Closing the Campus "Will Gap"
Turning campus resistance into improvements
On many college and university campuses, there is no lack of ideas or ambitious plans for student success, new programs or institutional innovation. As such, one would think that higher education is in a constant state of ongoing improvement.
It’s not.
Instead, efforts to convert new ideas into campus improvements frequently stall, not because of the lack of vision, but due to a persistent and often underestimated force: resistance to change.
This phenomenon, known as the “will gap,” manifests as inertia, apathy, or even outright opposition among faculty, staff, and other key stakeholders. The “will gap” is not merely a theoretical concern; it is a practical barrier that can cripple even the most promising and well-designed initiatives, undermining efforts to address urgent challenges such as declining enrollment, financial instability and student proficiency.
The “will gap” is characterized by a lack of motivation, engagement, or willingness among faculty and staff to actively participate in institutional improvement efforts. This disconnect between institutional aspirations and stakeholder commitment can stall or derail improvement initiatives, regardless of their potential impact.
Common forms of resistance include apathy, skepticism toward leadership, fear of increased workload or loss of autonomy, and “change fatigue” resulting from previous, poorly managed initiatives. These dynamics are compounded by unclear communication, insufficient incentives, and a lack of alignment between proposed improvements and the institution’s core mission.
Overcoming the will gap, therefore, is not just a matter of persuasion—it requires a comprehensive, evidence-based approach that addresses the underlying causes of resistance and fosters a culture of collaboration and shared ownership.
In today’s rapidly evolving higher education landscape - shaped by technological advancements, shifting workforce demands, and increasing calls for accountability - institutions that fail to address the “will gap” run the risk of losing their relevance and viability.
Conversely, those that succeed in closing the “will gap” are better positioned to achieve transformative outcomes for their students and communities. Drawing from proven strategies and campus experience, the following comprehensive approach outlines how an institution can move beyond aspiration, close the “will gap”, and achieve meaningful, sustainable improvement.
1. Leadership Must Model Commitment
Sustained transformation begins with visible, unwavering leadership. Institutional leaders—including presidents, provosts, deans, and cabinet members—must do more than voice support for new initiatives; they must actively participate and set the example for the entire campus. Leadership presence at meetings, public celebration of progress, and direct involvement in pilot projects or reforms send a powerful message: improvement is a core, non-negotiable priority, fully integrated with the institution’s vision and future.
Leaders should communicate clearly that engaging in these initiatives is an expectation for all stakeholders—not an optional activity. Consistent, public reinforcement of this expectation, along with recognition of teams and individuals who exemplify commitment, establishes a campus-wide norm: embracing improvement is integral to the institution’s mission and strategy. When leadership “walks the talk,” it signals to all that transformation is both urgent and achievable.
2. Connect Improvement to Core Mission and Strategic Plan
Every improvement effort should be seen as an extension of the institution’s core purpose, not as an add-on. When new initiatives are directly tied to the college or university’s purpose, mission and strategic initiatives, they gain importance and legitimacy in the eyes of faculty, staff, and external partners. This connection must be made explicit in all communications—reinforcing that reforms are the primary means by which the institution fulfills its promises to students, the community, and its stakeholders.
Leaders and champions should regularly use institutional data such as enrollment trends, proficiency rates, and financial stabilization to illustrate the urgency and necessity of improvement. Framing the narrative in this way helps stakeholders see how their engagement with new practices is vital for institutional sustainability and student success.
The message should be clear: “These actions are how we fulfill our mission and secure our future.”
3. Employ Multifaceted Communication
Effective communication strategies must be layered and audience-specific. Institutions should employ multiple rationales to reach different stakeholders, using moral, economic, and practical appeals:
Moral: Emphasize the ethical imperative to support students and advance learning.
Economic: Highlight how improved student outcomes sustain institutional funding and long-term financial health.
Practical: Demonstrate how new practices will enhance the institution’s reputation, workforce preparation, and operational efficiency.
In addition, effective communications should be characterized by:
Regular updates that share early wins, testimonials, and impact stories will help build trust and momentum.
Transparency which is crucial: stakeholders should receive frequent, tailored updates with clear data and progress metrics.
Updates that celebrate successes and openly address challenges, so that all members of the campus community feel informed, valued, and included in the journey.
Ongoing and two-way exchanges that are adapted to the needs and interests of each group.
4. Directly Address and Engage Dissenters
Engagement with resistance is essential for lasting improvement. Rather than avoiding or ignoring dissent, institutions should actively create structured opportunities for open dialogue. This can include town halls, department meetings, and focus groups where faculty, staff, and other stakeholders can voice concerns, ask questions, and suggest improvements.
It is important to listen empathetically, respond transparently, and, where feasible, incorporate feedback into the improvement process.
Institutions should also identify and empower respected “champions” among faculty and staff. These individuals can serve as informal leaders who model engagement, help address peer concerns, and demonstrate the benefits of new initiatives.
Acknowledge that improvement often brings discomfort, but consistently emphasize the shared goals and collective benefits for students and the institution as a whole.
5. Incentivize and Recognize Participation
Positive reinforcement drives cultural transformation. Institutions should align resources—such as budgets, grants, and professional development opportunities—with participation in improvement efforts. Recognize and celebrate departments, teams, or individuals who demonstrate leadership or outstanding involvement in new initiatives, both publicly and within institutional communications.
Meaningful incentives can include stipends, course release time, professional development credits, awards, or other forms of recognition for those who contribute actively to improvement. These incentives signal that the institution values and supports those who help advance its mission and student success goals.
6. Integrate Constant Improvement into Policy and Practice
For transformation to last, new practices must be embedded in institutional policy and daily operations. This involves updating job descriptions, evaluation criteria, and promotion or tenure guidelines to reflect engagement with and support for new initiatives. Participation in key activities such as training, advising reform, or student support programs should be clearly stated as an expectation for relevant roles and enforced through established accountability mechanisms.
Institutional policies should explicitly support and reinforce the desired improvements, ensuring that they are not seen as temporary projects but as integral parts of the college or university’s ongoing commitment to excellence and equity.
7. Foster Collaborative Ownership
Promote shared responsibility for improvement by inviting broad participation across the institution. Establish interdisciplinary working groups that include representatives from faculty, staff, student affairs, administration, and, where appropriate, students. These groups should be involved in both the design and implementation of new initiatives, ensuring that diverse perspectives shape key decisions.
Engage constituency organizations early and often. Involving these groups throughout the process not only builds trust, but also increases the sense of collective ownership and reduces perceptions that improvement is imposed from above.
Encourage feedback, empower participants to co-lead projects, and create transparent channels for ongoing collaboration, so that all campus stakeholders have a genuine stake in the institution’s success.
8. Provide Tools, Training, and Support
Lower barriers to participation by ensuring all stakeholders have the resources they need to succeed. Offer comprehensive training sessions, accessible both in-person and online, to equip faculty, staff, and administrators with the knowledge, skills, and confidence to implement new practices and technologies. Provide clear, step-by-step guides and documentation that clarify expectations and processes.
Make sure all relevant technologies—such as data dashboards, advising software, or communication platforms—are easy to access and use. Offer ongoing technical support and troubleshoot issues quickly. Streamline administrative processes to reduce unnecessary bureaucracy, and provide responsive help through dedicated support teams.
By proactively addressing logistical and skill-based obstacles, institutions can ensure that everyone is prepared and motivated to contribute to improvement efforts.
9. Monitor Engagement and Adjust Tactics
Continuously track participation and remain agile in response to feedback and changing needs. Systematically monitor engagement with new initiatives, such as attendance at trainings, involvement in key meetings, and adoption of updated practices. Use participation data to identify where engagement is strong and where additional encouragement or support is needed.
Solicit regular feedback from all stakeholder groups through surveys, focus groups, or informal check-ins. Be prepared to adjust strategies, timelines, or communication methods in response to genuine concerns or unforeseen barriers.
Recognize that flexibility and responsiveness are critical to maintaining momentum and building trust. Celebrate successes, learn from setbacks, and commit to ongoing improvement as the institution’s needs evolve.
10. Act Decisively When Resistance Persists
Despite the most comprehensive efforts—visible leadership, transparent communication, targeted incentives, robust support systems, and collaborative engagement—some resistance to institutional change may persist. It is essential that all campus constituencies understand from the outset that while open dialogue, empathy, and inclusion are core values, the institution’s mission and student success must remain the highest priorities.
Institutional leadership must clearly communicate that chronic obstruction or ongoing refusal to engage with critical improvement initiatives will not be allowed to undermine the collective progress. If, after all reasonable attempts at engagement and support, certain structural or individual barriers continue to block essential reforms, leadership has a responsibility to act decisively. This may involve reallocating resources, adjusting responsibilities, or, when necessary, removing persistent obstacles—whether they are procedural, departmental, or personnel-based.
Such action is not punitive, but protective: it safeguards the institution’s future, the well-being of its students, and the integrity of its mission. The message should be consistent and unequivocal—the needs of the many, and the long-term health of the institution, must outweigh the reluctance or resistance of a few. By setting and enforcing these expectations, leadership ensures that the path to progress remains clear and that the institution is positioned to serve its students and community effectively.
Ultimately, decisive leadership in the face of ongoing resistance signals to all stakeholders that while every voice matters and every concern will be heard, the imperative to advance the institution’s mission is non-negotiable. This commitment to action—when all other measures have been exhausted—demonstrates both resolve and accountability, reinforcing a campus culture that values student success and continuous improvement above all else .
And so . . .
Closing the campus “will gap” is not simply an administrative challenge—it is a moral and strategic imperative. By implementing a comprehensive, evidence-based plan, institutions can transform resistance into resolve, unlocking the collective potential of their communities to achieve meaningful, lasting improvement.
Robin Capehart served as the president of two universities over a 13-year period where his institutions experienced historic enrollment increases and record fundraising. Today, he serves as a Senior Consultant for Collegiate Consulting, Atlanta, GA primarily focusing on academic alignment with community needs, enrollment management and financial issues. Dr. Capehart welcomes your comments, questions and observations at freethinkinghighered@gmail.com.