Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Intersectional equity in higher education leadership: leveraging social capital for success
(USC Thesis Other)
Intersectional equity in higher education leadership: leveraging social capital for success
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Intersectional Equity in Higher Education Leadership: Leveraging Social Capital for Success
By
Steven G. Holley
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education
August 2022
ii
© Copyright by Steven G. Holley 2022
All Rights Reserved
iii
The Committee for Steven G. Holley certifies the approval of this Dissertation
Jennifer Phillips, Committee Member Name
Alison Muraszewski, Committee Co-Chair
Kimberly Hirabayashi, Committee Chair
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2022
iv
Abstract
The purpose of this qualitative study was to identify ways higher education institutions (HEIs)
can better support Black, indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) women leaders in their
progression into executive roles. Three research questions involving social capital guided this
study. Participants were a purposeful sample of 15 BIPOC women executives who currently
serve in executive leadership at various HEIs across the country. The data collection instrument
was semi-structured interviews and the thematic analysis approach as described by Patton (2002)
was used to analyze the data collected. The key findings were that participants affirmed three
major themes that impacted their journey to executive leadership: (a) social capital was
generated within HEI environments to create a foundation for success leveraged within the
Whiteness majority context prevalent in current HEIs; (b) structural social capital influenced
BIPOC women's success through the presence and support of institutional agents; and (c)
mentorship was deployed for every participant within various bridging and linking relationships
that affected their success. The BIPOC women executive leaders’ ability to leverage social
capital aided in the successful obtainment of their roles.
v
Dedication
My dissertation is dedicated to my father, Jim Holley, who never had the opportunity to further
his own education but created the path and built the foundation that granted me the privilege. I
also dedicate this work to Jim Martin, who made me a better human being by listening and
asking me questions. I miss the simplicity and wisdom of our times together. I would like to
dedicate this dissertation to my confidant and partner in life, Dr. Leigh Holley (the FIRST Dr.
Holley!) who never stopped believing in me even after I had stopped.
To my four sons, please see this work as an example of how we should always be learning in this
life. Listening and learning. Thank you for being you. Love you, Dad.
vi
Acknowledgements
There is a proverb that states, “Get wisdom, get understanding.” I am deeply indebted to
several individuals who have increased and broadened my understanding and created a path
toward (one day) wisdom. Thanks to my committee chair, Dr. Kimberly Hirabayashi, for very
patiently (and repeatedly) providing me with insights into the arena of academic writing. Very
patiently! Thank you, Dr. Alison Muraszweski, my co-chair, for taking the time to connect the
purposes and intent of each dissertation chapter for me, in a way that solidified enough for me to
write more successfully. Also, I am grateful for the numerous outlining sessions you conducted
with me. Thank you, Dr. Jennifer Phillips, for telling me my work could be better, expecting me
to do something about it, and asking me what I am going to do next. I have never seen coaching
done better than by you, Dr. Phillips.
Many thanks to the following: Karolyn Rubin, Al Cobb, Jamie Thompson, Amanda
Johnson, Renee Bostick, and Dru Anna Jackson. Each one of you provided a variation of
collegial support that sustained me at one or more key times over the last 30 months. I learned
how to write, edit, present, reflect, synthesize and defend better because of you.
Finally, I share my deepest heartfelt gratitude to the following: Amy Heerschap, David
Charles, Dr. Cynthia Baker, Dr. Nan Ho and Dr. Eleanor Steinman. Most days we termed
ourselves simply “Study Group,” but the words do not come close to describe the relationship
and its meaning. I would not be here if it were not for all of you and every time I sit down to put
words to paper I will hear a combination of your voices in my mind. Thank you for helping me
see my work, my thoughts, my efforts, and myself was “good enough” to achieve this
accomplishment. You are the best. I hope our careers and lives intertwine for the rest of our days.
iv
Table of Contents
Abstract iv
Dedication v
Acknowledgements vi
Table of Contents iv
List of Tables vi
List of Figures vii
Abstract Error! Bookmark not defined.
Chapter One: Introduction to the Study 1
Context and Background of the Problem 2
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions 4
Importance of the Study 4
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology 6
Definitions 7
Organization of the Dissertation 8
Chapter Two: Literature Review 9
Social Capital Theory 9
Background for Underrepresentation of BIPOC Women in Higher Education 16
Higher Education as an Industry 16
BIPOC Women in Higher Education 18
Challenge of Intersectionality 19
Role of Leadership Development 21
The Need for BIPOC Women in Higher Education Executive Leadership 23
Benefits to BIPOC Women Attaining Executive Roles 23
Diversity Bonus in Higher Education Organizations 24
Causes for the Underrepresentation of BIPOC Female Higher Education Executives 25
Systematic Racism in Higher Education 25
Higher Education Institutions Valuing of BIPOC Women 29
Understanding BIPOC Women 31
Glass and Concrete Ceilings 31
Access to Social Capital for BIPOC Women 33
Potential Solutions to Address Underrepresentation of BIPOC Female Executives 34
Leadership Development 35
BIPOC Women Need Mentors and Models 36
BIPOC Women Need Challenges 37
BIPOC Women Need Policies and Practices Supporting Progression 38
Social Capital 38
Access to People Who Can Help 40
Access to Information 41
Conceptual Framework 42
Summary 46
Chapter Three: Methodology 47
Research Questions 47
Overview of Design 47
v
Research Setting 48
The Researcher 48
Data Sources 49
Interviews 50
Participants 50
Instrumentation 51
Data Collection Procedures 51
Data Analysis 52
Validity and Reliability 53
Ethics 53
Chapter Four: Findings 55
Participants 55
Research Question: How Did Social Capital Influence the Career Success of BIPOC
Female Leaders in Higher Education? 55
Social Capital Created a Foundation for Success 57
Social Capital Was Leveraged in the Context of a White Majority of Participant
Higher Education Institutions 60
Research Question: What Aspects of Structural Social Capital Influenced the Career
Success of BIPOC Female Leaders in Higher Education? 63
Institutional Agents Provided Expressions of Trust and Support 64
Institutional Agents Granted Access to Information, Opportunities, and
Experiences 65
Institutional Agents Cast Vision for the Participants 69
Research Question: How Did Bridging and Linking Social Capital Affect the Success of
BIPOC Women in Higher Education? 70
Summary 74
Chapter Five: Recommendations 75
Discussion of Findings 75
Recommendations for Practice 80
Recommendation 1: Cultivating a Community Ethos That Promotes BIPOC
Women Is a Priority 80
Recommendation 2: Plan a Pathway of Organizational Engagement Activities
That Increase the Likelihood of Identifying Emerging BIPOC Women Leaders 84
Recommendation 3: Create a Growth Program Supported by Institutional Agents
Focused on Developing Emerging BIPOC Women for Executive Leadership 89
Growth Program Ally 92
Growth Program Sponsor 93
Growth Program Mentor 94
Growth Program Developer and Coordinator 95
Limitations and Delimitations 97
Recommendations for Future Research 99
Conclusion 100
References 102
Appendix: Communication to Participants 130
vi
List of Tables
Table 1: Interview Participant Information ................................................................................... 56
vii
List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework ................................................................................................. 45
Figure 2: Growth Program Institutional Agents ........................................................................... 91
1
Chapter One: Introduction to the Study
Black, indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) women are disproportionally
underrepresented in senior leadership positions in higher education; however, higher education
institutions (HEIs) have slowly progressed in the last few decades. Tran (2014) found people of
color accounted for 18% of full-time higher-education administrators, with 13% serving as
college and university presidents (6% Black, 5% Latina, 1% Asian American, and 1% Native
American). Of those individuals, women represent 11% (6% Black, 3% Latina, and 2% Asian
American; Tran, 2014). The question of why there are so few senior executive BIPOC women in
higher education concerns scholars (Eggins, 2017).
BIPOC women are entering the labor market at an increasing rate but continue to lack
access to leadership positions at the executive level (D. R. Davis & Madonado, 2015). J. C.
Brown (2019) demonstrated BIPOC women encounter gender bias in organizations, disrupting
their learning to become leaders. Intersectionality of multiple social identities (e.g., gender and
ethnicity) intensifies this problem (Arifeen & Syed, 2019). According to Soleymanpour et al.
(2015), the limited progress of BIPOC female executives has been attributed to the glass ceiling,
an invisible barrier to advancement based on organizational attitudes. S. L. Davis (2016) stated
organizations often do not create environments (e.g., mentoring programs) that support the
advancement of BIPOC women for development. Access to informal but beneficial networks in
organizations could assist BIPOC women in advancement to the upper ranks (Liu, 2019).
Gasman et al. (2015) suggested organizational culture can contribute to exclusion from
leadership development in subtle forms of bias. Providing BIPOC women with opportunities to
practice leadership skills, while receiving networking support, could create a larger pool of
qualified, experienced leaders to obtain senior positions (S. L. Davis, 2016). Higher education as
2
an industry offers many challenges for qualified, experienced leaders. Therefore, the focus of this
dissertation is to identify how HEIs can support BIPOC women leaders.
Context and Background of the Problem
The underrepresentation of people of color, compared to the general population, in HEI
leadership is notable. For the years 2012-2015, White non-Hispanic people represented 62% of
the total U.S. population, 73% of full-time faculty, and 86% of college and university presidents
(Ginder & Kelly-Reid, 2013; Kim & Cook, 2012; U.S. Census Bureau, 2015). Black/African
Americans represented 13% of the U.S. population, 6% of full-time faculty, and 7% of college
and university presidents. Hispanic/Latinx people represented 18% of the U.S. population, 5% of
full-time faculty, and 4% of college and university presidents. Asian/Pacific Islanders
represented 6% of the U.S. population and 9% of full-time faculty, but only 1% of college and
university presidents (Ginder & Kelly-Reid, 2013; Kim & Cook, 2012; U.S. Census Bureau,
2015). The American Council on Education revealed 13% of U.S. college and university
presidents are people of color (Kim & Cook, 2012). Women presidents increased by 3%, from
23% to 26% in 2011 (Cook & Kim, 2012); however, the number of women presidents has
remained at about 500 out of approximately 4,000 postsecondary institutions (Seliger & Shames,
2009). Moreover, the underrepresentation of women in leadership positions in higher education
is increasing slightly at highly ranked institutions. As of 2019, only 19.5% of the top 200 HEIs
ranked by Times Higher Education were led by women (Bothwell, 2020), up from 17% in 2017.
Disparities are pronounced at the intersection of gender and race. In 2009, African
American women led 22% of the nation’s historically and predominantly Black institutions;
however, only eight African American women led predominantly White, 4-year institutions
(Bower & Wolverton, 2009). BIPOC women are 7% of all senior administrators, compared to
3
9% of men and 38% of White women (King & Gomez, 2008). BIPOC women comprise only 3%
of chief academic officers, compared to 6% of men of color and 35% of White women (J. King
& Gomez 2008).
At the time of this study, there were no BIPOC women chief academic officers at
doctoral-granting public universities. In master’s public universities, there were 7% African
American women and 1% Latina women. In public baccalaureate universities, there were fewer
than 1% Asian American Pacific Islander women and Latina women (J. King & Gomez, 2008).
Because 40% of current presidents ascended from chief academic officer positions, the lack of
BIPOC women in chief academic officer positions is a cause for concern (J. King & Gomez,
2008). Data on BIPOC women in the top HEI position is revealing. A American College
President report indicated there are 4.8% African American college presidents, 1.4% Asian
American Pacific Islander, 2.8% Latinx, and 0.9% American Indian (Cook & Kim, 2012). Of
these presidents, the percentage of women includes 5% African American, 4.3% Latina, 0.7%
Asian American, and 0.7% American Indian. At the time of this study, there was only one
American Indian woman president of a baccalaureate institution. Reflection on the environment
BIPOC women lead in could be significant.
Higher education leaders have referred to their job as “herding cats,” yet the strength of
HEIs rests in the independent thought, creativity, and autonomy of the people who work with
them (Knowles et al., 2019). Leaders could not achieve the competing objectives of university
work without sharing responsibilities and accountabilities (Dopson et al., 2018). This sharing of
responsibilities requires a distributed leadership leveraged by social capital (Beckmann, 2017).
Social capital and social identity act as essential bridges between the individual agency of
employees and the organizational paradigm in this widely distributed leadership structure
4
(Bolden et al., 2015). Leaders are operating in uncertain environments and taking increasingly
diverse approaches to their leadership roles. Leadership development is vital in supporting this
highly complex context (Dopson et al., 2018). One particular need is the development of BIPOC
women higher education leaders who bring diverse approaches to their leadership.
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions
The purpose of this study is to identify ways that HEI’s can better support BIPOC women
leaders. Given the research suggesting BIPOC women are not moving adequately into leadership
roles in higher education, my study will seek to answer the following research questions:
1. How did social capital influence the career success of BIPOC female leaders in
higher education?
2. How did bridging and linking social capital affect the success of BIPOC women in
higher education?
3. What aspects of structural social capital influenced the career success of BIPOC
female leaders in higher education?
Importance of the Study
This study examines the underrepresentation of BIPOC women in higher education
executive leadership. The proportion of women and people of color in administrative positions is
not much different from previous years. Researchers surveyed 47,985 administrators from 1,053
HEIs in 202 unique positions in six administrative categories to reveal that people of color and
women made up 9% of HEI administrators in 2019 (Pritchard et al., 2020). The percentage of
presidencies held by women and people of color has increased over the long-term trajectory.
According to a survey of 1,546 leaders of 2-year and 4-year public, private nonprofit, and for-
profit institutions across the United States, 23% of college presidents were women in 2006,
5
26.4% in 2011, and 30.1% in 2016 (Gagliardi et al., 2017). According to the same study, in
2006, 13.6% of college presidents were minorities, dropping to 12.6% in 2011 and rising to
16.8% in 2016. Across all presidents surveyed, the number of presidents who served as senior
institutional leaders before becoming president rose over the period surveyed, 72.5% in 2006,
76.1% in 2011, and 82.9% in 2016 (Gagliardi et al., 2017).
The underrepresentation of women and people of color in leadership is evident in HEIs
serving people of color. Among 1,546 college and university presidents surveyed, 24% led
minority serving institutions (MSIs), defined as historically Black colleges and universities,
Tribal colleges and universities, and any institutions eligible to receive an MSI designation
(Imlay & Schaap, 2017). Of those presidents leading MSIs, only 35.5% of those presidents were
people of color, and 32.7% of those presidents were women.
The problem is critical to address because recent research shows organizations sustain
success by developing a pool of diverse, creative leaders who are attentive to the shifting needs
of their constituents (Dopson et al., 2018). Strong leaders in higher education need a unique
balance of solid collaboration skills, coupled with a business-like approach demanded by
stakeholders, such as students, governments, and businesses. (Bolden et al., 2015; J. C. Brown,
2019; Eggins, 2017). Leaders with diverse experiences, viewpoints, and backgrounds are crucial
to encouraging different perspectives, broadening an institution’s world views, and fostering
innovation at colleges and universities responsible for educating future leaders, workers, and
external constituents (Teague, 2015). While inroads have been made in capturing the experiences
of women and BIPOC education leaders, research is limited (N. N. Johnson & Fournillier, 2021).
6
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
The primary theory used to explore this practice problem was social capital theory (SCT).
Social capital theory contends that social relationships are resources that can lead to the
development and accumulation of human capital, which yields reproductive benefits (Day,
2000). Social capital theory was appropriate to examine this practice problem because it offers a
framework of organizational practices and stresses the importance of relationships to support
BIPOC women’s success in higher education. This study can inform those in power about the
use of social capital for BIPOC women, as related to their success as executive leaders in higher
education.
A theory of change refers to a perspective about how a situation can be adjusted,
corrected, or improved, including the underlying assumptions and preconditions needed to reach
a long-term goal (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). A theory of change involving social capital as a tool
for advancing BIPOC women in higher education could offer pathways that HEIs can consider to
better support BIPOC women to become leaders.
The study used qualitative research in the form of interviews applied to current BIPOC
women executives. The researcher analyzed interview content collected around specific themes
for analysis. This study identifies how HEIs can intentionally support BIPOC women leaders.
This research design aligns with the purpose of this study because barriers and benefits to
executive leader success are unique to each individual and best analyzed through gathering
knowledge from the people who experience them.
7
Definitions
To study the underrepresentation of BIPOC women in higher education executive
leadership, clarity of certain terms is required. The key concepts for this study are BIPOC,
intersectionality, and social capital.
BIPOC is an acronym used to refer to black, indigenous, and people of color (Scott,
2020). I use the terms women of color and BIPOC women to describe women who are of African
American or Black American, Asian American Pacific Islander, American Indian, and Latina
heritage. These descriptors are used, rather than minority or minorities, because of inherent,
implied positionality, power, and status. The U.S. Census has predicted by 2050, non-Hispanic
Whites will no longer be the majority. (Eggins, 2017)
Kimberle Chrenshaw introduced the term intersectionality in 1989, to demonstrate how
U.S. structures and discourses of resistance often frame identities as isolated and mutually
exclusive, resulting in the theoretical erasure of Black women who hold multiple minoritized
identities (Crenshaw, 1994; Carbado et al., 2013). Intersectionality provides a lens to frame
racial, ethnic, class, ability, age, sexuality and gender disparities and to contest existing ways of
looking at these structures of inequality (Zambrana & Dill, 2009).
Social capital is the goodwill available to the individuals or groups. Its sources lie in the
structure and content of the actor social relations, and its effects flow from the information,
influence, and solidarity it makes available to the actor (Adler & Kwon, 2002). Social capital
represents the sum of actual and potential resources embedded in the network of relationships
possessed by an individual or social unit, comprising both the network itself and the assets that
may be mobilized through that network (Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998).
8
Organization of the Dissertation
The researcher used five chapters to organize this study. This chapter provided the reader
with the key concepts and terminology commonly found in a discussion associated with equity
gaps in higher education at the intersectionality of BIPOC women. Chapter 2 reviews current
literature surrounding the scope of the study, including the history of higher education, and
benefits associated with more diversified executive leaders. It also discusses social science
theories supporting racial and ethnic diversity in higher education leadership roles, the critical
importance of leadership development in promoting BIPOC women and assumed social capital
barriers impeding the development of BIPOC women into leadership roles. Chapter 3 details the
methodology for selecting participants, data collection, choice of participants, and analysis.
Chapter 4 assesses the data and results based on a thematic analysis of stakeholder interviews,
documents, and artifacts. Chapter 5 provides proposed solutions, based on data analysis and the
literature, for closing the validated gaps and an implementation and evaluation plan for identified
solutions—current BIPOC women executives.
9
Chapter Two: Literature Review
This study was used to identify ways HEIs can better support BIPOC women leaders.
This study added to the limited body of research by investigating the participants’ lived
experiences in depth. The chapter begins with a critique of SCT. Then, the researcher offered a
general examination of the higher education industry. The researcher then discussed BIPOC
women in the higher education workforce. Next, the researcher described the challenge of
intersectionality that BIPOC women face in their pursuit of executive leadership roles. Finally,
the researcher described SCT, the theoretical framework that guides the interpretation and
analysis of the findings, and the role that social capital plays in higher education and the lives of
BIPOC women.
Social Capital Theory
The central proposition of SCT is that relationships matter. Social networks are a viable
asset, a store of solidarity or goodwill between people and groups. People derive benefits (or
disadvantages) from the human capacity to consider others and think and act generously and
cooperatively. This cohesion can be positive or negative, and because social capital is
multidimensional, it can be both positive and negative simultaneously.
Yosso (2005) mentioned social capital denied to people of color by a White, middle-class
culture and the same people of color using their social capital to gain education, legal justice, and
employment. Subsequently, people of color receiving social capital have given social capital
back to the social network that helped them, a tradition called “lifting as we climb” by the
National Association of Color Women’s Clubs (Yosso, 2005). While individuals can invest in or
destroy social capital, they do not own it, as it resides in their social relationships (Buys et al.,
10
2002). Instead, one can build social capital to increase the likelihood of being able to draw on it
when desired.
A review of the history of SCT reveals a wide range of perspectives based on theoretical
foundations and application of the theory. Social capital stems from the integration of
economics, sociology, political science, and other social sciences, as a conceptual innovation for
inter and transdisciplinary theoretical integration (Adam & Roncevic, 2003). Researchers
typically credit SCT to three authors who approached it from vastly different perspectives: (a)
the theory of capital by Pierre Bourdieu, (b) the rational choice approach by James Coleman, and
(c) the democratic or civic perspective by Robert Putnam (Claridge, 2018). The differing
perspectives of each author highlight the tension of viewing social capital as a public versus
private good, and its individual and collective components.
The theory of capital by Pierre Bourdieu is concerned with the dynamics of power in
society with recognition that social exchanges are not purely self-interested and emphasis on
structural constraints and unequal access to institutional resources based on class, gender, and
race (Dika & Singh, 2002). Bourdieu framed social capital as a resource acquired by individuals
or groups through the possession of institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance and
recognition (Bourdieu & Wacquant, 1992). Social capital is a property of the individual,
available to those who provide efforts to acquire it by achieving positions of power and status
and developing goodwill. Social capital does not include collective property attributes, which
Bourdieu called cultural capital. Bourdieu proposed people procure cultural and social capital
and economic capital through their upbringing or formal education. Therefore, dominant groups
in society can maintain power because access is limited (Yosso, 2005). This perspective is
starkly different from most current conceptualizations of social capital and contains many
11
concepts underlying the terms Bourdieu used (Claridge, 2018). There are broader sociological
theories of habitus and a rich set of theories that embrace the complexity of the social
environment rather than seeking simplification and reductionism.
The rational choice approach by James Coleman imports the economist principle of
rational action for use in the analysis of social systems (Forsman, 2005). Coleman’s perspective
is a union between the functionalist view of social action and rational theory, in which the utility-
maximizing pursuit of self-interest determines goals. Coleman connected sociology and social
actions of individuals with the rational ideas of economists that individuals act independently
and for self-interest (Jordan, 2015). Like Bourdieu, Coleman saw social capital as the social
structure of relationships among people (Claridge, 2018); however, Bourdieu viewed social
capital through the lens of power, status, and uneven distribution. In contrast, Coleman viewed
social capital as a public good, a collective asset of the group, and made little provision for any
inequality that results from or causes differential power and status. For Coleman, individuals
agree in social interactions for as long as the benefit persists, which is a primary tenant of
rational choice theory (Jordan, 2015). In this sense, social capital is a private and public good,
benefiting everyone in the group. Bourdieu posited social capital reproducing social inequality,
while Coleman treated social capital as almost universally productive (Claridge, 2018).
Robert Putnam proffered the democratic or civic perspective of social capital.
Researchers credit Putnam with popularizing social capital and treating it as a public good and a
feature of large population aggregates (Portes & Vickstrom, 2015). Features of social
organizations, such as networks, norms, and trust, facilitate action and cooperation for mutual
benefit. Some authors have criticized Putnam for conceptual and methodological flaws. The most
problematic is the oversimplification of complex and interrelated processes to a single or small
12
set of factors (Claridge, 2018). In this way, Putnam’s perspectives are antithetical to Bourdieu’s.
Putnam also offered a logical circularity, in which social capital is simultaneously a cause and
effect (Portes, 1998).
Nahapiet and Ghoshal (1998) connected SCT with Granovetter’s (1985) theory of
embeddedness. Several authors have regularly cited either Nahapiet and Ghoshal (1998) or Adler
and Kwon (2002) in research centering on SCT, particularly with use of their definitions of
social capital. The definition of social capital rendered by each researcher has been built on over
the years by subsequent researchers to address some of the challenges with SCT (Claridge,
2018). Commonalities of most definitions of social capital focus on social structures that have
productive benefits. Most definitions include role or rule-based origins (structural capital) and
mental and belief origins (cognitive social capital). Also, most definitions reference the highly
context-specific nature of social capital and its inherent complexity, which often leads
researchers to reduce or simplify concepts for practical research. In the end, social capital does
not have a clear and widely accepted meaning which is cited frequently as the primary challenge
in applying SCT (Dolfsma & Dannreuther, 2003).
Additional challenges exist in the broader use of SCT in research. First, simplification is
required to make sense of complex social environments, while at the same time,
oversimplification can obstruct meaningful findings (Claridge, 2018). Second, there continues to
be confusion about what causes social capital, what social capital is, and the actual results (Adam
& Roncevic, 2003; Adler & Kwon, 2002). Third, some authors consider SCT an umbrella
concept and not an actual theory (P. Haynes, 2009). Fourth, there is a question as to whether an
individual can exchange social capital in the economic sense. Fifth, there is a circularity to SCT
that is difficult to avoid. Some authors have claimed SCT is incredibly subjective and context
13
dependent, therefore difficult to assess and measure (McShane et al., 2016). For example, social
networks, roles, and rules are objective, but aspects like trust and shared understanding are
subjective. Connected to this challenge is that the same social capital has both productive and
destructive outcomes depending on context (P. Haynes, 2009). Third, practitioners use
interchangeable terminology to describe social capital. Various researchers use the terms type,
form, dimension, source, cause, determinants, substance, structure, consequence, outcome,
manifestation, and function to explain social capital, creating confusion (Claridge, 2018).
Finally, social capital is difficult to measure with a high degree of validity.
Social capital cannot be measured directly but inferred from its expressions, often called
determinants or manifestations (Claridge, 2018). The determinants impact social interactions and
therefore allow social capital to come about. Manifestations are the outcomes of social capital,
for example, promotion to executive roles. The measurement of social capital depends on the
level of analysis a researcher performs, driven by the interest of the researchers engaged (Turner,
2000). Analysis can be an individual, group or organizational, community, or national. These
levels overlap and interact, which is a theoretical cornerstone of Bourdieu’s (1986) idea of
society as a plurality of social fields. The level of analysis the researcher chooses drives which
theoretical framework can be used (Claridge, 2018). Because one cannot divide actual reality
into levels of analysis, the levels are inevitably embedded (Turner, 2000), contributing to why
simplification is required to make sense of the complex social environment, though
oversimplification can obstruct meaningful findings. The researcher has considered these
challenges in defining the study‘s parameters.
Using SCT in research requires a few key steps. First, the researcher must identify the
context for what is (and is not) essential and relevant to the project (Claridge, 2018). Second, the
14
researcher must make decisions about the focus of outcomes on individuals, groups, or the whole
organization or community (Turner, 2000). Third, the researcher must decide if social capital
operates in a group, between groups, or externally to the group. Fourth, as mentioned earlier, the
researcher must decide if social capital is primarily a public good, a private good, or both public
and private (Claridge, 2018). The researcher must also determine the primary theoretical
perspective they plan to use based on one or more key definitions. For this paper, the researcher
leveraged two standard definitions of social capital. The first definition is social capital is the
goodwill available to individuals or groups; its sources lie in the structure and content of the
actor‘s social relations. Its effects flow from the information, influence, and solidarity it makes
available to the actor (Adler & Kwon, 2002). The second definition of social capital the
researcher used is the sum of actual and potential resources embedded in available through and
derived from the network of relationships an individual or social unit possesses. Social capital
comprises the network and the mobilized assets (Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998). For this paper, the
researcher used the terminology of dimensions and functions of social capital.
The dimensions of social capital are (a) structural, (b) cognitive, and (c) relational
(Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998). Nahapiet and Ghoshal (1998) created the distinction between
structural, cognitive, and relational social capital, the most widely accepted framework for
understanding social capital. Structural social capital is the tangible social structure of an
organization. It is the network ties, fundamental roles, rules, precedents, and procedures of an
organization. Stanton-Salazar (2011) noted the main benefit of social contacts that provide
practical and emotional support to an individual navigating an organization. Cognitive and
relational social capital reflect the capability for resource exchange (Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998).
Cognitive social capital is the intangible system of meaning in an organization. It is the shared
15
understanding through context-specific language, codes, narratives, values, attitudes, and beliefs,
often manifested in the form of code between actors. Relational social capital relates to the
nature or quality of relationships expressed through trust and trustworthiness, obligations and
expectations, identity and identification. The core facet of relational social capital is
associability.
The distinction between these three dimensions builds on Granovetter’s (1992) discussion
of structural and relational embeddedness, in which structural social capital is tangible and
readily observable, while the relational dimension is intangible since it is what and how people
think and feel. Unfortunately, some authors conceptualized two (structural and cognitive) rather
than three (structural, cognitive, and relational) dimensions, which has led to additional
confusion in the literature about what is cognitive and what is relational social capital (Grootaert
et al., 2003). The similarity and overlap of cognitive and relational dimensions exasperate this
confusion (Claridge, 2018). The social capital functions the researcher used included bonding,
bridging, and linking social capital. Bonding social capital occurs with a social group. Bridging
social capital occurs between social groups differentiated by class, race, religion, and age. The
distinction between bonding and bridging social capital also builds on the work of Granovetter
(1992) on embeddedness.
Relationships among people or institutions at different levels of societal power link social
capital (Claridge, 2018). Researchers have credited the concept of linking social capital to the
World Bank (Szreter & Woolcock, 2004; Woolcock, 1998). One example of linking social
capital explored in this paper was the relationship between mentor and mentee (Schneider,
2006). The researcher planned to measure social capital in the study at the individual level. At
the individual level, researchers usually measure social capital by questionnaire surveys or
16
interviews using indicators that tap into social connections, social networks, and social support
(Claridge, 2018). The structural dimension includes social connections, relationships, and the
quantity and volume of social resources. The relational dimension includes social support and
associability. Cognitive social capital includes reciprocity, feelings of safety, and views of
multiculturalism. As the researcher made conclusions, the researcher was aware that much of the
data used to measure social capital is subjectively derived.
Background for Underrepresentation of BIPOC Women in Higher Education
To understand the application of SCT to this problem, the researcher needed a contextual
understanding. First, the researcher explored the underrepresentation of BIPOC women in the
higher education industry. It was also essential to visit the concept of intersectionality as it
applies in higher education. Finally, the researcher provided a short reflection on the use of
leadership development for BIPOC women in higher education.
Higher Education as an Industry
Higher education has seen much change in recent years. Information is now freely
accessible to anyone in the world at any time (S. D. King, 2018). While HEIs still grant official
certifications of mastery (i.e., degrees), the ability to learn directly from the source material is
fast becoming an opportunity for every person who desires it, without attending an HEI
(McCaffery, 2018). In addition, technological advancements have created a global knowledge
society that has demystified the higher education experience (Burnette, 2015).
Higher education as a business model has numerous new and diverse participants. For-
profit companies, such as Disney and Ford, have created learning organizations to provide
knowledge specialization for workers (McCaffery, 2018). For-profit companies, such as Apollo
and Education Management, have emerged to provide modalities that strip away much of the
17
tradition and value proposition HEIs have highlighted as differentiating themselves for potential
students (Hodgman, 2018). Some traditional HEIs (for example, Southern New Hampshire
University) have become mega-universities that offer a few students’ trappings of a residential
experience, while also offering online coursework, which closely matches the benefits of for-
profit entities (McCaffery, 2018).
Heightened accountability has emerged for traditional public and private HEIs. Federal
and state agencies are calling HEIs into account in the form of expected outcomes (Pew
Research Center, 2017). The relationship between HEI leaders and their boards has evolved to
include accountability (e.g., metrics), which is more common in for-profit entities (Doyle &
Brady, 2018). Internally, HEI leaders are wrestling with being accountable to each other,
creating a university identity crisis. Many HEIs were initially constructed as an idea more than a
specific model, challenging administrators to grapple with their mission and vision in response to
changing global needs or in deference to the world outside (Hofmeyer et al., 2015). Higher
education institution leadership teams are asking who they are as an institution. The senior
executive leader of these HEIs is the curator of that conversation. As a result, educational
researchers have developed new leadership models that can fit into educational contexts given
these new and evolving challenges (Esen et al., 2020).
Leadership models crafted for the uniqueness of higher education have emerged (Esen et
al., 2020). Hofmeyer et al. (2015) stated higher education leadership is the ability to influence
the direction in the context of the culture and is, therefore, about learning leadership
collaboratively. Because of the unique challenges faced by HEIs, Bolden et al. (2015) stated
shared leadership models offer a viable and practical approach to enhancing leadership in higher
education. Fields et al. (2019) conceptualized leadership in higher education as having a few
18
critical characteristics, including mentoring, empowering, and embracing identity. Adserias et al.
(2017) examined the views of 25 leaders managing HEIs, and many advocated for governance
using relational leadership models. Burnette (2015) cited the unique attributes of online
education require administrative leaders in higher education to work to build relationships,
highlighting that the negotiation skills needed for success are situational and contextual.
Higher education leaders work in a multicultural and diverse educational environments,
encompassing differences in race, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and age (Eliadis, 2018).
Eliadis (2018) found BIPOC women can lead in these diverse environments, as they bring
diverse strengths and perspectives. Gasman et al. (2015) suggested HEIs focus on racial and
ethnic disparities in senior administration to address industry challenges.
BIPOC Women in Higher Education
BIPOC women make up 9% of HEI administrators, including at the highest level of a
university president (Pritchard et al., 2020). Though there has been an increase in the pool of
available women and persons of color at the presidency level, there is still a shortage of BIPOC
women presidents (Espinosa et al., 2019). The American College President report indicated there
are 4.8% African American college presidents, 1.4% Asian American Pacific Islander, 2.8%
Latinx, and 0.9% American Indian; of these presidents, the percentage of women includes 5%
African American, 4.3% Latina, 0.7% Asian American, and 0.7% American Indian (H. L.
Johnson, 2017).
Pritchard et al. (2020) revealed women are more represented in lower level, lower paying
administrative positions than they are in top executive positions. Similarly, people of color are in
more significant numbers in lower level administrative positions (Pritchard et al., 2020). In 2017,
CUPA-HR published three reports on equity and diversity among higher education
19
administrators and found women and ethnic minorities (analyzed separately) continue to face
disadvantages of representation and pay (McChesney, 2018). As a result, the CUPA-HR
researchers considered the intersection of gender and ethnic minority status and what unique
challenges these individuals face in HEIs.
Challenge of Intersectionality
Intersectionality refers to discrimination or bias experienced by individuals with
overlapping identities, each identity associated with discrimination on its own (McChesney,
2018). Crenshaw (1994) introduced the term intersectionality to demonstrate how U.S. structures
and discourses of resistance often frame identities as isolated and mutually exclusive, resulting in
the theoretical erasure of Black women who hold multiple minoritized identities. Some
researchers have argued a lack of potency in using intersectionality as a modern lens (J. C. Harris
& Patton, 2018; Nichols & Stahl, 2019). J. C. Harris and Patton (2018) suggested
intersectionality has become a buzzword in higher education research, neutralizing its use to
encourage transformative change; however, McChesney (2018) used recent data to study
representation and pay equity for the intersection of two groups: (a) women and (b) individuals
who identify as either Black/African American or Hispanic/Latino. The author described the
inequity women and ethnic minorities experience, how these intersect for BIPOC women, and
how inequities differ by position type. For example, while minority men and White women earn
less than White men, BIPOC women are paid the least equitably, at 67 cents on the dollar.
BIPOC women are underrepresented in faculty and administrative positions, when
compared to the representation of men of color, White women, and White men. BIPOC women
experience the intersection of two challenges: (a) their gender and (b) their race or ethnicity
(McChesney, 2018). For example, BIPOC women have pay equity challenges at even higher-
20
level roles, being paid considerably less than White men are. While BIPOC women share this
issue with White women, they do not share it with men of color, suggesting gender is the critical
factor.
Researchers have reviewed intersectionality in higher education in some contexts.
Gopaldas (2013) mapped out intersectionality and the experiences of groups intending to
radicalize diversity advocacy. Assumptions in the study of marketplace diversity include
interdependent social identity structures, such as race, class, and gender, instead of independent
demographic variables. Methodological approaches include comparative ethnographic research
to reveal silenced voices. C. Haynes et al. (2020) analyzed literature of studies about Black
women in higher education over the last 30 years. They found all the scholars in 23 studies
addressed intersectionality by centralizing Black women as the subject to illustrate that Black
women’s lives cannot be fully understood by studying one dimension of identity alone. Nichols
and Stahl (2019) conducted a systematic literature review of 50 papers that explicitly adopted
intersectionality as a theoretical framework to interrogate how institutions produce advantages
and disadvantages. They determined considerable work is needed to actively address the
intersecting systems of inequity, impacting participation and outcomes of students and faculty.
A specific area of focus that could benefit BIPOC women aspiring to leadership roles
relates to leadership development in the intersectionality of BIPOC women. According to Taylor
et al. (2014), HEI administrators who understand the intersections of their own identities are
better apt to serve a diverse, growing student population. For example, one cannot state all
people of color experience racism. In the same way, HEI administrators with intersecting
identities can understand the compound effect racism has on marginalized groups. The authors
21
cite professional development series based on engaging dialogue about social-justice issues,
based on these experiences of racism.
Agosto and Roland (2018) found leaders can respond to experiences using
intersectionality. Using intersectionality to contest uneven power relations behind unjust
practices or procedures, researchers have connected race and gender to zero-tolerance policies
and ensuring women of color have equitable opportunities, such as access to finances for
professional leadership development (Agosto & Roland, 2018).
D. R. Davis and Maldonado (2015) employed a phenomenological study with African
American female academics and revealed that the intersection of race and gender affected their
leadership development and career trajectories. Participants faced exclusion from social
networks and confirmed securing sponsors, often White men with authority in the organization,
provided opportunities for advancement. Therefore, articulating how racial and gendered
identities inform the leadership development experiences in academia is needed to challenge the
traditional discourse of HEIs (D. R. Davis & Maldonado, 2015). In addition, understanding
intersectionality could aid organizations in establishing support mechanisms that BIPOC women
require.
Role of Leadership Development
Articulating identities requires a deep understanding of leadership development’s role in
BIPOC women ascending into successive roles. Leadership development includes organizational
activities (e.g., mentoring) that emphasize individual-based knowledge, skills, and abilities
associated with formal leadership roles that enable people to think and act in new ways
(Coleman, 1988). Leadership development may connect to organizational social capital.
22
Even in leadership development, the level of structural and linking social capital provided
by HEIs may not be adequate for BIPOC women. Jackson (2017) found although top leadership
is committed to the development, most existing programs lack emphasis on underrepresented
minorities. In Jackson’s study, seven of the 11 participants suggested leadership commitment
was absent or lukewarm. Ibarra (1993) suggested BIPOC women differ in character and
composition from their White male counterparts due to the organizational context in which
relationships occur. Because organizational context shapes the development of relationships and
network characteristics, the impact on leadership development also impacts BIPOC women
seeking support (Ibarra, 1993). Chang et al. (2014) explored how 14 leaders of color working in
faith-based higher education have experienced leadership development. Chang et al. concluded
that while emerging leaders are encouraged to seek leadership development, institutions do not
take responsibility for affirming and supporting emerging leaders of color with formal and
informal mentoring strategies. Higher education institutions offered limited development
opportunities due to a dearth of role models and the placement of minority leaders in dead-end
positions in the structural hierarchy (Chang et al., 2014). Two female and two male faculty of
color at a predominantly White institution (PWI) in the western U.S. engaged in self-study on
leadership development with a particular emphasis on the role of diversity issues (Diggs et al.,
2009). The authors concluded the administrative commitment and provision of diversity
programs and activities are insufficient to support faculty of color. Faculty of color need spaces
to express themselves, share experiences and perspectives, and vent and support each other in
(cultural) ways that are not necessarily safe in the official, formal workplace (Diggs et al., 2009).
Overall, the lack of development impacts the people of color who would be available and
prepared for roles as vice presidents and presidents (Mason, 2017).
23
A possible hindrance to leadership development in HEIs relates to the unique alignment
of relationships in most universities’ distributed leadership models. Goodman (2014) suggested
marginalization can exist in various contexts for people with multiple social identities working in
larger organizations. Bolden et al. (2008) argued social capital and social identity may be the
essential missing bridges between individual agency and the organizational structure of HEIs.
The Need for BIPOC Women in Higher Education Executive Leadership
Higher education institutions are diverse environments in which BIPOC women may be
able to assist using their diverse strengths and perspectives (Eliadis, 2018). Gasman et al. (2015)
explored the leadership landscape of eight Ivy League institutions. They suggested diverse
leaders could best address these HEI challenges. Howe-Walsh and Turnbull (2016) interviewed
faculty in U.K. universities. Participants revealed without inspiring women leading their
universities, they felt they would not receive support toward seniority. Hart (2006) analyzed data
collected from leading journals in higher education and revealed a lack of diversity in senior
levels of universities limits the success of individuals and institutions. Fox (2005) highlighted the
negative influence caused by the absence of top-tier women. In summary, higher education needs
leaders who understand and embrace diverse identities and can influence culture from that
position. BIPOC women professionals could meet that leadership need.
Benefits to BIPOC Women Attaining Executive Roles
BIPOC women desire executive leadership roles. Arjun (2019) conducted seven
interviews with women who self-identified as Black, African, or mixed race and were employed
as mid-level administrators at 4-year PWIs across the United States. These participants desired
senior roles and perceived certain activities would assist their ascension to executive roles.
24
Activities included updated HEI policies and procedures, facilitated mentor-mentee
relationships, and strategic recruitment/retention of BIPOC female administrators (Arjun, 2019).
Once BIPOC women attain executive roles, they use their status to help other BIPOC
women achieve career success. Hagan (2021) assessed the experiences of 48 female presidents at
Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges accredited institutions
and found participants used their executive roles to support the next generation of leaders
because others supported them during their leadership journeys. Cheung (2021) cited BIPOC
female leaders have used their positions internationally to establish mentoring networks, build
mentoring relationships with younger female academics, and create organizations to help
aspiring leaders attain executive roles. Globally, BIPOC women have established initiatives such
as Athena SWAN and Advance UK’s Aurora program to help BIPOC women advance (Cheung,
2021). Helping support BIPOC women into senior roles could also benefit the HEIs.
Diversity Bonus in Higher Education Organizations
Higher education institutions may not realize the benefits of diverse leaders prepared to
work in a multicultural environment (Eliadis, 2018). Research has shown representation from
many identities ensures greater cognitive diversity in a group, such as a senior leadership team
(Phillips, 2019). Interest in this diversity in HEIs has emerged.
Esen et al. (2020) researched five prominent higher education journals between 1995 and
2014 and determined studies focused on the attributes and benefits of female leadership had
increased significantly during the previous 5 years. Doyle and Brady (2018) performed a
literature review and suggested HEIs do not use a model of organization with a concentration on
diversity in leadership, and a model would create capacity for organizational change for HEIs.
Cooper (2020) noted BIPOC women participants cited their university leaders as not seeing the
25
value of diversity in leadership ranks. Understanding the need for more BIPOC female leaders in
higher education can lead one to consider the reasons for the underrepresentation of leaders in
executive roles.
Causes for the Underrepresentation of BIPOC Female Higher Education Executives
There are various causes for the underrepresentation of BIPOC women in the industry.
First, across many industries, including higher education, is the challenge of racism. The
behavior of historically White men-laden HEIs revealed in the literature demonstrates they do
not fully value BIPOC women as leaders (Cooper, 2020; Reeves, 2015). Related to these
qualities are the barriers to progression that BIPOC women face. Connected to these barriers is
the necessary social capital BIPOC women require to gain opportunities in their progression.
After exploring systematic racism in higher education, the researcher explored how HEIs
understand and value BIPOC women and how access to social capital is connected.
Systematic Racism in Higher Education
Research that proposes an intersectional focus to explain deficiencies should include a
discussion specifically on racism. For example, Bonaparte-Hagos (2021) shared lessons learned
during their transitions from faculty members to executive administrators and concluded race is
an unavoidable factor in career progression in higher education. They stated HEIs pressure Black
women administrators to demonstrate competency but grant White counterparts’ latitudes to
grow. The author also stated many minorities feel pressured to suppress personal values and
views to fit with organizational ones. These lived experiences are one of many examples of the
impact of racism on the progression of BIPOC women in higher education.
Social norms and practices in HEIs regulate and dictate the behavior of BIPOC women.
Anderson (2017) interviewed 10 female executive leaders of African American, Asian,
26
Caucasian, and Native American descent at 4-year HEIs in the United States. The interviews
focused on practices that influenced and contributed to success in executive positions. African
American participants articulated they experienced discrimination becoming leaders, while
Caucasian participants perceived their race gave them privileges. The Asian participant believed
their race impacted their motivation and goals, but they did not necessarily experience
discrimination. The Native American participants believed their race shaped their leadership
process but did not necessarily experience discrimination.
Sangha-Rico (2020) collected the experiences of 23 women of color serving in senior
leadership positions in public HEIs in California. Many participants shared how socially coded
expectations and norms, communicated directly by colleagues or superiors, regulated their
identities. Areas addressed related explicitly to the appearance and personal lifestyle of these
participants. Additionally, some tones in conversation and communication was viewed
negatively when practiced by a woman of color but praised when practiced by a White male
(Sangha-Rico, 2020).
BIPOC women have experienced extreme racial discrimination in the workplace.
Mitchell (2021) conducted a narrative inquiry of five Black women’s experiences as leaders in
PWIs in higher education in the northeast region of the United States. The author showed these
women must navigate the leadership norms of the organization dominated by White men, bias
and racism, and limited visibility in their organization. The study detailed numerous examples of
blatant racism and bias that were allowed, unrecognized, and unchallenged by White colleagues,
including dismissive, closed-minded, and disrespectful behavior by White colleagues that
occurred during meetings participants facilitated.
27
Wright (2019) examined the lived experiences of current and past women of color leaders
in higher education to identify common barriers, challenges, and strategies for success in
attaining leadership. Participants included 15 former and current women of color leaders with at
least 10 years in the field of higher education and professional titles at the director level or
higher. When asked about professional challenges, the most common theme, with almost 60% of
the mentions, was managing “isms”: e.g., racism, sexism, and ageism. When asked about
institutional challenges, the most common challenge, noted in over half of the responses, was the
hostile institutional environment. Participants described fighting for consideration based on race
and directly encountering racial attacks in the workplace.
Racism in HEIs impacts career success. Manley (2015) conducted a self-report
questionnaire on 74 participants—41 of whom were Caucasian—who were employees or faculty
in academic affairs. The researcher found differences in perceived obstacles among racial
groups. Specifically, more than half of non-White participants believed members of their racial
group have a more challenging time obtaining leadership positions in higher education than other
racial groups.
T. R. Davis (2020) conducted in-depth interviews with one White woman, one Hispanic
woman, one biracial woman, and two African American women who were leaders in central
Tennessee HEIs. All participants provided detailed descriptions of different types of
discrimination and biases they experienced as leaders in higher education. Participants of color
described organizational barriers to ascending into top leadership positions due to race (T. R.
Davis, 2020).
Hannum et al. (2015) revealed semistructured interviews of 35 women at the senior-most
levels of HEIs revealed racial discrimination themes. While 51% of the total sample mentioned
28
the theme of lack of opportunities and support, nearly 75% of women of color experienced this
barrier, compared to only 35% of White women who experienced it; this was a statistically
significant difference (Hannum et al., 2015).
Lindsey (2019) conducted a qualitative study of the experiences, self-conceptions, and
coping mechanisms of eight Black, cabinet-level, women administrators, navigating socially
constructed leadership environments in public and private institutes of higher education. The
study revealed ostracization of individuals who did not fit a White, male, patriarchal profile,
including exclusion from informal social networking and career advice. Participants expressed
unfair racialized performance realities, instigating them to overcompensate by attempting to
be “twice as good.” All but two participants indicated race was the most prominent professional
and leadership concern in progression and long-term success. Overall, the researcher found
continued organizational challenges for Black women in higher education leadership and
psychological taxation and gendered-racialized exploitation, which affects the well-being of
Black women administrators who continue to forge new pathways.
D. R. Davis and Maldonado (2015) employed a phenomenological study of African
American women academics to explore how race and gender identities informed their leadership
development experiences. The five participants were selected because they were African
American women in senior leadership positions in academia. The researchers discovered the race
of participants had negatively affected their careers. Participants reported experiences of being
invisible, voiceless, discriminated against, oppressed, undermined, and treated unfairly due to
their race. Participants were regularly excluded from critical organizational social networks
unless they could secure sponsors who advanced their careers. Overall, they experienced an
“unlevel playing field” in the workplace, due to their race.
29
Higher Education Institutions Valuing of BIPOC Women
HEIs and their leaders do not fully value the intersecting identities of BIPOC women who
seek to be executives, as demonstrated in how they respond to these women. Based on a research
study of nine women of color at nine U.S. HEIs, Eggins (2017) discovered barriers to
advancement for all women in U.S. academe include unfavorable work climates, challenging
structural characteristics, “leaky” pipelines, and difficult socialization experiences that
specifically exclude all women, including women of color. BIPOC women have faced
experiences such as doubts about their abilities to lead and conscious or unconscious reliance on
existing stereotyping that lead to isolationism and tokenism (Eggins, 2017).
Howe-Walsh and Turnbull (2016) used in-depth interviews with faculty in U.K.
universities to reveal how women struggle to navigate their careers. Participants revealed at each
stage of their careers, from recruitment and selection to retirement, all women dealt with issues
such as biases about their competencies, denial of access to male-dominated social networks,
denial of access to funding for research, and a lack of consideration for first authorship of
research papers. The male-dominated culture influences daily working practices, and the
evidence suggests exclusion from networks limits opportunities for career advancement (Howe-
Walsh & Turnbull, 2016).
Sangha-Rico (2020) used narrative inquiry to capture the stories of 23 women of color
senior leaders from multiple California HEIs. Many participants spoke about how they regulated
identities through socially coded expectations and norms. These expectations, often verbally
expressed by colleagues or superiors, spoke directly to societal customs for women of color,
including appearance, tone, and personal lifestyles. While some participants shared how their
gender and racial identities served as obstacles, others explained how these identities contributed
30
to their professional success, by instilling confidence in their abilities to become empowered
leaders.
A lack of understanding of BIPOC women could stem from a lack of understanding of
the concept of intersectionality. Agosto and Roland (2018) analyzed 15 education leadership
articles published in peer-reviewed journals between 2005 and 2017. They found
intersectionality is a conceptual framework focused on the experiences of individuals as leaders
and can be used to support the development of transformative educational leadership agendas.
In a literature synthesis, C. Haynes et al. (2020) examined 680 studies about Black
women in higher education published. Only 23 studies addressed intersectionality by centralizing
Black women as the subject to illustrate that Black women’s lives cannot be fully understood by
studying one dimension of identity alone. Furthermore, only 20 articles used intersectional lenses
to evaluate the intersectionality that reinforces the race, sex, gender, and class domination
shaping Black women‘s experiences in higher education.
Fully capturing the encompassing meaning of intersectionality remains a challenge.
Harris and Patton (2019) analyzed 97 peer-reviewed journal articles that focused on higher
education using Harper’s (2012) Race without Racism article as a guide to assess the articles.
Harris and Patton determined most scholars employed intersectionality in a cursory manner,
misappropriately, or in a reductionist manner.
Nichols and Stahl’s (2019) structured literature review of 50 refereed journal articles
demonstrates that when considering the workings of multiple systems of (dis)advantage,
academic participation intertwines the social and personal aspects of the higher education
experience. They surmised while intersectionality challenges the dominant view of higher
education, there is considerable work to be done to actively address the workings of intersecting
31
systems of inequity impacting outcomes. The challenges of understanding intersecting identities
in concept could impact how HEI leaders perceive BIPOC women (Nichols & Stahl, 2019).
Understanding BIPOC Women
BIPOC women in general and as current or potential executive leaders are
misunderstood. Mercurius (2018) interviewed 16 Black women professionals working at the Top
20 elite PWIs to explore their lived experiences. These professionals revealed they are viewed as
anomalies in their field and at times have to prove to stakeholders that, as professionals, they can
do their jobs. Participants revealed stakeholders expect them to be perfect and better than
everyone else as they are unique as BIPOC women in leadership roles.
Chance (2020) interviewed nine HEI Black women presidents and vice presidents who
referred to themselves as pioneers in their fields. Participants mentioned being constantly
reminded of their uniqueness and regularly dealing with misunderstandings due to this
uniqueness.
Glass and Concrete Ceilings
Women of color frequently experience identity-based challenges when pursuing
executive leadership roles in higher education. Wright (2019) examined the lived experiences of
15 former and current women of color leaders in higher education. Everyday experiences
included feelings of loneliness, proving oneself, and being the token person of color (Wright,
2019).
Anderson (2017) conducted 10 interviews with female HEI executives of four races at 4-
year HEIs in the United States. Results showed all of the female leaders believed their gender
impacted their career paths, regardless of their race category, and most believed their race
impacted their leadership progress. According to a narrative inquiry conducted with four African
32
American women in leadership roles, J. C. Brown (2019) identified racism and sexism as
barriers to career paths for women in their journey to executive leadership. In a
phenomenological study of 15 women of color in senior-level leadership positions at selected
U.S. universities, Cooper (2020) shared ethnic and psychological/emotional barriers have
dampened women of color’s rises to leadership. Reeves (2015) used qualitative multiple case
studies to explore the experiences of 13 female administrators in higher education. They
discovered themes of the glass ceiling as a phenomenon and gender barriers to career
advancement.
Not everyone sees or experiences the glass ceiling in the same way. Famiglietti (2015)
conducted a phenomenological study with eight successful executive women employed by
Fortune 1000 companies in California and revealed participants believed obstacles were virtually
nonexistent. Even though a glass ceiling exists, it was not part of their personal experiences.
In an anonymous survey of 177 participants (92 women and 85 men) currently employed
in positions with the potential for leadership in U.S. companies, McDaniel-Richmond (2016)
determined the glass ceiling has shifted: Men and women have similar perceptions concerning
barriers, and women are receiving as many opportunities to take on developmental assignments
as their male counterparts. Jarmon (2014) conducted a qualitative phenomenological study with
senior-level administrator women in the Midwest to describe perceptions of the glass ceiling.
Participants revealed the belief that the glass ceiling is not intentional but an “old-school” way of
thinking.
Hannum et al. (2015) conducted semistructured interviews of 35 women at the senior-
most levels of HEIs to reveal themes of discouragement and sabotage along with different
expectations for men and women in 60% of the women sampled. In the 51% of the total sample
33
who mentioned a lack of opportunities and support, nearly 75% of BIPOC women experienced
this barrier, revealing institutional support as a differentiator (Hannum et al., 2015). This lack of
a specific kind of social capital could be a contributing factor to these experiences.
Access to Social Capital for BIPOC Women
Social capital is the resources available to individuals in the structure of various levels of
organizations (Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998). Its effects include information, influence, and
solidarity that could be made available to individuals (Adler & Known, 2002). The dimensions
of social capital include (a) structural (e.g., network ties, roles, rules, procedures), (b) cognitive
(attitudes, beliefs, narratives, codes, and shared meaning), and (c) relational (trust, norms,
obligations, expectations) social capital (Claridge, 2019). The functions of social capital bond
people in a group, bridge diverse groups, and links people at different levels of power (Claridge,
2019). The use of social capital can improve various aspects of higher education activities,
including promoting BIPOC women into executive roles; however, it is not currently being used
for that purpose.
Gilmeanu and Gauca (2017) analyzed the top eight universities ranked by The Higher
Education for the year 2016 to investigate how top universities use social entrepreneurship to
increase the bridging social capital of their internal stakeholders and the role played by
leadership in strengthening the foundations of this social capital. The analysis revealed the
university experience could be much more valuable if there is a focus on increasing the social
capital inside the university to help internal stakeholders (e.g., leaders) achieve their maximum
potential.
Mainah (2016) interviewed 20 Black women employed in an academic institution in a
leadership position. Challenges experienced by participants involved exclusion from social and
34
informal networking sessions after work or outside the organization in other social places, which
is the structural dimension of social capital. Lack of exposure to linking social capital in the form
of leadership responsibilities and a lack of relational social capital in the form of support from
leadership made the issue of exclusion even more complicated.
Jackson (2017) conducted a mixed methods study to examine the structural social capital
dimension (succession planning, processes, and management practices) used in PWIs to diversify
senior executive leadership. Most participants identified that consideration of underrepresented
groups is a critical practice. They suggested that their institution has programs to help leverage
women, but nothing representing bridging social capital for BIPOC women (Jackson, 2017).
Formal and informal sponsorship is often an attribute of social capital in organizations.
Longman et al. (2019) interviewed 30 emerging and current female leaders in the Council for
Christian Colleges & Universities. They focused on the extent to which various kinds of
developmental relationships (e.g., mentoring, coaching, and sponsorship) participants
experienced. Only a few reported coaching or sponsorship, although the participants confirmed
that the value of having a network of influential relationships was vital in the leadership journey.
Helping organizations understand the unique intersectionality of BIPOC women and investing in
various forms of social capital could present aspects of a solution to the underrepresentation of
BIPOC female executives.
Potential Solutions to Address Underrepresentation of BIPOC Female Executives
Given the complexity of the higher education industry, potential solutions to address the
underrepresentation of BIPOC women executives revolve around a few possibilities. The
literature revealed the leadership development that accounts for the unique intersectionality of
35
BIPOC women could benefit. Specific aspects of social capital could be coupled with
development to enhance BIPOC women’s likelihood of progression.
Leadership Development
Articulating identities requires a deep understanding of leadership development’s role in
ascending BIPOC women into successive roles. Eggins (2017) found BIPOC women cited
leadership development as pivotal to their ascending to senior leadership positions in higher
education. Leadership development includes activities that emphasize individual-based
knowledge, skills, and abilities associated with formal leadership roles (or human capital) that
enable people to think and act in new ways (Coleman, 1988). Leadership development also
involves the social capital of building networked relationships among individuals that enhance
cooperation and resource exchange in creating organizational value (Bouty, 2000; Tsai &
Ghoshal, 1998). Unfortunately, the body of literature involving leadership development in higher
education, specifically at the intersection of BIPOC women, is sparse.
The practice of leadership development is mixed in higher education. Liu (2019) found
an increased need for leadership development in higher education. Longman et a. (2019)
interviewed 30 emerging and current female leaders about developmental relationships and
discovered only a few reported having been coached or sponsored. These participants confirmed
the value of having a network of influential relationships was vital in the leadership journey.
Leadership development can take various forms and applications for BIPOC women in
their progression toward executive roles in higher education. Dopson et al. (2018) examined
peer-reviewed work on leadership development in higher education to understand its content,
processes, outcomes, and impact. Results suggest current literature is small‐scale, fragmented,
and often theoretically weak, with many different and coexisting models, approaches, and
36
methods and little consensus on what may be suitable and effective in higher education (Dopson
et al., 2018). One typical example of leadership development (an attribute of social capital) is the
mentoring and modeling of aspirational BIPOC women for future roles. Beyond mentoring and
modeling, other forms of leadership development include giving BIPOC women new and
challenging activities and crafting organizational policies and procedures to best frame
development opportunities (Herwatic, 2016).
BIPOC Women Need Mentors and Models
Mentorship and modeling could impact BIPOC women’s progression in significant ways.
Herwatic (2016) examined the career paths of female community college presidents in Arkansas
to determine how these women navigated the leadership labyrinth. The labyrinth is a metaphor
that Eagly and Carli (2007) described as “the varied challenges confronting women as they
travel, often on indirect paths, sometimes through alien territory, on their way to leadership“ (p.
1) to reach the presidency. During the interviews, each participant discussed some aspects of
building social capital, specifically the importance of mentoring relationships and networking
(Herwatic, 2016). O’Roark (2015) studied six female community college presidents who
identified encouragement from mentors and colleagues that influenced their pathways to
becoming president. Finally, Reeves (2015) explored the experiences of 13 female administrators
who have career mentors in more advanced leadership positions in higher education. These
mentors provided trust (a relational social capital), honesty, and encouragement that helped their
mentees advance their careers.
The specific aspects of mentor-mentee relationships can and do vary. Female
administrators benefited from having multiple mentors with exposure to different perspectives
and different types of mentoring (Dennis-Jackson, 2018). Women with mentors holding higher
37
status positions received more effective coaching and career development mentoring (Reeves,
2015). Kinnersley (2009) studied 34 female administrators (30% BIPOC) in higher education in
Tennessee. Almost half (44%) of the participants had experienced mentoring informally. Of
those participants, 85% were satisfied with their overall relationship, and 80% of women agreed
their mentor provided relevant feedback to improve their performance, particularly in new and
challenging opportunities. One valuable opportunity for aspiring leaders cited by these
participants was coupling their mentor-mentee relationships with the freedom to try and fail at
new and challenging activities.
BIPOC Women Need Challenges
BIPOC women benefit from being challenged by new experiences, possibly even failing
at them. Grotrian-Ryan (2015) used mixed methods to highlight mentoring functions that
enhanced the learning experience for leaders in higher education for participants of the ACE
Fellows Program. Challenging assignments were an integral part of the ACE Fellows program.
Respondents were involved in various challenging assignments: partaking in institutional
advancement work, learning a different governance structure, exploring various international-
presence models, heading an institutional-wide diversity plan task force, and guiding a strategic
planning process (Grotrian-Ryan, 2015). This function received the most responses for being
frequently used and highly beneficial (Grotrian-Ryan, 2015). Using structured interviews of 10
Black women and higher education executives in PWIs, Hyppolite (2019) discovered leaders
stressed the ability to learn and mature when confronted with chronic or crisis adversity and
having a recovery plan when things go badly. Kinnersley (2009) determined gaining experience
is imperative to career development for the 34 female administrators surveyed, with 79%
agreeing that someone gave them opportunities to demonstrate their competencies and 68% of
38
female participants agreeing that their mentor assigned challenging tasks to stimulate
professional growth. While some HEIs have created a framework for formalized development,
many institutions do not have formalized practices at the organizational level.
BIPOC Women Need Policies and Practices Supporting Progression
Creating formal context through structural social capital for leadership development has
value to BIPOC women. Establishing policies that regulate the hiring and development of staff
consistent with the organization‘s strategies is essential if a unique pool of human resources is
desired (L. C. Harris & Ogbonna, 2001). S. Brown (2021) suggested connecting efforts to hire
more diverse employees directly to institutional policies and having departments draft diversity-
recruitment plans to identify aspirations for their workforce, such as reflecting the student body
or community. Arjun (2019) conducted seven semistructured interviews with women of color
mid-level administrators at 4-year PWIs across the United States. These participants call for
more HEI policies and procedures perceived by participants to benefit their ascension to
executive roles (Arjun, 2019). Tight (2018) reported human capital theory has been the most
influential theory affecting higher education policy over the last half-century or more. In more
recent years, researchers have supplemented human capital theory with SCT. While both theories
have underlying faults, they remain essential to higher education and higher education research
in maintaining the interest of policymakers and funders (Tight, 2018). To appropriately use SCT
and social capital, however, the various facets of social capital applied to BIPOC women should
be explored.
Social Capital
Examining social capital could provide potential support to BIPOC women seeking to
progress. Ayios et al. (2014) stated social capital applied can be a force for good. Callahan et al.
39
(2015) recommended increasing diversity in future leadership by building trustworthy
professional relationships, training professionals to recognize their social capital, and developing
practices for imparting capital to colleagues. Mentors may not recognize that access to networks,
opportunities for information exchange and trust development can be as important as career
mentoring (Callahan et al., 2015). Vorhaus (2014) revealed social capital functions are related to
class, ethnicity, culture, and gender; and impart an uneven capacity to convert potential capital
into practical resources.
The use of social capital is relevant to career progression in higher education. Bozionelos
(2014) performed observations and interviews with individuals from the Greek higher education
system. They determined the significant factor that shapes careers in Greek academia is social
capital in a broader cultural environment. Membership in an in group that uses its social capital
for the benefit of its members exclusively determined academic careers in Greece (Bozionelos,
2014). Angervall et al. (2018) investigated researchers‘ experiences in Swedish higher education
based on 27 interviews. Researchers found individuals can accumulate different forms of social
capital in an academic career and use the capital for progression differently.
Different forms of social capital, bonding, and linking, accumulate in different
institutional settings. Individuals and institutions together produce and accumulate social capital
and, in the case of structural gendered relations, can create inequality of access to social capital
(Angervall et al., 2018). Yawson (2018) conducted interviews with nine department chairs from
a single public university in Turkey to ascertain their views about social capital in their practices.
The researcher identified mutual trust, respect, and shared perspectives as significant social
capital in the department, in addition to informal social networks in higher administration that
helped them accomplish their work (Yawson, 2018).
40
Some higher education leaders have successfully used social capital to advance their
careers. Herwatic (2016) examined the career paths of female community college presidents in
Arkansas to determine how these women have navigated their way to the presidency. Each
participant discussed some aspects of building social capital (Herwatic, 2016). Gilmeanu and
Guaca (2017) analyzed the Top 8 universities ranked by Times Higher Education for 2016.
Results show all eight universities created organizational structures intended explicitly for the
development of internal stakeholders‘ social capital, resulting in various forms of community
service, incubators for social enterprises, and networks of collaborators interested in various
issues. Gilmeanu and Guaca recommended academic leaders focus more intently on ensuring
that internal stakeholders increase their social capital and thus can achieve their maximum
potential.
Bolden et al. (2008) conducted a study of 152 interviews in 12 U.K. universities. They
revealed a significant influence exerted by informal leaders, typically outside formal university
hierarchies and forums, through social networks and relationships. The social dimension
identified refers to both formal and informal networks and relationships in and beyond the
institution (social capital), and the shared sense of identity and purpose in and between groups
(social identity; Bolden et al., 2008). University leaders frequently spoke of needing to learn how
to navigate and use the informal paths and networks, sometimes totally bypassing and
occasionally undermining the formal channels (Bolden et al., 2008). Building these paths and
networks could provide BIPOC women access to resources.
Access to People Who Can Help
Various relational resources supplied via social capital could benefit BIPOC women.
MacLeod (2018) used qualitative interviews to examine the impact of coaching on 10 women in
41
academic leadership positions in higher education. Coaching for women in leadership roles in
academic administration resulted in increased mindfulness and presence, self-awareness and
confidence, and the ability to act, resulting in transformative change (MacLeod, 2018). The
narratives confirm that increased confidence arises from being able to talk things out loud in a
safe place. Many women talked about how coaching enabled them to act differently, have
confidence in decision-making, and propel themselves and their organizations forward. MacLeod
suggested coaching women in higher education might be a way forward to advance leadership,
increase resilience, and perhaps even generate thriving administrators.
Walker (2020) used social network analysis to study relational structures surrounding 140
African American female administrators, focusing specifically on formal and informal network
attributes. Participants shared members of their networks supported them by building capacity
and confidence, assisting them with work-related matters, and advocating for an opportunity with
new responsibilities.
D. R. Davis and Maldonado (2015) employed a phenomenological study with five
African American women in senior leadership positions in five U.S. colleges. The participants
acknowledged that sponsors significantly contributed to their career ascension to leadership even
though the women faced exclusion from informal social networks: “the good old boys club.”
Access to Information
BIPOC women need the information to achieve career success. Ault (2017) explored the
preparatory (prepresidential) experiences of six university presidents in the Midwest and their
perceptions about what best prepared them for the demands they experience leading institutions.
The presidents cited three critical competencies: (a) know-why competencies, enculturating
individuals to the understood values and perceived purpose of the organization critical to
42
navigate the academic cultures successfully; (b) know-how competencies, knowledge and
expertise for specific presidential job functions; (c) know-who competencies, interpersonal skill
sets and navigation of social networks. These competencies source from time spent with
presidents (before participants become presidents themselves), time spent with mentors, varied
experiences along the participants’ career paths, and the experiences of others at the same
institutions.
Mason (2017) explored the perceptions of preparedness for their first presidency among
15 randomly chosen Black/African American community college presidents. Surveyed
presidents cited the benefit of having individuals who could offer advice. This counsel included
advising on opportunities that individuals might not have considered without the direction of the
mentor.
Reeves (2015) used a case study to explore the experiences of 13 female administrators
who have career mentors in higher education. Strategic planning knowledge was vital in securing
the most senior-level leadership positions. Training through mentoring fostered mentee self-
awareness for strategic planning and applying new knowledge to move the organization forward.
Using interviews of 10 Black female higher education executives in PWIs, Hyppolite
(2019) discovered that understanding the rules of engagement is equally important as knowing
who makes the final decisions. Hyppolite further revealed each participant emphasized the
importance of needing someone to help grant them access to the inner circle.
Conceptual Framework
Relationships are a natural feature of life. Whether expressed in friendships or mentoring,
relational ties impact every individual. Ascending to executive roles in higher education involves
relationships. The connections that link hopeful executives with other academy members can
43
mean the difference between being accepted or rejected, receiving a promotion, or being passed
over. This study proposes a conceptual framework linking critical concepts of SCT in a
sociopolitical university culture to examine the relationships that lead to promotion to executive
roles. The central proposition of SCT is that relationships matter, and social networks are a
viable asset (Claridge, 2019). This model emphasizes social capital’s role as a mediating factor
for BIPOC women in attaining executive positions. At the core of social capital research is the
idea that or BIPOC women trying to achieve professional success and upward mobility in
hierarchical organizations, supportive relationships with critical organizational figures constitute
a powerful social resource.
This study claims social capital, manifested as necessary forms of support gained through
instrumental relationships, is critical for promotion to the executive level. Focusing on the value
of relationships to career success, Stanton-Salazar (2002) defined social capital as “connections
to individuals and to networks that can provide resources and forms of support that facilitate the
accomplishment of a goal” (p. 4). Researchers have described social capital as a relational asset,
a favor bank, or glue (Anderson et al., 2002). Claridge (2004) summarized the operationalization
of social capital as it is not just what you know but whom you know. Social capital can be either
positive or negative, and because it is multidimensional, it can be both simultaneously (Claridge,
2019).
The use of social capital holds promises to address challenges experienced by HEIs and
their leaders. Bolden et al. (2008) offered that without sharing responsibilities, accountabilities,
and resources, complex, varied, and competing objectives would be unachievable. There is close
interdependence between individuals (leadership) and organizational development. Therefore,
leadership development necessitates social capital development (Bolden et al., 2008). Tight
44
(2018) argued the theory of human capital, supplemented by SCT, is essential to higher
education. While social capital applied can be value neutral, its use can also be a force for good
(Avios et al., 2014). Vorhaus (2014) shared the social structure features in explaining an
educational context can specifically address inequality in class and ethnicity. The SCT applies to
hierarchically structured societies in which individuals and collectives are actors pursuing
purposive action to facilitate goals through access to social resources (Hauberer, 2011). Higher
education represents a structured society where one set of actors—BIPOC women—are not
allowed to perform to their utmost potential.
Existing HEI leaders can function as institutional agents in a network, occupying a
position that carries status. This status allows BIPOC women to engage people of power and
influence regularly. Any intervention guided by SCT would work to increase social ties to
multiple institutional agents (Stanton-Salazar, 2016). Connection to these institutional agents is
the function of linking social capital, as in relationships among people at different levels of
societal power. These institutional agents can provide an additional function of bridging social
capital, connecting other social groups, social classes, races, or religions. If successful,
institutional agents provide BIPOC women with organizational vocabulary and narratives,
a language of cognitive social capital, and a deep associability in the organization, known as
relational social capital. This language and associability promoted by and through institutional
agents, linking and bridging BIPOC women to others in the academy, have the potential to aid in
the promotion to executive roles.
It is difficult to understand the role of social capital in the promotion process without
understanding the embedded social structure of higher education with issues of power and
inequity. As highlighted in the previous chapter, the marginalized status of BIPOC women in
45
higher education plays a damaging role in their ascension to executive positions. There are
complex relational dynamics that BIPOC women must negotiate to develop connections and
obtain necessary social capital. Social capital, then, as conceptualized in this study, occurs in the
context of power relations in an environment that unequally distributes socially valued resources
through proximal ties and networks (Stanton-Salazar et al., 2000). The researcher proposes that
promotion to executive leadership is a process embedded in a higher education organizational
culture that can propagate unequal access to networks and resources. Therefore, the
manifestation of social capital in the form of relationships can positively influence the attainment
of executive leadership roles. Figure 1 provides a depiction of this conceptual framework.
Figure 1
Conceptual Framework
46
Summary
A literature review revealed a scarcity of research about BIPOC women in executive
leadership positions. Therefore, the researcher found it relevant to investigate the lived
experiences of BIPOC women striving for executive roles in higher education. The purpose of
this study is to identify ways that HEIs can better support BIPOC female leaders. Chapter 2
included a general examination of the higher education industry and a discussion about BIPOC
women in the higher education workforce. It also described the challenge of intersectionality
BIPOC women face in their pursuit of executive leadership roles. This chapter then explored
leadership development and forms of social capital and how both can benefit BIPOC women in
this pursuit. Finally, the researcher described SCT, the theoretical framework that guided the
interpretation and analysis of the findings, and the role social capital plays in higher education
and the lives of BIPOC women. The researcher identified several prominent themes of
intersectionality, glass ceilings, racism and sexism, lack of access to resources, and lack of
access to information. Chapter 3 provides an in-depth discussion of the research design and
outline this study‘s research methodology.
47
Chapter Three: Methodology
This study examined the voices, journeys, and leadership career paths of BIPOC women
in higher education. This chapter addresses the methodology of how these women navigate their
path to success in the organizational and personal influences and barriers they experience. The
researcher organized the study into the following sections: research questions, research design,
research setting, researcher positionality, data collection, validity and reliability considerations,
ethical procedures, and limitations.
Research Questions
1. How did social capital influence the career success of BIPOC female leaders in
higher education?
2. How did bridging and linking social capital affect the success of BIPOC female
leaders in higher education?
3. What aspects of structural social capital influenced the career success of BIPOC
female leaders in higher education?
Overview of Design
The study used qualitative research methods, specifically interviews. According to
Creswell et al. (2007), qualitative researchers incorporate their own beliefs into the research
project and inform the conduct and writing of the qualitative study. Merriam (2002) asserted
qualitative research has four major characteristics. First, qualitative research operates from the
participant’s perspective and elaborates on understanding their world and experiences (Bogdan et
al., 2007). Second, qualitative research allows an interactive process between the researcher and
the participants to probe for clarification, when necessary, while in their natural surroundings
(Merriam, 2009). Third, qualitative studies focus on building theories, hypotheses, and concepts
48
rather than testing these notions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). Fourth, qualitative research is very
descriptive and provides enough detail to understand a phenomenon studied (Gibbs, 2018).
Research Setting
The researcher based the study on BIPOC women in executive higher education
leadership roles, employed in universities and colleges in the United States, either in the chief
executive or as a direct report to the chief executive. Alignment with the conceptual framework
is essential. Engaging with participants who could shed light on the gendered and racialized
experiences in higher education was a focus. The researcher developed an intentional rationale
that supports the selection of participants who will best inform the study and pose research
questions (Creswell et al., 2007). According to McChesney (2018), BIPOC women represent
24% of the U.S. population and 8.5% of all 4-year degree holders, but only 9% of the higher
education workforce. Women comprise 30% of all presidents in higher education, but only 5% of
all presidents are BIPOC women (Gray et al., 2019). There are approximately 4,000 degree-
granting colleges and universities in the United States (Bryant, 2021).
The Researcher
The researcher’s primary positionality is a senior executive in higher education. As a
first-generation college graduate raised in a lower-income, rural upbringing, the researcher
appreciated the challenges of achieving success without certain advantages. As a father of four
Generation Z sons, raised in a highly diverse metro community, the researcher has gained a deep
appreciation of the challenges of people with differing backgrounds; however, as a White male
with multiple degrees and working in English-speaking jobs, the researcher has blind spots. The
researcher had concerns that while some traits might assist the examination of problems that
BIPOC women encounter, the researcher may not fully have understood the legitimacy of their
49
struggles. Therefore, the researcher was careful in interpreting data collected during interviews.
Furthermore, the researcher was careful about influencing participants in the phrasing of
questions. Finally, because the researcher has not personally experienced career limitations based
on social identities, observations and recommendations may nor seem complete and actionable.
For interview participants, the researcher considered the beleaguered state that the
population sampled might feel in completing another interview on barriers to progression. In
addition, the frequently visited nature of this study topic may frustrate participants, given their
current context. Additionally, the researcher is a White man, requesting them to participate in an
interview. That issue was related to positionality and identity but could have led to bias. Finally,
because the interview questions were communication participants received, the researcher took
care in the wording of questions to mitigate bias (Robinson & Leonard, 2018).
A framework for developing specific questions in advance assisted the researcher in
mitigating these issues. Patton (2002) guided how to structure various kinds of questions.
Burkholder and Thompson (2020) revealed experiences, feelings, and filters color what a person
sees, hears, and finds important in interviews. Tufford and Newman (2010) recommended
bracketing, reflexive journaling, and external interviews. External interviews are interviews with
those not participating in the study who may allow the researcher to discern biases in questions,
probes, or judgmental reactions (Tufford & Newman, 2010). The researcher will be using
external interviews to assist.
Data Sources
The researcher collected data through interviews with current higher education
executives. Engaging with participants who can shed light on the gendered and racialized
50
experiences in higher education was a primary focus. The researcher conducted interviews with
participants through Zoom technology.
Interviews
The researcher conducted semistructured interviews with executive leaders. These leaders
have experience in various areas, including the chief executive, academics, finance, and student
life. In addition, the interview method drew forth their experiences in higher education settings.
Participants
The interview participants were BIPOC women in executive leadership in higher
education. The sampling was convenience based, with a target sample size of 15 participants
across an expansive (national) demography. The researcher selected participants through
purposeful sampling to help the researcher understand the problem and the research question
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Purposive sampling is an effort to select a “typical” sample,
representative of the population to the best of the researcher’s knowledge (Pazzaglia et al.,
2016). Purposive sampling allows selection of participants who can help inform the central
phenomenon in a study (Creswell, 2015). The sample quality depends on the researcher’s ability
to select a sample typical of the population (Pazzaglia et al., 2016).
The researcher invited a selected number of women who identify as BIPOC women and
currently hold an executive leadership position in higher education for at least 6 months to
participate in the study. A sample of 15 women suitable to the study’s criteria was selected. The
population of executive leaders included varying areas of executive leadership experiences (chief
executive, academics, finance, student life) in higher education settings. The sample size was
held relatively small to accommodate the integrity and analysis of the qualitative portion of the
study. The researcher used primarily word of mouth and network connections to identify
51
participants for interviews and document analysis. Recruitment was done through official
channels, as the organization‘s IRB approved the study.
Instrumentation
Data for this study was collected using in-depth, semistructured interviews in the natural
settings of the participants. Kvale (1983) defined this process as one that seeks to describe and
understand the meaning of central themes in the interviewees’ lives, through a process aimed at
obtaining nuanced descriptions of the participants’ experiences. The researcher chose this
approach because many of the barriers experienced or successes achieved by participants are
unique to them. Interview questions, including probes, are included in Appendix A and are
directly tied to research questions and conceptual framework.
Data Collection Procedures
Patton (1990) described gathering information through in-depth interviews as necessary
to understand how people have organized the world and the meanings they attach to what goes
on in the world. Intended sources for this population were the researcher’s contacts and other
networks and organizations that intend to advance BIPOC women in higher education (e.g.,
HERS Network). The researcher reached out directly via email and phone to potential
participants the researcher knew and through intermediary contacts via email and phone to
potential participants the researcher did not directly know.
The researcher collected data through interviews beginning in Spring 2022. Each
interview lasted approximately 45 to 60 minutes. The researcher conducted interviews via Zoom
(Version 5.11.6). Before conducting the interviews, the researcher conducted background
information on the participants through internet searches and reviewed the personal curriculum
vitae provided by each participant. The researcher verified each participant met the inclusion
52
criteria through this research using LinkedIn and other social media sources and verified the
information with each potential participant. The researcher gained familiarity with the
participants‘ personal and professional information to enhance the inquiry. The researcher used
open-ended interview questions developed under each research question. All the interviews were
recorded and transcribed verbatim.
Research accurately recorded information, keeping notes in original form, and using an
interview format for consistency. The researcher conducted member checks to ensure that the
research accurately recorded the participants’ intent. The number and length of the interviews
ensured robust data. All data was adequately accounted for and kept to ensure viewing when
needed.
Data Analysis
Data analysis for the study was thematic analysis, used to discover recurring concepts or
ideas from participants (Patton, 2002). The researcher reviewed each audio from the interview
while reading the Otter.ai (Version 3.8.0) word-processed transcript to ensure that the transcripts
were accurate. Once the researcher verified transcripts as verbatim narratives, the researcher
provided each participant a copy of her transcript to review for accuracy of meaning. Next, the
researcher organized data by bracketing themes using categorization and coding to identify
patterns from participants‘ responses to the interview protocol and then for each research
question. Finally, the researcher created a narrative to describe the themes and interpret the data
to answer the research questions. The researcher maintained textual data to protect the
confidentiality of the participants.
53
Validity and Reliability
For participant interviews, qualitative validity means the researcher checks for the
accuracy of the findings by employing specific procedures (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). In
contrast, qualitative reliability indicates that the researcher‘s approach is consistent across
different researchers and among different projects (Green et al., 2007). The researcher used
strategies to ensure the credibility and validity of findings, including member checking, checking
transcripts, and using an external auditor or peer to review the entire project (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). The researcher also considered validity in the earliest stages of research to decide how to
collect data. The researcher ensured that the method and measurement techniques targeted what
the researcher intended.
For the interview, reliability in design and administration refers to the degree to which
questions on an interview generate the same kinds of information each time we use it under the
same conditions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Validity refers to the degree of truthfulness or
accuracy of an item or question and how well it measures what we intend it to measure (Merriam
& Tisdell, 2016). The researcher’s interview considered the general connection between validity
and reliability (Salkind, 2017). The researcher constructed interview questions to inform the
central tendency of measurement. The researcher considered respondents‘ processes to answer
questions, their cognitive processes, their willingness and ability to answer questions, and any
cultural factors influencing respondents (Robinson & Leonard, 2019).
Ethics
This research serves the interest of BIPOC women who might one day ascend to
executive roles and their higher education organizations as a whole. The ultimate goal of this
research was to identify the organizational and personal influences and barriers that BIPOC
54
women have to understand and address to advance to executive roles in higher education. The
research could harm participants if those in power do not like what they hear from the research
results. The research answers the questions, trying to bring about positive change for the
participants. The researcher has designed the questions and framed the scope; there is value in
involving BIPOC women in the planning process to ensure the researcher considers other
perspectives. Finally, the researcher disseminated the results to interested participants.
The researcher gained informed consent in advance. The researcher kept all participant
information confidential. The researcher gave interview participants small denomination gift
cards as appreciation and compensation. The researcher was clear that the purpose of the study is
to support the success of future BIPOC female leaders. The study proposal went through the
IRB process.
55
Chapter Four: Findings
This study aimed to identify how HEIs can support BIPOC women aspiring to executive
leadership. All participants described the awareness and accumulation of social capital, as
described in the theoretical framework. Detailed findings centered around the influence social
capital has had on these BIPOC women broadly, the effect structural social capital has had on
these participants, and the impact bridging and linking social capital has had on them.
Participants
Fifteen participants (see Table 1) provided interviews to the researcher to understand the
effect and influence that social capital had on their ascension into higher education executive
leadership. The population of executive leaders included varying areas of executive leadership
experiences (chief executive, academics, finance, student life) in higher education settings for a
wide range of years of service in higher education.
Research Question: How Did Social Capital Influence the Career Success of BIPOC
Female Leaders in Higher Education?
Social capital is the goodwill embedded in the network of relationships, comprising the
network itself and its assets (Adler & Kwon, 2002; Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998). Some authors
claim SCT is incredibly subjective and context dependent (McShane et al., 2016). For example,
social networks, roles, and rules are objective, but aspects, such as trust and shared
understanding, are subjective. Analysis has revealed the university experience can be much more
valuable if there is a focus on increasing the social capital to help internal stakeholders achieve
their maximum potential (Gilmeanu & Gauca, 2017).
56
Table 1
Interview Participant Information
Pseudonym Years of Experience
Betsi 20+
Bonny 20+
Bria 20+
Cara 20+
Cora 20+
Diane 20+
Hanna 10-20
Henty 10-20
Joanne 20+
Moesha 10-20
Moranne Less than 10
Neda 20+
Pearl 20+
Sara 20+
Valera 10-20
All participants described how social capital has broadly impacted their career success in
higher education. Their experience frames social capital as a community resource in their HEI
social structure that facilitates cooperation and collective action (Bowles & Gintis, 2002; Uphoff,
1999). Beyond their specific HEI, participants described a social trust that operated across
multiple HEIs and directly benefited their career success (Knack & Keefer, 1997; Putnam, 1993).
57
Two significant themes captured how participants reported experiencing career success: (a)
social capital was available as a foundation for participants’ success, and (b) social capital was
leveraged in the overall context of a White majority in their HEIs.
Social Capital Created a Foundation for Success
All participants commented their HEI operates to connect them with numerous
colleagues inside and outside the organization and across the institution at all levels. As a result,
all participants noted these connections helped them progress and achieve success. Through
specific practices, their HEIs have demonstrated certain core beliefs, a form of relational social
capital, which have supported the participants. Furthermore, the collaborative and interactive
nature of their HEI’s internal hierarchy and overall environment has conducted the promotion
and accumulation of social capital for these BIPOC leaders, contributing to their success.
Participants defined success in this context as ease of entry into the industry, job opportunities,
training, general support, and the ability to get work done through external and internal networks
facilitated by the HEIs.
HEIs have demonstrated specific beliefs that have impacted the participants’ success.
Diane, employed in HE for over 50 years, recalled several members of her various HEIs who
espoused a desire to give her and other women of color a chance to succeed in higher education.
Hanna’s organization promoted a diverse workforce through training focused on diverse
candidates. Both Diane and Hanna cited these practices as significant to their career success.
Bonny and Moesha described organizational practices focused on furthering education through
covering costs and providing flexibility of their schedules for course work as evidence of their
HEI’s belief in promoting them as women of color.
58
Cora and Cara, both presidents, cited training endorsed by their HEIs to prepare them for
their previous and current roles. Through peer network training endorsed by her board, Cora
learned directly from a current president who had been a vice president for finance. She offered,
“They broke down budgets [throughout] the sessions.” That knowledge, coupled with
understanding both the psychological and the sociological dimensions of higher education
prepared her for success as a president.
Betsi’s HEI demonstrated a belief in “giving back” to broader academia for the industry’s
good. Members of her HEI nominated her to a fellow’s program that helped her secure
subsequent roles at other HEIs. Even though her current HEI knew there was a strong likelihood
she would go elsewhere due to completing the fellow’s program, they felt it was essential to
improve broader academia, a form of “public good” social capital (Claridge, 2019). Hanna had a
similar experience in which her HEI defined success as assisting middle managers to achieve
executive roles. The HEI created a network of middle managers and invested in them through
training and coaching. This investment helped her attain a dean role at another institution. Her
HEI celebrated this promotion as a success story, even though she was leaving. Finally, several
participants cited their HEI’s belief in and encouragement to join higher education external
networks for participants’ betterment.
Ten of the 15 participants referenced encouragement by their HEI for joining external
networks. Moesha was encouraged to join and receive training from various professional
organizations, which helped her build an external network of higher education colleagues.
Participants cited benefits they received from these external networks as general support and job
opportunities. Bria served as president of role-specific external organizations, and the experience
elevated her and her university’s profile. The experience also allowed her to learn valuable skills
59
from peer executives that she cited as key to her success. Moraine received support from peer
CFOs through an external network that validated problems she faced in her home HEI.
Henty identified relationships outside her HEI through an external network that has
become a robust knowledge base for her. Hanna attributed the capital formed in her external
networks to her longevity: “Those three [professional networks] were crucial to keeping me in
the profession and recognizing strengths in my skill set.” Hanna, Moesha, Pearl, Diane, Valera,
Betsi, and Joanne all cited external networks in which they built capital among colleagues,
eventually leading to job offers. For Neda, collaboration with multiple internal colleagues has
evolved into a broader external network as she has moved from HEI to HEI but leveraged the
power and influence of those colleagues after she left. In other words, her external network
began as an internal network.
The collaborative and interactive nature of the HEIs’ internal hierarchies has facilitated
the promotion and accumulation of social capital for these BIPOC leaders, contributing to their
success. For Moesha, the liaison structure of her HEI created relationships with deans and senior
administrators to help her gain knowledge and build momentum for other initiatives. For Bonny,
the high level of interactivity in her HEI allowed her to network with colleagues who had risen to
executive roles and could reflect on those bonding experiences to inform their leadership
decisions, such as during the recent pandemic. Diane discovered and leveraged an informal
internal network in one private HEI she served. The experience allowed her to prepare for the
higher education executive level, through learning the attitude and assertiveness necessary to
lead, grit and perseverance, and the courage to make personal life changes. Sara’s HEI included
her in a faculty caucus that provided assertive outreach and valuable information for her success.
60
Meeting professionals from other disciplines gave her a reflection on cultural elements of
authority that she had not previously considered and that she still used in her presidency.
Participants described these internal networks as sometimes formal but often informal as
well. Overall, the effect was the participant’s growth and success. Once hired, several
administrators came alongside Joanne to help “embed me in that culture and provide a space for
me.” She learned about their careers and what she should think about if she wanted to have a
career in higher education. This reflection framed every successive role she had since that first
role. Sara described this environment: “We are conveners, bringing together people, being
thoughtful about with whom we share our expertise. … I think it is one of the most important
things that we can do.” Henty summarized her HEI environment: “It is an accelerator for the
work getting done when you have some mutual respect and understanding of what you do and
what your colleagues do.” All participants commented on the density of their HEI network of
relationships influencing work for their success. A significant portion of this network were White
en who aided the participants.
Social Capital Was Leveraged in the Context of a White Majority of Participant Higher
Education Institutions
All participants interacted with many White, men colleagues in their institutions and the
industry across their career paths, followed by, in much smaller proportions, White women and
people of color. These interactions meant BIPOC women had to navigate opportunities, knowing
those who grant them opportunities may not understand them or their needs. In a sociopolitical
university culture, dominant groups can maintain power because access is limited (Yosso, 2005).
Overall, however, participants expressed that social capital leveraged positive interactions with
White men along their progression.
61
White men still dominate leadership roles in their HEIs, as experienced by participants.
Cara said, “It is important for us to understand there is a great probability White men [are] the
majority of the demographics still.” Hanna revealed in almost 19 years of working in higher
education, except for the last 4 years, every boss she had was either a White man or a White
woman. Henty added, “I was reflecting not that long ago on the fact that I have never worked for
a Black woman, which I think is interesting.” Betsi reflected on the amount of talk in her specific
academic librarianship industry about how to diversify the industry because there are people of
color at certain levels. The higher up in the hierarchy, the fewer people of color. She noted there
are more White men (or men of color) who are heads of university libraries or deans of libraries.
She added, “Let’s be frank. The power dynamic is still of the predominantly White male world
that opens doors.” Moraine stated the belief “you cannot just be good as a person of color and all
of a sudden you will ascend to the top and that nobody will challenge you just because of
affirmative action.” She added, “You still often need White males to say, ‘I believe in this
person. I’m going to make sure that they are invited to the right things.’” Cora reflected,
“Women of color, in a predominantly White environment, are going in with anxiety about how
am I going to be perceived? So, who is proactively reaching out? Because a BIPOC woman may
not proactively seek help.”
Participants saw the profession changing in ways to assist BIPOC women. Valera
experienced “a white male [who] knew how I was trained because he was trained the same. That
is how I first got to an institution. This individual was thinking about not only finding good,
strong talent but diversity.” Neda recalled a White male vice president who influenced her: “He
pulled that ‘social’ out of me, and he opened every door imaginable. If it were not for him, I
would never have made assistant vice president at [this] very male, White-driven institution.”
62
Neda was the first Black woman to be an assistant vice president there because a man saw the
value she brought to the table. She added, “He knew that [the university] community was
changing and [what was] needed was someone who could bridge between the institution and the
community.” Cara echoed a similar sentiment: “We have had extraordinary White men focused
on helping others succeed, particularly women coming from not only underrepresented
minorities but from underprivileged backgrounds. That is a fantastic thing. That political
capital.”
Twelve of 15 participants indicated they had positively interacted with White males in
various ways that assisted their career success. Moesha shared she had supervisors who, except
for two individuals, had been either White men or White women. Diane said her mentors were
mostly White men because that is who was in the academy at the time, but they were very
encouraging and supportive. Pearl summarized her experiences in this way:
My informal network., people who seriously impacted my career growth, except for one
person, have all been White males. Strange, right? Those three White males for sure
impacted me because we developed a friendship. And I thought it was odd that, as an
African American female, that my work buddies were White males.
In summary, all participants experienced social capital through the density and
interactivity of networks in a collaboration that influenced their career success. All participants
referenced White males who contributed to this influence. A deeper look into these experiences
reveals that specific interactions participants had in their structural social capital attributed to this
influence.
63
Research Question: What Aspects of Structural Social Capital Influenced the Career
Success of BIPOC Female Leaders in Higher Education?
The most widely accepted framework of social capital includes the dimensions of
structural, cognitive, and relational social capital (Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998). In practice,
individuals’ multiple and overlapping relationships are not easily distinguished between the three
social capitals (Healy, 2002). Commonalities of most definitions of social capital include role or
rule-based origins, structural capital, mental and belief origins, or cognitive and relational social
capital (Claridge, 2018). Specifically, structural social capital is the tangible social structure: the
network ties, fundamental roles, rules, precedents, and procedures of an organization. A key
actor in structural social capital is the institutional agent.
Some people can function as institutional agents in a network, occupying a position that
carries status, allowing BIPOC women to regularly engage people of power and influence
(Stanton-Salazar, 2016). Specific roles played by an institutional agent include (a) direct support
(providing positional resources, knowledge about navigating the system, advocacy or network
coaching), (b) integrative support (coordinating integration into the network or offering cultural
guidance), (c) program development (to improve the overall system), and (d) network support
(recruiting, bridging people, brokering introductions, and identifying resources to support others;
Stanton-Salazar, 2011).
All participants described institutional agents who operated in one or more of these ways
in the formal structure of their HEI. These institutional agents created a trust for the participants
through encouragement and expressions of solidarity. The institutional agents expressly granted
participants access to information, opportunities, and experiences. The institutional agents also
64
cast a vision for the participants larger than their current viewpoint to help them “see more”
about themselves and their career potential.
Institutional Agents Provided Expressions of Trust and Support
The center of the benefits participants received relates to the nature or quality of
relationships expressed in the form of trust. Henty described these powerful benefits: “[My boss]
put me in vaulted spaces because he just trusted me on the basis of my talent and my willingness
to learn and his belief that I could do more.” Neda described the benefits of this trust: “People
trust me. Trust is huge. I would read communication that my colleague would write in the
president’s name, and they would ask me for my perspective.” This trust gave Henry and Neda
the confidence to try and succeed at progressive roles they would have never considered
attempting earlier in their careers.
Participants broadly experienced the benefits imparted by institutional agents in their
structural social capital with a reverberating theme of intentional solidarity, a sense of mutual
support that communicates “we are in this together,” giving them the drive to persevere.
Moraine’s boss assisted her transition into a new industry by demonstrating solidarity. She said,
“The social capital that helped me. [My boss] put me in all places where he was present, as his
clear Number 2. He said [to the organization], ‘When she speaks, I am speaking,’”
Moranne noted her boss could have been threatened by her; however, even when they
disagreed, he demonstrated support: “If we had debates and arguments about the direction we
were going, he and I had them alone, and when we left the room, we were aligned.” This
alignment gave Moranne the ability to transition into the industry easier. Early out in her higher
education career, Joanne received support to grow as herself: “I had this tendency because I had
been a lawyer, to frame everything as a legal argument. When colleagues would complain, [my
65
boss] said, ‘You know, she just has this way about her.’” The comfort of being her entire self led
her to pursue ways she could get better.
Moesha felt supported by a former boss who continued to support her: “He and I don’t
talk as often. It’s more of a I’m watching you from a distance. I’m so proud of everything you’re
doing. We’ll always be able to pick back up where we left off.” Moesha expressed inspiration to
persevere, knowing her former boss supported her from a distance.
In her role, Bonny’s President used his institutional agency to ask her to be an active part
in growing the solidarity in their HEI: “We realized we need(ed) more women in cabinet. I was
actually charged with hiring the new [chief financial office]. She wasn’t a woman of color, but it
was another woman” At the time of the interview their HEI had four women of in the cabinet.
Bonny reflected, “I think it’s understanding that women do bring something to the table. When
we come to [the president], he feels very confident.” Being partnered with a few women of color
had given Bonny resolve to do the hard work in front of them in partnership.
Neda expressed this solidarity in the form of the voices being heard: “I am currently part
of an organization where we are very intentional in how we are bringing people into the ever-
evolving and expanding group of professionals. I feel very good about that.” Neda believed her
HEI was experiencing momentum because all voices are heard. This effect was born from the
influence of institutional agents in her HEI. An additional benefit coupled with this trust and
solidarity is access granted to participants to critical resources.
Institutional Agents Granted Access to Information, Opportunities, and Experiences
Various forms and types of social capital have been extended to participants to help them
gain and scaffold new and necessary information. In her first few years at her first HEI, Diane
leveraged her relationships with institutional agents to gain crucial information about decision-
66
making processes, including consensus building, recognition and rewarding of employees, and
the tenure process. She added, “A lot that I learned that I was able to transition and transfer to
my work [at subsequent organizations].” Hanna’s institutional agents in multiple HEIs have
helped her gain information intuitively, while on the job: “My supervisors have often talked to
me through issues. Guiding, forcing play, but they didn’t allow me to just walk into failure. It’s
been very informative.” This particular way of garnering information has presented different
kinds of growth for Hanna to help her understand how to move an issue forward. Cora shared
another example of unexpected help and information she received from an institutional agent at
her HEI:
A gentleman. I think maybe in some ways, he hadn’t seen a Black woman before. But he
would talk to me and show interest because he’d been there a long time. He said to me,
“Well, come by my office. Let me just tell you about things.” Now, there’s no way that
he could mentor me. He didn’t have the skills, but he said, “I’m a helper. I’m gonna tell
you about university.” And so there would be occasions in which I needed to make sense
of something that’s happening with the Faculty Senate, I would go to him and talk to him.
Moesha described learning the skill of navigating the practical dynamics of HEIs through
her relationship with various leaders over her career. When she was asked to take on the role of
director of the Center for Inclusion, Moesha leveraged this information to build a new office. As
Moesha progressed, her access to information increased and assisted her more: “When I became
[assistant vice chancellor] for diversity, I was more of a direct contact with the senior
leadership.” A key skill she needed in this new role was crafting a budget. Moesha gained this
information because, earlier in her career, an institutional agent gave her the responsibility of
crafting budgets. She said, “Where other directors weren’t doing things budget-related, I was
67
doing things related to budget. I think that really was sort of what set me apart when that first
opening came.”
A key benefit expressed by participants was the opportunity granted by institutional
agents to try new things outside the scope of their current roles. Bonny shared, “I was hired [for a
different type of role], but because I had a knack for different systems and running different
algorithms, I was promoted to VP of scholarships and support services in about 6 weeks.” Henty
has had similar experiences: “In the last 4 years now, my portfolio expanded to include
institutional advancement, external relations, and all of the functions on behalf of attracting
revenue and relationships and the reputation of the institution.” These were not necessarily
opportunities she sought, but institutional agents in her organization offered her. In another
experience, Henty had a senior officer in another area who was able to see that she was the
“engine” behind a lot of the work and the ideas that were coming forth. Henty offered, “And so,
she actually plucked me out of where I was and put me under her organization. Pretty quickly, I
found myself [promoted].”
Diane said, “Our president, who hired me—I was able to capitalize on his openness to
make a change.” Pearl’s opportunities had also come about in unique ways. In almost 30 years of
higher education experience, Pearl had only made a formal application for a role once. She was
often given an opportunity to “try on” a role and then was permanently placed after sustained
success. She shared one example: “The former registrar had 25 years. She encouraged me: ‘Let’s
just give it a try for a few months [to see] if you like it.’ And a few months later, I was appointed
[permanently] as registrar.”
Participants described the experience of being given “space” by institutional agents to
work and learn. Bonny spoke of one boss: “He has given me a great deal autonomy to do what I
68
need to do. If I need support, he’s there to support. But for the most part, he’s given me space,
and that has been wonderful.” Hanna had similar experiences: “I’ve had supervisors allow me
space to problem solve. And they rightfully said, ‘What are you going to do about it?’ As
opposed to giving me an answer. Standing with me as I worked it out.” This granting of
influence was frequently coupled with a deep trust in various relationships in the HEIs.
The various institutional agents along the career paths of the participants—bosses,
mentors, peers, and helpers—encouraged and assisted participants to have varied experiences
that have increased their career success. External to her HEI, Diane, through the encouragement
and advice of HEI board members, served on the boards of various nonprofits. Her ability to
serve on these boards was sourced from her experiences working on the committees at her HEIs:
building relationships, making recommendations, and ensuring all relevant voices had a chance
to be heard. Her participation in both internal and external boards and committees was
encouraged by various institutional agents over her 50-year career. Betsi also had a senior
colleague who appointed her to be on various committees, and that experience prepared her to
influence governance discussions in her current role. Hanna had a presidents help her to see the
importance of serving in a similar way: “She started talking to me about the importance of being
on boards. She enlarged my world. It wasn’t a move up. It was more of a move out. And she
helped me get on those boards.” This work aided Hanna in eventually gaining her current role.
Institutional agents put Hanna in spaces where others did not know what Hanna knew and in
which she could really bring an influence to the conversation. All of these opportunities allowed
participants to see more of the world in which they worked.
69
Institutional Agents Cast Vision for the Participants
All of the participants described at least one person in their successive career paths who
challenged them to “see more” of themselves or their organization and asked them, “What’s
next?” in their career progression. These institutional agents were constantly casting vision for
what could be into the minds of the participants. Hanna described the experience in this way:
“She was very interested in me, saying, ‘I love what you’re doing here, but how are you
connected to the bigger world?’ And, ‘Where else are you a voice for higher education in the
broader society?”“ For Bonny, this “seeing more” took her thoughts to new places: “And after a
while, the VP started saying, ‘You’re going to be the next [vice president] of enrollment.’ And I
thought, well, that’s impossible.” Moesha empathized with this idea: “I’ve really just had some
amazing people, oftentimes seeing things in me that I probably didn’t even see in myself and
positioning me for the next opportunity, even when I wasn’t thinking about the next
opportunity.” She repeated the theme of institutional agents coupling encouragement along with
the practice of “seeing more” in her. For all of these participants, this vision casting moved them
down a pathway of considering that they actually could aspire to greater roles and
responsibilities.
Bria described institutional agents providing a similar coupling of vision and
encouragement on her path: “To a person, the ones who have supported me have said, ‘You
really should do this. I think you could really serve an institution well in this particular role.’”
These agents were always encouraging Bria to look at the next level. For Joanne, this type of
activity shaped her career choices in higher education: “[The] dean, who was leaving to become
president, [said], ‘You should be looking at vice presidents.’ I’d never have really thought of
that.” Cora echoed this experience with a slightly different benefit. At one point, she took the
70
counsel of institutional agents and applied for a presidency but did not obtain the role. But even
in that disappointment, there was a benefit for her: “It was like a dry run for me to gain a shape
of what I would want. That process helped me define what I wanted.” Henty summarized the
benefits she received from her institutional agents in this way:
That’s what I would say is common about each of these individuals and their impact on
my career is that they not only saw my ability to do what I was doing well but saw the
ways in which that could actually grow and be applied to a broader set of responsibilities
and advance the organization, if I were put in a position where I had more authority, more
resources, more access.
In summary, all participants reported experiencing career success due to the benefits of
social capital. Participants gained information, influence, and broad solidarity to engage in their
unique pathways and navigate their HEIs for career success. Participants also experienced
unexpected benefits—gaining vision to “see more” and specific career opportunities—provided
to them by institutional agents in their HEI structures, as a benefit of an expressed trust over
time. Participants described one type of interaction most intimately and repeatedly. Mentorship
experienced in bridging and linking social capital relationships holds a unique and special place
in the minds and hearts of participants and has directly impacted their success.
Research Question: How Did Bridging and Linking Social Capital Affect the Success of
BIPOC Women in Higher Education?
In the context of structural social capital, a distinction has been made between bonding,
bridging, and linking social capital, to describe different types of network ties (Lee & Jones,
2008). While bonding social capital occurs in a similar group, bridging social capital occurs
between social groups differentiated by class, race, religion, age, etc. (Granovetter, 2000).
71
Linking social capital are relationships among people or institutions at different levels of societal
power (Claridge, 2018). One example of bridging and linking social capital is the relationship
between mentor and mentee (Schneider, 2006). While institutional agents can and did act as
mentors, participants made a clear distinction in the benefits they derived from mentors.
Callahan et al. (2015) recommended increasing diversity in future leadership by building
trustworthy professional relationships, helping these professionals to recognize their own social
capital, and developing practices for imparting capital to colleagues.
Fourteen of 15 participants specifically referenced at least one mentoring relationship as
significant to their successful career paths. Participants prolifically used the word mentor
throughout the interviews, particularly when describing relationships with people from
differentiated groups (bridging social capital) and with people with greater levels of societal
power (linking social capital). Participants experienced receiving mentorship as a precursor to
their success and included various activities that they described as mentorship. Betsi described
her mentor experience as involving “opened doors, trust, support, and belief.” Cara referred to it
as political capital granted to her. Pearl stated her experiences this way: “I don’t think it was a
formalized process, but I had very good mentors. It was a vested interest in developing me as a
young professional. I didn’t even realize I needed it.” Henty described, “I did have [mentors]
who saw my potential and invested in me and ushered me into spaces that weren’t always
aligned with the position that I held in the organization.”
Often, participants described mentoring as involving wisdom offered to them by their
mentors. Henty referenced her most recent boss: “I think where she helped me is learning how
[to do my work in a way that other people did not] perceive that [they were] being challenged
and be intimidated by it.” This ability to adjust her approach to people has been powerful in
72
Henty’s success in her HEI. Moesha’s mentor taught her that “anything you mess up can be
fixed, as long as it is ethical.” This axiom boosted her confidence to try things, take risks, and
even make mistakes. Those actions garnered her attention for consideration for more senior
roles. Joanne remembered a professor telling her, “You don’t push yourself hard enough. This
sort of comes easy to you. That’s not how you want to be. You can never rest on your laurels. As
a Black woman, you can never rest.” Joanne applied that mantra in her career ever since. Dianne
referenced a board member, a Jewish man from New York City, New York, who “saw how
money worked” and gave the financial counseling that has benefited her as an administrator but
also personally toward retirement. Sara mentioned the dean of the College of Arts and Science,
who interviewed her for one of her jobs and, as a faculty member, set the tone for her around
undergraduate education and what was expected of her. She added, “That really shaped my
views about what I was expected to do as a member of the college but also what I expected of
my colleagues.” Sara referenced that mentoring relationship as key to her becoming dean. She
referenced the long-term depth of the mentoring: “I learned a lot from him, and he definitely has
continued to do so throughout my career.”
Some participants specifically mentioned communication and organizational navigation
as specific skills their mentors provided them. Hanna’s mentor taught her to be so clear that her
message could fit on the back of the business card. She added, “And still to this day, I’m
someone who doesn’t love speaking from a script because (those) words are in my head.” This
clarity of thought has helped Hanna move her work forward successfully. Moesha added, “[My
mentor] helped me build that skill [of communication] as an executive, you have to be able to tell
your own story and be able to articulate your mission in the work that you’re doing.” This ability
73
she learned is one attribute that helped her ascend to her current role in promoting diversity,
equity, and inclusion.
Cara had the challenge of changing the culture in a way that did not provoke a “big
uproar” at her HEI. Her mentor taught her to meet with faculty and staff in a way to win support
for organizational initiatives. Cara shared,
[He said to me], “So, the question is how do you start moving and changing the culture,
right? Here’s what you do. Whenever [you] search for a new department head, schedule
individual meetings for 2 consecutive days. Meet with every single faculty member,
every staff. You only need 15 to 20 minutes with each of them. You go to their
department. You don’t ask them to come to your office.”
She concluded: “It worked like a charm. I learned that no matter who I appointed [to an
important role], I would have a happy department because people felt that I had consulted with
them.”
A reverberating theme related to mentorship activities was the incredible strength of the
relationships and the personal closeness. Unlike the institutional agents that participants
experienced, participants spoke with fondness and passion in describing these mentoring
relationships as pivotal to their success. Cora relayed, “I had wonderful mentors, and there was a
psychological engagement.” Bonny explained, “My friend, who continues to be my mentor, is
now the dean at [an Ivy League university]. I love her dearly, but she’s like a big sister to me.”
Bonny described another mentor this way: “He just made me feel like I could do anything.” Cara
described working with one mentor multiple times in her career: “I ended up serving as interim
74
president. I asked [him] if he could serve as provost. So, that allowed us another opportunity to
work together. And it did not stop there.”
Recollection of these mentors and the relationships participants have had with their
mentors evoked very specific and strong words to describe them, including push, grow, space,
support, feel, love, faith, friend, big sibling, trust, belief, empathy, open doors, bounce things off,
green lights, took a chance, saw me, re-engaged me, invested, ushered, observed, willingness,
development, psychological engagement, vested interest, took me under [their] wing, [their]
words in my head, sit together, met with me, helping others succeed, smart, strong, said things
hard to hear, direct, honest, pointed, not shy, navigate, mentored, and political capital. These
mentors sit at the center of multiple layers of relationships inside the structure of participants’
HEIs and across the industry as a whole and have contributed to the success of these BIPOC
women.
Summary
Social capital influenced the career success of BIPOC women in their HEI. Broadly, SC
was generated in HEI environments to create a foundation for success leveraged in the Whiteness
majority context prevalent in current HEIs. Specifically, structural SC influenced BIPOC
women’s success through the presence and support of institutional agents. These institutional
agents created trust and solidarity among the participants, gave them access to information and
opportunities, and cast a vision for participants to see more for themselves in their future careers.
Mentorship was deployed for every participant in various bridging and linking relationships that
affected their success.
75
Chapter Five: Recommendations
This study examined the underrepresentation of BIPOC women in higher education
executive leadership. The underrepresentation of people of color in HEI leadership compared to
the general population is notable (Kim & Cook, 2012; U.S. Census Bureau, 2015). This study
aimed to identify ways HEIs can better support BIPOC women in their progression into
executive roles. The researcher found participants employed in several distinct functions with
executive higher education leadership including provost, chief financial officer, library dean,
chief development officer, secretary of board of trustees, chief diversity officer, chief student
affairs officer, chief admissions officer, vice president of external relations, and president.
Participants were employed full-time and had held their role for at least 2 years. Participants
lived and worked across many geographical regions (e.g., West Coast, East Coast, and South)
throughout the United States. Also, participants represented a mix of public and private higher
education experiences in their current and previous roles. Each woman interviewed articulated
how they experienced social capital in their progression into executive leadership roles.
This chapter discusses the findings from 15 BIPOC female participants who shared their
experiences progressing into executive leadership roles in higher education. First, the researcher
has summarized key findings addressing each research question. Next, the researcher provided
practice recommendations. Then, the researcher has included limitations and delimitations to the
study. Finally, a conclusion summarizes this chapter and the research overall.
Discussion of Findings
The findings of this study are in alignment with the conceptual framework created to
serve as the lens to guide this body of research. The researcher based the conceptual framework
of SCT (Claridge, 2019). This model emphasizes social capital’s role as a mediating factor for
76
BIPOC women in attaining executive positions. At the core of social capital research is the idea
that, for BIPOC women trying to achieve professional success and upward mobility in
hierarchical organizations, supportive relationships with important organizational figures
constitute a powerful social resource. As conceptualized in this study, social capital occurs in the
context of power relations in an environment that unequally distributes socially valued resources
through proximal ties and networks (Stanton-Salazar, 2000). The researcher proposed promotion
to executive leadership is a process embedded in a higher education organizational culture that
can propagate unequal access to networks and resources. Therefore, the manifestation of social
capital in the form of relationships can positively influence the attainment of executive
leadership roles. Several themes emerged throughout the study from the 15 participants. Some
emerging themes aligned with the literature reviewed in Chapter 2, while others were
unexpected.
All participants recalled experiences in their careers about social capital, of being either
denied or extended social capital as an asset contributing to their progression. This experience
concurs with the literature reviewed in Chapter 2. Yosso (2005) mentioned organizations deny
people of color social capital, and the same people of color use their social capital to gain
education and employment. Participants also aligned with Buys et al. (2002), in that individuals
can invest in or destroy social capital, yet they do not own it as it resides in their social
relationships. Participants described numerous relationships in which individuals generated
social capital for their benefit in highly context-specific ways, which aligns with the literature
reviewed in Chapter 2 (Granovetter, 1985; Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998). All participants
described the benefits received in multiple ways aligned with literature-driven categories of
information, influence, and solidarity made available to them (Adler & Kwon, 2002).
77
Participants readily understood and made the distinctions between the dimensions of social
capital (structural, cognitive, and relational) and its functions (bonding, bridging, and linking), as
described by Claridge (2018) in Chapter 2.
In the literature review, the researcher described higher education as an industry that
requires leadership models crafted for the industry’s uniqueness to influence the direction of HEI
culture and to develop its leadership collaboratively (Esen et al., 2020; Hofmeyer et al., 2015). In
addition, Eliadis (2018) noted higher education leaders work in multicultural and diverse
environments where BIPOC women can add value as they bring diverse strengths and
perspectives. Aligning with these observations, every participant described a need for more
significant commitment by HEIs as a crucial element to the success of future BIPOC women
executives. Current HEI leadership making commitments to prioritize promoting BIPOC women
into executive ranks was recommended by 11 of 15 participants. This recommendation agrees
with the suggestion from Gasman et al. (2015) that HEIs should focus on racial and ethnic
disparities in senior administration to address industry challenges, as described in Chapter 2.
Most participants referenced existing HEI senior leadership or their boards as the primary
stakeholders needed to promote this commitment to prioritizing promoting BIPOC women into
executive ranks in the form of an ethos or messaged environment. Framing the efforts needed to
change the current HEI landscape was described by 8 of 15 participants as systematic,
intentional, or proactive. This framing aligns with discourse on intersectionality, presented in
Chapter 2. Specifically, D. R. Davis and Maldonado (2015) articulated how racial and gendered
identities inform academic leadership development experiences. This lens of intersectionality is
needed to challenge the traditional discourse of HEIs. Three participants interviewed by the
researcher referenced the use of social capital as necessary for stakeholders in power to leverage
78
and communicate this commitment to advancing BIPOC women. A subset of participants noted
these activities as critical upon entering higher education from a different industry in their career
path.
One surprising theme in this study was that almost half of the participants (seven of 15)
entered higher education from other industries (for example, law, manufacturing, and
government agency). Given the relative difficulty of BIPOC women advancing in the higher
education industry, the researcher did not expect such a significant portion of participants
interviewed to have sourced from outside the industry. The seven participants cited their
background as a contributor to success, preparing them for their executive role in higher
education. Another contributor to success described is the efforts of institutional agents
providing bridging social capital in the form of organizational vocabulary and narratives and a
deeper associability in the organization, known as relational social capital (Claridge, 2018).
These experiences resonate with the proposition, presented in Chapter 2, that interventions
guided by SCT would work to increase social ties and allow BIPOC women to engage people of
power and influence regularly (Stanton-Salazar, 2016). Five participants referenced pools or
pathways to give BIPOC women candidates prolonged consideration from HEI leadership,
allowing them to develop and gain the full complement of necessary skills to become executive
leaders. Eggins (2017) described this consideration as leadership development that BIPOC
women cited as pivotal to their ascending to senior leadership positions in higher education.
Participants agreed that this leadership development enabled them to think and act in new ways.
In addition, participants recommended more of these leadership development activities to
increase the diversity of talent pools in the current higher education employment environment.
This recommendation from participants echoes Jackson’s (2017) contention that considering
79
underrepresented groups is a critical practice. A separate but connected activity mentioned was
an institutional agent’s direct investment in the participants.
The central proposition of SCT discussed in Chapter 2 is that relationships matter and
social networks are a viable asset (Claridge, 2019). Every participant referenced someone (e.g., a
colleague, a superior, a boss’ boss, a trustee, or a staff member’s spouse) who invested time in
them, providing them access to information, resources, or people. Stanton-Salazar (2016)
referred to these individuals as institutional agents who provide bridging social capital,
connecting participants to other social groups. As experienced by participants, these institutional
agents were embedded across the culture of their HEI and willingly provided relational or
positional power to better the participant’s growth and development as a leader (Angervall et al.,
2018; Bozionelos, 2014). Several participants cited a contributor to their success was that these
agents intentionally included them in “spaces and places” that role did not call for them to be at
the time, however, a boss or institutional agent intentionally included them in those spaces. This
activity and its benefit match the relational resources described as coaching by MacLeod (2018).
The knowledge gained by participants in those venues prepared them for their future executive
roles (Walker, 2020). Intentional messaging by stakeholders of social power coupled with an
intentional investment in emerging BIPOC female leaders garnered from a wide array of
engagement activities should improve the likelihood of success for these future executives, per
the participants.
Finally, all 15 participants were asked, “From your perspective, what role can HEIs play
in building social capital for emerging leaders who are women of color?” The responses to this
question led to findings that can be used build a foundation for the practice recommendations.
Participants offered several ideas and concepts when answering this question. The counsel taken
80
from their responses helped the researcher establish the following three proposed
recommendations for practice in the higher education industry.
Recommendations for Practice
This study focused on how HEIs can leverage social capital to address the
underrepresentation of BIPOC women in executive leadership roles in higher education. The
researcher has identified three recommendations to address the study’s critical findings,
including (a) cultivating a community ethos that the promotion of BIPOC women leaders is a
priority, (b) planning and conducting organizational engagement activities that increase the
likelihood of identifying emerging BIPOC female leaders for growth and development, and (c)
creating an intentional growth program supported by institutional agents focused on giving
emerging BIPOC women leaders the support they require for ascension into the executive ranks.
Recommendation 1: Cultivating a Community Ethos That Promotes BIPOC Women Is a
Priority
Providing support to move BIPOC women into executive roles will require foundational
support from current HEI leadership. Parker and Ogilvie (1996) developed a case that race and
gender-related constraints operating in dominant cultures of an organization limit leadership
success. Sims and Carter (2019) added organizations must unite to eliminate racial and gender
bias in the workplace. Hyppolite (2019) interviewed 10 Black women executives currently in
executive leadership in HEIs and recommended that university leadership take ownership of
campus climate and work to fix institutional barriers to the success of BIPOC women. Higher
education boards and senior leaders of HEIs must make bold, long-term public commitments to
reach equitable representation of BIPOC women in top leadership roles and require each division
and department in the university to do the same. HEI boards and senior leaders should base this
81
commitment on a thorough and thoughtful reflection of the organization’s current approach to
diversifying leadership. To accompany their commitment, HEIs must create annual benchmarks
to achieve those goals and publicly report on progress annually. This commitment, reflection,
and benchmarking undergird a felt and communicated community ethos that promoting BIPOC
women into executive roles is a priority.
HEI leaders should hold themselves accountable for communicating the perceived
potential for promising and emerging BIPOC women who already exist in the organization. This
communication should occur formally as part of the HEI’s communication strategy and
informally in discussions directly with emerging BIPOC women leaders. To prepare for these
formal and informal communications, HEI leaders should perform several critical activities to
maximize this communication. First, HEI leaders should reflect on their historical and current
role in creating and maintaining inequities. Gasman et al. (2015) recommended HEIs create task
forces focusing on racial and ethnic disparities in senior administration. This reflection should
create the groundwork for psychological honesty about past HEI behaviors and sincerity about
the commitment to rectifying the inequity resulting from the lack of BIPOC women in executive
leadership roles. Leaders could couple the historical reflections with a comparison to HEI peers
who have advanced BIPOC women.
This reflection would include a review of current systems (a type of structural social
capital) that perpetuate inequities. For example, Jarmon (2014) conducted research to describe
the barriers perceived by women as senior-level administrators in higher education. Institutional
leadership was a primary subtheme that described the organization’s practices for guiding,
directing, or influencing people. The central idea HEI leaders must address in this step is how
82
university processes, systems, and practices might create or sustain inequities that prevent
BIPOC women from advancing.
Prepared with this reflection and knowledge, senior leaders could realign their HEI based
on shared aspirational reflection of a future state and assess how their HEI can effect change.
HEI leaders should consider areas of initial focus, the desired impact they wish to have and that
area, and capabilities they can use to realize their goals.
Communication of these efforts will be necessary to convey the equity focus to
stakeholders and receive feedback and input from them. Akubue (2016) stated cultural influence
was the most significant hindrance to BIPOC women’s advancement to leadership in
semistructured interviews with university managers. Clear and frequent communication with
alumni, staff, students, and donors will ensure that people in every part of the HEI are advancing
a shared goal. Higher education leaders could signal their commitment by sharing updates on
equity goals with trustees, administration, faculty, staff, and external stakeholders and regularly
communicating these goals. Higher education leaders should consider embedding their new
priorities into HEI culture by incorporating the efforts toward this specific equity work as part of
the strategic plan. At various stages of the reflection and commitment process, the senior leaders
should conduct and participate in collective forums with other senior and mid-level management
to ensure a complete understanding of the current state and desire for the future state.
Dedicating sufficient resources to this work will be necessary. For this recommendation,
the most significant resource is the time of HEI leaders and focus on the most senior levels of the
organization. Assigning a senior leader and any corresponding needed staff to support the
implementation and tracking of progress will be necessary. The HEI could also consider offering
performance-based awards and compensation tied to goals to help sustain momentum toward the
83
rise of BIPOC women into leadership roles. Hitt et al. (2003) identified that organizations
enhanced strategic decisions and performance by capitalizing on the combination of human and
social capital when they benefit financially from diverse and equitable leadership.
The HEI leaders will need to explore the measurement of efforts. Leaders could track
their overall progress toward established key performance indicators, address initiatives that do
not yield the desired results and identify successes. Ongoing data monitoring and analysis of
BIPOC women in senior executive and supporting roles is crucial when espousing a desire to
make a change. Higher education institutions may also want to apply their measurement of the
diversity of their faculty. Often senior executive appointments rise from the faculty ranks, so
increasing the number of BIPOC women in the faculty should create a larger pool of
opportunities. Identifying trends in specific departments could bring potential areas of focus.
Performance and trends in faculty diversity, promotion, and tenure would highlight areas that
have diversified well or poorly. Higher education leaders may want to review diversity data on
staff and administration and trends in promotion and retention to identify inequitable outcomes.
Because most HEIs are lacking BIPOC women leaders currently, data from other areas of
diversity might prove helpful. Survey data may help leaders understand the experiences of
students and faculty from marginalized populations, which should drive the more pressing need
for BIPOC women leaders. Overall, survey data could also provide insight into the employee
experiences related to individual belonging and inclusion at the HEI. One area to consider for
measurement of the presence of BIPOC women all along the pathway toward executive
leadership.
84
Recommendation 2: Plan a Pathway of Organizational Engagement Activities That
Increase the Likelihood of Identifying Emerging BIPOC Women Leaders
One challenge to developing a greater quantity of BIPOC women executives is to have a
large enough group of emerging leaders to develop into executives. In this regard, there must be
several potential candidates at every step of the career pathway to eventually develop into a
significant number of prepared executives who are BIOC women. Higher education institutions
should incorporate the consideration of selecting for and embedding BIPOC women into various
engagement activities (e.g., workforce planning, recruiting, hiring, candidate evaluation,
networking, and succession planning) with the underlying premise that acknowledges that
BIPOC women feel valued and welcomed.
Research indicates system blockages disallow or force BIPOC women from the pathways
of progression. Howe-Walsh and Turnbull (2016) used in-depth interviews in U.K. universities
to reveal how women struggle to navigate their careers. A core finding of this research is that at
each stage of their career, from recruitment and selection to retirement, women struggled to
navigate their careers in a gendered environment. The man-dominated culture influences daily
working practices, and the evidence suggests that exclusion from networks limits opportunities
for career advancement.
Creating and sustaining a productive pathway requires an introspective look by the HEI
leaders who hold power. Actions and behaviors that reinforce and perpetuate the
disenfranchisement of BIPOC women create the departure of strong candidates, but HEIs can
reverse this phenomenon. A vital aspect of this reversal should include workforce planning
conducted by senior leaders of an HEI, most likely supported by the HEI’s human resources
personnel. Five participants referenced HEI leadership build pools for observing and nurturing
85
BIPOC women candidates over time. Higher education leadership could also use the time to
develop the full complement of necessary skills and social capital for BIPOC women to become
successful executive leaders. McCauley et al. (2013) suggested multiple activities build a fuller
and more inclusive talent pool. Activities include discussing career plans with high potential
hires early on in their tenure; sponsorship of BIPOC women for external developmental
activities, including top-tier executive education programs in leadership or executive master’s in
business administration programs; working with current, successful BIPOC women executives to
identify talented and younger women who are aspiring; monitoring high potential BIPOC women
throughout their career with particular attention to their assignments, managers, and
performance; tracking the succession, advancement, and retention of BIPOC women; ensuring
BIPOC women are given challenging developmental assignments enabling them to gain
visibility and to build a solid track record; establishing initiatives to enable women to network
with HEI senior executives, to meet potential sponsors, and to build potential allies (i.e.,
structural social capital); and, holding executives and managers accountable to both sponsor and
mentor high potential BIPOC women. Overall, workforce planning must discuss which activities
best aid their HEI in identifying and supporting emerging BIPOC women leaders. A vital result
of this workforce planning should be the manner of recruitment conducted by an HEI.
Higher education institutions can fast-track efforts to create BIPOC women executives by
considering multiple sources of opportunity (recruitment) to hire. Almost half of the participants
interviewed (seven of 15) entered higher education from other industries (e.g., law,
manufacturing, and government agency). They cited their backgrounds as a contributor to
success, preparing them for their executive role in higher education. One participant, Joanne,
commented, “I know a lot of women of color who are on the threshold of being at the executive
86
ranks. We are out there but may not be where you are looking.” In semistructured interviews
with seven administrators at U.S. PWIs, Arjun (2019) called for more higher education strategic
recruitment and retention of Black women administrators. Woollen (2016) explored the career
trajectories of six women presidents whose journeys to their executive roles were nontraditional.
The author discovered that their unusual (not in HE) backgrounds led them to understand the
institutional culture, community relations, and a sensitivity to the importance of relationship
building among diverse stakeholders. Gasman et al. (2015) studied Ivy League HEIs and noted
those schools limited their candidate pools by only seeking candidates from other elite colleges.
They recommended selection committees step outside the Ivy League arena and seek more
candidates of color from MSIs and public universities. Higher education leaders should focus on
recruiting opportunities to generate the most BIPOC women possible. Networking events
attended by HEI leadership should focus on the most diverse group of people possible to allow
those senior leaders to see the BIPOC women available for hire. Another potential resource is
searching in universities that have a high level of diverse undergraduate and graduate
populations. Higher education leaders could also consider budgetary incentives allocated to
specific departments that hire diverse scholars and staff. After hiring, HEI leaders should begin
working directly with these BIPOC women to assess and cultivate their potential.
Higher education institutions should assess newly hired BIPOC women for leadership
abilities early and provide resources based on those assessments. Once they have identified
potential talent, they can take steps to fast-track them, including exposing them to core business
functions across the university. These experiences will improve the likelihood of preparedness
for future roles. Seibert et al. (2001) tested a sample of 448 employees. Their findings that
information, resource access, and sponsorship mediate the relationship between social network
87
variables and career outcomes supported the integrated SCT of career success. Eliadis (2018)
found institutions can improve higher education leadership by increasing developmental schemas
and organizational identification, increasing women’s aspiration for leadership positions, and
encouraging diversity. The psychological linkage with the organization can trigger the desire of
women to strive for the top. As HEI leaders assess opportunities for growth in these emerging
BIPOC female leaders, they can seek to partner these BIPOC women with the individuals who
can help them grow.
While the following recommendation relates to the specific type of individuals that can
help BIPOC women flourish, the HEI leadership should still be mindful of creating an
environment of highly collaborative networks that specifically assist these emerging leaders.
Hierarchies create social orders for economic efficiency and affect corporate equality and
opportunities for advancement by gender (Amis et al., 2020). Networking programs can
minimize the effects of a hierarchical structure by providing motivational role models in
organizations for human capital development (Nishii et al., 2018). Underrepresentation in
leadership positions begins in careers based on lower social capital “fit” positions with decreased
network ties to those with higher “fit” positions, which perpetuates limited professional
opportunities and leadership advancement (Nishii et al., 2018). Seibert et al. (2001) demonstrated
that weak ties (ties outside one’s social circle) and structural holes (that exist between two
individuals who are not connected) positively relate to the level of social resources embedded in
a person’s network. The level of resources embedded was measured as the number of
developmental contacts in functional areas of an organization other than their own and at higher
levels in the organization. Social resources were, in turn, positively related to many promotions
88
and career satisfaction. Over time, this focus on strengthening social capital should translate into
promotion to the highest ranks.
Once BIPOC women are near the highest roles in HEIs, there is still work to be done,
specifically in succession planning. King and Gomez (2008) found BIPOC women account for
3% of all chief academic officers, from which HEIs draw 40% of all presidents. As a result, there
remains a dearth of women in presidential roles. Their dramatic drop in the presidential ranks
suggests they still encounter systematic roadblocks one step away from the top. Jackson (2017)
collected and analyzed data to explore the management of senior executive leadership. One
theme identified from findings called for diversity management as part of succession planning
and management with a strong need for consideration of BIPOC women for leadership
promotions.
To qualify them for executive roles, existing HEI leaders should focus on affording
BIPOC women near promotion to the top level the broadest range of opportunities. Beeson and
Valerio (2012) listed several factors that create obstacles to women’s selection for executive
roles. Among those factors include a narrow set of job experiences that can inhibit BIPOC
women’s understanding of how an organization operates. This limitation could hinder their
ability to demonstrate cross-organizational influence, a key advancement criterion. Dwivedi et al.
(2018) studied a qualitative comparison of female executive successions to male predecessor
executives. They found to overcome the low number of women in executive leadership positions
in organizations, and two conditions were enablers to success: (a) the female successor is an
insider of her organization, and (b) the male predecessor had a long tenure in the organization.
Multiple participants in this study referenced the successive female insider status and recognized
89
the male predecessor’s tenure as a precursor of their success. HEIs should look for ways to create
and capitalize on this specific social capital.
The Aspen Institute College Excellence Program convened a Task Force on the Future of
the College Presidency to examine what will be needed to strengthen the presidency in the
coming decades and to identify concrete and actionable areas of focus for doing so (Gagliardi et
al., 2017). This task force recommended HEI’s advance new and expanded ways to identify and
develop a diverse presidential talent pool. They also recommended states, systems, and HEIs
develop additional leadership programs to expand the pathway. Then, HEIs can intentionally
invest deeply in this more significant quantity of candidates with potential. The researcher
recommends a deeper investment through an intentional growth program.
Recommendation 3: Create a Growth Program Supported by Institutional Agents Focused
on Developing Emerging BIPOC Women for Executive Leadership
While Recommendation 2 deals with increasing the number of engagement activities
focused on identifying and developing BIPOC women for executive leadership, this
recommendation focuses on the qualitative depth needed for emerging BIPOC women leaders.
Select individuals across the organization should serve as institutional agents (allies, sponsors,
and mentors) to provide multidimensional growth for emerging BIPOC female leaders. This
growth includes psychosocial support, career advice, and information about an HEI or the higher
education industry, including informal aspects significant for cultural navigation. These
institutional agents should source from multiple organizational environments where they
regularly interact with emerging leaders. These individuals will connect emerging BIPOC
women leaders to opportunities, information, and resources; broaden their horizons about what is
90
possible in their lives and assist in navigating BIPOC women through unexpected opportunities
and crises to stay on track.
Every participant in this study referenced someone (e.g., a colleague, a superior, a boss’
boss, a trustee, a spouse of a staff member), who invested time in them, providing them access to
information or people. These institutional agents were embedded across the culture of their HEI
experience and willingly provided relational or positional social power to better the participant’s
growth and development as a leader. Cooper (2020) conducted a qualitative study to capture the
voices of senior-level BIPOC women in HEIs on how they could overcome barriers and
challenges to breaking the glass ceiling on their leadership career paths to senior-level
administration in higher education. The BIPOC women spoke about the process of having
leaders who were keenly aware of their potential, their skill set, and their mindset to build
sustainable relationships. Having a seasoned colleague, whether in their field or not, exposed
their potential and helped guide them toward the success of where they are now. Any
intervention guided by SCT would work to increase social ties to multiple institutional agents
(Stanton-Salazar, 2016). Connection to these institutional agents is the function of linking social
capital, or relationships among people at different levels of societal power (Claridge, 2019).
These institutional agents potentially provide an additional function of bridging social capital,
connecting other social groups, social classes, races, or religions (Stanton-Salazar, 2011). This
third recommendation of the study revolves around a group of institutional agents who called for
and brought around each BIPOC woman (identified in the engagement activities in
Recommendation 2) to serve in various and sometimes multiple capacities. Wright (2019)
examined the lived experiences of current and past women of color leaders in higher education to
identify common barriers, challenges, and strategies for success in attaining and sustaining
91
leadership. Participants mentioned the importance of having allies, sponsors, and mentors. This
third recommendation will include each of these roles, in addition to knowledge agents, formed
to support BIPOC women toward success, defined as a progression toward senior executive roles
in higher education. To support the efforts of these roles, the HEIs should deploy a program
developer and coordinator. Figure 2 provides a depiction of institutional agents supporting this
growth program.
Figure 2
Growth Program Institutional Agents
92
Growth Program Ally
Merriam-Webster defined ally as “one that is associated with another as a helper; a
person or group that provides assistance and support in an ongoing effort, activity or struggle”
(para. 2). In recent years, the term has been adapted specifically to a person supporting a
marginalized group. For example, Stanton-Salazar (2011) used institutional agent terminology to
describe an ally as it applies to this recommendation to provide direct support to BIPOC women
as knowledge agents, resource agents, and an advisor. These roles all fit in what Stanton-Salazar
called direct support. Participants broadly experienced the benefits imparted by institutional
agents in their structural social capital with a reverberating theme of intentional solidarity, a
sense of mutual support that communicates, “We are in this together.”
A knowledge agent provides resources most associated with navigating and ascending
through a social system through institutional discourses that regulate communication, interaction,
and resource access (Gee, 1989; Stanton-Salazar, 1997; Stanton-Salazar et al., 2000). A
knowledge agent knows the system and provides knowledge pertinent to navigating that system
(Bourdieu & Passeron, 1977). A resource agent possesses or has access to positional resources
linked to an advantageous position in a hierarchically arranged social system and personal
resources available for transfer to others without specific authorization (Lin et al., 2001; Stanton-
Salazar, 2011). For example, a president or provost in an organization would have power in this
form. An advisor gathers information, assesses problems, and helps the individual make
appropriate and effective decisions related to ascension in a system (Stanton-Salazar, 2011). An
executive assistant or chief of staff works similarly to an advisor in HEIs. The researcher has
combined these aspects of the institutional agency for this recommendation to describe an ally.
93
Higher education institutions should select a wide range of allies to be available to
emerge BIPOC female leaders as they encounter new information about the HEI environment or
help the emerging leader problem solve with existing information. An ally should have the most
profound knowledge about the HEI culturally. The primary focus of the ally is direct support of
the emerging BIPOC female leader. The ally will leverage knowledge about the culture and how
to navigate that culture to benefit the BIPOC woman directly.
Growth Program Sponsor
Merriam-Webster (n.d.) states sponsor as synonymous with patron which is defined as “a
person chosen, named, or honored as a special guardian, protector, or supporter” (para. 1a).
Stanton-Salazar (2011) used institutional agent terminology to describe an integrative agent in
social systems that, for this recommendation, is being combined to describe a sponsor. The
researcher has combined forms of integrative support (i.e., integrative agent and cultural guide)
to depict sponsorship for BIPOC women.
An integrative agent coordinates a person’s integration and participation in networks and
professional venues (for example, department meetings). A cultural guide leads a person through
new social situations in a particular cultural sphere and teaches the person to identify and interact
with key people in that cultural sphere (Stanton-Salazar, 2011). Guided cultural exposure is
essential to an empowered socialization process by which people learn to negotiate and
participate in multiple, existing, and often conflicting sociocultural worlds (Boykin, 1986).
Particular values and beliefs, expectations, actions, and emotional responses familiar to insiders,
or cognitive social capital, characterize each sphere (Claridge, 2019; Phelan et al., 1991). For
example, D. R. Davis and Maldonado (2015) interviewed African American women who were
94
presidents, vice presidents, or deans in U.S. colleges. The participants acknowledged that
sponsors significantly contributed to their career ascension to leadership.
Several participants cited a contributor to their success as being included in “spaces and
places” when their role did not call for them to work at the time; however, a boss or institutional
agent intentionally included them in those spaces. The knowledge gained in those venues
prepared the participants for their future executive roles, per the participants. For example, Betsi
reflected, “I accompanied him to meetings that he did not have to bring me to partly to bounce
back what my thoughts were, but also (as a) thought partner.”
Chyu et al. (2021) described amplification and sponsorship as strategies to promote
diversity and equity. Amplification allows BIPOC women’s ideas are heard and appropriately
credited. Sponsorship involves sharing opportunities with a specific group (like BIPOC women)
to maximize overall visibility and opportunities for that group. According to Hewlett (2013),
sponsors connect others career opportunities, make them visible to leaders to leaders in the
organization and provide cover when encountering trouble; however, when it comes to opening
doors, they see the person to the threshold of power (Hewlett, 2013). Giscombe (2007) found
African American women faced exclusion from informal social networks and did not have
memberships in the “good old boys” club; however, the participants confirmed that securing
sponsors who were willing to advance their careers and provide opportunities for their career
advancements. These sponsors were often White men who were the decision makers and had
positions of authority in the organization.
Growth Program Mentor
The dictionary defines a mentor as a trusted counselor, a tutor, a shepherd, or a coach
(Merriam-Webster, n.d.). A more personal connotation ascribed to the word and idea of a mentor
95
is not evident in an ally or sponsor. Throughout the interviews, participants described mentoring
relationships with solid feelings.
Mentoring is multidimensional and includes psychosocial support and career advice
(Eby, 1997; Kram, 1985; Ragins, 1997). Participants also used the verb coach in describing
activities by a mentor along their career path. MacLeod (2018) conducted interviews to examine
the impact of coaching on women in academic leadership positions in higher education. A key
theme that emerged was that coaching for women in leadership roles in academic administration
resulted in increased mindfulness and presence, self-awareness and confidence, and the ability to
take action resulting in transformative change. A crossover exists between what this
recommendation is describing as a mentor with that of an ally and sponsor. Peszek (2016)
conducted a qualitative study using in-depth interviews with women serving as presidents at
HEIs to capture the essence of successful female leadership. Mentors played a part in each
woman’s career trajectory, whether it was opening the door to a position or strategically planning
one woman’s pathway to the presidency. The women described the importance of individuals
who served as role models, coaches, or sounding boards, which aligns with Tolar’s (2012)
research. As part of in-depth interviews with 8 Latina midlevel to executive-level leaders in HE,
Degaldillo (2017) revealed mentors and mentoring are critical support mechanisms in attaining
and surviving competitive leadership positions.
Growth Program Developer and Coordinator
Extending the use of Stanton-Salazar’s (2011) application of institutional agents, two
other activities are essential in a growth program for BIPOC women aspiring to executive
leadership in HE, program developer and coordinator. First, the ally, sponsor, and mentor serve
96
the person more directly. Second, the program developer and coordinator serve more on behalf
of the HEI. It is feasible one person could perform these two roles.
The program developer develops a program, in this case, a growth program for emerging
BIPOC female leaders, that embeds the person in a system of agents, resources, and
opportunities. The program developer aligns all forms of social capital in such a way as to
maximize the program itself. The coordinator does work slightly more with the individual, but it
is on behalf of the HEI. This form of institutional support entails assessing the needs of the
individual, coordinating the provision of needed support and services, and working directly with
allies, sponsors, and mentors to ensure that the support or resources meet the needs of BIPOC
women.
Frequently, a person may lack the ability, help-seeking orientation, knowledge, or
resources to acquire support (Stanton-Salazar, 2011). The coordinator serves in a capacity similar
to the case manager’s role in social work (Hepworth et al., 1997). In assessing the needs of the
BIPOC women, the coordinator may seek expert knowledge from professionals or colleagues
who possess high levels of expertise relative to certain types of problems (Hepworth et al., 2006;
Stanton-Salazar, 2011). From the perspective of SCT (Lin, 2001), the quality of social capital
depends on the agent consulting with experts and other knowledgeable agents before providing
support to the BIPOC women. Effectively seeking and receiving good consultation depends on
the coordinator’s social networks, social capital, and networking skills (Stanton-Salazar, 2011).
There is research supporting this type of program development and coordination. For
example, Carmeli et al. (2009) used a sample of 209 participants to examine how leader
relational behavior cultivated social capital among organizational members. Leader relational
behavior includes helping someone (a) cognitively understand work contexts and situations, (b)
97
seek validations for their actions, thus providing a sense of being valued, (c) and gain support
and find relationships to be a secure base (Kahn, 2007). Carmeli et al. (2009) found a positive
relationship between this type of leader investment in organizational members and the member’s
performance. In 2017, the Center for Policy Research and Strategy of the American Council on
Education released a survey on the college presidency (Howard & Gagliardi, 2018). As an
extension of this survey, Center for Policy Research and Strategy convened a group of 10 current
and former presidents to reflect on the survey data and provide recommendations to increase the
parity between the representation of men and women presidents in higher education. Among
these recommendations were (a) to invest in women in earlier stages of their leadership
development and (b) to ensure full disclosure of the institution’s challenges and financial
condition to presidential candidates. For internal candidates, an action item to achieve these
goals was including potential future leaders in interactions with key internal constituents such as
the provost, the president’s office, development and fundraising, deans and directors, and
business affairs.
If successful, institutional agents (i.e., allies, sponsors, and mentors, facilitated by the
program developer and coordinator) could provide BIPOC women with existing organizational
vocabulary and narratives, a language of cognitive social capital, and a deeper associability in the
organization known as relational social capital. This language and associability promoted by and
through institutional agents could assist in linking and bridging BIPOC women to others in the
academy, which would have the potential to aid in their promotion to executive roles.
Limitations and Delimitations
There are some limitations to this study. The researcher is a White male college
administrator. The researcher’s values, beliefs, and assumptions guided the topic selection,
98
research design development, interviewing techniques, and subsequent data analysis. The
relationship between the researcher and researched is significant, as participants share personal
encounters, and the researcher is tasked with restorying such experiences. Although the
researcher attempted to conduct each interview consistently, the researcher might have led
participants unknowingly, misinterpreted their responses, or failed to eliminate bias. For
example, it might be easy to transpose the participants’ experiences into the researcher’s
experiences. The participants’ contributions’ accuracy depended on their willingness to respond
honestly and thoroughly. This study lacks prolonged engagement and persistent observation as
the participants’ apparent positions and impacted schedules limited the researcher’s interactions
with participants. The sample size could present a problem, as the invitation was not sent to all
BIPOC women in leadership roles in every HEI in the United States. Therefore, the findings
cannot be generalized to include all members of this population. There may be limitations in
accessing BIPOC women who hold executive leadership roles in higher education. The opinions
expressed by the research participants in the qualitative interviews should not be considered
inclusive of all BIPOC women. No inference should be drawn or generalized to the larger
population. Only those BIPOC women in senior leadership positions who are connected to the
purpose of this study will likely agree to share their experiences. In other words, participants
with contrasting viewpoints may not feel compelled to share their leadership stories through a
research study like this.
The choice of conceptual framework from which the study design was based provides
delimitation (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Additionally, other attributes delimit concerns as
considered. First, the researcher’s relationships and knowledge as a college administrator
provided a basis for access to the participants and insights into their lived experiences that are
99
important in understanding how they make sense of specific phenomena. Second, member
checking was used to provide additional review of the data and the researcher’s interpretation to
ensure the participants’ voices were held in the research. Third, the limitation of the researcher’s
ability to obtain participants’ reflections in their unique environment was mitigated using Zoom
technology. Fourth, the researcher shared transcripts of interviews with participants to ensure
responses limited misinterpretation or bias. Confirmation from participants of the accuracy of
transcripts also allowed for follow-up that extended overall engagement. Finally, while this study
is not representative of all BIPOC women in HE executive leadership, participants did reflect on
direct interaction with dozens of their peers to support their presented views and offered broader
contrasting viewpoints. While this benefit will not wholly mitigate generalizations’ concerns, the
perspectives help in the study’s limitations.
Recommendations for Future Research
This study explored the experiences of BIPOC women in their ascension to executive
leadership roles in higher education. Through interviews, the research fulfilled its purpose of
identifying ways HEIs can better support BIPOC women aspiring to executive leadership.
However, several factors can be further explored and better understood. For instance, this study
used intersectionality (Crenshaw, 1994) to explore participants’ experiences. As such, this
analysis excluded examining other forms of oppression these BIPOC women may have
encountered or currently encounter. This type of expanded study would require additional
investigation. For example, additional forms of identity may include the influence of age,
socioeconomic status, or nationality.
As the narrative inquiry aspect of this research seeks to capture the depth of participant
stories, the researcher would also recommend follow-up interviews to garner more insights into
100
participants’ experiences. With this follow-up, the researcher can better understand the full
context of life for each participant and develop a more meaningful relationship. Furthermore,
most participants plan to continue to progress into other and more senior roles. Follow-up
interviews would provide more profound and richer knowledge to inform this work. Also, a
different type of study focusing on longitudinal research could generate different challenges
faced by BIPOC women in higher education.
Finally, future research can focus on the various higher education systems and their
impact on the executive leadership experience. For example, participants’ experiences with
public and private HEIs differentiated would provide insightful information on how each type of
HEI influences the experiences of BIPOC women leaders.
Conclusion
This qualitative research study explored the experiences of BIPOC women in executive
leadership roles in higher education through the lens of SCT. In doing so, this research aimed to
understand the factors that contributed to the participants’ success, defined as the attainment of
an executive role in an HEI. Interviews were employed to capture the experiences of 15
executive leaders in various areas of executive leadership in public and private HEIs across the
United States. Common patterns were identified from shared experiences, as interpreted through
the lens of SCT, guided by published research. Dominant patterns included the presence of social
capital interwoven throughout HEIs in the form of networks, the influence of institutional agents
on participants’ success, and the direct role of mentors in participants’ success.
Higher education has changed dramatically in recent years (Eliadis, 2018). More than
ever, there are students from different international, racial, and gender backgrounds. Faculty and
staff continue to have greater diversity among their ranks, albeit at slow rates in senior positions
101
(Pritchard et al., 2020). Executive leaders reduce barriers to collaboration faculty and staff can
share resources, ideas, and expertise with each other (Fields et al., 2019). Higher education
institutions need executive leaders with awareness and experience to understand and lead in this
diverse environment. Leaders with diverse experiences, viewpoints, and backgrounds are crucial
to encouraging different perspectives, broadening an institution’s world views, and fostering
innovation at HEIs (Teague, 2015). Garnering the experiences of the success of the participants
of this study can help ensure the executives of tomorrow have the broadest range of experiences
to lead those institutions.
102
References
Adam, F., & Rončević, B. (2003). Social capital: Recent debates and research trends. Social
Sciences, 42(2), 155–183. https://doi.org/10.1177/0539018403042002001
Adler, P. S., & Kwon, S.-W. (2002). Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. AMRO, 27(1),
17–40. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2002.5922314
Adserias, R. P., Charleston, L. J., & Jackson, J. F. L. (2017). What style of leadership is best
suited to direct organizational change to fuel institutional diversity in higher education?
Race Ethnicity and Education, 20(3), 315–331.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2016.1260233
Agosto, V., & Roland, E. (2018). Intersectionality and educational leadership: A critical review.
Review of Research in Education, 42(1), 255–285.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X18762433
Akubue, M.-T. E. (2016). Exploring women’s advancement in top management positions in
higher education in Southeast Nigeria [Doctoral dissertation, Grand Canyon University].
https://www.proquest.com/openview/7d7481e124395df8ef0ff903f110d7f6/1?pq-
origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750
Amis, J. M., Mair, J., & Munir, K. A. (2020). The organizational reproduction of inequality.
Annals, 14(1), 195–230. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2017.0033
Anderson, A. & Jack, S. (2002). The articulation of social capital in entrepreneurial networks: a
glue or a lubricant?, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 14:3, 193-210, DOI:
10.1080/08985620110112079
103
Anderson, N. (2017). The glass ceiling controlling promotion of women in academia: A
phenomenological study [Doctoral dissertation, Northcentral University].
https://www.proquest.com/docview/2001570556
Angervall, P., Gustafsson, J., & Silfver, E. (2018). Academic career: On institutions, social
capital and gender. Higher Education Research & Development, 37(6), 1095–1108.
https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2018.1477743
Arifeen, S. R., & Syed, J. (2019). The challenges of fitting in. Personnel Review, 49(5), 1194-
1211. https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/PR-02-2019-0093/full/html
Arjun, W. A. E. (2019). Life at the intersection: Intersectionality, self-definition, and identity
negotiation among Black women mid-level administrators at predominately White
institutions [Doctoral dissertation, Northeastern University].
https://repository.library.northeastern.edu/files/neu:m044c9434/fulltext.pdf
Ault, B. J. (2017). Insight from the top: Experiences that best prepare presidents to lead
institutions of higher education in the 21st century [Doctoral dissertation, Oklahoma
State University]. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/215281292.pdf
Ayios, A., Jeurissen, R., Manning, P., & Spence, L. J. (2014). Social capital: A review from an
ethics perspective. Business Ethics, 23(1), 108–124. https://doi.org/10.1111/beer.12040
Beckmann, E. A. (2017). Leadership through fellowship: Distributed leadership in a professional
recognition scheme for university educators. Journal of Higher Education Policy and
Management, 39(2), 155–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2017.1276663
Beeson, J., & Valerio, A. M. (2012). The executive leadership imperative: A new perspective on
how companies and executives can accelerate the development of women leaders.
Business Horizons, 55(5), 417–425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2012.05.002
104
Bergin, T. (2018). An introduction to data analysis: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed
methods. Sage.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to
theories and methods (5th ed.). Allyn & Bacon.
Bolden, R., Jones, S., Davis, H., & Gentle, P. (2015). Developing and sustaining shared
leadership in higher education. http://www.lfhe.ac.uk/en/research-
resources/publications/index.cfm/BoldenST32
Bolden, R., Petrov, G., & Gosling, J. (2008). Tensions in higher education leadership: Towards a
multi-level model of leadership practice. Higher Education Quarterly, 62(4), 358–376.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2273.2008.00398.x
Bonaparte-Hagos, R. N. (2021, June 30). Young, Black, female, and moving into campus
leadership. The Chronicle of Higher Education.
https://www.chronicle.com/article/young-black-female-and-moving-into-campus-
leadership
Bothwell, E. (2020). Female leadership in top universities advances for first time since 2017.
Times Higher Education. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/female-
leadership-top-universities-advances-first-time-2017
Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and
research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Greenwood.
Bouty, I. (2000). Interpersonal and interaction influences on informal resource exchanges
between R&D researchers across organizational boundaries. Academy of Management
Journal, 43(1), 50–65. https://doi.org/10.5465/1556385
105
Bower, B. L., & Wolverton, M. (2009). Answering the call: African American women in higher
education leadership. Stylus Publishing, LLC.
Bowles, S., & Gintis, H. (2002). Social capital and community governance. The Economic
Journal, 112(483), F419–F436. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0297.00077
Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. (1977). Reproduction in education, society, and culture. Sage.
Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. J. D. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. University of
Chicago Press.
Boykin, A. W. (1986). The triple quandary and the schooling of Afro-American children. In U.
Neisser (Ed.), School achievement of minority children: New perspectives (pp. 57-92).
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Bozionelos, N. (2014). Careers patterns in Greek academia: Social capital and intelligent careers,
but for whom? Career Development International, 19(3), 264–294.
https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-01-2014-0011
Brown, J. C. (2019). Exploring barriers and motivators on the career paths of African American
women in executive leadership in nonprofit organizations [Doctoral dissertation,
University of La Verne].
https://researchworks.laverne.edu/esploro/outputs/doctoral/Exploring-Barriers-and-
Motivators-on-the/991004155267006311
Brown, S. (2021). Key questions about diversity. The Chronicle of Higher Education.
https://www.chronicle.com/report/free/building-diverse-campuses-4-key-questions-and-
4-case-studies
Brown, T. M. (2005). Mentorship and the female college president. Sex Roles, 52(9), 659–666.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-005-3733-7
106
Bryant, J. (2021, May 25). How many colleges are in the U.S.? Best Colleges.
https://www.bestcolleges.com/blog/how-many-colleges-in-us/
Burkholder, C., & Thompson, J. (2020). Fieldnotes in qualitative education and social science
research: Approaches, practices, and ethical considerations. Routledge.
Burnette, D. M. (2015). Negotiating the mine field: Strategies for effective online education
administrative leadership in higher education institutions. Charlotte, 16(3), 13–25.
https://www.infoagepub.com/Quarterly-Review-of-Distance-Education.html
Buys, E. L., Hanna, B. E., Woodley, E. J., & Summerville, J. A. (2002). The impact of privacy
on social capital. Queensland University of Technology Centre for Social Change
Research.
Callahan, C. N., Libarkin, J. C., McCallum, C. M., & Atchison, C. L. (2015). Using the lens of
social capital to understand diversity in the earth system sciences workforce. Journal of
Geoscience Education, 63(2), 98–104. https://doi.org/10.5408/15-083.1
Carbado, D. W., Crenshaw, K. W., Mays, V. M., & Tomlinson, B. (2013). Intersectionality:
Mapping the movements of a theory. Du Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race,
10(2), 303–312. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X13000349
Carmeli, A., Ben-Hador, B., Waldman, D. A., & Rupp, D. E. (2009). How leaders cultivate
social capital and nurture employee vigor: implications for job performance. The Journal
of Applied Psychology, 94(6), 1553–1561. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016429
Chance, N. L. (2020). “Nevertheless, she persisted”: Exploring the influence of adversity on
Black women in higher education senior leadership [Doctoral dissertation, Indiana
Institute of Technology].
107
https://www.proquest.com/openview/c2b4b79dd881c85e8280c587e47984e3/1?pq-
origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y
Chang, H., Longman, K. A., & Franco, M. A. (2014). Leadership development through
mentoring in higher education: A collaborative autoethnography of leaders of
color. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 22(4), 373–
389. https://doi.org/10.1080/13611267.2014.945734
Cheung, F. (2021, June 28). The “state” of women’s leadership in higher education. American
Council on Education. https://www.acenet.edu/Documents/Womens-Rep-in-Higher-Ed-
Leadership-Around-the-World.pdf
Chyu, J., Peters, C. E., Nicholson, T. M., Dai, J. C., Taylor, J., Garg, T., Smith, A. B., Porten, S.
P., Greene, K., Browning, N., Harris, E., Sutherland, S. E., & Psutka, S. P. (2021).
Women in leadership in urology: The case for increasing diversity and equity. Urology,
150, 16–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2020.07.079
Claridge, T. (2004). Social capital and natural resource management [Unpublished Thesis,
University of Queensland]. https://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/wp-
content/uploads/2013/01/Social-Capital-and-NRM.pdf
Claridge, T. (2018). Introduction to social capital theory. Social Capital
Research. https://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/wp-
content/uploads/edd/2018/08/Introduction-to-Social-Capital-Theory.pdf
Claridge, T. (2019). Current definitions of social capital: Academic definitions in 2019. Social
Capital Research and Training. https://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/current-
definitions-of-social-capital/
108
Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. The American Journal of
Sociology, 94. https://doi.org/10.1086/228943
Cook, B., & Kim, Y. (2012). The American college president 2012. American Council on
Education.
Cooper, T. (2020). Exploring the Voices, Experiences, and Leadership Career Paths of Women
of Color in Higher Education [Doctoral dissertation, Abilene Christian University].
https://digitalcommons.acu.edu/etd/277/
Crenshaw, K. (1991). Race, gender, and sexual harassment. Southern California Law Review, 65,
1467. https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/2867/
Crenshaw, K. (1994). Mapping the margins: intersectionality, identity politics, and violence
against women of color. In M. A. Fineman (Ed.), The public nature of violence: The
discovery of domestic abused (pp. 93–117). Routledge.
Creswell, J. W. (2015). Revisiting mixed methods and advancing scientific practices. In S. N.
Hesse-Biber & R. B. Johnson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of multimethod and mixed
methods research inquiry. Oxford University Press.
Creswell, J. W. & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Sage Publications.
Creswell, J. W., Hanson, W. E., Clark Plano, V. L., & Morales, A. (2007). Qualitative research
designs: Selection and implementation. The Counseling Psychologist, 35(2), 236–264.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000006287390
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2016). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among
five approaches. SAGE Publications.
109
Davis, D. R., & Maldonado, C. (2015). Shattering the glass ceiling: The leadership development
of African American women in higher education. Advancing Women in Leadership
Journal, 35, 48–64. https://doi.org/10.18738/awl.v35i0.125
Davis, S. L. (2016). Executive-level advancement: A qualitative study of the experiences of
African American women [Doctoral dissertation, Capella University].
https://www.proquest.com/openview/52e231ddf9674758671d4ab883911c45/1?pq-
origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750
Davis, T. R. (2020). Experiences of women when pursuing and sustaining top leadership
positions: A case study [Doctoral dissertation, Northcentral University].
https://www.proquest.com/openview/5c6ae4d96e85b2daed349ecfd3b568a1/1?pq-
origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y
Day, D. V. (2000). Leadership development: A review in context. Leadership Quarterly, 11,
583. https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/the-leadership-quarterly
Delgadillo, M. D. (2017). Latina community college leadership in California: Pathways to
executive management [Doctoral dissertation, University of La Verne].
https://www.proquest.com/docview/1973128620
Dennis-Jackson, T. (2018). African American women and their perceived barriers to attaining
leadership positions: A qualitative case study [Doctoral dissertation, University of
Phoenix]. https://www.proquest.com/docview/2224720199
Diggs, G. A., Garrison-Wade, D. F., Estrada, D., & Galindo, R. (2009). Smiling faces and
colored spaces: The experiences of faculty of color pursing tenure in the academy. Urban
Review, 41, 312–333. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-008-0113-y
110
Dika, S. L., & Singh, K. (2002). Applications of social capital in educational literature: A critical
synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 72(1), 31–60.
https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543072001031
Dolfsma, W., & Dannreuther, C. (2003). Subjects and boundaries: Contesting social capital-
based policies. Journal of Economic Issues, 37(2), 405–413.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00213624.2003.11506588
Dopson, S., Ferlie, E., McGivern, G., Fischer, M. D., Mitra, M., Ledger, J., & Behrens, S.
(2018). Leadership development in higher education: A literature review and implications
for programme redesign. Higher Education Quarterly, 73(2), 218–234.
https://doi.org/10.1111/hequ.12194
Doyle, T., & Brady, M. (2018). Reframing the university as an emergent organisation:
Implications for strategic management and leadership in higher education. Journal of
Higher Education Policy and Management, 40(4), 305–320.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2018.1478608
Dwivedi, P., Joshi, A., & Misangyi, V. F. (2018). Gender-inclusive gatekeeping: How (mostly
male) predecessors influence the success of female CEOs. Academy of Management
Journal, 61(2), 379–404. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2015.1238
Eagly, A. H., Eagly, L. L. C. A., Carli, L. L., &. Carli, L. L. (2007). Through the labyrinth: The
truth about how women become leaders. Harvard Business Press.
Eby, L. T. Alternative forms of mentoring in changing organizational environments: A
conceptual extension of the mentoring literature. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 51(1),
125-144. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1997.1594
111
Eggins, H. (2017). The changing role of women in higher education: Academic and leadership
issues. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42436-1
Eliadis, A. (2018). Women and leadership in higher education.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Andriana-
Eliadis/publication/328149983_Women_and_Leadership_in_Higher_Education_Systems
/links/5bbbc1f64585159e8d8d1a40/Women-and-Leadership-in-Higher-Education-
Systems.pdf
Esen, M., Bellibas, M. S., & Gumus, S. (2020). The evolution of leadership research in higher
education for two decades (1995-2014): A bibliometric and content analysis.
International Journal of Leadership in Education, 23(3), 259–273.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2018.1508753
Espinosa, L. L., Turk, J. M., Taylor, M., & Chessman, H. M. (2019). Race and ethnicity in
higher education: A status report. Virginia Tech Center for Public Administration and
Policy (CPAP), School of Public and International Affairs.
https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/handle/10919/89187
Famiglietti, R. R. (2015). Discerning the glass ceiling: A phenomenological study of the glass
ceiling, social role theory, role models, mentors, sponsors, and champions [Doctoral
dissertation, Drexel University].
https://www.proquest.com/openview/1cc69397dba90d475e3e67a1d9c62a00/1?pq-
origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750
Fields, J., Kenny, N. A., & Mueller, R. A. (2019). Conceptualizing educational leadership in an
academic development program. International Journal for Academic Development,
24(3), 218–231. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2019.1570211
112
Forsman, M. (2005). Development of research networks: The case of social capital. Åbo
Akademi University Press. https://www.doria.fi/handle/10024/4152
Fox, M. F. (2005). Gender, family characteristics, and publication productivity among scientists.
Social Studies of Science, 35(1), 131–150. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312705046630
Gagliardi, J. S., Espinosa, L. L., Turk, J. M., & Taylor, M. (2017). American college president
study 2017. American Council on Education. https://www.acenet.edu/Research-
Insights/Pages/American-College-President-Study.aspx
Gasman, M., Abiola, U., & Travers, C. (2015). Diversity and senior leadership at elite
institutions of higher education. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 8(1), 1–14.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038872
Gee, J. P. (1989). Literacy, discourse, and linguistics: Introduction. Journal of Education,
171(1), 5-17. https://doi.org/10.1177/002205748917100101
Gibbs, G. R. (2018). Analyzing qualitative data (Vol. 6). Sage.
Gilmeanu, D., & Gauca, O. (2017). Academic leadership and social capital in universities
through social entrepreneurship. Management & Marketing Journal, 15(2).
http://mnmk.ro/documents/2017_02/22.pdf
Ginder, S. A., & Kelly-Reid, J. E. (2013). 2012-13 Integrated Postsecondary Education Data
System (IPEDS) methodology report. National Center for Education Statistics.
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED544186.pdf
Giscombe, C. L. (2007). Pathways to success in science: A phenomenological study, examining
the life experiences of African-American women in higher education [Doctoral
dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst].
https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations/AAI3289278/
113
Goodman, D. J. (2014). The tapestry model: Exploring social identities, privilege, and
oppression from an intersectional perspective. In D. Mitchell (Ed.), Intersectionality and
Higher Education: Theory, Research, and Praxis (pp. 99–108). Peter Lang.
Gopaldas, A. (2013). Intersectionality 101. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing,
32(Supplement 1), 90–94. https://doi.org/10.1509/jppm.12.044
Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: The problem of
embeddedness. The American Journal of Sociology, 91(3).
https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/228311
Granovetter, M. (1992). Problems of explanation in economic sociology. In N. Nohria & R. G.
Eccles (Eds.), Networks and organizations: Structure, form and action (pp. 25-56).
Harvard Business School Press
Granovetter, M. (2000). The economic sociology of firms and entrepreneurs. University of
Illinois at Urbana-Champaign’s Academy for Entrepreneurial Leadership Historical
Research Reference in Entrepreneurship. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1512272
Gray, A. L., Crandall, J. R., & Taylor, M. (2019, October 21). The 5 percent: Action steps for
institutions investing in women of Color. Higher Ed Today.
https://www.higheredtoday.org/2019/10/21/5-percent-action-steps-institutions-investing-
women-color/
Green, J., Willis, K., Hughes, E., Small, R., Welch, N., Gibbs, L., & Daly, J. (2007). Generating
best evidence from qualitative research: the role of data analysis. Australian and New
Zealand Journal of Public Health, 31(6), 545–550. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1753-
6405.2007.00141.x
114
Grootaert, C. (2003). Measuring social capital: An integrated questionnaire. World Bank
Publications.
Grotrian-Ryan, S. (2015). Mentoring functions and their application to the American Council on
Education (ACE) fellows leadership development program. International Journal of
Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring, 13(1), 87–105.
https://doi.org/10.3316/INFORMIT.899460604716034
Hagan, A. C. (2021). Women presidents of higher education institutions: A mixed-methods
phenomenological study of the relationship between self-efficacy [Doctoral dissertation,
University of Louisiana at Lafayette].
https://www.proquest.com/openview/196bb434258440a82e18bdadfaa7e9d8/1.pdf?pq-
origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y
Hannum, K. M., Muhly, S. M., Shockley-Zalabak, P. S., & White, J. S. (2015). Women leaders
within higher education in the United States: Supports, barriers, and experiences of being
a senior leader. Advancing Women in Leadership Journal, 35, 65–75.
https://doi.org/10.18738/awl.v35i0.129
Harper, S. R. (2012). Race without racism: How higher education researchers minimize racist
institutional norms. The Review of Higher Education, 36(1), 9–29.
https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2012.0047
Harris, L. C. & Ogbonna, E. (2001). Strategic human resource management, market orientation,
and organizational performance, Journal of Business Research, 51, 157-166.
https://doi.org/10/1016/S0148-28963(99)00057-0
115
Harris, J. C., & Patton, L. D. (2019). Un/Doing intersectionality through higher education
research. The Journal of Higher Education, 90(3), 347–372.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2018.1536936
Hart, J. (2006). Women and feminism in higher education scholarship: An analysis of three core
journals. Journal of Higher Education, 77(1), 40-
61. ttps://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2006.11778918
Hauberer, J. (2011). Social capital theory: Towards a methodological foundation. Vs Verlag Fur
Sozialwissenschaften.
Haynes, C., Joseph, N. M., Patton, L. D., Stewart, S., & Allen, E. L. (2020). Toward an
understanding of intersectionality methodology: A 30-year literature synthesis of Black
women’s experiences in higher education. Review of Educational Research, 90(6), 751–
787. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654320946822
Haynes, P. (2009). Before going any further with social capital: Eight key criticisms to
address. Ingenio. https://www2.ingenio.upv.es/sites/default/files/working-
paper/before_going_any_further_with_social_capital__eight_key_criticisms_to_address.
pdf
Healy, T. (2002). The measurement of social capital at international level. Social Capital: The
Challenge of International.
https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.201.4254&rep=rep1&type=pd
f
Hepworth, D. H., Rooney, R., & Larsen, J. (1997). Direct social work practice: Theory and
skills. Brooks. Cole Publishing Company.
116
Hepworth, D. H., Rooney, R. H., & Larsen, J. (2006). Direct social work practice: Theory and
skills (5th ed.). Brooks/Cole.
Herwatic, A. D. (2016). Navigating the labyrinth of leadership: The experience of female
presidents in Arkansas community colleges [Doctoral dissertation, the University of
Nebraska - Lincoln]. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cehsedaddiss/269/
Hewlett. (2013, April 13). Mentors are good. Sponsors are better. The New York Times.
https://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/14/jobs/sponsors-seen-as-crucial-for-womens-career-
advancement.html
Hitt, M. A., Keats, B. W., & Yucel, E. (2003). Strategic leadership in global business
organizations: Building trust and social capital. Advances in Global Leadership, 3, 9–35.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S1535-1203(02)03002-2
Hodgman, M. R. (2018). Understanding for-profit higher education in the United States through
history, criticism, and public policy: A brief sector landscape synopsis. Journal of
Educational Issues, 4(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.5296/jei.v4i2.13302
Hofmeyer, A., Sheingold, B. H., Klopper, H. C., & Warland, J. (2015). Leadership in learning
and teaching in higher education: Perspectives of academics in non-formal leadership
roles. Contemporary Issues in Education Research, 8(3), 181–192.
http://hsrc.himmelfarb.gwu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1175&context=son_nurs_fac
pubs
Howard, E., & Gagliardi, J. (2018). Leading the way to parity: Preparation, persistence, and the
role of women presidents. Virginia Tech Center for Public Administration and Policy.
https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/handle/10919/97781
117
Howe-Walsh, L., & Turnbull, S. (2016). Barriers to women leaders in academia: tales from
science and technology. Studies in Higher Education, 41(3), 415–428.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.929102
Hyppolite, B. H. (2019). Black women’s journey to executive leadership [Doctoral dissertation,
Concordia University]. https://digitalcommons.csp.edu/cup_commons_grad_edd/369/
Ibarra, H. (1993). Personal networks of women and minorities in management: A conceptual
framework. Academy of Management Review, 18(1), 56–87.
http://aom.org/Publications/AMR/Academy-of-Management-Review.aspx
Imlay, S., & Schaap, B. M. (2017). Presidents of minority serving institutions. Virgina Tech
Center for Public Administration and Policy.
https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/handle/10919/95126
Jackson, L. D. (2017). A critical examination of senior executive leadership succession planning
and management with implications for underrepresented minorities [Doctoral
dissertation, Mercer University].
https://ursa.mercer.edu/bitstream/handle/10898/3740/Jackson_mercer_1160E_10033.pdf
?sequence=3&isAllowed=y
Jarmon, L. J. (2014). Cracking the glass ceiling: A phenomenological study of women
administrators in higher education [Doctoral dissertation, Iowa State University].
https://doi.org/10.31274/etd-180810-4141
Johnson, H. L. (2017). Pipelines, pathways, and institutional leadership: An update on the status
of women in higher education. American Council on Education.
https://www.aceacps.org/
118
Johnson, N. N., & Fournillier, J. B. (2021). Intersectionality and leadership in context:
Examining the intricate paths of four Black women in educational leadership in the
United States. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 1–22.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2020.1818132
Jordan, J. B. (2015). A study in how linking social capital functions in community
development [Doctoral dissertation The University of Southern Mississippi].
https://aquila.usm.edu/dissertations/44/
Kahn, W. A. (2007). Meaningful connections: Positive relationships and attachments at work. In
W. A. Kahn (Ed.), Exploring positive relationships at work: Building a theoretical and
research foundation (pp. 189–206). Psychology Press.
Kim, Y. M., & Cook, B. J. (2012). Diversity at the top: the American college president 2012. On
Campus with Women, 41(1). http://www.aacu.org/ocww/
Kinnersley, R. T. (2009). Mentoring relationships of women administrators in Tennessee higher
education [Doctoral dissertation, Tennessee State University].
https://digitalscholarship.tnstate.edu/dissertations/AAI3356142/
King, J., & Gomez, G. (2008). On the pathway to the presidency characteristics of higher
education’s senior leadership. American Council on Education.
King, S. D. (2018). Grave new world. Yale University Press.
https://doi.org/10.12987/9780300240078
Knack, S., & Keefer, P. (1997). Does social capital have an economic payoff? A cross-country
investigation. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(4), 1251–1288.
https://doi.org/10.1162/003355300555475
119
Knowles, G., Clark, R., & Andrews, J. (2019). Herding cats? Reflections on colleagues’
perceptions of learning & Teaching in engineering education. Proceedings at the 47th
SEFI Annual Conference, Budapest, Hungary. https://www.sefi.be/wp-
content/uploads/2019/10/SEFI2019_Proceedings.pdf
Kram, K. E. (1985). Mentoring at work: Developmental relationships in organizational life.
Scott Foresman.
Kvale, S. (1983). The qualitative research interview: A phenomenological and a hermeneutical
mode of understanding. Leiden Journal of International Law, 14(2), 171.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/156916283X00090
Lee, R., & Jones, O. (2008). Networks, communication and learning during business start-up:
The creation of cognitive social capital. International Small Business Journal, 26(5),
559–594. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242608094030
Lin, N., Cook, K., & Burt, R. (2001). Social capital: Theory and research. Transaction
Publishers.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.
Lindsey, K. (2019). Reclaiming her voice: Narratives of Black women in higher education
administration [Doctoral dissertation, Azusa Pacific University].
https://www.proquest.com/openview/96ae9b509abc78398dfe96f06f113d2c/1?pq-
origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y
Liu, W. (2019). Higher education leadership development: An international comparative
approach. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 24(5), 1–19.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2019.1623920
120
Longman, K. A., Drennan, A., Beam, J., & Marble, A. F. (2019). The secret sauce: How
developmental relationships shape the leadership journeys of women leaders in Christian
higher education. Christian Higher Education, 18(1-2), 54–77.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15363759.2018.1547031
MacLeod, Z. M. (2018). Thriving in higher education: Coaching women leaders [Doctoral
dissertation, Fielding Graduate University].
https://www.proquest.com/docview/2054023087
Mainah, F. (2016). The rising of Black women in academic leadership positions in USA: Lived
experiences of Black female faculty [Doctoral dissertation, The Chicago School of
Professional Psychology].
https://www.proquest.com/openview/70f9ef98078b51fed5e23cc96e56558e/1?pq-
origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750
Manley, M. N. (2015). Excuse me, this is my seat: Minority women in higher education
leadership [Doctoral dissertation, Wilmington University].
https://www.proquest.com/openview/15e076985f37e9c172e573ce7106cf71/1?pq-
origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750
Mason, G. K. (2017). The role of mentoring in developing future African American community
college presidents [Doctoral dissertation, Indiana Wesleyan University].
https://www.proquest.com/openview/3ea2906e280c723f0fe8fa294f86765c/1.pdf?pq-
origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750
McCaffery, P. (2018). The higher education manager’s handbook: Effective leadership and
management in universities and colleges. Routledge.
121
McCauley, C. D., Derue, S. D., Yost, P. R., & Taylor, S. (2013). Experience-driven leader
development: Models, tools, best practices, and advice for on-the-job development. John
Wiley & Sons.
McChesney, J. (2018). Representation and pay of women of color in the higher education
workforce: A CUPA-HR Research Brief. College and University Professional Association
for Human Resources. https://www.cupahr.org/wp-
content/uploads/Brief_WomenOfColor.pdf
McDaniel-Richmond, J. (2016). A quantitative examination of gender’s impact on the barriers of
advancement to senior-level management positions [Doctoral dissertation, Capella
University].
https://www.proquest.com/openview/792c16c89af5a97e752e547e1874e76c/1?pq-
origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750
McShane, C. J., Turnour, J., Thompson, M., Dale, A., Prideaux, B., & Atkinson, M. (2016).
Connections: The contribution of social capital to regional development. Rural
Society, 25(2), 154–169. https://doi.org/10.1080/10371656.2016.1194326
Mercurius, K. C. (2018). Diversity and exclusion in higher education administration: Black
women navigating their careers in advancement at elite, predominately White institutions
[Doctoral dissertation, Fielding Graduate University].
https://www.proquest.com/openview/477c34ffbf6c15fd2fc8efab8652ec45/1?pq-
origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y
Merriam, S. B. (2002). Introduction to qualitative research. In S. B. Merriam & R. S. Grenier
(Eds.), Qualitative research in practice: Examples for discussion and analysis (pp. 1–17).
Jossey-Bass.
122
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative case study research. In. S. B. Merriam & E. J. Tisdell (Eds.),
Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation (pp. 39–54). Jossey-Bass.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. Jossey-Bass.
Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Ally. from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ally
Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Mentor. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mentor
Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Sponsor. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sponsor
Mitchell, N. A. D. (2021). The triple burden: Black women leaders in predominantly White
institutions of higher education [Doctoral dissertation, The University of Vermont].
https://scholarworks.uvm.edu/graddis/1406/
Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational
advantage. AMRO, 23(2), 242–266. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1998.533225
Nichols, S., & Stahl, G. (2019). Intersectionality in higher education research: a systematic
literature review. Higher Education Research & Development, 38(6), 1255–1268.
https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2019.1638348
Nishii, L. H., Khattab, J., Shemla, M., & Paluch, R. M. (2018). A multi-level process model for
understanding diversity practice effectiveness. Annals, 12(1), 37–82.
https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2016.0044
Okolo, Z. (2019). Ready to lead: Women in the presidency. Virginia Tech Center for Public
Administration and Policy. https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/handle/10919/95070
123
O’Roark, J. J. (2015). Women community college presidents: A qualitative approach to exploring
leadership and overcoming potential barriers [Doctoral dissertation, University of
Arkansas at Little Rock].
https://www.proquest.com/openview/7644dc2fe984a8006685e8035dd36f24/1?pq-
origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750
Parker, P.S., & Ogilvie, D.T. (1996). Gender, culture, and leadership: Toward a culturally
distinct model of African-American women executives’ leadership strategies. Leadership
Quarterly, 7(2), 189-214. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(96)90040-5
Pazzaglia, A. M., Stafford, E. T., & Rodriguez, S. M. (2016). Survey methods for educators:
Selecting samples and administering surveys (Part 2). U.S. Department of Education,
Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional
Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Northeast & Islands.
https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/
Phillips, K. (2019). What is the real value of diversity in organizations? Questioning our
assumptions. In S. E. Page (Author), The Diversity Bonus: How Great Teams Pay Off in
the Knowledge Economy (pp. 223-246). Princeton University Press.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd edition). Sage
Publications.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Two decades of developments in qualitative inquiry: A personal,
experiential perspective. Qualitative Social Work, 1(3), 261–283.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325002001003636
124
Pazzaglia, A. M., Stafford, E. T., & Rodriguez, S. M. (2016). Survey methods for educators:
Selecting samples and administering surveys (Part 2). Regional Educational Laboratory
Northeast & Islands. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED567752.pdf
Pew Research Center. (2017). Sharp partisan divisions in views of national institutions.
https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2017/07/10/sharp-partisan-divisions-in-views-of-
national-institutions/
Phelan, P. Davidson, A. L. & Yu, H.C. (1991). Students’ multiple worlds: Navigating the
borders of family, peer, and school cultures. In P. Phelan & A.L. David-son (Eds.),
Cultural diversity: Implications for education (pp. 52-88). Teachers College Press.
Portes, A. (1998). Social capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annual
Review of Sociology, 24(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.24.1.1
Portes, A., & Vickstrom, E. (2015). Diversity, social capital, and cohesion. In A. Rea, E.
Bribosia, I. Rorive, & D. Sredanovic (Eds.), Governing diversity: Migrant integration
and multiculturalism in North America and Europe (pp. 41–62). Institut d’Etudes
Europeennes.
Pritchard, A., Nadel-Hawthorne, S., Schmidt, A., Fuesting, M., & Bichsel, J. (2020).
Administrators in higher education annual report: Key findings, trends, and
comprehensive tables for the 2019-20 academic year. College and University
Professional Association for Human Resources.
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED604981.pdf
Putnam, R. (1993). The prosperous community: Social capital and public life. The American
Prospect.
125
Ragins, B. R., & McFarlin, D. (1990). Perception of mentor roles in cross-gender mentoring
relationships. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 37(3), 321–339.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-8791(90)90048-7
Reeves, M. K. (2015). Glass ceiling effect: A qualitative study of higher education women
administrators and mentorship [Northcentral University].
https://www.proquest.com/openview/307c79796635c6496949e866a70bbcfb/1?pq-
origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750
Robinson, S. B., & Leonard, K. F. (2018). Designing quality survey questions. SAGE
Publications.
Robinson, S. B., & Leonard, K. (2019). Designing quality survey questions. Sage.
Salkind, N. J. (2017). Tests & measurement for people who (think they) hate tests &
measurement. SAGE Publications.
Sangha-Rico, R. (2020). Disrupting patriarchy: Women educational leaders and their gendered
and racialized experiences [Doctoral dissertation, California State University, Fresno].
https://scholarworks.calstate.edu/downloads/8c97kt25p
Schneider, J. A. (2006). Social capital and welfare reform. Columbia University Press.
Scott, A. (2020). Creating a welcoming community: A toolkit to support immigrants, refugees,
and BIPOC. https://conservancy.umn.edu/handle/11299/215248
Seibert, S. E., Kraimer, M. L., & Liden, R. C. (2001). A social capital theory of career success.
Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 219–237. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069452
Seliger, S., & Shames, S. L. (2009). The White House project report: Benchmarking women’s
leadership. White House Project.
126
Sims, C. & Carter, A. D. (2019). Revisiting Parker & Ogilvie’s African American women
executive leadership model. Journal of Business Diversity, 19(2), 99–112.
https://doi.org/10.33423/jbd.v19i2.2058
Soleymanpour Omran, M., Alizadeh, H., & Esmaeeli, B. (2015). The analysis of glass ceiling
phenomenon in the promotion of women’s abilities in organizations. International
Journal of Organizational Leadership, 4(3), 315–323.
https://doi.org/10.33844/ijol.2015.60323
Stanton-Salazar, R. D. (1997). A social capital framework for understanding the socialization of
racial minority children and youth. Harvard Educational Review, 67(1), 1–40.
https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.67.1.140676g74018u73k
Stanton-Salazar, R. D., Vásquez, O. A., & Mehan, H. (2000). Engineering success through
institutional support. In S. T. Gregory (Ed.), The academic achievement of minority
students: Comparative perspectives, practices, and prescriptions (pp. 213–247).
University Press of America.
Stanton-Salazar, R. D. (2002). A social capital framework for examining youth intervention
programs operating in school-based and community-based sites. Academia.
https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/49861333/Wilson.Proposal_2016_pdf-2-with-
cover-page-v2.pdf?Expires=1662580747&Signature=ACzRvfDCj8j7eV6Y1W1tu-
4PtuKdNDWFLaraP5DtBFVpUAXQg6yNkmFg3CwW9pinkR5cFWMXpUlP3IYDLKr
YAGF87D11j829iQn2Q7wBb-bAn5KPJuvOudSHk-K5f-DvC7ZjIVQ5B5cHmPoI-
ledvkAsYcZVrIxLF953o3tC1uL98PtD9pmV50wMcod2GZF2WKPxVl4pLtQxm2HsC9
GxN9Cg~w24Po62Ny5hN~bHR6B-
4O~qLMaRSjAClZJe5JC2NTTz~x~EgHfajxpx2ez9Oqjx2k1AkTH9zUWkVD~XUoonr
127
0AVObPXEoM8-F7zuW1WT6lSNjThj-Bxyss8Z4z3Pw__&Key-Pair-
Id=APKAJLOHF5GGSLRBV4ZA
Stanton-Salazar, R. D. (2011). A social capital framework for the study of institutional agents
and their role in the empowerment of low-status students and youth. Youth &
Society, 43(3), 1066–1109. https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X10382877
Stanton-Salazar. (2016). Contributions of social capital theory and social network models in
advancing the connection between students’ school-based learning and community-based
opportunities for pursuing interest-driven learning. Presentation at Power Brokers:
Building Youth Social Capital Through Connected Learning, Irvine, CA.
https://dml2016.dmlhub.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/5_Stanton-
Salazar_NYCHivesPaperpdf.pdf
Szreter, S., & Woolcock, M. (2004). Health by association? Social capital, social theory, and the
political economy of public health. International Journal of Epidemiology, 33(4), 650–
667. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyh013
Taylor, B. J., Miller, R. A., & Garcia-Louis, C. (2014). Utilizing intersectionality to engage
dialogue in higher education. In D. Mitchell (Ed.), Intersectionality and Higher
Education: Theory, Research, and Praxis (pp. 229–239). Peter Lang.
Teague, L. J. (2015). Higher education plays critical role in society: More women leaders can
make a difference. Forum on Public Policy Online, 2015(2).
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1091521
Tight, M. (2018). Human and social capital and their application in higher education research. In
Theory and Method in Higher Education Research, 4, 209–223.
https://doi.org/10.1108/S2056-375220180000004013
128
Tolar, M. H. (2012). Mentoring experiences of high-achieving women. Advances in Developing
Human Resources, 14(2), 172–187. https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422312436415
Tran, N. A. (2014). The role of mentoring in the success of women leaders of color in higher
education. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 22(4), 302–315.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13611267.2014.945740
Tsai, W., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital and value creation: The role of intrafirm networks.
Academy of Management Journal, 41(4), 464–476. https://doi.org/10.5465/257085
Tufford, L., & Newman, P. (2010). Bracketing in qualitative social work. Qualitative Social
Work, 11(1), 80–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325010368316
Turner, J. H. (2000). The formation of social capital. Social capital: A multifaceted perspective
(pp. 94–146). The World Bank.
Uphoff, N. (1999). Understanding social capital: Learning from the analysis and experience of
participation. Social capital: A multifaceted perspective (pp. 215–253). World Bank.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2015). Annual estimates of the resident population by sex, race, and
Hispanic origin for the United States, states, and counties: April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2014.
https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?tid=ACSDP5Y2015.DP05
Vorhaus, J. (2014). Function and functional explanation in social capital theory: A philosophical
appraisal. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 33(2), 185–199.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-013-9380-5
Walker, C. R. (2020). Still I rise: The role of social capital on the experiences of African
American women senior administrators in higher education [Doctoral dissertation, the
University of North Carolina at Greensboro].
129
https://www.proquest.com/openview/4085b21907bfa9fa1fc523c12246fcf0/1?pq-
origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y
Woolcock, M. (1998). Social capital and economic development. Toward a theoretical synthesis
and policy framework. Theory and Society, 27, 151-208.
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006884930135
Woollen, S. (2016). The road less traveled: Career trajectories of six women presidents in higher
education. Advancing Women in Leadership Journal, 36, 1–10.
https://doi.org/10.18738/awl.v36i0.15
Wright, M. M. (2019). Women of color in higher education leadership. Pepperdine University.
Yawson, K. A. (2018). Social capital in institutions of higher education: an examination of the
interaction between social capital and department leadership [Doctoral dissertation,
Middle East Technical University]. https://open.metu.edu.tr/handle/11511/27055
Yosso, T. J. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community
cultural wealth. Race Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 69–91.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1361332052000341006
Zambrana, R. E., & Dill, B. T. (2009). Conclusion: Future directions in knowledge building and
sustaining institutional change. In B. T. Dill & R. E. Zambrana (Eds.), Race, class, and
gender in theory, policy, and practice (pp. 274–290). Rutgers University Press.
https://doi.org/10.36019/9780813546513/pdf#page=290
130
Appendix
Communication to Participants
I am researching social capital as it relates to BIPOC women’s success in executive
leadership in higher education. Social capital is the resources available to individuals that lies
within the structure of various levels of organizations (Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998). Its effects
include information, influence and solidarity that could be made available to individuals (Adler
& Known, 2002). The dimensions of social capital include structural (network ties, roles, rules,
procedures), cognitive (attitudes, beliefs, narratives, codes and shared meaning), and relational
(trust, norms, obligations, expectations) social capital (Claridge, 2019). The functions of social
capital bond people within a group, bridge across diverse groups, and link people at different
levels of power (Claridge, 2019).
The problem I am examining is the underrepresentation of BIPOC women in leadership
positions higher education. The purpose of this study is to identify ways that HEI’s can better
support BIPOC female leaders. The interview questions are:
Interview Questions Potential Probes RQ
1. Please describe your career path, beginning
with your first job in higher education to your
current role.
What was unexpected? 1
2. From your perspective, what role can/do
higher education institutions play in building
social capital for emerging leaders who are
women of color?
What makes you say this?
3
3. Describe policies, processes, customs, or
practices, if any, that one or more HEI’s had
in place that helped assist you in your
ascension to your executive role.
How has that changed as
your authority or position
has changed?
3
4. Describe any formal or informal networks
embedded in an HEI that helped you ascend
to your executive role.
a. How have these networks hindered
your ascension?
3
131
5. Please focus on the three people that you
place closest to you in your professional
sphere of influence.
a. How would you describe your
relationship to these people?
b. In what ways have these people been
valuable to you in leadership, if at all?
c. Specifically, how have these three
people helped you in your promotion
in leadership positions?
How has that changed as
your authority or position
has changed?
2
6. Did your professional/personal network
include any senior leaders in higher education
during your years before you first thought of
becoming a HEI executive? If so, please
elaborate.
a. Describe the impact any member(s) of
your network had on your: (a)
decision to pursue each successive
job, and (b) ability to obtain each job
2
7. Once you decided to apply for your first
executive position, describe your experience
with accessing other current executives who
weren’t already part of your network.
2
8. If as a candidate you gained access to HEI
executives who were not already part of your
network, how did you utilize them to improve
your candidacy?
a. If as a candidate you were unable to
access additional executives, why do
you think that was the case?
b. How did you overcome that lack of
access to obtain your first executive
role?
Tell me more about that.
2
9. In considering the competencies needed for
your current role, please describe the impact
any member(s) of your network had on your
development of any of those competencies
before you thought of pursuing your first
executive role.
How has that changed as
your authority or position
has changed?
2
10. What advice do you have for young women
of color professionals pursuing an executive
leader position?
Can you describe how this
might look/what this looks
like?
1
Abstract (if available)
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Women in information technology senior leadership: incremental progress and continuing challenges
PDF
Working-class social identity and sense of belonging in higher education: a mixed-methods study
PDF
The experience of Eritrean refugee women in addressing their mental health needs
PDF
Assessing mental health barriers faced by Air Force law enforcement veterans
PDF
Motivation for participating in virtual religious communities: developing social capital
PDF
The lack of gender diversity in executive leadership ranks within higher education
PDF
Beyond deficit thinking: highlighting the strengths and resilience of Black indigenous and people of color students thriving in higher education
PDF
A study of diversification In the outdoor recreation industry and its connection to the Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) urban health equity gap
PDF
The lack of Black women in higher education executive leadership in four-year colleges and universities
PDF
Military spouse well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic
PDF
Leadership in an age of technology disruption: an evaluation study
PDF
The underrepresentation of African Americans in information technology: an examination of social capital and its impact on African Americans’ career success
PDF
Cultivating a culture of equity: lessons learned from librarians of color
PDF
The underrepresentation of Black, indigenous, and people of color in executive-level information technology positions
PDF
The underrepresentation of Asian American Pacific Islanders serving in the senior and executive leadership ranks in the U.S. Navy SEALs
PDF
Chinese-Vietnamese American college students: narratives of educational experiences and college success
PDF
Double jeopardy: the influence of prevalent race and gender bias on women of color executive leadership promotions
PDF
The role of organizational leaders in creating sustainable diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in the workplace
PDF
Understanding burnout in non-denominational clergy: a social cognitive approach
PDF
Job satisfaction and retention of women clergy
Asset Metadata
Creator
Holley, Steven Gareth
(author)
Core Title
Intersectional equity in higher education leadership: leveraging social capital for success
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)
Degree Conferral Date
2022-08
Publication Date
09/07/2024
Defense Date
09/07/2022
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
BIPOC women,higher education: institutional agents,intersectionality,OAI-PMH Harvest,social capital
Format
application/pdf
(imt)
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Hirabayashi, Kimberly (
committee chair
), Muraszewski, Alison (
committee member
), Phillips, Jennifer (
committee member
)
Creator Email
sgholley@aim.com,sholley@usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC111764648
Unique identifier
UC111764648
Legacy Identifier
etd-HolleyStev-11187
Document Type
Dissertation
Format
application/pdf (imt)
Rights
Holley, Steven Gareth
Type
texts
Source
20220908-usctheses-batch-978
(batch),
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Repository Email
cisadmin@lib.usc.edu
Tags
BIPOC women
higher education: institutional agents
intersectionality
social capital