Lloyd Southeastern University - Lakeland Follow this and additional works at: https://firescholars.seu.edu/coe Part of the Educational Leadership Commons , and the Higher Education Ad
INTRODUCTION
Higher education institutions (IHEs) have long been criticized for their slow pace of change, but globalization has intensified the pressures shaping how they respond As tuition, textbooks, housing, and food costs rise—and governments push for broader participation while parents question the value of a degree—universities face mounting scrutiny and resource strain In this climate, IHEs increasingly focus on socio-economic status and strive to expand access by creating diverse pathways for disadvantaged students to earn a college education Administrators are being encouraged to adopt an entrepreneurial mindset and to build institutional capacity to change quickly in order to compete in a rapidly evolving global higher education environment.
Christian colleges and universities are confronting rising secularization and external pressures already shaping secular academia In response to critiques from accrediting agencies and the general public, many Christian campuses are addressing concerns about perceived gaps in intellectual rigor that are sometimes associated with the evangelical subculture (Glanzer, Alleman, & Ream, 2017; Marsden, 1996; Galli et al., 2018; Noll, 1995) The central debates focus on whether students are educated within a denominational or confessional ethos without sufficient emphasis on critical thinking and exploration of alternative ideas and theories, and analyses frequently note a lack of faculty and student diversity on Christian college campuses (Longman, 2017).
In 1979, a small Bible college in the southeastern United States appointed a new president, setting the stage for four decades of organizational change Over the next forty years, the college underwent several leadership and structural transitions that reshaped its mission and operations This proposed qualitative case study examines the historical context and the rationale behind these transitions, focusing on the administrations of three presidents to understand how leadership decisions influenced the institution's evolution.
During the Great Depression, churches across the United States, especially in the rural South, sought solutions to Americans' desperation Evangelists traveled the region, witnessing widespread poverty and limited education among southerners who clung to the hope of salvation in an era that felt hopeless In response, churches and evangelists pursued different approaches: some looked to government aid, while others embraced revival as a pathway to renewal (Greene, 2017).
Recognizing the need to do more, evangelist Guy Shields set out to establish a Bible school that would serve the southeastern states In 1935 during a camp meeting, the Alabama
Shield of Faith Institute was founded in New Brockton, Alabama, and despite the financial constraints of the 1930s U.S economy, revival and a commitment to Bible training kept the school going (van der Laan, 2010) The 1937 catalog identified the institution as a Bible-training school, naming it South-Eastern Bible Institute, a designation that would later be changed.
Established in 1936, this Bible training school serves prospective ministers, missionaries, and Christian workers by aiming to develop in every student three core requirements for effective Christian living and ministry: spirituality, knowledge, and vision.
From 1935 to 1956, the school relocated among several sites and underwent multiple name changes, ultimately settling in Lakeland, Florida as South-Eastern Bible College In 1977, the college was renamed Southeastern College of the
To avoid confusion with a similarly named institution in Alabama, the college changed its name while administrators emphasized that the mission would remain unchanged The Fall 1977 issue of the Southeasterner confirms this continuity, stating that there has been no change in the college’s philosophies (van der Laan, 2010, p 90).
In 1986, under President James Hennesy, Southeastern College of the Assemblies of God (Southeastern) earned regional accreditation from the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS), marking a milestone that boosted the institution’s academic credibility Although still rooted as a Bible college, Southeastern was required to elevate its faculty credentials, with more than 40% of professors holding doctoral degrees The accreditation also prompted a library expansion to broaden resources and support higher-level research These changes reflected Southeastern’s move toward greater academic standards while preserving its theological mission.
After Dr Hennesy’s retirement, Southeastern appointed Dr Mark Rutland as president in 1999, and his tenure saw enrollment rise from about 1,000 to more than 3,000, with new faculty and staff, upgraded facilities, expanded housing, and campus landscaping that gave it a tropical-paradise feel The university introduced new undergraduate majors and graduate programs, and Rutland pursued a long-term vision to transform Southeastern from a liberal arts college into a university In 2001, Southeastern College underwent the SACS reaffirmation process and was approved, enabling the institution to begin its transition to a university; by 2005, Southeastern College of the Assemblies of God became Southeastern University.
In a major organizational restructure, the university established four colleges—College of Education, College of Business and Legal Studies, College of Arts & Sciences, and College of Christian Ministries and Religion—each governed by a dean who oversees its administration.
In 2011, Dr Kent Ingle became president of Southeastern University (van der Laan,
Under his leadership, the university experienced unprecedented growth in enrollment, facilities, athletics, and programming From 2011 to 2019, the student body rose from about 2,500 to more than 8,700 students (Reeves, Lloyd, & Permenter, 2019) Much of this growth was driven by the School of Unrestricted Education, which delivered online education, dual enrollment, and extension sites across the United States (Reeves et al., 2019) The launch of a university football program and other athletic offerings further fueled facilities expansion and enrollment gains The university added its first doctoral program in 2013, the Doctor of Education, followed by a Doctor of Ministry in 2017, and a Doctor of Strategic Leadership and a PhD in Organizational Leadership in 2018.
The institutional changes at Southeastern University (SEU) offer rich opportunities for studying leadership, organizational change, growth, and development This study analyzes the leadership initiatives of SEU’s presidents during major institutional transitions and the factors that influenced those changes To illuminate these dynamics, the researcher conducted interviews with three SEU administrators who served through periods of rapid change from 1979 to 2019.
The theoretical underpinnings of this case study relied on organizational change theory
Organizational change describes moving from the current state to a desired future state, a process grounded in Kurt Lewin’s classic three-step model of unfreezing, change, and refreezing (Lewin, 1951) This approach emphasizes that successful change is planned but requires an unfreezing of the status quo to enable transition; it is particularly useful for understanding episodic change and the main drivers behind it (Seyfried & Ansmann, 2018) According to Lewin, leaders must create the perception that change is needed, generate motivation for it, and then implement the change during the unfreezing phase, where awareness is raised that the status quo impedes goal achievement (Hussain et al., 2018).
Figure 1 depicts the process of the change model developed by Lewin (1951) Typically, leaders first identify a need for organizational change, although the need may arise from other sectors of an institution The organization then begins the process of unfreezing and creating employee involvement As the change process takes place, knowledge sharing between employees and leadership is emphasized Communication and knowledge sharing are essential in order to create organizational cohesiveness and buy-in of the change According to Lewin, without proper communication, education, and time, employee resistance to change will increase Once knowledge sharing is complete, the leadership can begin the change process in concert with employees After implementing the change, the refreezing phase takes place to consolidate the change and one can measure the impact of change as part of a continuous improvement process
Figure 1 Lewin’s model of organizational change (Hussain et al., 2018)
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
This qualitative case study investigates the factors that produced organizational change at an evangelical IHE from 1979 to 2019 and examines the outcomes of those changes, based on interviews with three leaders conducted over the forty-year span to capture a longitudinal view of leadership and change The literature review is organized into three sections—organizational change and leadership, American evangelical education, and leadership and change in Christian higher education—placing the case within broader discussions of how faith-based institutions navigate transformation and the role of leadership in shaping institutional trajectories.
This section on organizational change and leadership links lifelong learning to leadership by defining lifelong learning, explaining its importance for leaders, and outlining educators’ roles in fostering it; it then reviews the levels of organizational change—from individual to group to systems—and examines how organizational models govern the integration of change; it also considers the impact of change on employees and how leaders navigate implementation by managing psychological contracts with internal constituents; finally, it presents strategic leadership as a framework for guiding organizational change.
American evangelical education reveals how theological, cultural, and political factors shaped the formation, separation, and expansion of evangelical higher education The analysis begins by tracing the historical background of evangelical intellectual life in the United States to provide context for subsequent discussion The literature review then narrows its focus to evangelical higher education in the United States, drawing out the themes that inform this study Taken together, this section contextualizes the study's themes and clarifies the organizational change identified in the case study, helping readers understand how these forces shaped evangelical education.
The final section examines leadership and change in Christian higher education, focusing on how organizational climate influences commitment within Christian IHEs It reviews the impact of globalization on Christian higher education and identifies the factors that foster change in Christian IHEs The discussion then turns to leadership changes in Christian higher education, highlighting positive leadership practices and the importance of a clear institutional vision Finally, it considers how leaders should navigate uncertainty, accreditation processes, and the role of faith communities within the context of evangelical higher education.
Organizational Change and Leadership Lifelong Learning and Leadership
Scholars have debated the role and impact of lifelong learning for years, underscoring its importance for leadership and ongoing professional development In 1975, Wilbur Cohen, former dean of the University of Michigan’s College of Education, challenged higher education institutions to become more flexible to meet the needs of lifelong learners More than forty years later, scholars continue to call for greater efforts to reach lifelong learners This article explores what lifelong learning is, why it matters for leadership, and the role educators play in fostering a culture of lifelong learning.
Cohen (1975) argued that a person who learns by doing, continually processes information, and gains knowledge through experience becomes a valuable member of an organization In essence, lifelong learning requires insatiable curiosity and a willingness to change, two traits that keep employees adaptable and growth‑minded Kotter (2012) reinforced this view, underscoring how continuous learning and proactive adaptation drive organizational performance in today’s dynamic environments.
Cohen linked lifelong learning with competitive drive and, in doing so, outlined five concrete traits of effective lifelong learners: risk-taking, humble self-reflection, seeking others’ opinions, attentive listening, and openness to new ideas These habits reinforce the value of continual learning, while Kotter describes the outcomes when they are put into practice.
Lifelong learners develop the capacity to navigate a complex and changing business environment, becoming unusually competent at driving organizational transformation and learning to lead This view aligns Kotter’s 2012 framing with Cohen’s 1975 ideas, suggesting that although Cohen’s work is dated, its core concept of lifelong learning continues to resonate with 21st‑century discussions on leadership and continuous development.
Kotter (2012) argues that the shift in organizational structures for both white- and blue-collar workers makes lifelong learning essential for 21st-century leadership In today’s work environment, employees can no longer stay in a single job or role throughout their careers, as changes in technology, workflows, and marketplaces demand ongoing adaptation He contends that without a commitment to lifelong learning, individuals will struggle to keep pace with rapid organizational changes Those who resist continuous learning are often more likely to fear change, hindering their ability to navigate evolving work settings. -**Support Pollinations.AI:**🌸 **Ad** 🌸 Unlock your content’s potential with Pollinations.AI [free text APIs](https://pollinations.ai/redirect/kofi)—boost SEO while mastering lifelong learning!
Across workplaces, the sense that jobs are slipping away grows stronger as people hear stories of downsizing and being reengineered out of work Concerns about health insurance and the rising cost of college for their children keep workers up at night In this climate, growth, personal renewal, and the development of leadership potential often get pushed aside, and many cling defensively to the status quo They focus on protecting what they already have rather than embracing the leap into the future.
To propel lifelong learning and prepare people for the future, we must examine the role educators play in cultivating students' intrinsic motivation to learn Educators who emphasize curiosity, relevance, and ongoing skill development can ignite a durable passion for learning that lasts a lifetime Effective teaching strategies connect learning to real-world goals, encourage independent inquiry, and model lifelong learning behaviors When schools and teachers create supportive, engaging environments, students become self-directed, future-ready learners who continuously adapt to change.
In the digital age, Tucker (2016) emphasizes cultivating a desire for lifelong learning, arguing that the internet and search engines like Google make passive learning increasingly unrealistic He calls on educators to design approaches that help students locate and interpret the vast information available to them, enabling learners to become self-directed and adaptable over time While acknowledging the benefits of technology and online education, Winslow (2017) warns of risks, including how the commodification of higher education can undermine lifelong learning by shaping learners who struggle to adapt to diverse workplace environments Taken together, Tucker and Winslow suggest that educators should foster lifelong learning across all levels of education, ensuring that learning extends beyond a commodified framework.
The debate over lifelong learning has deep roots, dating back more than four decades when educators warned about a rapidly changing society and envisioned lifelong learners as the response Many, including Cohen, remained hopeful that cultivating lifelong learners would meet the challenges of such change Lifelong learning reframes leadership not as a gifted trait, but as a skill driven by the effort to continually learn.
Understanding lifelong learning at the individual level is only the starting point for grasping how leadership shapes organizational change Although change must involve individuals, lasting transformation requires attention to every level of the organization—from individuals to groups to system-wide structures—to ensure durable results The upcoming section examines change through the three-tier lens of individual, group, and system, highlighting how changes at each level interact to drive comprehensive organizational transformation.
Burke (2017) outlines three levels of organizational change: the individual level, the group level, and the system-level Change at the individual level is often met with resistance, which can slow or derail broader transformation At the group level, Burke notes both substantial benefits and notable challenges, reflecting how team dynamics influence change outcomes System-level change typically lags behind and tends to emerge after shifts have occurred at the individual and group levels Understanding how each level operates helps illuminate the overall process of organizational change.