The losses of leadership? Masks, mirrors and meaning when leading in Higher Education

Leadership – as a noun, trope, imperative, directive and proxy - is used repetitively in higher education. It is an empty signifier. While noting this lack of definitional clarity, leadership roles in universities remain competitive and coveted. Titles, salaries and profile follow. Within universities, the attributes of successful leaders are rarely studied. Instead, Goffmanesque frontstages are assembled that construct a seamless story of promotion and achievement. This positional power subverts accountability, transparency and scrutiny. These frontstages mask, minimize and decentre failures, inconsistencies and detours that deflect from a crisp narrative of success. There are also losses in and from leadership. This theoretical article deploys distinctive and provocative literature from outside of the United States, United Kingdom, and Canada. Activating the leadership research from Aotearoa / New Zealand, the Philippines, China, Iran, and Saudi Arabia, this article investigates the consequences of marginalizing academic success in teaching and research as a requirement for leadership roles and positions. This article shows that communication skills are more significant in creating organizational success than neoliberal-framed financial ‘management.’ With little attention to followership or failures, what is lost from leadership?