Content uploaded by Ralph Gigliotti
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Ralph Gigliotti on Oct 05, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
The Journal of Literacy and Technology
Special Issue for Suddenly Online – Considerations of Theory, Research, and
Practice
Fall 2020 ISSN: 1535-0975
18
Sudden Shifts to Fully Online: Perceptions of Campus Preparedness and
Implications for Leading Through Disruption
Article Info
Abstract
Ralph A. Gigliotti, Ph.D.
Rutgers University
The impact of the coronavirus pandemic on all sectors, including
colleges and universities, has been extensive. The pivot to a
suddenly online teaching and work environment raises important
questions regarding student learning and development,
curriculum design and delivery, virtual team engagement, and
the very future of higher education, and as highlighted in this
essay, the ways in which institutions adapted quickly to the
circumstances of a global pandemic sheds important light on the
dynamics of crisis leadership in higher education.
This essay examines varying perceptions of campus
preparedness in response to this shift to a suddenly online
environment based on an early survey that was distributed in
March 2020. The exploratory findings from this project
highlight relevant themes for the analysis and practice of leading
others in a suddenly online context, including the deployment of
careful and systematic emergency operations plans to prepare
for such shifts, ongoing leadership communication, familiarity
with and an investment in the infrastructure to support fully
online work and learning modalities, and a people-centered
response to the crisis. The essay concludes with research-
informed recommendations as colleges and universities enter
what will likely be an increasingly ambiguous and uncertain
period ahead.
Keywords: Communication theory,
Leadership communication,
Leadership development, Higher
education, College/university
The Journal of Literacy and Technology
Special Issue for Suddenly Online – Considerations of Theory, Research, and
Practice
Fall 2020 ISSN: 1535-0975
19
The first reported case of COVID-19
in the United States was detected in
Snohomish County, Washington, on January
19, 2020. In the weeks to follow, cases
became more prevalent in other regions of
the country, leading the World Health
Organization to declare a Public Health
Emergency of International Concern on
January 30. By March 11, when the WHO
characterized the outbreak as a pandemic,
the number of COVID-19 cases outside of
China increased 13-fold, and the number of
affected countries tripled (World Health
Organization, 2020). As of September 2020,
there were more than 31 million confirmed
cases of the virus, with over 20% of the
cases (approaching 7 million) reported in the
United States, and nearly 1 million deaths
attributed to the virus worldwide (Johns
Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center,
2020).
The impact of the coronavirus
pandemic on all sectors, including colleges
and universities, has been extensive. In short
order, college and university campuses
announced the transition to virtual
instruction, restrictions on employee and
student international travel, and new policies
for working from home. The unprecedented
activities of recent months, coupled with the
uncertainty surrounding the operations and
academic calendar for the 2020–2021
academic year, are disorienting and
unsettling for the higher education
community. As reported in a recent survey
of college leaders conducted by the
Association of Public and Land-grant
Universities (APLU) (2020), the leading
challenges facing higher education have
been further exacerbated as a result of the
pandemic, including government funding,
student mental health, diversity and
inclusion, and affordability. Furthermore, as
supported by a recent study by Aucejo,
French, Araya, and Zafar (2020), the
pandemic has had a disproportionate impact
on low-income students, who are 55% more
likely to have delayed graduation due to
COVID-19 than their higher-income peers.
The pandemic is apt to accelerate trends that
were already underway, and one area that
will probably be most impacted by the
pandemic involves the further integration of
technology into the design and delivery of
course instruction and into the college and
university workplace. As Marcus (2020)
reports, “These trends may not transform
higher education, but they are likely to
accelerate the integration of technology into
it” (para 7).
The pivot to a suddenly online
environment—the focus of this special
issue—is relevant for the many stakeholders
who are engaged in the activities of higher
education, with cascading effects on the
work of nearly every college and university
department. The accelerated migration to
this fully online context raises important
questions regarding student learning and
development, curriculum design and
delivery, virtual team engagement, and the
very future of higher education, and as
highlighted in this essay, the ways in which
institutions adapted quickly to the
circumstances of a global pandemic sheds
important light on the dynamics of crisis
leadership in higher education that may
serve as a guide for the unpredictable yet
almost certainly messy and tumultuous
period ahead.
The Journal of Literacy and Technology
Special Issue for Suddenly Online – Considerations of Theory, Research, and
Practice
Fall 2020 ISSN: 1535-0975
20
The Network for Change and
Continuous Innovation (NCCI)
1
brings
together individuals and institutions with a
shared interest in the areas of leadership,
change management, organizational
performance, and innovation in higher
education. As Gigliotti and Scott (2019)
wrote in an essay prior to the pandemic:
Change and innovation remain as
important today as they did 20 years
ago when this unique higher
education association was founded.
NCCI helps leverage and scale
change in higher education. Across
institutions, states, and nations, the
association provides an infrastructure
to share experiences, explore best
practices, and partner in developing
new approaches. The scope and scale
of changes that our members are
making in their institutions now is
exponentially larger than even a few
years ago, as is the impact of those
changes.
Crises provide unique opportunities for
invention and reinvention in higher
education (Gigliotti, 2016, 2019), and
although the long-term impact of the
COVID-19 pandemic is not entirely clear,
the crisis of our time is a watershed moment
for higher education and likely the source of
significant change and transformation across
each of our institutions.
A survey was conducted with NCCI
members in the early days of the pandemic
to explore the issues of institutional crisis
preparedness, the desired competencies for
crisis leaders in higher education, and the
ways in which the association could best
support member institutions amid this public
1
NCCI is an association of nearly 100 member institutions ranging from smaller community colleges to large
research universities for which I currently serve on the Board of Directors. For more information regarding NCCI,
please visit https://www.ncci-cu.org/.
health emergency. This essay examines the
preliminary survey findings which address
varying perceptions of campus preparedness
in response to this shift to a suddenly online
environment. The exploratory findings from
this project highlight relevant themes for the
analysis and practice of leading others in a
suddenly online context, including the
deployment of careful and systematic
emergency operations plans to prepare for
such shifts, ongoing leadership
communication, familiarity with and an
investment in the infrastructure to support
fully online work and learning modalities,
and a people-centered response to the crisis.
The essay concludes with specific
recommendations as colleges and
universities enter what will likely be an
increasingly ambiguous and uncertain period
ahead.
Literature Review
Rapid Shifts to Online Learning and Work
Environments.
The growth in distance education was
underway prior to the pandemic. According
to the National Center for Education
Statistics (2020), in fall 2018, of the
19,645,918 total postsecondary student
population, 6,932,074 students
(approximately 35%) were enrolled in
distance education courses at degree-
granting postsecondary institutions, and
3,257,987 students (approximately 17%)
were enrolled in exclusively distance
education courses. One source of distance
education includes online-degree programs,
which are now widespread across the higher
education ecosystem. As Kelderman (2020)
The Journal of Literacy and Technology
Special Issue for Suddenly Online – Considerations of Theory, Research, and
Practice
Fall 2020 ISSN: 1535-0975
21
notes, “Nationwide, enrollment in online-
degree programs has ballooned since the
Great Recession, increasing nearly 60
percent from 2012 to 2017 at public four-
year colleges, and more than 66 percent at
private nonprofit institutions.” Certainly, the
rapid shift to remote instruction in response
to the COVID-19 pandemic raises
interesting questions regarding the
differences between carefully planned and
coordinated approaches to distance
education and online learning, and what
many are labeling emergency remote
teaching. Effective online learning results
from careful instructional design and
planning, using a systematic model for
design and development (Branch & Dousay,
2015; Means, Bakia, & Murphy, 2014), and
decisions regarding the design of online
educational offerings must consider the
following dimensions: modality, pacing,
student-instructor ratio, pedagogy, instructor
role online, student role online, online
communication synchrony, role of online
assessments, and source of feedback (Means
et al., 2014). As Hodges, Moore, Lockee,
Trust, and Bond (2020) indicate, “the
distinction is important between the normal,
everyday type of effective online instruction
and that which we are doing in a hurry with
bare minimum resources and scant time:
emergency remote teaching.”
Despite the growth of distance
education and partially and fully online
degree programs prior to the pandemic, the
percentage of faculty who had never taught
online remained quite high. According to
Inside Higher Ed’s 2019 Survey of Faculty
Attitudes on Technology, conducted with
Gallup, 46% of faculty taught an online
course, an increase from 44% in 2018 and
30% in 2013. In his summary of the survey
findings, Lederman (2019) noted the
following:
Lest anyone think that that trend
means professors have fully
embraced the value and benefits of
online education, though, think
again. While three-quarters of
instructors who have taught online
believe it made them better teachers
in several key ways, professors
remain deeply divided about whether
online learning can produce student
learning outcomes equivalent to
face-to-face instruction.
As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic,
nearly all faculty have now become
increasingly more familiar with some degree
of online or remote instruction. In a
remarkably swift period, colleges and
universities across the country cancelled
face-to-face classes and mandated that
faculty move their courses online to help
prevent the spread of the virus. According to
Hodges et al. (2020), “the primary objective
in these circumstances is not to re-create a
robust educational ecosystem but rather to
provide temporary access to instruction and
instructional supports in a manner that is
quick to set up and is reliably available
during an emergency or crisis.” In a survey
of faculty conducted by the Chronicle of
Higher Education, “about 60 percent of
faculty members, and a similar share of
academic administrators, said spring’s
courses were worse than face-to-face
offerings” (Williams June, 2020). Thus,
despite valiant efforts to ensure continuity of
course instruction, the shift of planned in-
person courses to suddenly online modalities
was found to be disruptive, and the level of
learning perhaps of lesser quality than what
otherwise would have been possible through
in-person instruction. Furthermore, as found
in a survey conducted by Ithaca S&R of
15,000 students at 21 colleges and
universities, respondents indicated a desire
The Journal of Literacy and Technology
Special Issue for Suddenly Online – Considerations of Theory, Research, and
Practice
Fall 2020 ISSN: 1535-0975
22
for more communication about the changes
being made in response to the pandemic and
increased feelings of disconnection with
other students and their instructors as a
result of the shift to virtual instruction
(Blankstein, Frederick, & Wolff-Eisenberg,
2020).
In addition to the dramatic shifts in
the delivery of course content, the norms
and expectations of the workplace were
upended as a result of the pandemic.
According to Bowen (2013), trends in
information technology have contributed to
significant changes in management and
administrative processes, research and
scholarship, teaching, and the overall work
experience and office environment.
Teleworking emerged in the 1970s, but as
Markarian (2007) highlights (as cited in
Waters, 2015), it quickly gained popularity
in the 1980s in response to concerns
regarding energy, transportation, and the
environment. Prior to the pandemic,
telecommuting was on the rise, with an
increase of 159% in the number of people
telecommuting in the United States between
2005 and 2017 (U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics, 2020). Waters (2015) highlights
the benefits of telecommuting, particularly
in reducing some of the barriers for work in
colleges and universities, but she also
addresses many of the challenges that
perhaps may have limited telecommuting
arrangements in higher education and the
myriad challenges such arrangements
present for communication, management,
and trust (Dalhstrom, 2013).
As noted by Guyot and Sawhill
(2020), “the COVID-19 pandemic is, among
other things, a massive experiment in
telecommuting. Up to half of American
workers are currently working from home,
more than double the fraction who worked
from home (at least occasionally) in 2017–
18.” As Reeves and Rothwell (2020) report,
higher-income workers are much more
likely to be working from home during the
pandemic. The resistance to adopting
flexible work arrangements prior to the
pandemic, coupled with the realities of not
being able to convert some roles and
responsibilities among college and
university personnel into a virtual delivery,
were two of the many challenges facing
leaders in responding to this necessary pivot
for the college and university workplace.
Underpinnings of Leadership and Crisis
Leadership.
The COVID-19 pandemic and the
dramatic and sweeping impact on our
personal and professional ways of being
meet the criteria of what Weick (1993)
refers to as a cosmology episode, which
“occurs when people suddenly and deeply
feel that the universe is no longer a rational,
orderly system” (p. 633). As he goes on to
suggest, “What makes such an episode so
shattering is that both the sense of what is
occurring and the means to rebuild that
sense collapse together” (p. 633). Those
engaged in leadership play an active role in
helping others make sense of the conditions
within their environments, and the role of
sensemaking becomes especially prominent
and heightened during times of crisis,
change, and disruption (Bartunek, Rousseau,
Rudolph, & DePalma, 2006; Gioia &
Chittipeddi, 1991; Maitlis & Sonenshein,
2010; Stephens, et al., 2020; Weick, 1988,
1993, 1995). Leaders at all levels of higher
education faced a number of challenges
preceding the pandemic, particularly those
dealing with access, affordability, student
preparation and instruction, financial
stability, public perceptions, campus safety,
and diversity and inclusion, in addition to
the sweeping array of operational demands
required to run a highly complex and
The Journal of Literacy and Technology
Special Issue for Suddenly Online – Considerations of Theory, Research, and
Practice
Fall 2020 ISSN: 1535-0975
23
decentralized organization with multiple
missions and a wide array of stakeholders
(Ruben, De Lisi, & Gigliotti, 2017). The
pandemic added greater responsibility to the
work of higher education leadership, and it
remains at the top of mind as colleges and
universities prepare for an academic year
that is laden with uncertainty.
Leadership is viewed through a wide
array of lenses, and it is broadly defined in
the literature. Two prominent definitions
that take a communication-centered
orientation include Northouse’s (2018) view
of leadership as a “process whereby an
individual influences a group of individuals
to achieve a common goal” (p. 5) and
Johnson and Hackman’s (2018) definition of
“human (symbolic) communication that
modifies the attitudes and behaviors of
others in order to meet shared group goals
and needs” (p. 12). In exploring leadership
through the prism of communication, it
becomes important to consider not just the
actions and behaviors of an individual with
positional power, but rather the ways in
which leadership, as a process, emerges
through the interactions, interplay, and
convergence of leader, followers, and
context—what Kellerman (2016)
characterizes as the leadership system. As
recent communication scholarship
highlights, followers play a highly
significant and critical role in making
leadership possible (Alvesson &
Sveningsson, 2013a, 2013b; Fairhurst &
Connaughton, 2014a, 2014b; Ruben &
Gigliotti, 2016a, 2016b 2019). Thus, as we
consider the shift to a suddenly online
learning and work environment, the actions,
competencies, and decisions of those in
formal leadership roles is worthy of
analysis, as will be highlighted and
explained in the pages ahead, but so too
must we consider the ways in which
followers—including the many stakeholders
involved in higher education institutions—
co-construct the experiences of a suddenly
online teaching and learning environment.
Leadership can be found at all levels of an
organization, and as both a formal and
informal, planned and unplanned way of
being (Gigliotti, Ruben, & Goldthwaite,
2017; Ruben & Gigliotti, 2016a, 2016b).
Approaching leadership as a communicative
process hones in on the ways in which
“power and agency are widely dispersed
(rather than concentrated in the hands of
leaders) and are marshalled by both non-
leaders and leaders to co-construct
leadership and followership identities”
(Tourish, 2014, p. 80). Thus, from a
communication paradigm, we have come to
recognize verbal and nonverbal messages
delivered by leaders as one source of
leadership communication, along with the
many other strategies, structures, and
processes that make social influence
possible (Ruben & Gigliotti, 2019), and the
training and development of leaders at all
levels of higher education, particularly those
efforts focused on crisis situations, must
consider and privilege the criticality and
complexity of communication (Gigliotti &
Ruben, 2018; Wallace & Becker, 2018).
One final stream of literature that is
worth acknowledging prior to discussing
some of the central research findings is the
growing body of work in crisis leadership in
higher education and what it might mean in
navigating the realities of a suddenly online
workplace and learning ecosystem. As
Ulmer, Sellnow, and Seeger (2018)
acknowledge, an organizational crisis is a
specific, unexpected, and nonroutine event,
or series of events, that create high levels of
uncertainty and simultaneously present an
organization with both opportunities for and
threats to its high-priority goals (p. 7). The
The Journal of Literacy and Technology
Special Issue for Suddenly Online – Considerations of Theory, Research, and
Practice
Fall 2020 ISSN: 1535-0975
24
pandemic has revealed an abundance of
threats and opportunities for higher
education—exposing that which is broken
and forging new opportunities for
reinvention and renewal that may now be
possible (Ruben, 2020). I have come to view
crises as both externally imposed and
socially constructed (Gigliotti, 2019,
forthcoming), and the perception of crisis
among followers, constituents, or
stakeholders requires a leadership response
that treats the issue or situation with
importance. In considering the types of
events or situations that might develop into
crises of significance for colleges and
universities, I offer the following definition:
Crises are events or situations of
significant magnitude that threaten
reputations, impact the lives of those
involved in the institution, disrupt
the ways in which the organization
functions, have a cascading influence
on leadership responsibilities and
obligations across units/divisions,
and require an immediate response
from leaders. (p. 61)
According to each of these dimensions,
there is a widely shared view of the
pandemic as an unsettling and paradigm-
altering crisis of significant magnitude—one
that alters our ways of being, connecting,
working, and learning. As Yan (2020)
writes, “The widely implemented social
distancing measures to control the COVID‐
19 pandemic have generated one
unprecedented shift. That is, various types of
human social interactions (e.g., shopping,
banking, learning, meeting, and
entertaining) are shifted from dominantly
offline to dominantly online” (p. 2). For
leaders in higher education, the uniqueness
of the moment, coupled with the
overwhelming uncertainty regarding the
virus and the wave(s) that might lie ahead,
make the actions and decisions particularly
complex. Consequently, this crisis calls for
careful analysis of the actions and behaviors
of leaders in supporting the shifts required.
Colleges and universities face
especially unique challenges when dealing
with crises, due in part to the presence of a
decentralized organizational structure,
reliance on committee-based decision-
making, and tradition of shared governance
that might lead to slower and more
participatory methods of crisis response
(Gigliotti, 2019). Crises require immediate
attention (Laermer, 2003; Mitroff, 2004), a
coordinated and centralized response
(Barton, 2001; Coombs, 2018), and a dual
focus on both the short-term and long-term
implications of any decisions that might be
made in response to the crisis (Gigliotti,
2019; Klann, 2003); yet there is a long-
standing expectation of careful, deliberate,
and democratic decision-making efforts in
higher education that might restrict urgent
responses, alignment with centralized
policies and guidance, and short-term triage
efforts. Colleges and universities are
regularly criticized for being slow-moving
operations, and agility may at times seem
countercultural and perhaps even threatening
to the core values of the academy (Utz,
2020). However, as detailed in earlier
sections, colleges and universities engaged
in colossal and commendable efforts to pivot
quickly to fully online learning and work
environments, and some institutions of
higher education were among the first
organizations of any kind to close physical
operations and embrace social distancing in
the early days of the pandemic in the United
States (Baker, Hartocollis, & Weise, 2020).
The exploratory findings from this study of
college and university personnel provide a
glimpse into perceptions of campus
preparedness and desired leadership
The Journal of Literacy and Technology
Special Issue for Suddenly Online – Considerations of Theory, Research, and
Practice
Fall 2020 ISSN: 1535-0975
25
competencies in navigating the dramatic
disruptions posed by the pandemic, and as
highlighted by the emergent themes detailed
ahead, the shift to a suddenly online context
requires a focus on the deployment of
careful and systematic emergency operations
plans to prepare for such shifts, ongoing
leadership communication, familiarity with
and an investment in the infrastructure to
support fully online work and learning
modalities, and a people-centered response
to the crisis.
Methodology
Upon receiving IRB approval from
Rutgers University, the survey was
distributed on March 9, in the very early
days of the pandemic in the United States,
and it remained open for two weeks.
Additional reminders were distributed via
NCCI committee and communities of
practice chairs. Eighty individuals accessed
the survey, and nearly 30 respondents
provided responses to the open-ended
questions resulting in nearly 20 pages of
qualitative data. The final data set comprised
of respondents from at least 18 institutions,
representing varying units across their
respective institutions, including senior
administration and staff roles in offices of
the chancellor, academic affairs,
administration and finance, organizational
development and effectiveness, change
management, information technology,
human resources, and alumni and student
relations. Using a constant comparative
approach to data analysis (Lindlof & Taylor,
2017; Miles, Huberman, & Saldaña, 2019),
the qualitative survey responses were coded
based on dominant themes, and subsequent
reviews of the data helped the researcher
refine, condense, and modify the central
themes highlighted in the sections that
follow.
Findings
Crisis Preparation.
Respondents were asked to consider
perceptions of institutional crisis
preparedness at the outset of the coronavirus
pandemic. Individuals noted the following
areas where their campuses seemed best
prepared. First, as several respondents noted,
the existence of an emergency operations
plan and the ability to quickly set the plan
into action were important dimensions of
crisis preparation in the early days of the
pandemic. The existence and deployment of
this plan, typically coordinated by a
COVID-19 emergency response team,
allowed institutions to respond swiftly to the
crisis.
The demonstration of ongoing
communication from senior leadership was
also recognized as an area of strength by
survey respondents. As one individual
noted, “Communications have been ongoing
and clear and concise with detailed
instructions on impacts and what community
members need to do.” And as highlighted by
another respondent, “Leadership is keeping
on top of changing recommendations daily
and communicating.” Prompt, clear, and
ongoing communication are markers of
excellence as they relate to crisis
communication, and many respondents
seemed satisfied by their institution’s
response in this area. Interestingly, for some,
the realization of the severity of the crisis
required a shift in communication and
response, as detailed by the following
comment: “Once they realized how serious
it was they’ve caught up to reality and are
The Journal of Literacy and Technology
Special Issue for Suddenly Online – Considerations of Theory, Research, and
Practice
Fall 2020 ISSN: 1535-0975
26
now much better at communicating and
providing helpful resources.”
Germane to the scope of this essay
and the focus of this special issue, the
institution’s history with technology, online
learning, and remote work policies played a
significant role in perceptions of crisis
preparedness. The availability of technology
and evidence of an agile response from the
campus community to support rapid shifts to
remote learning and virtual work
arrangements were both highlighted as
particular strengths. One individual
complimented the institution’s “access to
many tools and experts to help transition
courses and work to a virtual environment.”
As another respondent suggested, “Our
Office of Digital Education has existed for
20 years and is able to be a critical resource
to faculty as they transition to remote
teaching and learning. Our remote
technologies (VPN, Zoom, Teams) were
well-utilized by staff prior to the crisis,
which has been helpful.” The history
preceding the crisis matters, and prior
adoption of systems, resources, and
equipment to support a rapid shift of this
kind played an important role in perceptions
of crisis preparedness.
One final area of strength
highlighted by survey respondents reflected
a people-centered response to the crisis by
members of the senior leadership team. The
unprecedented nature of the pandemic and
the widespread disruption it invoked within
institutions of higher education contributed
to an environment of high uncertainty and,
for some, anxiety. As noted in one
respondent’s response, “While no one has
experienced anything quite like this before,
having strong leaders who care about the
well-being of the students, faculty and
staff—as well as the university as an
institution—is a definite strength.” This
appreciation for a people-centered response
to the crisis was prominent in some of the
survey responses regarding the impact of the
crisis on students who needed to return
home safely and on employees who needed
support in quickly transitioning to a remote
work environment.
Initial Concerns.
Several of the themes noted as areas of
strength were also recognized by many
individuals as areas for greatest
improvement at their institution. For
example, timely, clear, and ongoing
communication from senior leaders in
response to the crisis was recognized as both
a preparedness element and an area of
greatest concern. Reflecting on the lack of
communication in the early days of the
pandemic, one respondent offered the
following: “Communication has been poor.
The messaging is not being handled
centrally so different groups are getting
different messages. There is no regular
cadence of communication so no one knows
when to expect updates, which is drowning
central offices in emails asking when they
will get info. Additionally, most messages
that contain substance come after hours,
which people are taking as a sign of
avoidance by leadership.” This sentiment
was shared by others who took issue with
the institution’s failure to “set up consistent,
transparent, broad, timely communication
channels” and to “capture and share
organizational artifacts and knowledge as
decisions are made.”
Like the reaction to the perceived
absence of communication from senior
leadership, some respondents expressed
concern with the delayed response by
individuals with emergency management
responsibilities to adequately address the
crisis. For example, as one person noted,
The Journal of Literacy and Technology
Special Issue for Suddenly Online – Considerations of Theory, Research, and
Practice
Fall 2020 ISSN: 1535-0975
27
“We seemed least prepared in our ability to
take decisive action. We are still doing a lot
of wait and see before we’re willing to make
the decision.” Another respondent
characterized their institution as being “late
to the game,” a sentiment shared by others
who compared the institution’s response to
nearby companies in the region: “The
response has been slow and the institution
could have been more proactive in
responding to COVID-19. Other nearby
companies mandated remote working weeks
prior to our institution.”
Bearing in mind the importance,
noted previously, of an institution’s history
with virtual learning and remote work, the
reluctance to embrace trends in either of
these areas in the past undoubtedly
complicated the sudden transition to remote
work required in this situation. For example,
as suggested by one respondent, “Our
institution is not well versed in these virtual
tools and has always been rather
conservative with remote work options.
Some people even seem to think they still
need to be in the office despite not being
needed on campus just because they do not
enjoy working from home.” This sentiment
was widely shared by survey respondents, as
illustrated in the following response: “We
have resisted staff requests to work from
home for years; the university had to pivot
quickly and find ways to equip and be okay
with thousands of staff members working
remotely.” Additionally, survey results
showed that “antiquated and paper-fueled
processes,” coupled with the very real
difficulties of converting some in-person
courses and programs to a fully online
delivery, posed challenges for college and
university personnel.
Inadequate efforts to appropriately
engage the campus community and help
stakeholders cope with the disruptive change
was a final area of concern in the early days
of the pandemic. This important dimension
of crisis leadership that some perceived to
be lacking involved “managing emotions”
and “helping people cope with the isolation
and change” triggered by the global
pandemic.
Desired Crisis Leadership Competencies.
Survey respondents were asked to
identify the qualities most desired in higher
education leaders in response to the public
health crisis. As supported by much of the
crisis management and crisis leadership
literature, leading during times of crisis is a
complicated endeavor, particularly due to
the high stakes, ambiguous and uncertain
conditions, and competing views of internal
and external stakeholders. The following
qualities/abilities emerged from the survey
data as most preferred:
▪ Active listening
▪ Adaptability/flexibility
▪ Balance short- and long-term
priorities
▪ Calm under pressure
▪ Clear, concise, and ongoing
communication
▪ Compassionate, and committed to
the well-being of students, faculty,
and staff
▪ Confidence
▪ Creative/Innovative
▪ Discipline
▪ Emotionally intelligent
▪ Empathy
▪ Fairness
▪ Familiarity with best practices
▪ Fast but thoughtful decision-making
The Journal of Literacy and Technology
Special Issue for Suddenly Online – Considerations of Theory, Research, and
Practice
Fall 2020 ISSN: 1535-0975
28
▪ Holistic point of view
▪ Honesty/integrity
▪ Humility/vulnerability
▪ Level-headed
▪ Mindful
▪ Optimistic
▪ Present, engaged, and responsive
▪ Resilient
▪ Resourceful
▪ Share clear expectations
▪ Transparency
The scale of the COVID-19 crisis is
staggering, and its potential impact on
institutions of higher education is
extraordinary. Given the complexity of the
crisis, three quotes presented in the survey
data may serve as a useful guide for leading
higher education institutions through this
unprecedented situation. First, as one
respondent indicated, compassionate risk-
taking is most critical, for “we are going to
have to be willing to take risks to survive
this.” Another individual recognized the
need for one to “interpret and deliver
copious changing information in a coherent
manner,” all the while having the “ability to
inspire us to be our best selves in a time of
uncertainty.” Finally, as one person offered,
“Redefining our priorities is critical. What
was important two months ago is probably
not what is most important now. Make
decisions and make them quickly. We need
to be ready to respond to the current
situation at a moment’s notice and de-
prioritize things that are no longer top
priority.”
Infrastructure for Community Support.
A final question within the survey
asked respondents to consider the ways in
which NCCI could best support individuals
and institutions during this challenging time.
The open-ended responses are organized
around five action items, which are also
likely relevant to the work of other
professional associations and consortia
engaged in efforts to support university
personnel:
• Deliver best practices for effective
crisis management/leadership and
ideas for leading teams and
providing emotional support during
changing times.
• Develop an infrastructure to help
members learn from what other
universities are doing to support
students, faculty, and staff, and to
identify approaches that are most and
least effective.
• Provide links to member institution
websites to highlight how they are
addressing the crisis.
• Create virtual discussion or message
boards to engage members in
conversation with others and learn
how others are adjusting their work
to support their institution.
• Continue to offer webinars with
content focused specifically on
navigating current circumstances.
As these action items seem to suggest,
professional associations and institution-
specific centers and support units can play
an important role in developing a platform
for the exchange of relevant resources, an
infrastructure for the exchange of salient
best practices, and the development of
community among geographically dispersed
colleagues—each of which takes on an even
greater level of relevance during times of
organizational and environmental crisis.
The Journal of Literacy and Technology
Special Issue for Suddenly Online – Considerations of Theory, Research, and
Practice
Fall 2020 ISSN: 1535-0975
29
Discussion and Implications
Crises reveal the connected,
interwoven, and interdependent features of
the human condition. Within times of crisis,
we can see more clearly what is broken,
what is in need of healing, and what matters.
As Solnit (2020) posits,
When a storm subsides, the air is
washed clean of whatever particulate
matter has been obscuring the view,
and you can often see farther and
more sharply than at any other time.
We may feel free to pursue change in
ways that seemed impossible while
the ice of the status quo was locked
up. We may have a profoundly
different sense of ourselves, our
communities, our systems of
production, and our future.
At this time, we find ourselves at
only a partial and tentative moment of
reprieve. We can look behind us to explore
the immediate impact of the pandemic and
the impact on leading sudden shifts to fully
online work and learning environments,
while also looking ahead to the inevitable
disruptions that might continue to threaten
the activities and operations of higher
education. In consideration of the
preliminary findings of this study, several
paradoxes emerge that can contribute to how
we engage in the analysis, exploration,
interrogation, and practice of leading in
times of disruption, uncertainty, and
volatility.
The first paradox involves a craving
for certainty, clarity, and information during
a time of widespread uncertainty. In the
immediate pivot to a fully online
environment, frequent and ongoing
communication from campus leadership was
acknowledged as both an area of strength
and an area for improvement by survey
respondents. As we look ahead to the
upcoming academic year and the potential
for ongoing waves of disruption as a result
of the virus, the desire for clarity during a
time that is noticeably lacking such
precision can help to guide as well as
complicate approaches to leadership
communication.
Second, the shift to a suddenly
online environment for teaching, learning,
and work exposed the affordances of
available technologies (Leonardi, 2013)
while also revealing the deficiencies that can
result from a lack of human connection
(Murthy, 2020). The sounds and scenes of
the last few months—virtual graduation
celebrations to honor the contributions and
accomplishments of the graduating class,
images of loved ones exchanging
conversations separated by glass dividers,
the chorus of shared music resonating from
the physically distanced balconies of Italy,
the routine cheers in New York City in
support of first responders, and the now
normalized parades and Zoom gatherings to
celebrate special occasions—all serve as
poignant reminders of the desire and need
for emotional human connection during a
time of physical and social distancing. The
survey findings point to the importance of
demonstrating and displaying care for the
well-being of the entire community, and in
navigating future shifts to fully online ways
of being, leaders at various levels will need
to continue to explore ways of
communicating care and cultivating
connection in both physical and mediated
modalities.
The final paradox—and one that will
continue to complicate the efforts of higher
education leadership—is the need for swift
and agile responses in a sector that prides
itself on careful and collaborative decision-
making. When crises strike, colleges and
The Journal of Literacy and Technology
Special Issue for Suddenly Online – Considerations of Theory, Research, and
Practice
Fall 2020 ISSN: 1535-0975
30
universities are held to the same
expectations for a speedy and coordinated
response as any other sector (Gigliotti,
2019), and as described by several of the
survey respondents, the ability to quickly
deploy an emergency plan in response to the
outbreak of the pandemic was recognized as
both a source of strength and area for
improvement.
In light of these three paradoxes,
below are several implications for theory,
research, and practice during this unique
historical moment:
• Revisit emergency response plans based
on how the institution responded to the
outbreak in March 2020, and critically
consider how to move forward in what
will likely be an increasingly
ambiguous and uncertain environment
for colleges and universities.
• Solicit feedback from key stakeholders
representing various parts of the
institution with a goal of learning the
lessons, impact, and implications of the
shift to suddenly online on teaching,
learning, and workplace engagement.
• Crises threaten reputations and disrupt
operations, and they require immediate
responses and both frequent and
ongoing communication from leaders.
At both an individual and collective
level, analyze the communication
surrounding the shift to suddenly
online, and through the lenses of
representative stakeholders, consider
the ways in which these messages align
with the unit, department, or
institution’s mission, and how future
messages on such topics might offer
expertise, instill hope, build
community, and allow stakeholders to
engage in the decisions that impact the
institution at large.
• Pursue physical and virtual
infrastructures to support community,
including the implementation of robust
learning management systems and
appropriate training opportunities for
using such systems, sharing resources
on ways of cultivating connections
when leading virtual teams, and
creating opportunities for forging new
interdisciplinary relationships across
the institution that can help ignite
reinvention strategies that might be
necessary to move the institution
forward.
• Recognizing the impact on student
well-being, consider the following
research-informed recommendations
from Blankstein et al. (2020) based on
their study of student perceptions:
continue to communicate with students;
rethink how to adapt technical and
specialized coursework for online
instruction; enhance connection and
collaboration with students in fully
online modalities; invest in academic
and financial advising; and target
students with the greatest need. As the
authors suggest, and as supported by
many recent studies, “Students from
groups that were historically
underserved and marginalized before
the pandemic were more likely to face
challenges during the spring 2020 term”
(p. 21), and it is incumbent on leaders
across higher education to explore ways
of best supporting equity, inclusion, and
success across the student lifecycle.
• Reimagine the purpose of higher
education and revisit how the mission
of the unit, department, or institution
may meet the needs of a post-COVID
world. Many pundits are predicting that
the pandemic will be the catalyst to
The Journal of Literacy and Technology
Special Issue for Suddenly Online – Considerations of Theory, Research, and
Practice
Fall 2020 ISSN: 1535-0975
31
forever change higher education, and in
consideration of our collective and
sudden shift to fully online, the
conditions are ripe for some shared
sensemaking on reasons for pursuing
work in this sector, ideas for engaging
more meaningfully with our students
and colleagues, and principles to help
guide how we intend to handle the
inevitable future crises.
The themes raised throughout this
article shed important insight on the varying
perceptions of campus preparedness in
response to this shift to a suddenly online
environment; however, it is important to
acknowledge several research limitations.
The collection of data occurred during very
early days of the crisis in the United States
and perceptions of leadership during this
period were still being established. As such,
the survey findings accurately capture
perceptions at the time of data collection,
but not necessarily as the crisis unfolded
throughout the spring semester and summer
months. Additionally, although individuals
from several institutions responded to the
survey, more rigorous data collection from
numerous individuals at each of the
represented institutions would strengthen the
data and perhaps expand on some of the
exploratory themes discussed in this article.
Finally, as with any qualitative
methodology, the ideas raised throughout
this article are not meant to be exhaustive or
generalizable. Rather, these findings pose
important connections and questions for
those engaged in higher education
leadership, and it is my hope that these
themes will prove useful for those engaged
in future research on this topic.
Conclusion
Ulmer et al. (2018) present a view of
crises as opportunities for learning and
improvement, “viewing them as they are
perceived in Chinese culture, where the
symbol for crisis in the Mandarin language
is interpreted as dangerous opportunity” (p.
4). The danger, fear, and uncertainty found
in this moment can paralyze our institutions;
yet we may also use this opportunity to
reorient ourselves toward renewal and
growth that is centered on a commitment to
key stakeholders, a commitment to
correction and learning, and a commitment
to the core values that uphold our work
across higher education (Ulmer & Sellnow,
2002). As the findings of this project
suggest, early reactions of campus
preparedness in navigating a dramatic and
sudden shift to fully online centered
primarily on the importance of the
deployment of careful and systematic
emergency operations plans to prepare for
such shifts, ongoing leadership
communication, familiarity with and an
investment in the infrastructure to support
fully online work and learning modalities,
and a people-centered response to the crisis.
Looking ahead, research, theory, and
practice may build upon these exploratory
findings in considering more fully three
paradoxes that are reflective of this historic,
disorienting, and unsettling historical
moment—the desire for information during
a time of remarkable uncertainty, the hunger
for connection during a moment of social
distancing, and the need for agile leadership
in an environment that privileges broad
engagement and practice.
The Journal of Literacy and Technology
Special Issue for Suddenly Online – Considerations of Theory, Research, and
Practice
Fall 2020 ISSN: 1535-0975
32
References
Alvesson, M., & Sveningsson, S. (2003a).
The great disappearing act:
difficulties in doing “leadership.”
Leadership Quarterly, 14(3), 359–
381.
Alvesson, M., & Sveningsson, S. (2003b).
Managers doing leadership: the
extra-ordinization of the mundane.
Human Relations, 56(12), 1435–
1459.
Association of Public and Land-grant
Universities (APLU). (2020). How
COVID-19 changed everything and
nothing at all. Retrieved from
https://www.aplu.org/library/how-
covid-19-changed-everything-and-
nothing-at-all/file
Aucejo, E. M., French, J. F., Araya, M. P.
U., & Zafar, B. (2020). The impact
of COVID-19 on student experiences
and expectations: Evidence from a
survey. NBER Working Paper No.
27392. Cambridge, MA: National
Bureau of Economic Research.
Baker, M., Hartocollis, A., & Weise, K.
(2020, March 6). First U.S. colleges
close classrooms as virus spreads.
More could follow. The New York
Times. Retrieved from
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/0
6/us/coronavirus-college-campus-
closings.html
Barton, L. (2001). Crisis in organizations II
(2nd ed.). Cincinnati, OH: College
Divisions South-Western.
Bartunek, J., Rousseau, D. M., Rudolph, J.,
& DePalma, J. (2006). On the
receiving end: sensemaking,
emotion, and assessments of an
organizational change initiated by
others. Journal of Applied
Behavioral Science, 42(2), 182–206.
Blankstein, M., Frederick, J. K., & Wolff-
Eisenberg, C. (2020). Student
experiences during the pandemic
pivot. Ithaka S+R. Retrieved from
https://sr.ithaka.org/wp-
content/uploads/2020/06/SR-Report-
Student-Experiences-During-the-
Pandemic-Pivot.pdf
Bowen, W. G. (2013). Higher education in
the digital age. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press.
Branch, R. M., & Dousay, T. A. (2015).
Survey of instructional design
models (5th ed.). Bloomington, IN:
Association for Educational
Communications and Technology.
Coombs, W. T. (2018). Ongoing crisis
communication: Planning,
managing, and responding (5th ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Dahlstrom, T. R. (2013). Telecommuting
and leadership style. Public
Personnel Management, 42(3), 438–
451.
Fairhurst, G. T., & Connaughton, S. L.
(2014a). Leadership: A
communicative perspective.
Leadership, 10(7), 7–35.
The Journal of Literacy and Technology
Special Issue for Suddenly Online – Considerations of Theory, Research, and
Practice
Fall 2020 ISSN: 1535-0975
33
Fairhurst, G. T., & Connaughton, S. L.
(2014b). Leadership communication.
In L. L. Putnam & D. K. Mumby
(Eds.), The SAGE handbook of
organizational communication:
Advances in theory, research, and
method (pp. 401–423). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Gigliotti, R. A. (forthcoming). The
perception of crisis, the existence of
crisis: Navigating the social
construction of crisis. Journal of
Applied Communication Research.
Gigliotti, R. A. (2019). Crisis leadership in
higher education: Theory and
practice. New Brunswick, NJ:
Rutgers University Press.
Gigliotti, R. A. (2016). Leader as performer;
leader as human: A discursive and
retrospective construction of crisis
leadership. Atlantic Journal of
Communication, 24(4), 185-200.
Gigliotti, R. A., & Ruben, B. D. (2018). The
role of communication theory in
leadership training and development.
In J. D. Wallace & D. Becker (Eds.),
The handbook of communication
training: A best practices framework
for assessing and developing
competence (pp. 238–252). New
York: Routledge.
Gigliotti, R. A., Ruben, B. D., &
Goldthwaite, C. (2017). Leadership:
Communication and social influence
in personal and professional
settings. Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt.
Gigliotti, R. A., & Scott, K. (2019, June 20).
Advancing quality and excellence in
higher education. eCampus News.
Retrieved from
https://www.ecampusnews.com/2019
/06/20/advancing-quality-and-
excellence-in-higher-education/
Gioia, D. A., & Chittipeddi, K. (1991).
Sensemaking and sensegiving in
strategic change initiation. Strategic
Management Journal, 12(6), 433–
448.
Guyot, K., & Sawhill, I. V. (2020, April 6).
Telecommuting will likely continue
long after the pandemic. Brookings.
Retrieved from
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-
front/2020/04/06/telecommuting-
will-likely-continue-long-after-the-
pandemic/
Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust,
T., & Bond, A., et al. (2020, March
27). The difference between
emergency remote teaching and
online learning. EDUCAUSE
Review. Retrieved from
https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/
3/the-difference-between-
emergency-remote-teaching-and-
online-learning
Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource
Center. (2020). Johns Hopkins
University and Medicine. Retrieved
from https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/
Johnson, C. E., & Hackman, M. Z. (2018).
Leadership: A communication
perspective (7th ed.). Long Grove,
IL: Waveland Press.
The Journal of Literacy and Technology
Special Issue for Suddenly Online – Considerations of Theory, Research, and
Practice
Fall 2020 ISSN: 1535-0975
34
Kelderman, E. (2020, June 1). Spurred by
coronavirus, some colleges rush to
move online. The Chronicle of
Higher Education. Retrieved from
https://www.chronicle.com/article/Sp
urred-by-Coronavirus-Some/248893
Kellerman, B. (2016). Leadership—it’s a
system, not a person! Daedalus,
145(3), 83–94.
Klann, G. (2003). Crisis leadership.
Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative
Leadership.
Laermer, R. (2003). Full frontal PR: Getting
people to talk about you, your
business, or your product. Princeton,
NJ: Bloomberg.
Lederman, D. (2019, October 30).
Professors’ slow, steady acceptance
of online learning: A survey. Inside
Higher Ed. Retrieved from
https://www.insidehighered.com/new
s/survey/professors-slow-steady-
acceptance-online-learning-survey
Leonardi, P. M. (2013). Theoretical
foundations for the study of
sociomateriality. Information and
Organization, 23(2), 59–76.
Lindlof, T. R., & Taylor, B. C. (2017).
Qualitative communication research
methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Maitlis, S., & Sonenshein, S. (2010).
Sensemaking in crisis and change:
Inspiration and insights from Weick
(1988). Journal of Management
Studies, 47(3), 551–580.
Marcus, J. (2020, April 23). Will the
Coronavirus forever alter the college
experience? The New York Times.
Retrieved from
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/2
3/education/learning/coronavirus-
online-education-college.html
Markarian, M. (2007). Remote access.
Career World, 36(2), 19–21.
Means, B., Bakia, M., & Murphy, R. (2014).
Learning online: What research tells
us about whether, when, and how.
New York: Routledge.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña,
J. (2019). Qualitative data analysis:
A methods sourcebook (4th ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mitroff, I. I. (2004). Crisis leadership:
planning for the unthinkable.
Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Murthy, V. (2020). Together: The healing
power of human connection in a
sometimes lonely world. New York:
HarperCollins.
National Center for Education Statistics. US
Department of Education. (2020).
Distance learning. Retrieved from
https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.a
sp?id=80
Northouse, P. (2018). Leadership: Theory
and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Reeves, R. V., & Rothwell, J. (2020, March
27). Class and COVID: How the less
affluent face double risks. Retrieved
from
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-
front/2020/03/27/class-and-covid-
how-the-less-affluent-face-double-
risks/
The Journal of Literacy and Technology
Special Issue for Suddenly Online – Considerations of Theory, Research, and
Practice
Fall 2020 ISSN: 1535-0975
35
Ruben, B. D. (2020). Departmental and
institutional renewal in the wake of
the COVID-19 pandemic: Applying
the Excellence in Higher Education
framework. Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Ruben, B. D., De Lisi, R., & Gigliotti, R. A.
(2017). A guide for leaders in higher
education: Core concepts,
competencies, and tools. Sterling,
VA: Stylus.
Ruben, B. D., & Gigliotti, R. A. (2016a).
Leadership as social influence: An
expanded view of leadership
communication theory and practice.
Journal of Leadership and
Organizational Studies, 23(4), 467–
479.
Ruben, B. D., & Gigliotti, R. A. (2016b).
Communication: Sine qua non of
organizational leadership theory and
practice. International Journal of
Business Communication, 54(1), 12–
30.
Ruben, B. D., & Gigliotti, R. A. (2019).
Leadership, communication, and
social influence: A theory of
resonance, activation, and
cultivation. Bingley, UK: Emerald.
Solnit, R. (2020, April 7). “The impossible
has already happened”: What
coronavirus can teach us about hope.
The Guardian. Retrieved from
https://www.theguardian.com/world/
2020/apr/07/what-coronavirus-can-
teach-us-about-hope-rebecca-solnit
Stephens, K. K., Jahn, J. L. S., Fox, S., et al.
(2020). Collective sensemaking
around COVID-19: experiences,
concerns, and agendas for our
rapidly changing organizational
lives. Management Communication
Quarterly, 34(3), 426-457.
Tourish, D. (2014). Leadership, more or
less? A processual, communication
perspective on the role of agency in
leadership theory. Leadership, 10(1),
79–98.
Ulmer, R. R., & Sellnow, T. L. (2002).
Crisis management and the discourse
of renewal: Understanding the
potential for positive outcomes of
crisis. Public Relations Review,
28(4), 361–365.
Ulmer, R. R., Sellnow, T. L., & Seeger, M.
W. (2018). Effective crisis
communication: Moving from crisis
to opportunity (4th ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2020).
Employed persons working at home,
workplace, and time spent working
at each location by full- and part-
time status and sex, jobholding
status, and educational attainment,
2019 annual averages. Retrieved
from
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/atu
s.t06.htm
Utz, R. (2020, June 24). Against
adminspeak. The Chronicle of
Higher Education. Retrieved from
https://www.chronicle.com/article/A
gainst-Adminspeak/249047
Wallace, J. D., & Becker, D. (Eds.). (2018).
The handbook of communication
training: A best practices framework
for assessing and developing
competence. New York: Routledge.
The Journal of Literacy and Technology
Special Issue for Suddenly Online – Considerations of Theory, Research, and
Practice
Fall 2020 ISSN: 1535-0975
36
Waters, K. A. (2015). Teleworking in higher
education: What managers should
know before developing teleworking
policies. College and University,
90(3), 28–31, 34–38. Retrieved from
http://www.aacrao.org/professionalre
sources/publications/college-
university-journal-%28c-u%29
Weick, K. E. (1988). Enacted sensemaking
in crisis situations. Journal of
Management Studies, 25(4), 305–
317.
Weick, K. E. (1993). The collapse of
sensemaking in organizations: The
Mann Gulch disaster. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 38(4), 628–652.
Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in
organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Williams June, A. (2020, June 4). Did the
scramble to remote learning work?
Here’s what higher ed thinks. The
Chronicle of Higher Education.
Retrieved from
https://www.chronicle.com/article/Di
d-the-Scramble-to-Remote/248928
World Health Organization Director-
General’s opening remarks at the
media briefing on COVID-19. (2020,
March 11). Retrieved from
https://www.who.int/dg/speeches/det
ail/who-director-general-s-opening-
remarks-at-the-media-briefing-on-
covid-19---11-march-2020
Yan, Z. (2020). Unprecedented pandemic,
unprecedented shift, and
unprecedented opportunity. Human
Behavior and Emerging
Technologies.
