Community College Leadership Succession Planning: A Mix of Preparation Levels

Running Head: COMMUNITY COLLEGE LEADERSHIP SUCCESSION PLANNING
Community College Leadership Succession Planning: A Mix of Preparation
Levels for Anticipated Retirements
Patrick G. Mickle, Ed.D.
A Dissertation of Practice Presented to the Faculty of the
School of Education of Maryville University
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the
Degree Doctor of Education
2014

ii
Acknowledgements
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Dr. Tammy Gocial, Dr.
Denise Pearl, and Dr. Susan Bartel of Maryville University. This study would not
have been possible without your valuable advice, guidance, and encouragement.
I also would like to thank the many community college presidents and
human resource directors who offered their valuable insight and participation in
the study. Your contribution is greatly appreciated.
Finally, I wish to thank my family for their love, support, and patience.

iii
Abstract
There has been a significant amount of research regarding the need for
leadership succession planning in community colleges and recommendations
made at the national level for best practices; however, there is a significant
research-to-practice gap regarding what is actually being done. This study
surveyed presidents and human resource directors at fifty-three community
colleges in Illinois and Missouri to determine whether they are concerned about
the need for leadership succession planning, whether they are currently utilizing
some type of leadership succession planning, and to evaluate the level of
readiness for predicted Baby-Boomer generation retirements. The location of
institutions was spread fairly evenly across nine Urbanicity designations with the
most (17%) being in Rural Remote locations. The findings indicate that 85% of
the participants feel that their community college is either somewhat prepared or
is well prepared for leadership succession, but a mix of preparation levels and
content of succession plans was discovered once specific questions were
evaluated. This evaluation reveals that, although there was some promise in the
preparations thus far, there is still much to be done with succession planning at
community colleges. Aspects to consider for improvement of succession
planning are also presented.
Keywords: Leadership development; succession planning; community
college leadership; impending leadership shortage, baby-boomer
retirements

iv
Table of Contents
List of Tables.......................................................................................................vi
List of Figures......................................................................................................vii
Chapter I: Context ...............................................................................................1
Introduction................................................................................................1
Community Colleges History, Evolving Mission, and Trends.....................2
Leadership Succession Planning in Corporations .....................................4
The Need for Community College Leadership Succession Planning.........5
Recommendations for Leadership Succession Planning in Community
Colleges ....................................................................................................6
Research Purpose.....................................................................................8
Research Questions..................................................................................9
Summary ..................................................................................................10
Chapter II: Review of Literature ..........................................................................12
Introduction...............................................................................................12
Demographics of Current Community College Leaders ...........................13
Age...................................................................................................13
Gender .............................................................................................14
Race.................................................................................................14
Education .........................................................................................14
Recommendations based on national demographics.......................15
Skills, Education, and Competencies Needed for Community College
Leadership................................................................................................16
National level recommendations for core competencies ..................16
Recommended Higher Education Leadership Development Methods .....18
Internal candidate development / grow-your-own leadership
programs ..........................................................................................18
University-based community college leadership programs...............19
Professional development for community college administrators and
presidents.........................................................................................20
Learning from Corporate Succession Planning Best Practices ................21
Summary ..................................................................................................25
Chapter III: Methodology ....................................................................................26
Introduction...............................................................................................26
Research Questions.................................................................................26
Participants...............................................................................................27
Instruments/Materials ...............................................................................30
Design and Methodology..........................................................................31
Reliability and Validity...............................................................................32
Ethical Considerations..............................................................................33
Data Analysis............................................................................................35

v
Summary ..................................................................................................36
Chapter IV: Results ............................................................................................37
Demographics ..........................................................................................37
Demographics of current community college leaders.......................37
Demographics of participating community colleges..........................38
Succession Planning Awareness and Perceptions...................................39
Succession Planning Preparations and Considerations ...........................41
Succession Planning Professional Development Methods and Content ..44
Planned retirement programs ...........................................................46
Skills, education, and competencies.................................................46
Grow-your-own leadership programs or equivalents ........................47
Succession Planning Keys to Success.....................................................47
Clarify expectations ..........................................................................48
Support from senior leadership ........................................................48
Evaluation of results .........................................................................48
Succession Planning Alternatives.............................................................48
Planned retirement programs ...........................................................49
Grow-your-own leadership programs or equivalents ........................49
Succession Planning Readiness ..............................................................50
Threat and risk analysis....................................................................50
Comparison to national level recommendations...............................51
Readiness ........................................................................................52
Chapter V: Conclusions and Discussion ............................................................55
Introduction...............................................................................................55
Key Findings.............................................................................................55
Strengths of the Study..............................................................................56
Limitations of the Study ............................................................................56
Recommendations for Future Research...................................................58
Implications for Practice ...........................................................................59
Aspects to consider when developing a community college
leadership succession plan ..............................................................59
Recommendations for improvement of current community college
leadership succession planning........................................................60
Conclusion................................................................................................62
Appendices:
Appendix A: Invited Participant Community Colleges...............................64
Appendix B: Community College Leadership Succession Planning Survey
.................................................................................................................66
References..........................................................................................................73
Vita Auctoris........................................................................................................76

vi
List of Tables
1 Urbanicity of Community College Locations .............................................38
2 All Professional Development Methods Offered or Supported ..................45

vii
List of Figures
1 Generation of President ............................................................................38
2 Participants foresee negative impact due to baby-boomer retirements?...40
3 Level of Succession Planning and Implementation ...................................40
4 Level of Personnel Included in Succession Plan.......................................42
5 Succession Planning Customization .........................................................43

COMMUNITY COLLEGE LEADERSHIP SUCCESSION PLANNING 1
Chapter I: Context
Introduction
At the conclusion of World War II, returning U.S. service members and
their new spouses began creating families at an astounding rate, and the
generation that came about due to the increased birth rate is referred to as the
baby-boomers. The baby-boomer generation, defined as those 78.2 million
Americans born between 1946 and 1964 (Leubsdorf, 2006), are now reaching
the traditional retirement age of 65 and are becoming eligible to retire from 2011
through 2031. Across the United States, a massive wave of workforce
retirements has begun. Although it has started relatively slowly, the peak of this
generation’s population was born in 1957, and thus retirements are predicted to
peak in 2022. This really comes as no surprise. We, as a nation, have come to
know this phenomenon for some time through mainstream media and the
catchphrase, “the graying of America”. Much of the focus has been on the
impact of the baby-boomer generation retirements on Social Security and
pension plans, but we are becoming increasingly aware of the impact this mass
exodus will have on the workforce capability itself as the “brain drain” of skills and
experience ensues.
One area of particular interest and concern is the effect these retirements
will have on leadership in higher education institutions, especially in community
colleges. Since many community college systems came into existence in the
mid-to-late 1960s and grew throughout the 1970s, a large number of people from

the baby-boomer generation were hired as faculty and staff. Since these jobs
were stable and offered decent pay and benefits, many of these employees
stayed and were eventually promoted within the organizations. Today, much of
this stable workforce has more than 40 years of service and has reached
retirement age (Fleck, 2001). It is predicted that college and university turnover
of faculty and administrator positions will be as high as 50% nationally over the
next several years (Betts, Urias, Chavez, & Betts, 2009). Therefore, this study
explored the existence of and the need for succession plans that focus on the
development of leaders in community colleges due to the large number of
anticipated retirements of baby boomers currently holding these positions. This
chapter will begin with a look at what makes community colleges unique, discuss
the background of succession planning in corporations, touch on the need for this
type of planning in community colleges, and then explore the recommendations
made for leadership succession planning in community colleges.
Community Colleges’ History, Evolving Mission, and Trends
In the timeline of human history, the concept of community colleges is
relatively new. The first community college in the United States opened in 1901
in Joliet, Illinois. The idea grew slowly until a record 457 public community
colleges, then referred to as junior colleges, opened their doors in the 1960s.
Today, there are over 1,166 community colleges in existence (AACC, 2012).
With each of these institutions currently employing a number of baby-boomers in
leadership roles, it is easy to see what kind of national impact their anticipated
retirements can potentially have.

The original mission of community colleges was to act as an extension (or
supplement) to the education received at the high school level. These
institutions were also established to provide additional education to communities
for people who were not able to leave home to attend school at distant colleges
and universities. Over the past four decades, the mission of the community
college has evolved tremendously. This expanded mission now includes
community education, workforce training and development, technical education,
and remedial education in math, composition, and reading due to an increasing
number of incoming students who are ill-prepared for college-level work (AACC,
2012). Community colleges also now represent a cheaper alternative to
traditional four-year colleges by offering associate degrees, as well as
transferrable coursework into universities. It is this ever-changing and expanding
mission that makes community college leadership especially complex. It is this
complexity that makes succession planning especially important at the
community college level, and provides the motivation for fundamental change in
community college leadership in the future (Romero, 2004).
As the population of the United States slowly grows, it would stand to
reason that so too would community college enrollments. However, continued
growth and improvement in the U.S. economy is now slowing enrollments in
community colleges as potential students are increasingly deciding to go to work
instead of college. Couple that with the potential impact the “Student Loan
Bubble” (massive accumulated student loan debt nationally that could lead to
default) may have on incoming students’ ability to pay for education, and higher

education could see a recipe for disaster. Community colleges, however, may
fair better than most other higher education institutions (4-year colleges and
universities) due to the lower cost of attendance and the fact that many
continuing education students have their educations funded through other means
such as work rehabilitation programs. Either way, future administrators will need
to be savvy in the ways of increasing enrollments, decreasing costs, and
preparing others to assume higher level leadership roles.
Leadership Succession Planning in Corporations
Leadership succession planning is the method by which internal and
external candidates are identified, recruited, trained and developed to take over
leadership roles within an organization (Kim, 2010). This type of planning is
nothing new to the corporate world. In corporations, leadership succession
planning is considered a risk management system and not something solely
initiated by an event such as a retirement (Kim, 2010). The reason for this is
simple: Investors will not tolerate an operational disruption in business due to a
leadership change (emergency or unplanned). To create a succession plan for a
specific event after it has unfolded (unplanned departure due to illness, scandal,
or even death) means that the organization is already too close to crisis. True
leadership succession planning is an ongoing process that is considered to be a
strategic human resource function. Personnel are continually identified and
developed as successors to key organizational leaders. These types of systems
have been a byproduct of studies conducted in the 1980s and implemented
throughout the 1990s (Kim, 2010). These studies included Carnazza (1982) who

suggested what actions companies could take to achieve succession planning,
Mahler and Graines (1983) who made a call for more suitable corporate
succession planning, Rhodes and Walker (1984) who investigated the various
pathways to effective corporate succession planning, Hall (1986) who studied the
steps to succession planning, and Friedman (1984, 1986) who asserted the
importance of training and development personnel in succession planning. Plans
are continually evolving as organizations and the business world change. Since
higher education institutions are now also experiencing increased competition
and significant change, it is this researcher’s conviction that much of the
leadership best practices used in corporations can be applied to community
colleges as well.
The Need for Community College Leadership Succession Planning
In the mid-to-late 1960s, the baby boomer generation started entering
college in droves. An incredible growth was seen at the state university level, but
even more so at the newly created junior colleges (later called community
colleges) throughout the United States. This increase in demand for higher
education fueled a great need for college educators, thus a hiring boom began to
take place. As this trend continued into the early 1970s, many baby boomers
finishing their graduate work found themselves drawn to the community colleges
as faculty members (Fleck, 2001). Because of the nurturing educational
environment, satisfactory pay, and decent benefits, many who were hired have
continued to work for these institutions ever since. Furthermore, many of them
and their similarly-aged peers have been promoted to positions of leadership as

Department Chairs, Deans, Vice-Presidents, and Presidents. A vast amount of
knowledge and experience has been developed over the past 40 years in this
generation of higher education leaders. If they retire without passing this
knowledge on to the next generation of leaders, an immense disruption will be
felt in the continuity of educational operations everywhere.
To further complicate the situation of upcoming mass retirements, the role
of community colleges is continually expanding to such roles as a “pipeline” of
students with transferable skills heading to universities, as technical colleges of
degrees and certificate programs for industry, as career colleges of vocational
education leading directly to jobs, as workforce development/industrial training
sources, and as a continuation of high school education with increased remedial
math and reading offerings (Romero, 2004). It is this ever-changing and
expanding mission that makes community college leadership especially complex.
Furthermore, states throughout the country are facing budget deficits and thus
are cutting funding of community college systems. The financial situation at
community colleges has quickly become the ultimate exercise in doing more with
less. The need for preparing the next generation of leaders now to address
these challenges is imperative.
Recommendations for Leadership Succession Planning in Community
Colleges
Initially, recommendations for leadership succession planning in
community colleges have focused primarily on the recruitment and preparation of

college presidents. This is due to the predicted number of presidential
retirements, a total of 84% by 2017, among community college leaders (McNair,
Duree, & Ebbers, 2011). However, there has been recognition of the need to
expand leadership succession planning to include positions from the traditional
lines of promotion that are stepping stones to the presidency (such as vice
presidents, deans, directors, etc.). These comprehensive training and
development programs to prepare internal candidates for specific leadership
positions within a community college are referred to as “grow-your-own”, or
GYO’s. They are based on the premise that if external leadership candidates
cannot be found, then the organization “grows its own” (Reille & Kezar, 2010). A
major complication for some GYO’s, however, is that many of the personnel
usually in line for promotion to higher leadership positions are also of the same
generation, and therefore, are also expected to retire within the same span of
time. Valid succession plans must also take into account the shrinking pool of
candidates at multiple levels.
The unique nature and role of community colleges necessitates the
development of leaders with an equally unique set of leadership skills (McNair,
2010). To answer this call, the American Association of Community Colleges
(AACC) has developed six core competencies (AACC, 2005) that have been
identified as vital to all community college leaders: organizational strategy,
resources management, communication, collaboration, community college
advocacy, and professionalism. Each of these competencies should be kept in
mind when developing succession plans, as they lend themselves well to

objectives and learning outcomes of leadership development programs, whether
internal to the organization or externally utilized to develop university degree
programs and professional seminars.
Because so much institutional knowledge could be lost when community
college leaders retire, succession plans should also entail a renewed look at
organizational culture and history. This helps maintain a synergy between a
college’s past, present, and future, and preserves the alignment to the
institution’s mission and values. There may also be an opportunity to use
succession planning, at this time, to introduce a desired change in the
organization’s culture for future benefit.
Research Purpose
Although there has been much written and discussed about what
leadership succession planning in community colleges should look like, there is
not much information to be found about actual plans that have been implemented
and are currently in use. It is estimated, then, that many community colleges
may not be currently utilizing this type of plan. Instead, these institutions have
continued to fill openings as they become available through recruitment,
advertising, website postings, and the use of traditional search committees. This
approach is called replacement planning (Kim, 2010), and is to be expected
since a large shortage of qualified workers has never existed in higher education.
In addition, these traditional approaches to filling vacancies include processes

with which human resource departments already have experience and for which
they already have workable procedures in place.
The big difference facing community colleges in the near future is that
many of the usual pool of candidates available to recruit from other institutions,
private industry, and government are also of the same baby-boomer generation.
We are currently just at the beginning of a potential crisis that began slowly in
2011 and is estimated to continue well into the 2030s (Leubsdorf, 2006).
Traditional methods of replacing leaders such as job postings and search
committees may still be working for now, but community colleges are quickly
approaching a time when these efforts will no longer be adequate for future hiring
needs. Succession plans must be implemented and in process for several years
if community colleges are to be ready.
Research Questions
The three research questions that this study is designed to answer are:
1. What is the level of awareness? Do community college presidents and
human resource directors in Illinois and Missouri feel their institutions will
be negatively impacted by mass baby-boomer generation retirements, and
is there a recognized need to pursue leadership succession planning as a
result?
2. Where community college succession plans exist, to what degree are
the following national-level recommendations specified in the plan:
Diversity goals, levels of personnel included, customization for specific

institutional characteristics, AACC’s six core competencies, and
consideration of succession planning best practices in “Corporate
America”?
3. Based on the findings for research questions 1 and 2, what is the level
of readiness for predicted “baby-boomer” retirements in Illinois and
Missouri community colleges, and how do these preparations compare to
recommendations at the national level?
This research study surveyed 53 local community colleges in the states of
Illinois and Missouri about leadership succession planning in their organizations.
Responses were reviewed to determine whether they are concerned about the
need for succession planning, whether they are currently utilizing some type of
succession planning, and evaluated the level of readiness for predicted “baby-
boomer” retirements. These data were then compared to recommendations and
best practices at the national level to identify gaps in practice and suggest
corrective measures to ensure favorable continued operations of Illinois and
Missouri community colleges.
Summary
The prediction of baby-boomer generation retirements is quite dramatic,
and its likely impact on community colleges is significant. Couple this with the
ever-evolving and expanding role of community colleges in education and the
reductions in state funding across the country, and there seems to exist a
challenging future for these organizations. Related, the skillsets for community

college leaders are becoming increasingly complex and unique. This is why
succession planning to develop future leaders who can step into a leadership
role quickly and seamlessly at these institutions is more important now than ever.
The sustainability of future community college operations depends on it.

Chapter II: Review of Literature
Introduction
Understanding community college leadership succession planning
requires examining four main areas. The first area to consider is the
demographics and statistics associated with the current leadership nationally at
community colleges. This information helps predict when retirements will
become a potential crisis, it provides details about what the current leader’s
qualifications and credentials represent, and it provides insights and
recommendations about how to effectively deal with the issues at hand.
Secondly, it is important to consider the special qualifications community college
leaders must possess because of the unique nature of these institutions.
Additionally, a look at what can be done to remedy the skills gap of newly
appointed leaders will be noted. Related, an examination of the American
Association of Community Colleges Leadership Criteria will serve as an
additional resource for identifying necessary skillsets. The third area examines
the methods of developing leaders in higher education, including the use of
Grow-Your-Own internal candidate advancement programs, university-based
leadership degree programs, and professional development educational
seminars for targeted skill improvement. The final worthwhile area to consider is
a comparison of corporate succession planning to that of higher education with
the hope of learning from their methods to improve academia. These four areas
frame the scope of this review of literature.

Demographics of Current Community College Leaders
To fully understand the situation of impending retirements, it is important
to look at the demographics and statistics associated with the current leadership
nationally at community colleges.
Age. The growing need for succession planning in higher education due
to retirement of the baby boomer generation has been identified and debated
since as early as 2001. Later predictions put higher education administrator
turnover at a rate as high as 50% in the next several years (Leubsdorf, 2006),
and community college presidents reaching retirement age at 84% by 2017
(McNair et al., 2011). To complicate matters, the traditional “pipeline” of internal
candidates (those currently holding positions as Vice Presidents, Deans, and
Department Chairs) are also of the same baby-boomer generation, and therefore
are also reaching retirement age within this same timeframe (Romero, 2004).
It is hard to predict just when the pending retirements will become a crisis
due to several variables. For example: Some institutions, in an effort to get in
front of the looming crisis, have offered early retirement incentives to initiate
replacement of aging faculty and administrators while the candidate pool is still
plentiful (Clark & d’Ambrosio, 2005). Most others, however, have been operating
as if no retirement issue exists. Another variable that has had an impact on
timing is the economic downturn from 2006-2011, which significantly postponed
many retirements. Finally, there are some in the baby-boomer generation that
are redefining retirement, and plan on continuing to work beyond the traditional
retirement age of sixty-five. Regardless of when the retirements actually ramp

up, succession plans must be in place and operable in order to reduce the impact
on continued institutional operations.
Gender. When we look beyond the age of current community college
presidents and chief academic officers, we find that gender disparity is also an
issue with only 44% of positions held by females, while 56% are currently held by
males (Keim & Murray, 2008). According to the American Association of
Community Colleges Membership Database, the disparity is quite a bit larger in
these two positions with 72% male and only 28% being female (AACC, 2013).
Although there is a difference between the reported statistics, it is evident that a
gender disparity exists. While there has been a slow increase in the number of
female Chief Academic Officers in the last twenty years, it is evident that any
worthwhile succession plans should incorporate an effort to actively recruit and
develop more females into these roles.
Race. According to the American Association of Community Colleges
membership database (2013), community college leaders (chief education
officers, presidents, chief academic officers, etc.) are predominately White/non-
Hispanic (81%), while Black/non-Hispanic (8%) and Hispanic (6%) comprise the
largest minority groups. A rather large race disparity in community college
leadership roles suggests that succession plans should also incorporate an effort
to actively recruit and develop people of other races into these roles.
Education. A look at current community college administrators, chief
academic officers, and president’s educational backgrounds offers a glimpse of
the preparations future candidates should pursue. Of the 70% of current

administrators who earned doctoral degrees, 71% of those were education
majors and 66% completed their dissertations on studies related to the education
field (Keim & Murray, 2008). Although certainly education is not the only type of
degree or major befitting community college administrators (an increasing
number are coming with an MBA and business background), it is evident that it
should be strongly considered. It is interesting to note, however, that a decline of
78% in earned doctoral degrees in community college leadership occurred
between 1982 and 1997 (Keim & Murray, 2008). This may be due, in large part,
to an overall decline in universities offering programs of this type.
Recommendations based on national demographics. Although a
national study by Betts et al. (2009) addressed changing United States and
higher education demographics overall, the recommendations they put forth to
deal with succession planning needs in relation to diversity needs seem
especially fitting for community colleges. The four recommendations were:
“1. Define visible career paths within and across divisions leading to senior
administrative positions;
2. Provide on-going professional development across all levels of
administration (entry, mid-, and senior level);
3. Make an institutional commitment to succession planning;
4. Commit to increasing diversity in higher education administration
through recruitment, professional development, advancement, and
retention.” (p. 4)

If these four recommendations are set as institutional goals for succession
planning, then community colleges should be well prepared for anticipated
retirements while addressing outstanding diversity concerns.
Skills, Education, and Competencies Needed for Community College
Leadership
One of the best ways to start determining what skills, education, and
competencies are needed by future community college leaders is to ask the
people currently holding these positions. A national survey of current community
college presidents asked about their preparations for the role, and what they
would do differently if given the chance (McNair et al., 2011). Of all the
responses provided, the four most common self-identified gaps in their
preparation for the role of president were conflict management, mediation,
conflict resolution, and working with a board of trustees. When asked for their
recommendations as to how to fix these disparities, the top three responses were
job shadowing, internship opportunities, and doctoral programs in Education
Management (McNair et al., 2011).
National level recommendations for core competencies. Related, the
importance of the Six Core Competencies for Community College Leaders, as
developed by the American Association of Community Colleges, were addressed
in a previous study by McNair (2010) and have been identified as vital to all
community college leaders nationwide:

1. “Organizational Strategy – An effective community college leader
strategically improves the quality of the institution, protects the long-
term health of the organization, promotes the success of all students,
and sustains the community college mission, based on knowledge of
the organization, its environment, and future trends.
2. Resource Management – An effective community college leader
equitably and ethically sustains people, processes, and information as
well as physical and financial assets to fulfill the mission, vision, and
goals of the community college.
3. Communication – An effective community college leader uses clear
listening, speaking, and writing skills to engage in honest, open
dialogue at all levels of the college and its surrounding community, to
promote the success of all students, and to sustain the community
college mission.
4. Collaboration – An effective community college leader develops and
maintains responsive, cooperative, mutually beneficial, and ethical
internal and external relationships that nurture diversity, promote the
success of all students, and sustain the community college mission.
5. Community College Advocacy – An effective community college leader
understands, commits to, and advocates for the mission, vision, and
goals of the community college.
6. Professionalism – An effective community college leader works
ethically to set high standards for self and others, continuously

improves self and surroundings, demonstrates accountability to and for
the institution, and ensures the long-term viability of the college and
community.” (AACC, 2005, para 1)
Community College presidents nationwide resoundingly agreed that these
competencies were an important and vital part of the administrative role, and
should be included in any leadership or doctoral education program (McNair,
2010).
Recommended Higher Education Leadership Development Methods
Although there are a number of training and development programs
recommended for community college leadership, the three programs currently
most common nationwide include Grow-Your-Own (GYO) internal candidate
advancement programs, university-based leadership degree programs, and
professional development educational seminars for targeted improvement.
Internal candidate development/“grow your own” leadership
programs. A GYO is defined as a comprehensive training and development
program to prepare internal candidates for specific leadership positions within the
organization; if external candidates cannot be found, then the organization
“grows its own” (Reille & Kezar, 2010). Since these programs are designed
specifically to suit an individual institution’s leadership development needs, no
information could be found about research on custom development practices or
overall effectiveness. Some commonalities do exist, however, in the use of
classes, seminars, and workshops focusing on team building, collaboration,

institutional mission, budgeting processes, funding, culture and values, emerging
issues, governance, and ethics (Hull & Keim, 2007). Other methods of
employing a GYO program could include mentoring, job shadowing, and team
projects. Unfortunately, these practices seem to get seldom use because they
require more personal involvement and time commitment on the part of identified
mentors. Instead, less personal classroom exercises in personality type and
career planning are more common. The advantage of using a GYO type of
program is that it allows an organization to tailor the training specifically to its
needs. The disadvantage is that without some type of adherence to
standardized program development, fundamental problems within an
organization could continue to persist (Reille & Kezar, 2010).
University-based community college leadership programs. In
addition to a specific development program tailored to institutional needs, formal
educational opportunities are the most widely used type of development with
regards to higher education leadership, in particular the Ed.D. in Higher
Education Leadership (Friedel, 2010). In 2001, the Carnegie Foundation called
for reform of doctorate education based on widespread criticism that these
programs did not represent women and minorities, had alarmingly high drop-out
rates, and that they did not prepare graduates of these programs for real-world
work in their field. A five-year project called the Carnegie Initiative on the
Doctorate (CID) eventually concluded that the Ed.D. needed to be retooled. Six
areas of focus were determined as distinct differences necessary to make sure
that the program developed capable practitioners instead of researchers. First,

the Ed.D. is to be considered a professional practice doctorate – not a stripped
down Ph.D. Second, it should typically offer a 3-year program (with dissertation
imbedded) and be completed by full-time, employed, higher education personnel.
Third, there should be less concentration on training of researchers, and more
focus on management and leadership of community colleges. Fourth, internship
experiences should be included to ensure real-world practical knowledge
development. Fifth, a community college track should be a separate cohort due
to the unique challenges and environment of these institutions. Finally, the
cohort should be made up of diverse groups from various backgrounds
throughout higher education organizations such as facilities, education, and
student services (Friedel, 2010). Several of the educational doctorate goals
connect to the data provided by the national survey of presidents conducted by
McNair (2011), in that leaders were interested in obtaining more practical skills
and an internship was a venue in which to obtain these skills.
Professional development for community college administrators and
presidents. Related, professional development is used in a number of industries
as a means of focused training in specific areas of concern. In regards to higher
education, The Community College Leadership Development Initiative (CCLDI,
2001) recommends twelve issues of educational leadership that should be
specifically addressed when administering professional development programs:
personal qualities, communication skills, working with individuals or groups,
cultivating leadership, institutional culture, managing internal institutional
functions, planning, ethics, teaching and learning, diversity and inclusion,

external environment, and history and mission. When evaluating the
professional development specifically tailored to presidents of community and
technical colleges, Wallin (2002) found that three of the most important skills
identified by current presidents included budget management, establishing
relationships with local political leaders, and establishing relationships with state
political leaders. These skills include external as well as internal responsibilities
as a president.
Other professional development for community college administrators
include a concept called Dynamic Leadership Development (Basham & Mathur,
2010). In this type of training, the differences between management and
leadership are defined, with the strengths and weaknesses of each highlighted.
Creating a dynamic team, a mix of managers (those focused on daily duties,
procedures, details) and leaders (those focused on motivation, inspiration, vision
and mission) is considered to be universally essential for effective community
college administration nationwide.
All of the possibilities described above are specific to higher education, but
higher education can certainly learn from succession planning practices and
leadership development programs outside of the industry. Best practices from
corporate leadership succession planning will be discussed next.
Learning from Corporate Succession Planning Best Practices
Corporate succession planning is considered strategic planning, and starts
with a structure, or model, that outlines the plan of action. One of the finest

examples of this is the ten-step organizational succession planning model based
on a national study of corporate best practices (Rothwell et al., 2005). Since this
type of planning requires direct support from the CEO, the first step is to clarify
the expectations of the CEO. This is important because the CEO controls the
resource allocation for succession planning, as well as their personal time
commitment to such an endeavor. In the second step, competency models must
be established for present and future talent needs. This can be accomplished
through establishment and review of job descriptions, and involves defining the
knowledge, skills, and abilities required to perform crucial roles. The third step
involves conducting a 360-degree assessment of individuals who hold key roles
in order to compare what is (360-degree assessment data) to what should be
(competency models). Step four is the revision (or establishment) of the
performance appraisal system that is used to assess potential candidates against
required KSAs (knowledge, skills, and abilities), and to ensure the system’s
alignment with the succession plan. The performance appraisal system is the
key measurement tool for determining the success or failure of individuals in their
roles, and the deciding factor of whether or not an employee is retained in the
succession plan. While step four measures current performance of key
personnel, step five involves establishing an assessment of employee’s potential
for promotion. It is important at this step to incorporate the career plans (desires)
of individual employees to ensure alignment with the succession plan. Once this
takes place, the sixth step is the creation of career development plans in order to
address any identified skills gap between where a key employee is and where

they plan to be. After the career development plans are created, the seventh
step is the implementation of the individual plans with each key employee. This
may involve formal training and development through internal and external
educational means, as well as assignment of tasks designed to develop the
employee through work. A great example of this would be to delegate some
responsibility for the budget to a person who needs to learn budgeting skills, and
coaching them through the process. Step eight is the mapping and tracking of
key personnel skills and competencies. This inventory can then be used to
leverage the workforce to meet strategic organizational goals, as well as
deploying the right talent in times of crisis. Step nine outlines the employee and
company responsibilities to the succession plan, and makes each accountable
for key tasks. The means to hold both the employees and the organization
accountable is absolutely crucial, and can determine the success or failure of the
plan. The tenth and final step of the organizational succession planning model is
the evaluation of results. It provides the feedback loop to ensure that succession
planning is a process of continuous improvement. Elaborate means of
measuring and evaluating the value of succession planning and management are
employed in the corporate world (Kim, 2010). One method is the Rothwell
Model, which concentrates on five key measurements: reaction, learning,
behavior, outcomes, and return on investment (Rothwell, 2005). Another system
of measurement widely used is Balanced Scorecards, which also includes five
individual measures: financial, customer, internal process, learning, and

innovation (Kim, 2010). It should be noted that, while these best practices have
been nicely articulated, they have not been empirically tested in practice.
Corporate succession planning, when done effectively, has been
recognized as benefitting organizations in six main ways (Rothwell et al., 2005).
The first is the establishment and/or revision of job descriptions. This allows
companies a starting point for evaluation of personnel needs in relation to the
competitive environment, available workforce, technological development, and
customer demands. Secondly, companies are able to identify mission critical
positions, as well as key potential candidates to fill these roles in the event that
they become available. The third benefit is that the inventory of available talent
allows companies a foundation for their succession plans, and the ability to
identify skills gaps so that training and development efforts can be more
effective. The fourth benefit is the formation of clear career pathways so
employees can see what they need to do to qualify for advancement. This
greatly improves personnel retention, as employees are better able to see their
current place in the organization and the possibilities of where they can go. This
also helps reduce the probability of discrimination in candidate selection because
the career pathways are open and transparent. The fifth benefit that companies
receive is the added return on investment in personnel due to a better prepared
workforce. Employees enjoy an improved sense of job fit and are more effective
in their roles. Finally, the sixth benefit is that succession plans allow the proper
pre-selection and promotion of star performers in key roles, while those who

have not risen to the occasion may be removed from the succession plan. This
reduces the chance of getting the wrong people into key positions.
Summary
It is clear the history and evolving mission of community colleges make
these organizations unique, and this requires special qualifications that
community college leaders must possess. The American Association of
Community Colleges Leadership Criteria outlines these qualifications in detail for
community colleges nationwide, and establishes a baseline by which to compare
existing training efforts. An examination of the demographics and statistics
associated with the current leadership at community colleges nationally shows
that there is still considerable opportunity for increased diversity and that
succession planning may be a viable way to address this need. Finally, there are
many recommended methods of developing leaders in higher education, as well
as corporate succession planning models to learn from and compare to
succession planning efforts at community colleges.
Where there has been much research as to the need for succession
planning and recommendations for what it should look like, there is a significant
research-to-practice gap in what is actually being done in community colleges,
especially here in Illinois and Missouri. This is why it was necessary to survey
local community colleges about succession planning in an effort to compare and
contrast it to what is being recommended at the national level.

Chapter III: Methodology
Introduction
The purpose of this study was to survey community colleges in the states
of Illinois and Missouri to investigate whether these institutions are aware of the
need for succession planning in their organizations; are currently they utilizing
succession planning; and, based on survey and demographic data, determine
the level of readiness in these community colleges. This was a descriptive
quantitative study with some open-ended qualitative data. Quantitative data were
analyzed using descriptive statistics (number of responses, percentage of
responses compared to the whole). The potential benefit to participants,
participating community colleges, and society would be additional awareness and
preparation for anticipated retirements in higher education (specifically in
community colleges in Illinois and Missouri), as well as presentation of aspects to
consider when developing a succession plan.
Research Questions
The three research questions that this study is designed to answer are:
1. What is the level of awareness? Do community college presidents and
human resource directors in Illinois and Missouri feel their institutions will
be negatively impacted by mass baby-boomer generation retirements, and
is there a recognized need to pursue leadership succession planning as a
result?

2. Where community college succession plans exist, to what degree are
the following national level recommendations specified in the plan:
Diversity goals, levels of personnel included, customization for specific
institutional characteristics, AACC’s six core competencies, and
consideration of succession planning best practices in “Corporate
America”?
3. Based on the findings for research questions 1 and 2, what is the level
of readiness for predicted “baby-boomer” retirements in Illinois and
Missouri community colleges, and how do these preparations compare to
recommendations at the national level?
At the conclusion of this study, the answers to these questions provide a glimpse
into the current state of Illinois and Missouri community colleges’ succession
plans, as well as aid in comparing these plans with established best practices of
content and format for evaluation of their potential effectiveness in the years to
come.
Participants
Using a purposive/non-probability sampling technique to identify
participants based on their knowledge and professional judgment (Johnson &
Christensen, 2012), Illinois and Missouri community college presidents and
human resource directors were invited to participate in this study because they
are most likely to be involved in developing and/or implementing leadership
succession plans for these institutions. All participants used in this study are

older than 18 years of age. The total number of individuals invited to participate
was 106 (one president and one human resource director from each of the 53
community colleges identified – see Appendix A for the full list of institutions
contacted). The gender and racial/ethnic makeup of the participant pool is not
known since these were not criteria for the study.
The participant institutions for the study were chosen from a list of
member community colleges in the American Association of Community Colleges
(AACC) for Illinois and Missouri. The 38 Illinois and 15 Missouri community
colleges provide a broad range of institutions to study, including Large City, Mid-
sized City, Suburban, Town Remote, Rural Distant, and Rural Fringe. They
include primarily public institutions as there is only one private not-for-profit
community college in these two states. For-profit organizations were not listed
on the AACC website and have been excluded from this study. For the
community colleges included in the study, Urbanicity has been defined as the
degree of urbanization (NCES, 2005), and classifies/defines twelve areas as:
City-large: Territory inside an urbanized area and inside a principal city
with population of 250,000 or more.
Illinois community colleges that fit this classification: 0
Missouri community colleges that fit this classification: 2
City-midsize: Territory inside an urbanized area and inside a principal city
with population less than 250,000 and greater than or equal to 100,000.
City-small: Territory inside an urbanized area and inside a principal city
with population less than 100,000.

Suburb-large: Territory outside a principal city and inside an urbanized
area with population of 250,000 or more.
Suburb-midsize: Territory outside a principal city and inside an urbanized
area with population less than 250,000 and greater than or equal to
100,000.
Suburb-small: Territory outside a principal city and inside an urbanized
area with population less than 100,000.
Town-fringe: Territory inside an urban cluster that is less than or equal to
10 miles from an urbanized area.
No Illinois or Missouri community colleges fit this classification.
Town-distant: Territory inside an urban cluster that is more than 10 miles
or less than or equal to 35 miles from an urbanized area.
Town-remote: Territory inside an urban cluster that is more than 35 miles
from an urbanized area.
Rural-fringe: Census-defined rural territory that is less than or equal to 5
miles from an urbanized area, as well as rural territory that is less than or
equal to 2.5 miles from an urban cluster.
Rural-distant: Census-defined rural territory that is more than 5 miles but
less than or equal to 25 miles from an urbanized area, as well as rural.
Rural-remote: Census-defined rural territory that is more than 25 miles
from an urbanized area and is also more than 10 miles from an urban
cluster.

Instruments/Materials
The research instrument is the Community College Leadership
Succession Planning Survey (see Appendix B) that was developed by the
researcher specifically for this study using the Qualtrics survey tool. Each
participant was asked to answer 20 questions: 17 multiple choice with optional
comments section and three open-ended. The questions were designed to seek
information about the overall awareness of the potential impact of baby-boomer
retirements on their organization, whether succession plans were in place, as
well as information about their current succession planning efforts (at community
colleges where these plans exist). Skip logic was implemented for those who did
not currently have a succession plan in order to bypass questions related to the
type of succession planning used. Demographic information about the
community college Urbanicity and the current president were also gathered in
order to look for correlations between this information and preparedness.
The Initial pilot testing of the research instrument for the community
college leadership succession planning study was done as a face-to-face
interview to support an in-depth interview methodology and performed at Ranken
Technical College in a meeting with President, Stan Shoun. Mr. Shoun was
selected because of his past experience with succession planning as a Vice
President of Workforce Development at Central Virginia Community College in
Lynchburg, Virginia prior to becoming president at Ranken. Piloting of the survey
and interview questions was a bit of an eye opener, as I realized just how easy it
was to have questions initially misinterpreted and the interview go off-track for a

while. This information was used to revise the methodology to an on-line survey
in order to reach a wider audience, as well to revise the questions used to create
more structure in order to acquire the desired information. The results of the pilot
test were only used to improve the survey and were not included in the study, so
his participation in the pilot testing created no contamination of the research
findings.
Mr. Shoun was unavailable the second time to pilot test the newly
completed survey, so secondary review was accomplished through feedback
from faculty advisors, Dr. Tammy Gocial and Dr. Denise Pearl. The resulting
changes involved adjustment of the question order that moved demographic
inquiry to the end of the survey, and the addition of skip logic to allow participants
who had no succession plan to bypass questions regarding the type of
succession planning used.
Design and Methodology
The Community College Leadership Succession Planning Survey was
sent out as an embedded link in an email invitation to participate to presidents
and human resource directors of the identified 53 institutions on April 11th
, 2014.
The email also included a brief paragraph describing the purpose of the research
study. Once the participants clicked the embedded link to the survey, they were
first presented with an Implied Consent form. If participants chose to proceed to
the survey, they simply clicked next and were directed to 20 questions that took
approximately 15 minutes to complete. If they declined, they were directed to the
end of the survey to a message that thanked them for their time. The first

reminder to participate was sent out April 22nd
, with a final reminder to participate
sent on May 20th
, 2014. The survey was closed as of May 23rd
, 2014.
Reliability and Validity
The reliability and validity of the participants was determined by ensuring
that only Illinois and Missouri community college presidents and human resource
directors were invited to participate from the list of member community colleges
in the AACC (American Association of Community Colleges). Contact
information for these individuals was verified on the website of each community
college involved. Review of past studies and literature regarding content and
scope of community college succession planning was the basis for the questions
created. Peer review (Boudah, 2011) of interview questions ensured
appropriateness to that of the research study goals. Survey questions are
general enough to ensure this study could be generalized to another institution or
community college setting for future study. Transparency in survey questioning,
data gathering, data analysis, and interpretation should allow for consistency of
review, repeatability, and reliability assurance so that others may be able to
replicate the study. It is questionable whether or not the results of this study will
be applicable elsewhere (other than Illinois and Missouri), although it is assumed
that the overall structure of a succession plan for Illinois and Missouri community
colleges of various sizes and in various locations would have some transferrable
benefit to similar institutions. Peer debriefing (Boudah, 2011) by Maryville
University faculty ensured validity of quantitative and qualitative data, as well as
subsequent analysis. Possible differences in interpretation of literature under

review for the study and collected data could pose a threat to the construct
validity. The methods employed should give a detailed picture of the succession
planning preparations at Illinois and Missouri community colleges for anticipated
baby-boomer retirements. Only information pertaining to this scenario is used.
Ethical Considerations
IRB approval to conduct research was obtained from the home institution
prior to launching the survey, and the project was conducted in full accordance
with all applicable sections of the IRB guidelines. The methods of data collection
regarding succession planning included an online survey sent via e-mail to the
participants. Gathered data is stored on Qualtrics (password protected account)
and a password protected computer, and is only accessible by the researcher.
Data has only been shared with the researcher’s faculty advisors, Dr. Tammy
Gocial and Dr. Denise Pearl, as part of the development, data analysis, and
production of this Dissertation of Practice in the Higher Education Leadership
program at Maryville University. After the conclusion of this study in December
2014, the electronic data will be deleted from the Qualtrics web-site and
password protected computer by December 2015.
The results of this study are printed as part of the researcher’s
Dissertation of Practice and shared with the Maryville University research
advisors and doctoral cohort members. Electronic versions of the Dissertation of
Practice will be sent to participating community college presidents and human
resource directors who have requested a copy by December 31st
, 2014. No
participant or participating community college’s identifiable information is shared

because institutional and participant names have not been linked to the survey
responses.
The risks associated with this research are minimal, and all replies were
anonymous. The only risk is a potential breach of anonymity if the data might
somehow be connected to a particular institution, but the questions are broad
enough that this is unlikely to occur. The following protections are in place to
minimize risks and protect the participating presidents, human resource directors,
and institutions:
I/P addresses have not been recorded as part of the on-line survey.
Institutions are coded by their Urbanicity (level of urban development in
the region), and aggregate data is presented in Urbanicity categories.
The positions of people contacted to participate in this survey have been
noted (e.g., presidents and HR directors), but no identities have been
used when presenting survey results. All responses are anonymous.
The potential benefit to participants, participating community colleges, and
society would be additional awareness and preparation for anticipated
retirements in higher education (specifically community colleges in Missouri and
Illinois), as well as presentation of aspects to consider when developing a
succession plan.
Data Analysis
Results are organized according to the following sub-headings:
Demographics, Succession Planning Awareness and Perceptions, Succession
Planning Preparations and Considerations, Succession Planning Professional

Development Methods and Content, Succession Planning Keys to Success,
Succession Planning Alternatives, and Succession Planning Readiness. Once
demographic and survey data were collected, responses were reviewed to
determine whether they are aware of the need for succession planning, and
whether they are currently utilizing some type of succession planning. Data were
analyzed using descriptive statistics (number of responses, percentage of
responses compared to the whole). Since the participants represented
community colleges spread across most of the available Urbanicity designations,
statistical measures such as mean and standard deviation were either
unavailable or produced insignificant results due to the low n in each
classification involved. The data collected were then compared to
recommendations and best practices at the national level from the literature
review to identify gaps in practice, evaluated for the level of readiness for
predicted “baby-boomer” retirements, and suggestions provided for corrective
measures to ensure favorable continued operations of Illinois and Missouri
community colleges in the future.
Summary
By studying community college succession planning at the local level, and
comparing it to what is currently being recommended at the national level, gaps
are identified and corrective measures suggested to assist in ensuring favorable
continued operations of Illinois and Missouri community colleges. The potential
benefit to participants, participating community colleges, and society would be

additional preparation for anticipated retirements in higher education (specifically
community colleges in Illinois and Missouri).

Chapter IV: Results
Invitations to participate in this research were sent to 106 presidents and
human resource directors of 53 community colleges in Illinois and Missouri.
"Unable to deliver" messages were received almost immediately from three
invitees. An attempt was made to call the three individuals to verify email
addresses. Voicemail messages were left for each, but there were no responses
received. An email from one community college in Illinois was received stating
that their president had recently retired and that they were currently searching for
a replacement. A reminder was sent to all participants two weeks after the
survey launch and a final reminder to all participants one month later. The
survey was closed after six weeks. A total of 30 responses were received for a
29.1% response rate, 11 of which provided contact information so they could be
sent a copy of the study once completed.
Demographics
Demographics of current community college leaders. Of the 30
respondents to the survey, only twenty-three answered the key demographics
questions about the president of their community college. The majority of
participants represented a community college that had a president who was male
(83%), with a doctoral degree (83%), and who was born in the Baby Boomer
(1946-1964, 70%) or Traditionalist (1922-1945, 4%) Generation (see Figure 1).
This information certainly supports the literature on the subject of impending
retirements.

Figure 1. Generation of president
Demographics of participating community colleges. Of the 30
respondents to the survey, only 23 answered the key demographics questions
about their community college. Fifteen participants (65%) represented community
colleges in Illinois while eight were in Missouri (35%). Table 1 depicts the
classification of “Urbanicity” (i.e., degree of urbanization) of the location of the
community colleges. The location of institutions was spread fairly evenly across
the eleven NCES (2005) Urbanicity designations with the most (17%) being in
Rural Remote locations.
Table 1
Urbanicity of Community College Locations
Urbanicity Number %
Large City 2 9%
Mid-Size City 2 9%
Small City 3 13%
Large Suburb 3 13%
Mid-Size Suburb 3 13%
Small Suburb 1 4%
Town, Fringe 1 4%
Town, Distant 1 4%
Rural, Fringe 1 4%
Rural, Distant 2 9%
Rural, Remote 4 17%
Total N=23 100%
0%
26%
70%
4%
Millennial – Generation Y (born
between 1981 – 1999)
Generation X (born between 1965 –
1980)
Baby Boomer Generation (born
between 1946 – 1964)
Traditionalist Generation (born
between 1922 – 1945)

Succession Planning Awareness and Perceptions
Research Question 1: What is the level of awareness? Do community
college presidents and human resource directors in Illinois and Missouri feel their
institutions will be negatively impacted by mass baby-boomer generation
retirements, and is there a recognized need to pursue leadership succession
planning as a result?
Of the 30 respondents to the survey, 28 answered the key questions
regarding succession planning preparedness at their community college. When
asked how prepared they felt their institution was to deal with succession issues,
a surprising majority of the participants answered somewhat (71%) or well
prepared (14%). Only four felt that their institution was unprepared (14%). Of
those four, two had presidents who were in the Generation X category.
Participants were also asked when they could foresee their institution’s
operations being negatively impacted by “baby-boomer” generation retirements
(Figure 2). Seventeen (61%) respondents felt that their institution would be
negatively impacted within the next 1 to 5 years while four (14%) replied that
would never be a problem. Of those four, two had presidents who were in the
Generation X category. Five (18%) replied that they were unsure and had no
succession plan, with two of those having Baby-Boomer Generation presidents.

Figure 2. Participants foresee negative impact due to baby-boomer retirements?
When asked what level of succession planning and implementation has
taken place at their institution (see Figure 3), 10 (36%) responded that they had
limited succession planning, 6 (21%) replied that they had an average level of
succession planning, and 4 (14%) answered that they had done better than
average succession planning with some implementation. That is a total of 20
(71%) institutions that actually have some succession plan in place. Eight (29%)
respondents, however, acknowledged that they have no succession plan in place
and no future timetable to create one.
Figure 3. Level of succession planning and implementation
Finally, participants were asked about their institution’s future outlook for
succession planning. Nine (32%) acknowledged that their institution has no
66%
15%
19%
Respondents felt that their institution
would be negatively impacted within the
next 1 to 5 years
Replied that would never be a problem
Replied that they were unsure and had
no succession plan
29%
36%
21%
14% No Succession Plan
Limited Succession Planning
Adequate/Average Succession Planning
Better than Average Succession Planning
with Some Implementation

future plan to create a succession plan, and 8 of those mentioned above have no
current plan in place. Eight (29%) replied that they have the creation of a
succession plan pending, and 9 (32%) responded that their institution has a
succession plan in place that needs to be revisited and revised. Only 2 (7%)
answered that they have a succession plan fully implemented and are revisiting
or revising on a regular basis.
Succession Planning Preparations and Considerations
Research Question 2: Where community college succession plans exist,
to what degree are the following national level recommendations specified in the
plan: Diversity goals, levels of personnel included, customization for specific
institutional characteristics, AACC six core competencies, and consideration of
succession planning best practices in “Corporate America”?
Of the 20 participants who acknowledged that their community college has
some type of succession plan, only 16 responded to the following questions
regarding diversity goals, levels of personnel included, and customization of
succession planning for specific institutional characteristics.
To investigate one of the recommendations from a national study by Betts
et al. (2009) regarding diversity and inclusion in succession planning, participants
were asked about the level to which women and minorities are specifically
included in their institution's succession planning. While 16 out of 30 participants
responded to this question, only one from a suburban community college
responded that they had an institutional goal in which women and minorities were
specifically/actively identified, developed, and/or recruited. The other 15 (94%)

replied that their institution’s succession planning includes all races, ethnicities,
genders, etc. and does not specifically target any particular group(s) for special
consideration. These organizations represented the whole spectrum of
Urbanicity, from Rural on one end to Large City on the other.
Another recommendation that resulted from the national study by Betts et
al. (2009) was to “provide on-going professional development across all levels of
administration”. In order to investigate this area, participants were asked what
position level their institution’s succession planning was designed to include and
consider (see Figure 4). Of the 30 respondents to the survey, 16 replied to this
question. A majority of 10 (63%) answered that their institution included
positions of division/department chairs, supervisors and above, while two (12%)
replied that their institution included deans, directors, managers, and above.
Taking into account that not all community colleges have a division/department
chair level, a combined look at these first two answers reveals that a majority of
12 (75%) institutions involve multiple levels of administration in their succession
plans. Three (19%) individuals responded that only vice presidents and above
were included, and 1 (6%) acknowledged that only the level of president is
included in its succession plan.
Figure 4. Level of personnel included in the succession plan
6%
19%
12%63%
president only
only vice presidents and above
deans, directors, managers, and above
division/department chairs, supervisors
and above

When asked about the level of customization that their succession plans
have in order to fit their institution (covering mission & vision statements,
institutional culture, core values, etc.), a mix of responses were returned (see
Figure 5). Of the 16 individuals who answered this question, a relatively small
majority of 5 (31%) answered that they had an equal mix of standardized
features and customization, and 4 (25%) replied that their succession plans were
completely customized to fit their institution. There was an even split of 3 (19%)
that had a standardized succession plan with some limited customization and 3
(19%) that had their plans customized with limited standard features. Only 1
(6%) had a standardized succession plan with no customization to the institution.
Figure 5. Succession planning customization
In order to compare leadership succession planning at the local level to
recommendations at the national level, participants were asked how important
the American Association of Community Colleges (AACC) six core competencies
were in developing a community college leadership succession plan. A total of
23 participants answered this question; 11 (48%) responded that they are very
important, should be fully implemented, and integral to plan development.
Another 10 (43%) replied that they are important and should be considered or
6%
19%
31%
19%
25%
Standardized Succession Plan with No
Customization
Standardized Succession Plan with Some
Limited Customization
Equal Mix of Standardized Features &
Customization
Customized with Limited Standard
Features
Completely Customized to Fit Our
Institution

kept in mind for plan development. Only 2 (9%) thought these were of limited
importance. Collectively, all participants felt the six core competencies were
important in developing a community college leadership succession plan.
Another comparison of leadership succession planning at local community
colleges to recommendations nationally involved consideration of succession
planning best practices used in corporate America when developing a plan. Out
of 15 participants who answered this question, a majority of 11 (73%)
acknowledged that these best practices were not considered. This is surprising
considering that community colleges usually work closely with corporate America
on workforce development and funding initiatives to support talent development
among their students.
Succession Plan Professional Development Methods and Content
A main component of succession planning is professional development.
Participants who acknowledged some sort of succession plan were asked about
a number of professional development methods that their organizations
supported (see Table 2). Twenty-three respondents checked all opportunities
that applied, and 21 (91%) chose “Professional training seminars by either
national or state-level organizations (e.g., American Association of Community
Colleges, Missouri Community College Association)”, 19 (83%) picked “Provide
tuition assistance or work release time for pursuing formal university degree
programs (e.g., Ed.D. or PhD. in Educational Leadership or Community College
Administration)”, and 15 (65%) identified ““GYO” – Grow Your Own internal

candidate leadership development program (e.g., internally developed classes,
seminars, workshops, mentoring)” as researched in the national study by Reille
and Kezar (2010). A surprising 6 (26%) said that “Candidates are solely
responsible for creating their own professional leadership development plan and
methods”, and another 5 (22%) answered that “Assistance is provided in creating
a leadership development plan, but the candidates are responsible for their own
professional development methods”.
Table 2
All Professional Development Methods Offered or Supported
Method Number %
Professional training seminars by either
national or state-level organizations (e.g.,
American Association of Community
Colleges, Missouri Community College
Association)
21 91%
Provide tuition assistance or work release
time for pursuing formal university degree
programs (e.g., Ed.D. or PhD. in
Educational Leadership or Community
College Administration)
19 83%
“GYO” – Grow Your Own internal
candidate leadership development
program (e.g., internally developed
classes, seminars, workshops, mentoring)
15 65%
Candidates are solely responsible for
creating their own professional leadership
development plan and methods
6 26%
Assistance is provided in creating a
leadership development plan, but the
candidates are responsible for their own
professional development methods
5 22%

Some valuable comments were shared when participants were presented
with an open-ended question about what content their institution’s succession
plan covers. These responses were organized under three main themes:
Planned retirement programs; Skills, education, and competencies; and Grow-
your-own development programs or equivalents.
Planned retirement programs. As discussed in the study by Clark &
d’Ambrosio, 2005), these programs allow leaders an opportunity to provide
advance warning of their intentions to retire. In this way, they may assist with the
preparations and transition, thus leaving a positive legacy. A couple of survey
participants provided some insight regarding their institutions use of these types
of programs:
“A 4-year planned retirement program in order to have knowledge in
advance of a potential key vacancy; having discussions and determining
interest among employees for certain positions (through annual evaluation
and monthly/quarterly one-on-one discussions concerning goals);
reviewing individual competencies of interested individuals and assessing
what they will need to be ready for the next step.”
“We have a Succession Plan that provides an incentive for eligible retirees
to give notice 4 years in advance of retiring. The primary purpose is to
ensure knowledge transfer and documentation and to plan for staffing the
vacancy created. Separate from this Plan, other succession planning
occurs in a less formalized manner.”
Skills, education, and competencies. Here are some survey responses
relating to the recommendations by the American Association of Community
Colleges (2005) and the Community College Leadership Development Initiative
(CCLDI, 2001):
“Our plan outlines competencies, skills, degree requirements, experiences
desired, and special characteristics needed for most if not all key
administrative positions.”

“Our plan includes: Personal development, key issues in higher education,
position requirements, best practices, legal issues and personnel.”
Grow-your-own leadership programs or equivalents. These
responses relate to the grow-your-own programs as discussed in the study by
Reille and Kezar (2010):
“Our Leadership Academy includes the following: Leadership
Competencies, Legal Issues, CAO function, Student Services leadership,
College budgeting, President's Perspective, building relationships with
legislators.”
“The plan involves participation in leadership academy, tuition assistance
& release time for completion of terminal degree. However, participating
in these activities does not guarantee a position.”
The responses that were given fit well with the national recommendations, and
confirmed that those recommendations have been actually implemented in at
least 12 of the respondent institutions.
Succession Planning Keys to Success
Participants with succession plans were also asked in an open-ended
question about what they felt were their program’s keys to success. The purpose
of this question is to reveal elements of the succession plans that make the
difference between success and failure, as well as look for any potential
relationships to the ten-step organizational succession planning model based on
a national study of corporate best practices by Rothwell et al. (2005). Here are
some noteworthy comments that were shared, grouped into the following
themes: Clarify expectations; Support from senior leadership; and Evaluation of
results.

Clarify expectations. Step 1 of the ten-step organizational succession
planning model highlights clarifying expectations of the organization and the
individual being considered for promotion in the success plan. This survey
response exemplifies the concept well:
“Creating opportunities for employees to explore potential next steps in a
‘safe’ environment; also to be prepared for change by planning for it.
Finally, all positions require a full search, so preparing employees for that
process rather than creating an expectation of being ‘handed’ a job.”
Support from senior leadership. The following response fits well with
Step 1 of the ten-step organizational succession planning model, as well as Step
2 establishment of competency models:
“Administrators with vision for their respective area, an in-depth
understanding of the colleges' mission and strategic plan, positive energy,
ability for a high capacity to get things done, strong conflict resolution
skills, and collaborative skills are the most common keys to success
needed for all positions.”
Evaluation of results. The closest response to supporting Step 10 of the
ten-step organizational succession planning model, evaluating results, is this
comment:
“We offer a Leadership Academy for 10 participants every other year. Our
desire is to provide resources and growth opportunities to current
employees interested in leadership roles. We believe our efforts will be
successful if we are enriching and retaining our strongest employees as
well as making our institution stronger and more marketable to outside
candidates.”
Succession Planning Alternatives
Other great comments were shared when participants were presented
with an open-ended question about what other strategies are employed to create
the next generation of community college leaders. This question was designed

to seek out alternative solutions that may not have been mentioned in the
literature. Notice that the answers describe initiatives that are considered
integral parts of succession planning, but some of the respondents saw these as
alternative methods instead.
Planned retirement programs. Once again, the concept of planned
retirement programs appears as discussed in the study by Clark & d’Ambrosio,
2005). It is interesting that this respondent thought of this as an alternative
method, yet the description is strikingly similar to an earlier response regarding
succession plan content:
“The college offers a planned retirement program for employees that are
4 years from retirement. That allows the college to prepare any employee
that has an interest in the upcoming position to provide education,
experience and guidance. When the incumbent retires we are ready for
the successor to be promoted. Unfortunately, this methodology is not
always used in all departments.”
Grow-your-own leadership programs or equivalents. Again, we see
comments about programs that would be considered grow-your-own as
discussed in the study by Reille and Kezar (2010), yet these respondents
regarded their efforts as alternative methods:
“We have developed an internal leadership development program for new
and emerging leaders. We are presenting at the Higher Learning
Commission in April 2014 on the very subject.”
“I have a President's Leadership Academy that brings members of
employee groups together for a year-long professional development
opportunity. It started in 2008. Six academies have been held with 125
leaders completing the academy so far. This opportunity does allow for
"Growing your Own". Some of the leaders have been promoted or
assumed other types of leadership roles at the institution.”

“We have already faced multiple retirements of key personnel (baby
boomers) and have more to come. We have started an employee
leadership program to develop emerging leaders and teach them about
what leaders do in each area. We also pay for personal professional
development by paying for employees to go back to school.”
“We participate in a Leadership Academy that is hosted by another
community college in the state. This Academy is based on AACC's six
leadership competencies. We also do some internal laddering of positions
to get people in the right positions in preparation for a supervisor moving
on.”
“We have a partnership with (Rural Community College) to offer a
leadership academy every other year. Tuition assistance/release time for
terminal degrees is offered, as well as professional development
opportunities.”
“In-house leadership academy; external networking and recruitment;
developmental assignments of potential future leaders; situational
leadership training of all managers”
Succession Planning Readiness
Research Question 3: Based on the findings for research questions 1 and
2, what is the level of readiness for predicted “baby-boomer” retirements in
Illinois and Missouri community colleges, and how do these preparations
compare to recommendations at the national level?
Threat and risk analysis. Current demographics show that 74% of the
community college presidents in Illinois and Missouri are of either Baby-Boomer
or Traditionalist generation. It is evident that the presidential retirement
prediction of 84% by 2017 from the study by McNair et al. (2011) is fairly
consistent with what is actually happening. Remember that seventeen (61%)
respondents felt that their institution would be negatively impacted within the next

1 to 5 years. According to these demographics, succession plans should already
be in place in community colleges as it takes several years for succession plans
to be functional in order to reduce the impact on continued institutional
operations. This crisis is ready to hit, and soon. It is good that a total of 20
(71%) institutions actually have some succession planning in place. What is
shocking is that 8 (29%) acknowledged that they have no succession plan in
place and no future timetable to create one. Since only 4 (14%) answered that
they had done a better than average job of succession planning with some
implementation, preparations levels are considered mixed at best. Overall, many
community colleges in Illinois and Missouri are at a substantial risk of being
negatively impacted by anticipated retirements.
Comparison to national level recommendations.
The four recommendations of Betts et al. (2009) with respondent
information compared:
1. Define visible career paths within and across divisions leading to senior
administrative positions: No direct mention, but several respondents
commented that their institution had a “President’s Leadership Academy”
or connected with another institution that offered such a Leadership
Academy.
2. Provide on-going professional development across all levels of
administration (entry, mid-, and senior level): A majority of 12 (75%) out of
16 respondents indicated their organization involves multiple levels of
administration in their succession plan.

3. Make an institutional commitment to succession planning: A total of 20
(71%) institutions actually have some succession plan in place, and 8
(29%) have a succession plan pending (in progress).
4. Commit to increasing diversity in higher education administration
through recruitment, professional development, advancement, and
retention: Only 1 out of 16 respondents (6%) acknowledged that this is an
institutional goal for their community college.
American Association of Community Colleges (AACC) six core
competencies: All 23 respondents agreed that these competencies were
important in some fashion; either limited importance up to and including very
important.
The overall evaluation of the comparison to national level
recommendations is good. Most community colleges in Illinois and Missouri
understand these concepts, and are making some use of them in their
succession plans. It was surprising, however, that there was not a stronger
commitment included to building leadership potential in diverse candidates.
Readiness. Although there is a good start at many community colleges to
prepare for upcoming retirements, there is still much that needs to be done.
Awareness of the looming retirement crisis at this point should be closer to, if not
at, 100%. Even a community college with a Generation X president can be
impacted if that president leaves and the institution is forced to seek new
leadership from a shrinking pool of qualified applicants.

The succession plan readiness is determined based upon the
recommendations made at the national level for all community colleges, but now
applied specifically to participating institutions in Illinois and Missouri. Current
demographics, as well as responses to key questions establish the criteria for
evaluation. Readiness levels are as follows:
Excellent: 90% - 100% of Illinois and Missouri community colleges have
succession plans in place, implemented, and operational. Content and methods
utilize national recommendations for succession planning.
Good: 80 – 89% of Illinois and Missouri community colleges have
succession plans in place and implemented. Content is good, but could use
more standardization to national recommendations.
Average: 70 – 79% of Illinois and Missouri community colleges have
succession plans in place. Content is limited, but major components are present.
Needs improvement: 60 – 69% of Illinois and Missouri community colleges
have some sort of succession plans in place. Content is lacking, with major
components missing.
Failing: Up to 59% of Illinois and Missouri community colleges have some
sort of succession plans in place. Content is sparse.
Actual succession planning efforts (where they exist) show promise.
Although “President’s Leadership Academy” may not have been immediately

recognized as a “Grow-Your-Own” leadership program by many respondents, the
explanations and descriptions of these programs certainly qualify it as one.
Overall, the succession planning readiness level for Illinois and Missouri
community colleges is considered “Needs Improvement:” 60 – 69% of Illinois and
Missouri community colleges have some sort of succession plans in place.
Content is lacking, with major components missing. A lot of work needs to be
done to get a larger percentage of institutions ready for anticipated leadership
retirements in the very near future.

Chapter V: Conclusions and Discussion
Introduction
The purpose of this study was to survey community colleges in the states
of Illinois and Missouri to investigate whether these institutions are concerned
about the need for succession planning in their organizations, or are currently
utilizing succession planning; and based on survey and demographic data,
evaluate to determine the level of readiness for key leadership retirements in
these community colleges.
Key Findings
After evaluation of the study results, these six key findings become apparent:
 The majority of participants represented a community college that had a
president who was male (83%), with a doctoral degree (83%), and who
was born in the Baby Boomer (1946-1964, 70%) or Traditionalist (1922-
1945, 4%) Generation.
 Illinois and Missouri community colleges will certainly be facing the
predicted Baby-Boomer retirement crisis within the next 1 – 5 years.
 Actual succession planning efforts (where they exist) show promise.
 Although “Leadership Academy” may not have been immediately
recognized as a “Grow-Your-Own” leadership program by many
respondents, the explanations and descriptions of these programs
certainly qualify it as one.

 Overall succession planning levels were better than expected considering
the lack of research-to-practice studies to be found, but this study shows
that there is still a long way to go regarding awareness and preparation,
especially with regard to meeting the national recommendations for
succession planning with the exception of a clearly-stated commitment to
the leadership development of diverse candidates.
 Preparation levels among community colleges are mixed at best, and an
overall rating for readiness in Illinois and Missouri community colleges is
“Needs Improvement”.
Strengths of the Study
The choice of methodology allowed for reaching out to a large number of
community colleges to gather some general information about whether these
institutions are concerned about the need for succession planning in their
organizations, or are currently utilizing succession planning. Making the survey
anonymous favored candid responses on what could otherwise be a delicate
subject at many institutions. The open-ended questions proved to be quite
effective in collecting valuable information about succession planning at the
participating community colleges.
Limitations of the Study
A research survey, such as the one used in this study, is a great way to
get an overall feel for the level of concern, planning, and preparations regarding
leadership succession planning in community colleges. One major drawback,

Community College Leadership Succession Planning: A Mix of Preparation Levels

Community College Leadership Succession Planning: A Mix of Preparation Levels

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (8)

Similar to Community College Leadership Succession Planning: A Mix of Preparation Levels

Similar to Community College Leadership Succession Planning: A Mix of Preparation Levels (20)

Community College Leadership Succession Planning: A Mix of Preparation Levels