Erlane K Ghani, PhD
Faculty of Accountancy, Universiti Teknologi MARA Cawangan Selangor, Puncak Alam
Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Introduction

The issue of leadership has long been debated due to its importance in an organisation. Leadership is considered one of the most observed but least understood phenomena, involving a dynamic endeavour that both researchers and practitioners have struggled to make sense of for centuries (Mohamed Jais, Yahaya, & Ghani, 2020). It is defined as the ability to support and empower a group of people to accomplish a common task. According to Burns (1978),

leadership refers to mobilising and influencing people to work towards a common goal, which is done by building interpersonal relationships and breaking traditions to achieve an organisation’s objectives. However, leadership in a university differs from that in other organisations as they present a unique set of leadership challenges (Smith & Wolverton, 2010). It is believed that this difference is attributed to the fact that members of a university often operate in an environment that provides little oversight and yet have a strong voice in key institutional decisions (Briggs, Robinson, Hadley, & Pederson, 2019).

Institutional Leadership

In the university environment, institutional leadership positions have always been regarded as temporary appointments for a specific period of time. Institutional leadership of academics is an important aspect that needs to be given due attention in the universities. The holders of key positions, such as vice-chancellors, deputy vice-chancellors, deans, directors, and many others, have stories and experiences to pass on (Mohamed Jais. & Ghani, 2021). Filan and Seagren (2003) stated that leadership in higher education can be viewed as “dynamic, complex and multidimensional and therefore offers numerous opportunities for further investigation due to the constant changes, adjustments and turbulent environment over the past decade” (p. 21).

Obviously, the higher education system plays an important role in the development of a society and has become even more important due to globalisation and knowledge-based economies (Garwe, 2013). In addition, universities must compete internationally for students, rankings, and partnerships. Therefore, given university leaders' changing expectations and roles, it is important that those with previous experience share their experiences with those who are new to these positions. Sharing perspectives on leadership attributes, styles, foundations, governance matters, and role diversity, and how these attributes will impact the universities—is the approach to strengthening the stability of institutional leaders as they assume their roles (Ahmad & Ahmad, 2019). The aim is to develop leaders who have a clear purpose in leading universities for the future generation that will eventually be key to a country's national agenda.

Institutional Administrator vs Institutional Researcher

The debate about institutional leadership centred on administration and research revolves around the question of whether university leadership should prioritise efficient management, operational effectiveness, or research excellence and academic innovation (Carlsson, Kettis, Soderholm, 2014). Institutional administrators such as the vice chancellor, deans, directors, and administrative managers centred on administration generally focuses on operational efficiency and financial sustainability (Iqbal, & Piwowar-Sulej, 2022). Universities are large, complex organisations that require strong financial management, infrastructure development, and policy implementation. Effective leadership, therefore, ensures sustainable funding, resource allocation, and regulatory compliance. In addition, the institution's leadership must balance the interests of students, faculty, government agencies, and industry partners. Over and above that, administrative leadership ensures smooth coordination between academic departments, student affairs departments, and external organisations (Rony, Lestari, Ismaniah, Yasin. & Lubis, 2023). Therefore, strong administrative leadership helps with branding, marketing, and global outreach to attract talent and funding (Hemsley-Brown, Melewar, Nguyen, & Wilson). Finally, universities face challenges such as declining enrolment, funding cuts, and technological disruption, and it is the job of institutional administrators to manage crises effectively and ensure institutional stability (Jayabalan, Dorasamy, & Raman, 2021).

The primary goal of institutional research, on the other hand, which is centred around research, is to promote knowledge and innovation within a university. Institutional researchers see the existence of universities primarily as creating and disseminating knowledge (Volkwein, 1999) and ensuring alignment with future scientific and technological needs (Guo, Hao, Wu, & Hu, 2023). Research-orientated leadership promotes breakthrough discoveries and academic excellence. In addition, a strong research culture attracts world-class faculty, postdoctoral fellows, and doctoral students and enhances the academic reputation of the universities. Moreover, research-focused leadership ensures competitive grant applications, partnerships with industry, and the development of innovative projects (Postiglione, 2011). Institutions with strong research leadership influence public policy and technological advancement and are often better rated in global rankings and contribute to societal progress. As universities strive for global ranking, institutional research may seem the ideal mechanism to achieve this goal (Reichmann, Klebel, Hasani-Mayriqi, & Ross-Hellaue, 2021).

Conclusion

Institutional leadership is crucial to determining an organisation's vision, strategy, and overall performance. The question is which focus is the best for a university, particularly one that aims for global ranking involving teaching and research. The best institutional leadership strikes a balance between administration and research. While administration provides stability, funding and compliance, research leadership drives academic innovation and institutional prestige. The ideal leader should integrate both aspects and foster an environment in which research thrives within a well-managed institutional framework. The question is: Are we having a balance of these two paradigms?

To ensure a balance between these two paradigms, institutions could offer leadership development programmes that purposely combine administrative and academic skills. This might include cross-training, collaborative governance structures, and strategic planning procedures that promote both operational efficiency and research quality. Encouraging interaction between institutional administrators and research leaders may also assist in creating a common vision that is consistent with institutional sustainability and academic success.