2015

Case Study Analysis:

Shawna Williams
CCHE 600: Assignment #2
JENNIFER ATKINSON

As the face of community college leadership changes, Tradition-Bound Community

College (TBCC) finds themselves with a new president. Shawna Williams is viewed by her

subordinates in a very polarizing manner. While analyzing the effectiveness of Shawna Williams
as a leader, her decision to retain the existing strategic plan of the college will be evaluated. In
addition to her strategic plan for TBCC, the roll her gender and ethnicity have played in her
perceived effectiveness will be evaluated. Finally, the message and vision that Dr. Williams
should convey as well as the type of leader she should present herself as will be evaluated
based on current published opinion.

Incoming leadership will determine the success or decline of community colleges that

have thrived under the inaugural leadership (Amey & Twombly, 1992). Due to the importance
placed on the original leadership of community colleges during the formative years, a very set

standard of what type of leader deemed acceptable seems to be indelibly marked on the topic

of community college leadership. This archetype leader was a strong, militaristic type of leader
that led to the propagated image of the great man variety of leadership (Amey & Twombly,
1992). Based on commentary provided by faculty of TBCC, Dr. Williams initial decision to

retain the existing strategic plan of the previous president was initially well received but as

budget cuts and other issues were raised change was necessary. The perception of the faculty

was that Dr. Williams lacked vision and leadership skills necessary to navigate the tougher times
the college would be facing. Her early decision to maintain the status quo weakened her

appearance as a leader in the facultys eyes. This perceived weakness may in part be due to the
absence of a plan developed by Dr. Williams that would clearly outline her vision and the

direction the college would take during challenging and changing times. Since the college was
1|Page

used to having a leader that was more autocratic, Dr. Williams lighter touch caused faculty to

believe that she was not leading at all. This perception may be false but is deeply rooted in the
historic expectations of community college leadership. Leaders who do not fit the well

documented mold of the historic leadership of community colleges may be overlooked, even
though change from the great man style of leadership is now called for (Amey & Twombly,
1992).

The accepted images of leadership are limited and exclusionary especially when

compared with the diverse makeup of the student bodies of community colleges (Amey &

Twombly, 1992). We should seek to change the description of leadership to empowering,

facilitator, collaborative and educator instead of being described as great man, pioneer,

builder, commander and visionary (Amey & Twombly, 1992). The greatest limitation on the

historic image of a community college leader is that they were white men. Since the tradition
of leadership is so tied to the gender and ethnicity of the leaders, females of color are often
overlooked for these types of position. Women and ethnic minorities experience several

barriers to advancement into upper administration rolls (Jackson & OCallaghan, 2009). The

perception that Dr. Williams was not a strong leader with a vision that would guide the college
through challenges may be due to the prevalent view that women play a subordinate role to
men and therefore cannot offer strength in leadership (Nidiffer, 2001). Dr. Williams has the

opportunity to change these perceptions by distinguishing herself as a strong leader. As the

only minority president in the district, she is in a unique position to provide mentorship and
inspiration to other women in administration rolls that may someday also be promoted to
higher leadership rolls. Having mentors available for women of color is critical for the

2|Page

continued advancement of diverse leadership in higher education (Jackson & OCallaghan,

2009).

New leaders must be just as strong as their predecessors. Due to changing times, new

leaders must now have the skills to build coalitions, be inspirational to staff and students, and
above all else must have a well communicated unique vision (Gilliland, 1991). When Dr.

Williams first arrived she professed a policy of look, listen and learn. She took the time to get

to know the faculty, students and staff to gain a perspective on the needs of the college. As she
enters into her second year as president she needs to have a well-articulated vision that she

can present to the faculty and staff based on her findings from the previous year and the future
changes the college will face due to budgetary constraints. She must clearly communicate and
inspire the faculty and staff to make her vision a reality (Wheeler, 2012). She needs to assert

the type of leader that she will be moving forward. The best leaders are those that lead based
on the situation, not stringent rules which restrict necessary change (Nidiffer, 2001). Dr.

Williams needs to communicate her organizational strategy, outlining the ways she wishes to
strengthen the college (Eddy, 2010). This can include how she intends to increase student

enrollment while focusing on resource management in order to keep costs within the new

budget constraints. She can perhaps even outline plans to adapt the college culture to the
changing demographic of incoming students.

Changes in leadership can lead to concerns within an organization if the new leader is

not clear from the beginning what the new vision and mission are moving forward. These

changes need to be ushered in with confidence and clear directives for all involved so that there
is not confusion or fear within the organization. Women in leadership positions need to be

3|Page

especially careful to set the tone for their leadership style early on. Early and frequent

communication is critical to ensure the existing team feels part of any changes that will be

shepherded in by new leadership. Some new leaders want to continue on the path set by their
predecessor, but others will choose to blaze a new trail. In either case, strife can result from

lack of clear communication. If Dr. Williams chooses to begin changing the path of TBCC due to
current circumstances, she needs to do so with clear communication while expressing to staff

and faculty the role that they will play in the changes to come. Current presidents are held to a
higher standard of accountability, they need to be transparent and connected with faculty and

students, and they also need to embolden the faculty to embrace the mission and vision of the
college (Hendrickson, Lane, Harris & Dorman, 2012).

4|Page

References:

Amey, M., & Twombly, S. (1992). Re-Visioning Leadership in Community Colleges. The Review
Of Higher Education, 15(2), 125-150.
Eddy, P. L. (2010). Community college leadership: A multidimensional model for leading
change.Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing, LLC
Gilliland, J. (1991). Diversifying leadership in community colleges. New Directions For
Community Colleges, 1991(74), 93-101. doi:10.1002/cc.36819917415
Hendrickson, R. M., Lane, J. E., Harris, J. T., & Dorman, R. H. (2013). Academic leadership and
governance of higher education. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing, LLC.
Jackson, J. & OCallaghan, E. (2009). Ethnic and Racial Administrative Diversity: Understanding
Work Life Realities and Experiences in Higher Education: ASHE Higher Education Report,
Volume 35, Number 3. doi: 10.1002/aehe.3503
Niddifer, J. (2001). New leadership for a new century. In J. Niddifer & C. Bashaw (Eds.), Women
administrators in higher education: Historical and contemporary perspectives (pp. 101131). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Wheeler, D. (2012). Unsuccessful Leadership Models. In, Servant Leadership for Higher
Education (1st ed., p. 9). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

5|Page