Community colleges operate at the intersection of broad public missions, fiscal constraints, and constant change. Demographic shifts, funding volatility, technological transformation, and evolving student needs have intensified the demand for a resilient, diverse leadership pipeline capable of leading through uncertainty.

Theory‑grounded internal programs that grow leaders from within offer a promising response to leadership turnover and succession challenges documented across the sector (Claybourne et al., 2020; Higher Ed Jobs, 2023). Monroe Community College’s (MCC) Leadership Education and Development (LEAD) program exemplifies such a model—linking leadership theory to practice through diagnostics, cohort learning, shadowing, mentoring, and applied benchmarking projects. This article synthesizes LEAD’s design and alignment to contemporary leadership scholarship and succession planning guidance, and provides design principles for replication.

The Challenge: A Shrinking Pipeline and Rising Demands

Leadership turnover among community college executives has accelerated, with many presidents reporting intentions to step down within five years and search pools failing to keep pace with institutional needs (Claybourne et al., 2020; Higher Ed Jobs, 2023). Qualitative studies and field reports point to limited, uneven succession planning and unclear preparation pathways to executive roles, particularly for women and leaders of color (Artis & Bartel, 2020; Gray, 2023). In response, colleges are reexamining how they identify, cultivate, and advance internal talent, including structured grow your own (GYO) programs that emphasize applied learning, mentoring, and cross‑organizational networking (Benard, 2012; Runestad, 2014).

Program-at-a-Glance: Structure, Eligibility, and Experiences

Purpose and Eligibility. LEAD is a year‑long leadership education experience designed to deepen participants’ understanding of community college challenges, strengthen leadership skills for a changing environment, and clarify future goals. It is open to full‑time faculty, professional staff (specialist and above), and civil service staff (analyst/programmer/ supervisor and above).

Curriculum and Modalities. The program integrates (a) diagnostics and self‑insight (e.g., DiSC and emotional intelligence workshops); (b) common scholarly and practitioner readings discussed in monthly seminars facilitated by executive leaders; (c) cross‑functional shadowing of directors, associate vice presidents (AVPs), vice presidents (VPs), and, as available, the president; (d) mentoring outside the reporting chain; and (e) applied benchmarking projects presented to senior leadership. These learning experiences are anchored within MCC’s broader leadership development portfolio.

Theoretical Foundations: How LEAD Operationalizes Leadership Scholarship

Transformational and Authentic Leadership. Transformational leadership emphasizes idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration (Bass & Stogill, 1990), competencies reflected in LEAD’s executive‑facilitated seminars, cross‑functional shadowing, and mentoring. Authentic leadership complements this with self‑awareness and relational transparency, cultivated through diagnostics, self-reflective writing, and mentor dialogue that challenges LEAD participants to examine their internalized moral perspective (Walumbwa et al., 2008). Thus, program facilitators operate from the premise that people are most inspired when their work aligns with their strengths and values (Debebe, 2017), which are explored and embedded in LEAD’s self‑insight and goal‑setting activities.

Servant Leadership and Equity‑Minded Practice. Servant leadership emphasizes service to others and the community (Liden et al., 2014); this leadership style aligns closely with the community college access mission and LEAD’s focus on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). Program seminars explicitly address demographics, DEI, funding, innovation, accountability, risk, and planning, preparing leaders to advance a student‑ready college (McNair et al., 2022).

Human and Social Capital Development in GYO Programs. Evidence from community college GYO studies highlights how campus‑based programs convert individual learning/human capital into network‑based capacity/social capital through cohorting, executive access, and project‑based inquiry (DeLozier, 2019). At MCC, LEAD participants consistently report stronger cross‑campus relationships, improved systems understanding, and greater readiness for advancement. Together, these frameworks position LEAD not simply as training, but as an institutional strategy for distributed leadership.

Why GYO Matters: Succession, Continuity, and Culture

Continuity and Readiness. Formal succession planning within higher education remains inconsistent and, when implemented, is typically concentrated on executive‑level positions rather than institutionwide talent development. Current best‑practice literature emphasizes the importance of identifying high‑potential employees and preparing them through targeted professional development and stretch assignments (Donadel, 2025; EAB, 2026)—key features reflected in the LEAD program. Within this context, the MCC program is distinctive for three primary reasons.

First, the program is administered through the Division of Diversity, Equity, and Belonging and co‑facilitated by the vice president for that division. This administrative placement is unique, as the division’s mission and the vice president’s role position the program to support whole college efforts that cultivate a sense of belonging among faculty, staff, and students. Second, the program is intentionally cross‑functional, designed to strengthen leadership capacity across all divisions and at all organizational levels rather than focusing on a single employee group or administrative tier. Third, the program is explicitly aligned with MCC’s strategic plan, providing participants with multiple opportunities to connect their daily work to the institution’s strategic priorities and reflect on how they enact those priorities in practice.

Diversity and Inclusion. Intentional pipelines are also equity pipelines. Succession planning can help reduce racial and gender gaps in leadership by providing equitable access to mentoring, sponsorship, and high‑visibility projects. Diversifying the presidency requires reimagining access to the pipeline and addressing structural barriers that historically marginalized groups face (Gray, 2023). These are all elements of both the mission and strategic plan at MCC, which helps to demonstrate to prospective employees that the college is committed to developing employees at all levels.

Organizational Learning. GYO programs that include internal benchmarking and governance exposure socialize emerging leaders into shared governance, performance accountability, and data‑informed decision‑making. Long‑term returns include durable project legacies, new cross‑campus partnerships, and a common leadership language (DeLozier, 2019; Runestad, 2014).

Inside the LEAD Experience: From Self‑Insight to Systems Impact

Self‑Insight and Interpersonal Effectiveness. Structured self‑assessment (e.g., DiSC) and emotional intelligence (EI) workshops develop shared vocabulary around behavioral styles and EI competencies, translating into stronger collaboration across departments.

Understanding the Community College Context. Executive‑facilitated seminars blend scholarship with local data on funding, enrollment, and innovation, demystifying MCC’s operating model and strategic priorities. This approach aligns with findings that impactful program components deepen understanding of institutional culture and complexity (Runestad, 2014).

Practicing Leadership via Shadowing and Mentorship. Shadowing directors, AVPs, and VPs exposes participants to authentic decision cycles and dilemmas, while out‑of‑chain mentors provide psychologically safe spaces for sense‑making and feedback—operationalizing situated learning (DeLozier, 2019).

Research, Benchmarking, and Executive Communication. Benchmarking against near‑peers and presenting recommendations to senior leadership strengthens analytical rigor and executive presence—competencies associated with transformational leadership and readiness for stretch roles (AbulJaber Yayha et al., 2024; Michel, 2024).

Early and Emergent Outcomes

Improved Readiness for Stretch Roles. Exposure to executive decision contexts, governance, and benchmarking elevates readiness for interim assignments, committee chair roles, and formal promotions, echoing evidence that GYO programs strengthen leadership pipelines (Kirkland, 2016; Runestad, 2014).

Shared Leadership Language and Culture. Recurring engagement with equity, innovation, accountability, and risk/prioritization cultivates a common frame for discussing institutional change—a cultural asset during strategic pivots (Claybourne et al., 2020).

Momentum for Succession Planning. By normalizing leadership development as institutional citizenship, programs like LEAD contribute to cultures where leaders routinely coach successors and distribute authority—key practices for robust succession planning (Donadel, 2025; EAB, 2026).

Lessons Learned and Design Principles for Replication

Sustainability and Institutional Investment. The costs associated with administering LEAD are relatively modest. The program’s co‑lead receives a small stipend for the additional responsibilities, comparable to compensation typically provided to adjunct faculty. Beyond this stipend, program expenses include photocopying materials, purchasing leadership textbooks for participants, and funding one $150 individual coaching session for each participant. The program also requires the purchase of an online self‑assessment tool that enables participants to gain insight into their leadership styles and to develop their ability to recognize and adapt to the work and communication styles of others. Finally, the program budget includes the cost of a closing luncheon with the president and college officers, during which participants present their capstone projects.

Anchor to Mission and Equity. Make a student‑ready college the north star and embed equity and demographics throughout the curriculum rather than as add‑ons (Gray, 2023).

Build Human and Social Capital Together. Use cohort models, cross‑division assignments, and mentoring to expand networks and create durable collaboration pathways (DeLozier, 2019; Runestad, 2014).

Design for Executive Access and Visibility. Regular interactions with presidents and VPs and presentations to senior leadership demystify strategy and governance and accelerate executive communication skills (Artis & Bartel, 2020).

Integrate Reflection and Coaching. Goal statements, reflective essays, and out‑of‑chain mentoring cultivate self‑awareness, a core competency across authentic and transformational leadership traditions (AbulJaber Yayha et al., 2024; Debebe, 2017).

Quantitative and Longitudinal Data

Since its inception, LEAD has graduated 30 participants across four cohorts, with 30 percent assuming expanded leadership responsibilities and 60 percent serving on cross-institutional committees within a year of program completion. One example of LEAD’s success is the ascension of a former program coordinator to the positions of school specialist and student success coach, then to her current role of assistant to the Provost for Academic and Student Affairs. Although participation in LEAD cannot be directly linked to the success of this employee, we believe that the program provides participants with an understanding of institutional culture, leadership skills, and self-awareness that allows them to be viable candidates for many opportunities at the college.

Evaluation

To assess participant learning, we use the following methods: (1) post-program surveys, (2) promotion tracking, (3) additional educational achievements, and (4) innovative programs. The college’s goal is to develop a longitudinal evaluation framework in partnership with institutional research to track advancement and retention outcomes.

References

AbulJaber Yayha, M., Kamil, S. A., Barakat, M., & Alkabi, H. S. (2024). Exploring theoretical constructs in leadership excellence: A multidimensional framework. Journal of Ecohumanism, 3(5), 763-778.

Artis, L., & Bartel, S. (2020). Filling the leadership pipeline: A qualitative study examining leadership development practices and challenges facing community college presidents in Illinois. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 45(9), 674-686.

Bass, B. M., & Stogdill, R. M. (1990). Bass & Stogdill's handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and managerial applications. Simon and Schuster.

Benard, M. K. (2012). Grow your own leaders: Case study of a community college leadership development program [Doctoral dissertation, San Diego State University]. SDSU University Library Digital Collections. https://digitalcollections.sdsu.edu/do/f2ef6b61-c020-4735-8eaf-60f9c4f6327a/file/33ba8d87-09f4-46f3-92d7-ea0f31da51c1/download/sdsu:3359%20OBJ%20Datastream.pdf

Claybourne, C., Fluker, C., Geisler, I., Pfeifer, L., Pierson, K., & Wulf, R. (2020). Building the community college leadership pipeline: Prioritizing succession planning. At Issue, 10, 1. Ferris State University, Doctorate in Community College Leadership. https://www.ferris.edu/administration/academicaffairs/extendedinternational/ccleadership/images/DCCLAtIssue2020.pdf

Debebe, G. (2017). Authentic leadership and talent development: Fulfilling individual potential in sociocultural context. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 19(4), 420-438.

DeLozier, J. (2019). Community college grow your own leadership: A phenomenological study of employee perceptions of individual and organizational leadership development [Doctoral dissertation, East Tennessee State University]. East Tennessee State University  Digital Commons. https://dc.etsu.edu/etd/3623

Donadel, A. (2025, June 24). Here are 3 ways college leaders can groom emerging talent. University Business. https://universitybusiness.com/here-are-3-ways-college-leaders-can-groom-emerging-talent

EAB. (2026). Succession planning toolkit: Seven tools to better identify and develop high-potential talent for critical roles in higher education.

Gray, A. (2023, June 26). Renaissance: The role of succession planning in diversifying the American college presidency. Higher Education Today. https://www.higheredtoday.org/2023/06/26/renaissance-the-role-of-succession-planning-in-diversifying-the-american-college-presidency

Higher Ed Jobs. (2023, April 25). The future of the college presidency. https://www.higheredjobs.com/Articles/articleDisplay.cfm?ID=3457

Kirkland, K. L. (2016). An assessment of a community college’s grow‑your‑own leadership program: Perceptions of program graduates and community college staff members: a sequential mixed-method case study [Doctoral dissertation, Rowan University]. Rowan Digital Works. https://rdw.rowan.edu/etd/977

Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Liao, C., & Meuser, J. D. (2014). Servant Leadership and serving culture: Influence on individual and unit performance. Academy of Management Journal, 57(5), 1434.

McNair, T. B., Albertine, S. L., McDonald, N. L., Major, T., & Cooper, M. A. (2022). Becoming a student-ready college: A new culture of leadership for student success (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.

Michel, A. J. (2024). Comparative analysis of leadership theories: Transformational, servant, situational, and skills approach in organizational contexts. IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 29(12, 6), 10-16. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/387174435_Comparative_Analysis_Of_Leadership_Theories
_Transformational_Servant_Situational_And_Skills_Approach_In_Organizational_Contexts

Runestad, E. J. (2014). Grow your own leaders: Campus‑based leadership development programs [Doctoral dissertation, St. Cloud State University]. The Repository @ St. Cloud State. https://repository.stcloudstate.edu/hied_etds/74

Walumbwa F. O., Avolio B. J., Gardner W. L., Wernsing T. S., & Peterson S. J. (2008). Authentic leadership: development and validation of a theory-based measure. Journal of Management, 34(1), 89-126.

Calvin J. Gantt is Vice President, Diversity, Equity and Belonging, and Executive Director, Downtown Campus, and Kimberly F. DeLardge is Director, Student Services, at Monroe Community College in Rochester, New York.

Opinions expressed in Leadership Abstracts are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of the League for Innovation in the Community College.