Beyond Buy-In: The Conditions for Transformation

One of the lessons I have learned as a leader is that transformative change rarely happens because people buy into an idea. It happens because they help build it.

Too often, leaders focus on gaining support for initiatives that have already been designed. The strategy is developed, the vision is articulated, and the team is invited to get on board. While that approach may produce compliance, it rarely creates the ownership necessary for lasting change.

The most meaningful transformation I have experienced has come from a different approach: creating the conditions for people to build something together from the very beginning.

When I began my role as provost, I knew that any significant change we hoped to achieve would depend on the strength of our leadership team. That meant investing not only in relationships between the provost and each dean, but also in the relationships among the deans themselves and with our associate vice president.

I wanted us to learn how to work together as a true leadership team. I wanted our conversations to move beyond updates and reports. I wanted the deans to trust their judgment, challenge one another’s thinking, and feel comfortable bringing forward ideas, concerns, and support needs. Most importantly, I wanted them to see themselves not simply as leaders of individual divisions but as stewards of a larger institutional mission.

To begin building that foundation, we participated in a three-day leadership retreat facilitated by Academic Impressions. The first two days took place off campus and focused on understanding ourselves and one another. We explored our leadership styles, communication preferences, strengths, stressors, and blind spots. We examined how our greatest strengths could sometimes limit our effectiveness and how our weaknesses could be strengthened through intentional development or complemented by the talents of others.

After returning to campus, we spent several weeks putting those conversations into practice. When we reconvened for the third day of the retreat, we reflected on how far we had already come and recommitted ourselves to where we wanted to go next.

What emerged from that experience was more powerful than I anticipated.

Before the retreat, I had strong individual relationships with each member of the team. After the retreat, we became a team.

The difference was profound.

The deans began relying less on me as the sole source of feedback and validation and increasingly turned to one another. They shared ideas, tested assumptions, strengthened plans, and worked through challenges together before bringing initiatives forward.

Rather than presenting ideas through the lens of a single division, they began considering how those ideas would affect students, colleagues, and programs across Academic and Student Affairs. They started thinking beyond their own areas of responsibility and toward the broader institutional ecosystem we were collectively responsible for leading.

They did not do everything together, nor should they have. However, they began discussing most things together. As trust deepened, so did accountability, and shared leadership did not reduce responsibility; it strengthened it.

Because ideas were developed collaboratively, there was greater ownership of outcomes. Because plans were shaped through multiple perspectives, they were often stronger and more resilient. And because challenges were discussed openly, solutions emerged more quickly and with broader support.

The change was evident not only in what we accomplished, but in how we worked together. The deans increasingly brought forward integrated ideas that reflected the needs of Academic and Student Affairs as a whole rather than the interests of a single division. They challenged one another’s assumptions, refined one another’s thinking, and sought opportunities to align their efforts in service of larger institutional goals.

For me, this created space to engage at a more strategic level. Our time together became less focused on operational troubleshooting and more focused on the larger questions only a provost and dean can answer together: institutional priorities, transformational opportunities, student success, and organizational direction.

The team dynamic we built became the foundation for pursuing meaningful change. Since then, we have undertaken initiatives that have reshaped aspects of the student experience and improved student outcomes. Those accomplishments matter, but what I value most is the culture we created together.

We learned that accountability extends beyond deliverables and results. It also includes how we treat one another.

One of the most important lessons from our retreat was that difficult conversations do not have to be unkind and disagreement does not have to be disrespectful. Strong teams challenge one another because they care deeply about the work and because they care about one another.

When trust and respect are present, disagreement becomes productive rather than personal. Different perspectives strengthen ideas rather than threaten them. Team members become more willing to raise concerns, test assumptions, and offer alternative viewpoints because they know the conversation is grounded in a shared commitment to one another and to the mission they serve.

Trust does not eliminate conflict. It creates the conditions for healthy conflict.

Respect does not mean avoiding hard conversations. It means having them with integrity.

Shared purpose does not remove accountability. It deepens it.

When those conditions are present, leadership becomes less about authority and more about possibility.

I am grateful for the colleagues with whom I have had the privilege to work, lead, learn, and grow. Together, we built a foundation rooted in trust, respect, and shared commitment. The work that followed would not have been possible without it.

And neither would the possibilities that still lie ahead.