From College Presidents to CEOs: The Corporate Evolution of Universities

The modern university president is not an academic caretaker inherited from centuries past but an architect of institutional metamorphosis. Their canvas is not a department or a program but the DNA of higher education itself. Like a caterpillar digesting itself within its chrysalis to emerge as something entirely new, they must orchestrate not just change but rebirth, maintaining the soul of academia while reimagining its entire form.

This is not about preserving traditions or modernizing practices. It is about having the courage to question every foundation, the wisdom to preserve what truly matters, and the boldness to reconstruct everything else from the ground up. The future belongs not to those who can manage decline or navigate change but to those who can envision and engineer transformation; such is the Burden of a Modern University President.

The Evolution: Transforming Higher Education Leadership from the Ground Up

Higher education stands at a defining moment, and the path forward demands more than modernizing existing structures. Simply digitizing lectures, streamlining processes, or adding new programs to aging frameworks misses a crucial truth: the foundation itself needs reimagining. The challenges facing universities today reflect a fundamental misalignment between traditional academic structures and modern educational needs.

The current model of higher education took shape in an era of limited knowledge access, stable funding, and predictable career paths. Faculty roles were designed when research moved slower, physical classrooms constrained teaching methods and students followed more uniform educational paths. A case can be made how Unity Environmental University demonstrates how fundamental transformation can succeed. Rather than simply adding sustainability courses to a traditional curriculum, Unity rebuilt its entire educational model around environmental leadership, reconceptualizing everything from faculty roles to our operating model, resulting in over 10X scalable growth since 2016 and launching a whole new Distance Education Vertical - Untethered Learning.

This transformation extends beyond organizational charts or funding models. It touches on how knowledge is created and shared, how learning is facilitated, how resources are allocated, and how success is measured. The shift we need isn't about replacing academic values with corporate ones; it's about building new structures that better serve those values in today's context. While traditional universities pride themselves on stability and gradual evolution, today's rapid technological advancement, especially in the AI space and global challenges, requires institutions capable of more fundamental transformation.

The Underlying Disagreement

Universities, for all their history and tradition, are businesses; they are all incorporated. For decades, we have acted as though they are not, allowing outdated leadership models to persist while financial pressures mount and the expectations of students, governments, and employers evolve. The idea of universities adopting the CEO style as the modern presidency leadership model is about something other than importing corporate culture wholesale. It is about acknowledging that universities are complex organizations that need the strategic clarity, operational efficiency, and accountability that a corporate perespective adds to the equation.

This shift means staying within the core values of higher education, such as academic rigor or intellectual freedom. It also means evolving leadership to preserve these values in a world that demands resilience, adaptability, and results. This evolution in leadership is about more than abandoning the heart of higher education; it is about ensuring its survival and relevance.

Here are six key areas where a CEO-style approach to the modern presidency could reshape universities while preserving their core mission for tuition-driven institutions.

1. The Funding Model Needs Overhaul        

The financial pressures on universities are undeniable. Public investment has declined for decades, tuition revenues are under pressure, and education costs have risen. The traditional university leadership structure, rooted in stewardship and consensus-building, was never designed to navigate this environment.

The Modern Presidency - A CEO-led approach - could help institutions focus on their financial sustainability, allocate resources strategically, and prioritize programs that deliver measurable value. Universities can continue their missions; but they do need leaders who align their aspirations with the realities of funding and competition.

Fundamental Changes to Prioritize Financial Viability

1. Eliminate Inefficient Bureaucracy. Streamline workflows, cut redundant roles, create clear RSAs, and remove slow decision-making processes that waste time and money and frustrate stakeholders.
2. Eliminate Underperforming Programs. Phase out programs with low enrollment or poor outcomes to reallocate resources to high-demand, impactful areas aligned with institutional goals while preserving academic disciplines germane to your core curriculum.
3. Eliminate Unused or Underutilized Physical Assets. Repurpose, lease, or sell underused buildings or properties to reduce maintenance costs and fund strategic priorities.
4. Eliminate Legacy Practices That Add No Value. Modernize outdated systems, such as rigid scheduling and pedagogical hubris, and nonintegrated technologies to better align with current needs and improve effectiveness or scalability.

2. Balancing Accountability with Academic Freedom        

A common concern about CEO-style leadership for the modern presidency is the potential erosion of academic freedom. However, this fear often stems from misunderstanding what academic freedom truly means.

Academic freedom protects a scholar’s right to pursue research and inquiry without interference. It does not mean immunity from accountability or a refusal to align contributions with institutional priorities. Under a CEO-led model, accountability can coexist with academic freedom through tailored, measurable metrics and an understanding of institutional funding structures.

For institutions reliant on grants or endowments, accountability would focus more on research productivity and long-term prestige. For tuition-driven schools, accountability metrics might prioritize teaching quality and student outcomes. This distinction ensures that all faculty and staff are held to high standards without undermining the principles of academic inquiry (stop the one-size-fits-all approach).

Critical Actions to Reinforce Accountability

1. Eliminate Vague Performance Expectations. Replace undefined expectations with clear metrics for teaching effectiveness, research impact, and student engagement.
2. Eliminate Misaligned Faculty Priorities. Remove practices that allow faculty activities to stray from the university’s mission, ensuring alignment with institutional strategy.
3. Eliminate Ineffective Oversight Processes. Streamline evaluation systems to focus on meaningful outcomes rather than burdensome, outdated procedures.
4. Eliminate Archaic Reward Systems. Revise reward structures prioritizing seniority or tradition over measurable impact in teaching, research, or institutional advancement.

3. Evolving the Faculty Model to Meet Modern Demands?        

The financial pressures on universities demand changes in leadership and a rethinking of how faculty roles are structured. In my work, we have reconstituted the traditional faculty model into six distinct positions, each tailored to institutional priorities and designed to maximize impact:?

1. Research-Focused Faculty: These roles prioritize advancing knowledge through securing grants and producing impactful scholarship.?
2. Teaching-Centric Faculty: Specialists in pedagogy/androgogy who focus on delivering exceptional instruction and mentoring students to ensure high-quality learning experiences.?
3. SME Faculty: By balancing research and teaching responsibilities, these positions contribute to institutional scholarship and student success.?
4. Professional Practice Faculty: Industry experts who bring real-world experience into the learning, enhancing career preparation for students in applied fields.?
5. Service-Oriented Faculty: Focused on administrative duties, external engagement, and leadership roles supporting institutional operations and strategic goals.?
6. Adjunct, Contract Faculty & SMEs: Hired for specific teaching or project needs, these roles provide flexibility and agility in addressing fluctuating demands without long-term commitments.?

Adding emerging roles like academic administrators, who focus on institutional strategy, or curriculum designers and learning experience designers, who reimagine educational delivery for modern learners, underscores the evolving nature of academic work. Similarly, academic advisors play a vital role in student retention and success. While these positions may challenge traditional notions of faculty, they reflect the multifaceted expertise required to sustain and advance universities today.

This reimagined faculty model into various independent positions balances flexibility with accountability, ensuring that every role contributes meaningfully to the institution’s mission while meeting the demands of a changing higher education landscape.?

4. Alumni as Brand Ambassadors        

Alumni often resist the idea of universities adopting corporate principles, viewing such shifts as a betrayal of tradition. However, nostalgia for the university they once knew can significantly hinder progress.

Universities must communicate openly with alumni about financial and operational realities, emphasizing that leadership changes are not about abandoning the mission but ensuring its survival. While alumni donations are essential, more is needed to insulate a university from financial challenges. Instead, alumni can be vital as brand ambassadors, mentors, and advocates.

Fundamental Changes to Maximize Alumni Support

1. Eliminate Overemphasis on Donations. Treat alums as more than financial contributors by focusing on their influence as mentors and institutional advocates.
2. Eliminate One-Size-Fits-All Engagement Strategies Tailor outreach to align with alumni skills, industries, and interests to foster meaningful relationships.
3. Eliminate Minimal Involvement in Branding. Engage alums in marketing and recruitment efforts to showcase their success stories and amplify the university’s reputation.
4. Eliminate Superficial Alumni Engagement Avoid shallow gestures that fail to show mutual value. Offer roles that support alums career growth and institutional advancement.

Explore this resource on our alumni engagement approach to learn more about creating a sustainable, revenue-centric strategy that maximizes alumni support as brand ambassadors rather than relying on them primarily for donations.

5. Boards and Regulators Must Adapt        

A CEO-style model for the modern presidency also requires boards and regulators to rethink their roles. Boards must transition from passive oversight to active strategic partnership. They should set clear performance expectations, hold leadership accountable, and ensure decisions are made in the institution’s best long-term interest.

Regulators, meanwhile, must allow universities the flexibility to innovate, updating rigid accreditation standards and funding formulas that penalize change.

Key Areas to Rethink Governance

1. Eliminate Unqualified Board Members. Appoint individuals with relevant finance, technology, or strategy expertise rather than relying on prestige or connections.
2. Eliminate Excessive Focus on Tradition Stop prioritizing historical practices over forward-looking strategies. Adopt governance models that reflect modern challenges.
3. Eliminate Counterproductive Regulatory Metrics Remove metrics prioritizing selectivity or graduation rates over meaningful measures like access, learning outcomes, and student support.
4. Eliminate Board Meddling in Operations Boards should focus on strategic oversight without interfering in day-to-day management, empowering leaders to execute effectively.

6. Preserving Rigor and the Right to Fail        

The rise of CEO-style leadership as the modern president does not and should not imply a softening of academic rigor. Universities must remain where students are intellectually challenged; failure is an acceptable part of learning.

A CEO-led approach to the modern presidency would build systems that support student success without lowering standards. The goal is to create conditions where students can succeed through effort and resilience while maintaining the right to fail as a critical growth opportunity.

Fundamental Changes to Strengthen Rigor

1. Eliminate Participation Trophies in Education. Reject the idea that effort alone guarantees success. Uphold rigorous standards to ensure credentials reflect real achievement.
2. Eliminate Coddling Through Over-Accommodation. Balance support with accountability. Over-accommodating students undermines resilience and critical thinking.
3. Eliminate Guaranteed Outcomes. Remove policies that prioritize completion metrics over academic integrity. Students must earn success through merit.
4. Eliminate Fear of Academic Risk. Encourage ambitious, experimental projects. Rigor thrives when students push boundaries, even at the risk of failure.

Conclusion: The Corporate Evolution of Universities

The shift from the traditional presidency to the Modern Presidency's CEO approach is about something other than turning universities into net revenue-positive corporations. It is about adopting leadership practices that align with modern realities. By embracing strategic thinking, accountability, and adaptability, universities can preserve their core values while meeting the demands of today’s world.

My Top 4 Pieces of Advice for Adopting a CEO-Led Model

1. Get Ruthless About Priorities: Cut what does not align with your mission or produce results. Unapologetically reallocate resources to areas that drive impact.
2. Demand Data-Driven Decisions: Feelings are not strategies. Insist on hard data backing every decision. If it cannot be measured, it is a distraction.
3. Challenge Sacred Cows - Question everything: Legacy programs, governance structures, pet projects. Your institution's survival depends on disrupting the status quo.
4. Own the Backlash - This model will make enemies: Your job is to lead with conviction. If you are not ruffling feathers, you need to be bolder. Embrace it. Strong leadership requires the courage to challenge the status quo, and disruption often leads to discomfort. Your role is to stand firm, communicate clearly, and confidently move forward. If you’re not ruffling feathers, you're not being audacious enough. Leaders who avoid backlash rarely drive meaningful change; they merely conform. Take the heat and use it to fuel progress.

Shifting to a CEO-led model for the modern presidency in higher education requires decisiveness, resilience, and an unrelenting focus on outcomes. The future of higher education belongs to leaders bold enough to embrace this change. Lead or be left behind.

?