Engaging election contention: Understanding why presidents engage with contentious issues

Abstract

In recent years, technology has made it possible, and in some ways critical, for college and university presidents to increase campus‐wide communication. Following the 2016 US presidential election, many college presidents across the country sent campus‐wide communications in response to the election, while others chose not to respond. The resulting reactions from campus and community stakeholders to these communications, or the lack of communication, from presidents was mixed due to the contentious nature of the election. In an effort to better understand a president’s decision to communicate, this study utilised coded interviews with 12 US flagship institution presidents or vice‐presidents for communication, providing insight into why presidents generally respond to contentious events and, more specifically, why presidents chose to respond to the 2016 election of Donald Trump. Four motivations that generally influenced presidential communications were identified (i.e., responsibility to campus stakeholders, pressure to respond, emphasise university values and the role of a public university), and subsequent sub‐themes were identified while analysing why presidents responded to the 2016 election specifically. This study concludes by offering implications for presidential communication and directions for future research on presidential engagement with contentious events.

The road already traveled: communication advice for higher education leaders

“…Our findings align with the work of McNaughtan and McNaughtan (2019), which argued that how the issue impacts campus stakeholders, pressure from external entities to respond, and how closely the issue connects to institution’s core values should guide presidents’ decisions about when to communicate. The presidents in the study interpreted this differently according to their own style and perception of their campuses’ needs.…”

“…These failures to communicate can affect campus presidents’ relationships with institutional governing board members, academic faculty, administrative staff and the public in the wake of campus sex scandals, political disputes, incidents of harassment and racially charged hate crimes. Thus, understanding and wielding communication skills is increasingly important among the many elements of leadership campus presidents must master (Gagliardi et al , 2017; McNaughtan and McNaughtan, 2019). A college or university president’s job requires communicating with a variety of stakeholders in situations including one-on-one meetings, group discussions, media interviews, social media and formal speeches (Bensimon, 1989; Cole, 2015; Eddy, 2005) as well as via e-mail and social media.…”

“…Finally, a growing body of research examines how institutional leaders respond to local, national, and global events. Some scholars have sought to understand why higher education leaders would engage with external events (Legon et al , 2013; McNaughtan and McNaughtan, 2019), while others have analyzed how presidents responded (McNaughtan et al , 2018; Vitullo and Johnson, 2010). McNaughtan et al (2019) found that institutional leaders make communication decisions and craft their external communication in consultation with their institutional mission statements.…”

Performing Anti-racism: Universities Respond to Anti-Black Violence

“…However, doing so would be a change. Prior presidential and policy discourse has been noted for race-neutral language (Hypolite & Stewart, 2019; McNaughtan & McNaughtan, 2019) and the ways in which this color-evasive language of HEI leadership maintain the status quo of who is included and who is excluded (Cole & Harper, 2017; Davis & Harris, 2015; Moore & Bell, 2019). It also sets a tone that continues to normalize White experiences and behaviors and racializes all others.…”

“…Instead, multiple actors shape the statements. Further, presidential responses to public events are “inherently risky given the diversity of opinions and perspectives that exist on college campuses” (McNaughtan & McNaughtan, 2019, p. 199), with many presidents noting an obligation to respond national crisis. While the role of presidents may be perceived as symbolic, requiring engagement from diverse stakeholders, they are critical to setting a tone for advancing racial equity on campus (Andrade & Lundberg, 2022).…”