"It’s hard to be good at everything."
That line from Dr. Tuesday Stanley wasn’t just a reflection—it was a warning.
As the president of Westmoreland County Community College for nearly a decade, Dr. Stanley led through financial strain, enrollment pressures, and shifting political dynamics long before they became national headlines. In a recent Campus Convos episode with BibliU CEO Dave Sherwood, she offered a candid look at the evolving reality of college leadership, and the growing mismatch between expectations and authority.
Today’s college presidents must do it all: triage crises, navigate politics, and balance competing demands from faculty, trustees, lawmakers, and students. And they must do it while walking a tightrope—under scrutiny and often without the tools or authority to move quickly.
As Academic Impressions puts it: "The president of a college or university stands in the crosshairs... asked to be the compass for the institution's mission and values while at the same time moving the institution in new, bold directions".
Expectations for today’s college presidents are growing—yet their time in the role is shrinking. The average college presidential tenure has dropped from 8.5 years in 2006 to just 5.9 in 2022. More than half of sitting presidents plan to step down within five years; nearly a quarter plan to leave within two. Perhaps most revealing: only about half are confident the role can realistically be done by one person.
This leadership burnout mirrors a larger breakdown in trust. Public confidence in higher education has eroded, and college leaders are feeling the weight. According to Inside Higher Ed’s 2024 Survey of College and University Presidents, nearly one in three say they are now more likely to discourage others from pursuing the role than they were just a few years ago.
Why? The top reasons cited include:
Too many expectations. Too few ways to meet them.
And the impact is already visible. A wave of high-profile resignations has swept through campuses nationwide—from flagship public institutions to small private colleges. Many leaders now leave before their contracts end. Some don’t recommend the role at all.
Presidencies once seen as capstones are increasingly viewed as untenable.
What was once a role centered on vision and tradition has now become a balancing act, one that demands crisis management, political navigation, and the ability to meet competing expectations from all corners of campus life. One week you’re a fundraiser; the next, you're on the frontlines of campus controversy.
As Dr. Stanley puts it: “We’ve seen this play out even at elite universities—you come out on one side of an issue and 50% of the people are unhappy, the other side and the other 50% are unhappy.”
This isn’t just emotionally exhausting, it’s structurally flawed. The intricate nature of university governance means that presidents must lead through negotiation, not mandate. This makes it nearly impossible to move quickly or decisively.
As Walt Gardner, education author and former educator of 28 years, describes: “College presidents can’t operate the way leaders in other fields do… They are expected to solve what are insolvable problems in a way that doesn’t alienate any single stakeholder.”
The result: institutions paralyzed by indecision, and presidents caught in the crossfire, expected to fix everything without alienating anyone. But naming these structural stressors clearly is the first step toward change—starting with better support systems, more aligned governance, and smarter tools to clear the way.
If colleges want to retain strong leaders, they need to empower them. That means more than symbolic support—it means trusting presidents with the authority to make difficult decisions, aligning governance structures, and clearing the bureaucratic hurdles that keep them reactive instead of strategic.
Dr. Stanley pointed out a key difference between higher ed and the corporate world: "In the corporate space, there are incentives for boards and management to merge. In higher ed, those incentives aren't there... and there’s not a lot of expertise [in merging institutions].”
Without shared incentives or clearer alignment between boards and presidents, decision-making slows. Leadership becomes more about navigating internal politics than driving institutional progress.
Institutions must rethink governance and reward systems:
Anything less risks losing the very people tasked with turning things around. But the momentum for change is building across the sector, and these solutions offer a solid first step.
Technology alone can’t solve leadership burnout, but it can help remove roadblocks that contribute to it. When used thoughtfully, EdTech can relieve presidents of the operational noise that clutters their days and pulls focus from strategic priorities.
This starts with simplification:
At BibliU, we’re committed to this vision. Our solutions help institutions cut through complexity, connecting students with the materials they need and giving leaders the clarity and confidence to act.
And the results are tangible. At Jackson College:
For presidents, that kind of data becomes more than just a report—it’s evidence. Proof that the institution is delivering on its mission. And that proof strengthens their position with boards, funders, and legislators while creating momentum for deeper innovation.
Only 36% of U.S. adults say they have confidence in higher education, down from 57% in 2015, according to Gallup. That erosion of trust isn’t just a public opinion problem—it’s the backdrop presidents are expected to lead through.
As Forbes recently put it, the presidency has become tougher than ever, thanks to intense political crossfire, sky-high expectations and minimal tolerance for failure. The pressure is exhausting and driving people out of the role altogether.
If higher ed is going to adapt and thrive, it has to start by supporting its leaders. That means moving beyond acknowledgment and into action, reimagining the systems, partnerships, and expectations that shape the presidency today.
Because real progress requires more than vision. It requires leadership that’s empowered to deliver it.
Discover how districts can stop wasting money on unused access codes and ensure every student gets what they need with smarter, usage-based billing.
How districts like Socorro and Ysleta are transforming their approach—and saving time and money.
As consolidation reshapes the higher ed ecosystem, institutions are navigating a complex trade-offs. This blog explores how some market shifts increase risk and reduce choice — and how BibliU is building a different model: one that puts institutional priorities and stability first.
