University Leadership Is a Team Sport
There is a persistent myth that a university president can be the “end all, be all” — the ultimate savior of a university. While the...
There is a persistent myth that a university president can be the “end all, be all” — the ultimate savior of a university. While the role is undeniably significant, no president is a superhero with unlimited powers who can single-handedly transform an institution. The reality is — and has been for some time — that the complexity of a modern university far exceeds the ability of any one person to manage, let alone lead, every aspect of this vast enterprise.
Universities today face unprecedented challenges: evolving student needs, technological disruption, fiscal pressures, and increasing demands for accountability and measurable outcomes. To successfully navigate the current multifaceted and complex landscape, the leadership team must function not as a rigid hierarchy of command but as a cohesive team focused on university-wide goals and shared success. Vice presidents and college deans face similar expectations, yet the growth of a college or division often depends on factors outside their direct control. For instance, academic deans rely on undergraduate enrollment growth to meet their objectives, but the key functions driving that growth typically reside elsewhere in the university. Admissions and recruitment efforts, in turn, depend on other units — academic departments to provide the right mix of programs, marketing to build institutional awareness, and fundraising to secure sufficient scholarship support.
It is important to state the obvious: simply hiring individuals with the title of “vice president” and putting them in a weekly meeting does not create a leadership team. To truly create a team, the senior university leaders (president, vice presidents, deans, etc.) must: create a sense of horizontal leadership among each other and their direct reports; be intentional when making personnel decisions; be strategic and deliberate when forming and identifying teams; and foster a culture that supports and sustains effective senior teams.
The Value of Horizontal Leadership in Senior University Teams
Unlike traditional top-down models, horizontal leadership emphasizes collaboration, shared responsibility, and mutual accountability among senior leaders. It rejects the siloed mindset in favor of cross-functional engagement, fostering an environment where ideas flow freely, decisions are strengthened by diverse perspectives, and the collective expertise of the team is fully leveraged.
Universities are intricate ecosystems where academic affairs, student services, finance, advancement, and operations intersect. As discussed by Susan Snyder and Melody Rose, a horizontal leadership team breaks down barriers between these units, ensuring the university moves forward with clarity and unity of purpose. From my perspective as a former president, cultivating this form of leadership is essential not only for institutional effectiveness but also for building trust internally and projecting confidence externally.
Horizontal leadership also demands that senior leaders move beyond their functional boundaries and see themselves as co-owners of the university’s mission. As Snyder and Rose explain, this means embracing “collective priorities” and “collective behavior” — owning goals for the entire institution and recognizing that these must sometimes supersede divisional interests. It requires leaders to demonstrate that broader perspective through their actions, decisions, and communication. Furthermore, a horizontal team approach demands rich and vibrant communication between and among the members. This is essential as the entire university — from students to trustees — will easily see whether the team is aligned or not.
When this model is in place, the president’s role evolves from issuing directives in a strict hierarchy to enabling others to advance initiatives that propel the university forward.
The Imperative of Getting the Right People: “Hire Slow but Fire Fast”
Jim Collins, in his oft-quoted book Good to Great, observed that great organizations first focus on “getting the right people on the bus.” Nowhere is that more relevant than in building a university’s senior leadership team.
As I have previously written, quoting the late Steven B. Sample, the hiring or firing of the closest advisors and direct reports to the leader will be among — if not the — most important decisions a university leader will make.
Hiring senior leaders in a university is a complex, high-stakes process. The pressure to fill vacancies quickly — especially in critical roles such as provost, chief financial officer, or vice president for student affairs — can be intense. However, rushing the hiring process often results in misaligned values, poor team fit, and ultimately diminished effectiveness. Therefore, it is imperative to be methodical and take the time to do it right.
In my experience, it is far more effective to invest time and effort up front to ensure a candidate will contribute meaningfully to a horizontal leadership model. This means evaluating not only the technical requirements of the role, but also how the individual will influence team dynamics and what strengths they bring to enhance the leadership team’s success.
Conversely, when it becomes clear that a senior leader is a poor fit — whether because of skill gaps or inability to work within a horizontal framework — it is critical to act decisively. Prolonging misalignment drains morale, slows progress, and erodes the team’s credibility. A swift but fair exit process, coupled with transparent communication, protects the integrity of the leadership team and signals a firm commitment to excellence.
Thus, “Hire Slow, Fire Fast.”
Be Specific and Strategic in Creating Teams
Richard Hackman’s research on teams, outlined in his books Senior Teams and Leading Teams, offers invaluable guidance for university presidents seeking to build high-performing leadership groups.
A critical factor of a successful team is its membership makeup. For senior university teams, this means appointing leaders who not only possess functional expertise but also bring the interpersonal skills and mindset necessary for collaborative work. It’s not enough to have a collection of competent administrators; the group must operate as an integrated system where members understand and embrace their interdependencies.
This cannot be left to chance. When building a senior leadership team, leaders must intentionally seek individuals who are both strong team players and capable leaders. These teams are more likely to succeed when:
- Team membership is carefully selected to include individuals who complement each other’s skills and bring diverse viewpoints.
- Clear norms and processes guide how decisions are made, how conflicts are resolved, and how the team interacts internally and externally.
- The team has a compelling purpose that aligns with broader institutional goals and motivates members beyond individual agendas.
- The “type” of team is clearly defined. Hackman outlines four types:
- Informational: These teams exchange and share information across leaders throughout the university. They also give the president a forum to share updates, create alignment, and solicit broad feedback without a public announcement. These teams usually meet regularly and have a wider reach than most others, though still limited in scope.
- Consultative: These teams address specific issues, providing advice and insights on projects or upcoming matters (e.g., preparing for a Board of Trustees meeting).
- Coordinating: These teams are formed to synchronize important activities related to a specific initiative that will impact multiple offices across the university.
- Decision-Making: These teams help shape and support the university’s most critical decisions.
Many senior teams may fulfill one of these roles (e.g., a senior leadership team focused on the overall budget). However, the president’s cabinet, at times, will be asked to serve all four of these roles over the course of the year. It is important for the president to annually review the cabinet’s expectations and clarify its roles whenever a new member is added.
Practical Steps for University Leaders to Build a Culture for Effective Senior Leadership Teams
While most individuals desire to be a part of a highly effective team and they understand its importance, as stated by Susan Snyder and Christy Pearson, “All too often, though, an executive team may struggle to achieve effectiveness, much less high performance. It must confront the organization’s most complex issues while being highly visible — there is, quite literally, nowhere to hide. When the executive team is not aligned, the impact quickly becomes apparent to other leaders and negatively impacts its performance.” The following are several steps that the president can take to initiate a culture of horizontal leadership.
1. Establish a shared vision for leadership: Early on, define what horizontal leadership means in your university’s context. Set expectations around collaboration, mutual accountability, and shared decision-making.
2. Identify the collective priorities: Establish not only how each individual will be held accountable for their divisional goals; but also the larger goals that everyone will be collectively responsible for.
3. Invest in team development: Use retreats, coaching, and facilitated dialogues to build trust and refine working norms. Hackman notes that even the most talented groups need deliberate time and space to grow into cohesive teams.
4. Monitor team health continuously: Look beyond individual performance to assess how well the team functions collectively. Are there hidden silos? Is communication open? Are decisions made inclusively?
5. Seek a range of experiences and complementary expertise: A mix of disciplinary backgrounds, leadership styles, and life experiences strengthens horizontal leadership and prevents groupthink. (Doris Kearns Goodwin’s Team of Rivals is a perfect case study!)
6. Be willing to make tough personnel decisions: Adhere to the “fire fast, hire slow” philosophy. Prioritize long-term team effectiveness over short-term convenience.
7. Model horizontal leadership yourself: As president, your behavior sets the tone. Demonstrate openness to input, respect for differing opinions, and a willingness to share leadership responsibilities.
8. Rinse and repeat: Like a team that wins its first championship, the work isn’t done after the first success. Teams should routinely assess their own “health” through open, honest conversations about their purpose, dynamics, and areas for growth.
The Return on These Efforts
Leading a senior leadership team in a university is a demanding yet profoundly rewarding endeavor. Embracing horizontal leadership as the guiding principle transforms the team from a collection of individual actors into a high-functioning unit capable of addressing complex challenges with agility and shared purpose.
A senior leadership team can be a strong organizational asset if it is horizontally aligned with its members all pursuing collective goals and priorities. This team dynamic adds significantly to the ability of the university to navigate the current environment, serve its stakeholders better, and meet ambitious goals for the university. Furthermore, the members of the team themselves gain personally and professionally.
As a university president, I have come to believe that no other investment yields greater returns than cultivating a senior leadership team that embodies horizontal leadership, stands united in purpose, and operates with both trust and rigor between and among its members. It is this team that charts the university’s course, navigates uncertainty, and ensures we fulfill our mission to educate, innovate, and serve.
