Leadership in Turbulent Times

The racial reckoning of 2020, alongside the collective trauma of the global Covid-19 pandemic, led to a proliferation of DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) offerings within the US higher education system. At the same time, university social justice spaces found a reduction in their staffing, restriction of their work, and an increase of outsourced DEI contributions from non-justice focused locations. This research based, and semi-autobiographical chapter situated Buolamwini's work on coded bias, is grounded in the work of Spivak and Butler, and O'Neil's contributions on mathematical mismanagement. It charts the systematic dismantling of social justice efforts at one mid-sized regional public university as their work was replaced with invalidated and outsourced DEI efforts and gamed with numerical retention requirements, which did little to remedy the genuine inequity built within higher education systems. This chapter offers inferences regarding what those changes mean for inclusion efforts within higher education writ large, particularly with regard to students with marginalized identities (queer, trans, and BIPOC students) who face systemic oppression in the higher education system.

This chapter proposes a sustainable trajectory for leadership and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) organizational change in higher education. Leadership practices and strategies necessary to construct and implement change and cultivate diverse, equitable, and inclusive educational environments are deliberated, with particular emphasis on transformational leadership theories and practices. These types of organization development practices produce concrete transformation in institutions that have long-established, inert, and deeply entrenched cultures in which discriminatory or even racist practices have been deeply embedded and accepted over time. The complex dynamics of transformation in higher education, brought on, in part, by the rigidity of its organizational structure coupled with its history and foundation in racism and racist practices, makes achieving sustainable change difficult in higher education. Transformational change requires the creation of new mental models through meaning making and perspective sharing that allow individuals in higher education to think differently about how higher education institutions should operate given the rapid shifts in our society. Organizational change leaders must engage in deep, purposeful, and critical reflection and examination of the organization's culture to lay the groundwork for significant change. The chapter explores topics such as leading change through transformational leadership and the styles, practices, and capabilities associated with it, leadership development, strategic diversity leadership, and the Chief Diversity Officer (CDO) as change leader in higher education. The internal and external environmental trends demanding substantive change in higher education continue to intensify over time. The demand for pervasive transformation in higher education is resounding, and institutional leaders must be open to and even drive new and innovative approaches to shifting its very core – its DNA, its culture – to meet those demands.

Women who are the primary caretaker of the home, as a choice or as a necessity, have to negotiate an effective work-life balance and many times, the need to take care of their home results in lost opportunities for career development and advancement (Maki, 2015). For most, the opportunity to capitalize on the missed opportunities will occur after childbearing years (Maki, 2015). This study reconstructed the advancement to executive leadership of women who were employed at four-year, public universities using narrative inquiry and guided by the conceptual framework of social cognitive theory (Andrews, Squire, & Tamboukou, 2013; Bandura, 1989). In this study, six women in higher education were interviewed to discuss work-life balance as it pertains to being an executive leader of a four-year public institution. The participants of this study pinpointed family and work-life balance as important factors for their decision-making process. Balancing work and life can be challenging when you are a person in a leadership position and the degree of difficulty increases when children and family are included. Many women believe that they must choose between their careers and their family. Women postponing their careers for their spouses may not seem abnormal because there tends to be an expectation that male's advancement is prioritized over the woman's (Parker, 2015). As more women are taking on leadership roles, the idea and evolution of establishing and maintaining a strategy for work-life balance becomes a very integral topic and one that needs continuous exploration.

Women leaders are critically underrepresented in academic leadership, and the leadership of diverse groups of women has been profoundly undervalued. Women of color leaders within higher education face a double bind of racial and gender disparity and biases within the education workforce and their institutions. This chapter situates leadership in the education workforce and the process of women of color becoming leaders within an understanding of intersecting social identities and intersectionality. At all levels of higher education, women of color, particularly Black women, have increased over time and present an opportunity to understand how their intersecting identities, feminist standpoint, and collective community contribute to increased racial diversity, gender diversity, and inclusive workplaces.

This chapter explores the parallels between the recruitment and retention of students from marginalized backgrounds, and efforts with similarly identifying faculty and student affairs administrators. Higher education institutions target specific student populations to increase access, thus leading to an increase of students of color, low-income students, and first-generation students on college campuses (Chen & Nunnery, 2019). This welcome development proves inadequate on its own, as the critical support structures necessary for student success are not in place. Students' lived experiences are not attended to in a manner that fosters thriving (Jack, 2019; Nunn, 2021).

Research underscores the significant positive impact on marginalized students of having faculty and student-facing administrators from similar backgrounds on their campus (Braxton et al., 2014; Kuh, Kinzie, Buckley, Bridges, & Hayek, 2007). The intentional recruiting of these college personnel provides a vital means of attending to the needs of underrepresented students. Yet, the student experience is not instructive for the work with underrepresented college employees. The lived experiences of the faculty and administrators from marginalized identities are not being addressed either, similar to that of underrepresented students (Orelus, 2020). When these college personnel leave institutions unexpectedly or stay but are not thriving, this impacts students, colleagues and the college as a whole. In many respects, institutions are replicating inequities they commit to substantively dismantle, limiting the racial justice work they promised, and effectively thwarting their own Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) efforts.

Using an autoethnographic approach, this chapter will explore these parallel issues, and propose recommendations for future research and institutional policy and practice for retention of underrepresented faculty and student-facing administrators.

As a workplace, Higher Education has long been spatially socialized as a heteronormative with counter spaces (LGBTQ resource centers) in which assumptions about an individual's sexuality have been assumed as heterosexual or gay/lesbian pushing mononormativity. This study focused on the narratives of six bisexual faculty and staff to uncover how mononormativity is (re)produced in the workplace. We analyze the ways in which bisexual faculty and staff experience an unevenness of power in communicating their bi identity. We drew on Lefebvre's (1991) theory to understand how the social workplace is sexualized presenting our findings through an ethnodrama.

The purpose of this chapter is to illuminate the importance and impact of Black women in higher education, specifically considering how they themselves and others engage with them regarding their intersectional identities. Through a Black Feminist Auto-ethnographic approach, the authors develop and articulate a reflexive praxis to reveal the hegemonic practices that Black women are subjected to at Historically White Institutions (HWIs). The authors, two Black women educators at HWIs, amplify the challenges Black women experience in academia by naming and describing their lived experiences in hopes of providing insights into the continued disparities that exist. In doing so, this chapter highlights how the authors dismantle systems to excel in their respective areas as educators. The authors center their identities as Black women to offer insight and perspectives on how they navigate experiences in academia.

For many foster alumni, challenges arise as they age out and transition into adulthood and higher education. One area that has been overlooked is how intersecting identity impacts transition among foster youth, especially Black women. Using Scholarly Personal Narrative (SPN) as a methodology, I used myself as the subject to share my lived experiences as a Black woman in foster care through my transition from foster care to adulthood, college, and my career as a Student Affairs professional. Utilizing transition theory and intersectionality as frameworks, I aim to highlight the complex and nuanced challenges of foster youth as they experience major transitions as well as how identity can show up in their professional lives, especially if they are in a field that is tasked with supporting individuals that have a similar lived experience.

A recent study reported Black women are frequently labeled unprofessional due to hair presentation, 1.5 times more likely to be sent home citing “unprofessional hair,” and 80% likely to alter their natural hair texture (Dove, 2019) through chemicals or heat to fit into organizational norms. Meanwhile, conversations about hair discrimination and bias remain whispers in The Ivory Tower. Despite this study, contemporary research regarding higher education and the politics of Black women, Black hair, and hair texture is sparse. The lack of representation in higher education organizations and lack of literature suggest that Black, higher education professional women are at risk of experiencing chilly work environments that could impact belonging, career trajectory, and earning potential. Some individuals outside the African Diaspora may consider the notion of a physical characteristic, like hair, to be insignificant, let alone a salient identity for Black women. However, my experience as a higher education practitioner and scholar states differently. I assert higher education institutions continue to perpetuate and reproduce oppressive dynamics that specifically target Black women and Black hair when hair discrimination and bias are left out of the conversation to address diversity and inclusion concerns. This chapter introduces a historical context of Black hair discrimination; explores my lived experiences navigating Black hair, hair texture, and professionalism in higher education; outlines challenges for higher education institutions and prioritizes Black women alongside diversity and inclusion efforts.

Black women faculty are experiencing multiple marginalities within their intersectional identities (Thomas & Hollenshead, 2001). The overwhelming obstacles that they face in academia regarding racism, lack of mentorship, and its impact on productivity are well documented (Allen, Huggins-Hoyt, Holosko, & Briggs, 2018). However, through a raced and gendered intersection centering Black women, these workplace obstacles can transform into something far more insidious (Young & Hines, 2018). Black women academics do not enter academic environments that have been liberated from racism, sexism, or misogynoir; instead, the environment itself is a microcosm of the world in which they reside (Thompson, 2020). Black women academics are double minorities and face issues such as isolation from collegial networks; lack of institutional/departmental support; forced positionality into the role of mentorship for students of color; and increased visibility and bodily presentation concerns (Allen et al., 2018; Pittman, 2010). Further still, the workplace dynamics and needs of students of color can collide within the work of Black women academics, increasing the prevalence of othermothering and a racialized and gendered racial uplift (Griffin, 2013; Mawhinney, 2011). Though previous studies have demonstrated positive effects of university diversification, women, ethnic minorities, sexual minorities, and religious minorities continue to face antagonistic environments (Cunningham, 2009; Hughes & Howard-Hamilton, 2003). Rooted within Black Feminist Thought and Critical Race Theory, this chapter aims to highlight the intersectional identities of Black women academics and identifies mechanisms to address how Black women are experiencing multiple marginalities within their intersectional identities (Hirshfield & Joseph, 2012).

This chapter tackles the tension between equity and excellence that critics often highlight in opposition of diversity initiatives and efforts in the higher education employment setting. We present several arguments that respond to the assumptions undergirding these criticisms, by drawing on prior research to emphasize that equity and excellence are not mutually exclusive. Furthermore, we present new evidence from a national sample of Black and Hispanic Engineering Faculty (BHEF) (n = 68) to argue that their racialized work experiences promote exclusive environments that serve to sustain their underrepresentation and marginalize their performance contributions. We conclude with a new direction for how to cultivate inclusive work environments in higher education.