 2003 conference program was outstanding and provided an excellent opportunity to network with all colleagues. The Women of Color Conference continues to be viable and energizing. The additional exposure to the network has resulted in increased attendance at the annual conferences and more inclusiveness on the governing board. (personal interview, April 21, 2011)

The Virginia Women of Color event created a venue for women of color and white women to engage in genuine collegial and personal affiliation that provided networking and bonding opportunities for and with women of color. The Virginia Network now hosts the Women of Color Conference every 3 years as part of its statewide programming. Themes of the conferences, like the regular annual conference, focus on networking, mentoring, and leadership development for all women. The Women of Color Conference also provides an opportunity for women of color to discuss and analyze how everyday work and life issues affect them in ways that have different implications.

The Virginia Network Women of Color Conferences have been instructive and purposeful for all attendees (women of color and other attendees); the conference is attended not only by a large number of women of color but also by a significant number of other conference attendees. The 2006 and 2009 conferences had approximately 250 attendees, and an analysis of the participants showed that at least 75% of participants were women of color. A summary review of survey responses revealed more than 80% satisfaction with the conferences (E. S. Weatherington, personal interview, April 21, 2011).

The New Jersey State Network’s Women of Color event started in 2005 as a networking breakfast. Based on consistent demand from attendees, it evolved into a luncheon conference. Each year the event attracts more than 100 women of color from New Jersey higher education institutions. Most recently, the event has been attracting attendees from neighboring New York and Pennsylvania. Barbara Gada, Provost at Union County College, indicated that “several women who have attended our conferences have moved up the leadership ladder. Some have moved from institutions within the state to take advantage of advancement opportunities” (personal interview, April 21, 2011). According to Gada, the New Jersey ACE/OWHE Network board has welcomed a significant increase in women of color as a result of these programs. In addition, mentoring relationships have developed between board members and attendees.

National and Regional Leadership Forums

The final initiative or program described in this article is the series of national and regional leadership forums. Each forum provides leadership development to a cohort of around 25 to 30 women. From 2007 to 2010, the National Forums (always held in Washington, D.C., home of OWHE and ACE) have served 219 senior women administrators seeking a presidency, vice presidency, or deanship (OWHE, 2011). During the 2.5-day sessions, participants learn from accomplished leaders in higher education, covering issues from budgeting to communicating with the press to work–life balance to dealing with athletics. The participants also have the opportunity to meet search consultants and presidential mentors.

The regional forums, held from Texas to Alaska to South Carolina, have served 239 women who were in midlevel academic careers and ready to consider moving to higher levels of leadership (e.g., department chair, director, assistant/associate dean, or dean; OWHE, 2011). These forums provide participants access to accomplished leaders in higher education, and they cover a wide variety of relevant issues (e.g., strategic planning, budgeting, fundraising, managing multiple constituencies, leadership styles, and crisis management). During the regional forums, women receive guidance on planning their career path, enhancing their portfolios, finding mentors, and preparing for the search process.

Initial Assessment and Testimonials

As the examples provided suggest, one size for event-planning and networking does not seem to fit the United States as a nation, specific states, or the women therein. Although assessment at the state level has not been consistent, many have used helpful evaluation and assessment tools. Those states that have made it a priority to assess network activities have been able to improve events and overall membership, but assessment has not been comprehensive—most likely the result of a volunteer-run organization managed by women who are already almost always overcommitted professionally and personally. However, the majority, if not all, of the networks do recognize the critical need for future assessment and evaluation. Not all state networks have been successful, and in 2010 the ACE State Network Executive Board (also volunteers) established a subcommittee to review relationships between the various components of the ACE/OWHE/State networks. The subcommittee determined that a survey of network coordinators would allow the executive board to understand and then improve the relationship between the executive board and the state network coordinators and in the end improve leadership development at the state and national levels.

The survey was distributed in January 2011, with response from 35 coordinators, many of whom had been active in the networks for years (43% active from 6 to 10 years; 9% active for more than 10 years). The ACE State Network Executive Board (2011) found that the state coordinators wanted a framework for their work that is prefabricated to clarify their roles; more than 97% wanted a checklist of responsibilities to guide their time commitment. One respondent noted, “We need more materials we can use at events and in publications. We need language to communicate what the network is and how it can benefit an individual. The website language is not enough.” The survey also affirmed the importance of networking for the women most active in the state and national networks. The coordinators claimed that the most important parts of the organization are the State Coordinators’ Annual Conference (held each spring just before the ACE annual meeting), the liaisons from OWHE and the executive board, and leadership training events.

A couple of narrative comments from this survey pinpoint the unique value of the state networks in the OWHE’s leadership development goals. When asked how the networks add value, one respondent wrote,

They involve women who would not normally have access to leadership development and optimization. They reach across states and help in developing a pipeline of women leaders. They provide a network with depth as well as breadth. They provide leadership opportunities for women who might not otherwise have them. They help to identify women leaders outside of the beltway.

A second comment focused on connections as well: “The state networks can provide the audience with connection points that will ultimately lead to OWHE accomplishing its goals.” Perhaps as a caution to the OWHE and board, one coordinator noted, “OWHE never makes sense until one tells the story to others, and even then it is difficult.”

Although antidotal evidence does not provide generalizable support for programs, testimonials on the effectiveness of OWHE programs can help make an initial case for their success. Four women leaders provided the following insights:

My forum experience many years ago demystified the presidency and presented leadership as an entirely human experience, within reach, and worth pursuing. My work with OWHE over the years has reaffirmed my belief that all aspiring leaders need champions, mentors, and role models and that experienced leaders need to be those champions, mentors, and role models. (Dr. Madlyn Hanes, vice president for Commonwealth Campuses, Penn State University, and former chancellor, Penn State University, Harrisburg)

It is quite probable that I would not be the leader that I have become had it not been for the OWHE programs and networking opportunities. I consider OWHE and its ACE Networks an important part of my leadership journey, instilling the how to’s, the confidence, and the courage to lead. (Dr. Marie Foster Gnage, president of West Virginia University at Parkersburg)

Throughout my career as a dean, a community college chancellor, and most recently as Chancellor Emeritus of the University of Hawaii, Hilo, I have deeply appreciated the support from the Network at OWHE. (Dr. Rose Tseng, chancellor emerita, University of Hawaii, Hilo)

Dr. Shirley R. Pippins, senior vice president at ACE and former president at both Suffolk County Community College (NY) and Thomas Nelson Community College (VA), provides another convincing testimonial. She contends that she was “saved by ACE” and that OWHE Director Donna Shavlik (1982 to 1997) helped her realize her potential. “I was wandering alone in the wilderness of higher education leadership,” writes Pippins. “It was only after I connected to the Office of Women, and became involved with the Commission and the Network that I discovered how vulnerable I had been and how much support was available” (personal communication, April 15, 2011). Pippins chaired the OWHE’s Commission on Women in Higher Education, leading its presidents (mostly female) in efforts to strengthen women’s pathways to leadership. She also regularly presented at the OWHE’s Leadership Forums, training sessions that she found “restorative and informative.”

These are only four of thousands of women who have been served by this unique network over the past thirty-plus years. As these testimonies suggest, the OWHE at ACE has—for nearly four decades—created a supportive structure of meetings and networks that have enabled women to define their leadership paths.

Implications for Leadership Development

The need for leadership programs specifically targeting women is evidenced by the testimonials of leaders, such as those highlighted in this article. As long as females are underrepresented in leadership positions, the advancement of women should be a focus of academic leaders as well as leadership development and HRD professionals. HRD professionals are particularly well suited to be involved in designing, supporting, and implementing programs that provide leadership training and professional development for women.

Three important aspects of leadership development programs for women emerged from the interviews and survey results discussed in this paper. First, women need more than information and training to successfully advance into leadership positions. Second, they benefit from feedback and encouragement that enables them to find clarity of vision for their career path and the confidence to develop the knowledge and skills necessary for pursuing their goals. Finally, mentors are instrumental in helping them recognize opportunities for career advancement through the utilization of networks to obtain desired positions.

The ACE has more than three decades of experience in delivering quality leadership programs for women in higher education. OWHE should continue to strengthen its efforts to create a strong and vibrant system of state networks to support the advancement of women and deliver quality leadership development programs. The success of the state networks is evidence that the use of volunteers to deliver these programs can be an effective approach and a rewarding investment of time and resources. In fact, the large number of women leaders volunteering their time to work with these networks indicates such initiatives and programs are valued. Yet, perhaps the most daunting challenge for the OWHE is maintaining this national system of state networks run by busy professionals; therefore, improvements can be made.

As the 2011 state network survey indicates, clarification and enhancements are needed to strengthen the operations of these networks. By establishing an operational framework of common goals and activities for networks, OWHE can provide the direction and guidance needed to deliver even more effective leadership development programs throughout the United States. In addition, OWHE can better assist state networks with continuity and effectiveness by providing guidelines that have been built on collective experiences and lessons learned from their peer networks. For example, if information such as this could be gathered by state networks through assessment and evaluation tools at every event, it could then be shared with the national office. OWHE could then compile and distribute these results to other states through the published guidelines and presentation of best practices at their annual conference.

Other countries and regions interested in developing more women for leadership in higher education should consider implementing similar initiatives, networks, and programs; however, it is important that each is customized based on relevant variables (e.g., culture, location, objectives, resources, and support systems). A compelling theoretical and operational framework must be flexible enough to accommodate differences and allow groups to address the specific needs of their constituents. The OWHE has found that two components of this framework are particularly important for the future success of networks: (a) procedures to insure continuity and consistency of activities and (b) assessment tools and strategies that allow for rigorous evaluation and continued improvement of programs and activities. Overall, creating an effective and sustainable system of local, state, or regional organizations, with the common objective of developing and promoting diversified leadership from within a particular group, could produce significant results. Targeted programs have the advantage of being able to focus on issues and concerns specific to the group.

These leadership programs offer solutions for higher education institutions, states, and countries seeking to provide training, development, and support for current and future women leaders. OWHE’s system of state networks, women of color summits/training, and national and regional leadership forums should also be considered as models for other professions, industries, and organizations attempting to diversify leadership. HRD and leadership practitioners can be a critical force in designing and implementing these types of developmental opportunities for future women in higher education and beyond.

Recommendations for Further Study

There are numerous opportunities for further study focused on leadership programs and initiatives for women in higher education. Perhaps most imperative is the need for more research on the continuing impediments of advancing women into leadership positions. The contradiction between the public’s perceptions that women should be equally represented in all levels of leadership positions and the reality that inequalities continue is a critical issue that should be further addressed. Reasons for hindrances toward advancing women should be further explored and innovative pathways for women’s advancement in higher education and other sectors should be considered.

The OWHE state network system should be further studied and evaluated to determine the reasons for the apparent long-term success of a system that is organized and operated exclusively by volunteers at the state level. Such information would be beneficial in determining if this model would work for leadership development programs in other professions, business, and industry. In addition, further data should be gathered to determine the impact that these leadership development programs have on the women participants. Although antidotal evidence suggests that these programs result in more women moving into more and higher leadership positions, studies should be conducted to follow the career advancement of participants to determine the magnitude of the influence of the state networks’ programs. Further study and documentation of the state networks can assist in establishing structures and strategies that may serve as a model for the advancement of HRD in other professions, business, and industry.

Conclusion

We believe that the absence of women in leadership roles in higher education is not due to a lack of ability, ambition, or commitment but to the lack of opportunity. The White House Project (2009) is only one of the most recent reports to document the continuing gap in women’s leadership in higher education, noting that “the presence—or absence—of female academic leaders can have far-reaching influences not only in the institutions themselves, but beyond that, on the scope of research and knowledge that affects us all” (p. 16). OWHE and its initiatives have created opportunities to bridge the gap by offering leadership development programs, forums, seminars, and conferences where women are encouraged to enhance their leadership skills in preparation for taking on top leadership roles in higher education. The OWHE network of leaders who volunteer their time and resources for the purpose of encouraging the advancement of women into leadership positions is a model that should be considered for other groups and sectors.