Literature Review

Introduction

The literature review section will focus on the Private Higher Education System (HES) of UK, primarily, pointing out the needs of leadership, personality traits of the leaders, different leadership models and approaches used to overcome any challenges in the sector. The education system of the United Kingdom (UK) is known worldwide, for its excellent standards and quality of education. Academic institutions, like other sectors, face different challenges, due to dynamic environment, changing needs, of educational world and technological world and other uncertain events like Covid 19. Therefore, leaders of Higher education (HE) sector must enhance their capabilities and need to adapt new strategies, according to the changing needs and demand of time (Al-Husseini and Elbeltagi, 2016).

Experienced higher education administrators and senior leaders/teachers team up with reputable industry experts to address the most critical and current challenges affecting the higher education system, i.e., the colleges and universities. Where, student learning, access to resources, student affordability, racism, fund-raising for new projects, and adoption of new technology are a few challenges faced in the Higher Education Leadership (Antony, Cauce and Shalala, 2017). The educational leaders assist the whole industry with providing trainings, sharing their experiences, and developing new talent. Therefore, Leadership style has been identified to be one of the most important factors, to incorporate innovation and change, because leaders can influence the whole system or institution by adopting multiple strategies. These strategies may include: introduction and incorporation of new ideas, set specific goals, taking alternative path, and create a culture of innovation (Al-Husseini and Elbeltagi, 2016).

As innovation is critical for any sector, it is also essential for the educational sector. In the recent times, it has become a critical factor, for the survival of any educational organization or sector of the world. Innovative leadership style or transformational leadership style has proved to be the key factor in achieving competitive advantage, in difficult times of change and competition (Al-Husseini and Elbeltagi, 2016). Leadership is commonly recognized as a key component in any organization's success, or failure. This is also true for higher education institutes, where the influence of leaders and leadership is crucial for the academic and administrative success. Where, academic leader faces the numerous challenges that are related to higher education sector (Gigliotti and Ruben, 2017). These challenges include: significant reduction in public sector support, divergent views on the purpose of higher education, opportunities and threats presented by new technologies for teaching and learning process, and a rapidly changing and competitive global economy. Given the current situation, there is always a compelling need for colleges and institutions, to pay more attention to leadership development (Gigliotti and Ruben, 2017).

Changes and Revolution faced by Private Higher Education Sector (HES) Of UK

As the world is rapidly changing, and is driven by powerful external forces like politics, economics, and technology, educational world is also affected. Similarly, factors like online learning, globalization of education, and blooming of artificial intelligence (AI), have disrupted the education sector, presenting numerous challenges for the current and future leaders, as now educational sector has revolutionized, altogether, especially after Covid 19 (Antràs, 2020). Also, academic institutions, like other industries, are striving to enhance their capabilities and adapt students and industry expectations. Higher education institutions (HEIs) are critical, since they are innovators, who can create new products and services, in form of graduates and provide industry with training, experience, fresh talent and employees (Al-Husseini and Elbeltagi, 2016). Due to the decline of the public sector, all over the world, private higher education was pushed and came into the spotlight, by the end of the twentieth century. As, Governments are unwilling to spend the public funds on higher education, despite the continued high demand from the corporate sectors for the availability of skilled personnel (Welch, 2011). Therefore, Private institutions initiated and filled the gap between demand and supply and started to offer necessary knowledge to fulfill the need of the twenty-first-century economy (Ben-David, 2017). Higher education privatization is directly related to its expansion. When the private sector or system grows, it raises questions on how to create or generate its funds. Also, how to fund them from public funds, etc. (KWIEK, 2018).

The scope of private colleges and universities differ in their nature and scope, in different parts of the world. Initially, in most part of Europe, the higher education was mostly funded by the government, with only a small part of private sector, which included mostly Catholic schools or semi-private bodies that provided specific courses (Ben-David, 2017). The Tuition fees were low in Europe, while the private sector of education dominated in the Asian countries and prices were high. For example, higher education in East Asia (Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, and Taiwan) has 80% of the students enrolled in the private universes (Hawkins, 2011). There are two kinds of privatization in the higher education sector, in world, external and internal. Where, External privatization, which is the flourishing private segment and internal privatization includes fee-paying courses, which have nominal or no fees in the in the public sector. As, with passage of time, students started to attend more private schools and higher education classes, which were privately funded, privatization of education, increased (KWIEK, 2018). Privatization started from 1945 and in 1990s, European transition countries started to do experimentation with privatization process (KWIEK, 2018). It was first applied on services like: old-age pension processes, health care system and the higher education sector. The conventional welfare state was overburdened, with different sectors, due to financial difficulties. Europe started to initiate privatization of higher education system, as the states could not bear the expenses of all the specialized courses.  Therefore, Governments made a logical decision about the extension of the education sector, which expanded privatization of education in Europe (KWIEK, 2018). This research focuses on the private higher education sector (HES) of UK.

When, Traditional education grew and country boundaries are pulled back, for the students to acquire Higher Education (HE), Universities and Colleges (both public and private), all over the world, had to adapt change and faced many challenges, due to changing technologies, concepts, shifting demographics, different ethnicity students and faculty had different problems, and academic interests were even different (Chandler, 2013). In order to address this problem, many professional and vocational programs, kept on adding in the sector, due to demand. Which helped the higher educational sector to grow, but this increased the challenges, and the continuing need to more faculty, and increased regulatory obligations, etc. But, the higher education sector, with help of private sector, remained focused towards the academic needs of the students. Where, many campus goals have been designed, in a way to be more responsive to external demands and expectations, which need strong leadership and administration (Chandler, 2013). Numerous insights are gathered on the private Higher Education sector (HES)'s different phases. One of the findings was that the HES adopted a commercial attitude and practices, which became more accepted in higher education sector.

Also, many authors have emphasized on the importance of adapting pure market rules and commercial logics to the university setting (Pucciarelli and Kaplan, 2016). While, another prevalent claim is that higher education institutions must establish competitive strategies to identify sources of change, invent appropriate reactions to such change, and develop policies and strategic guidelines that allow for evolution or even revolution, if needed. The changes of private sector conflict with conventional higher education professional values, which are typically associated with academic independence and the advancement of human knowledge, which made private higher institutions, different from public sector. The service departments became important in private universities, where, providing student services, accommodation, sports facilities, administration of student finance, were core functions. While, the university functions also changed, including: human resources, finance, marketing, management, alignment of research funding, and collaboration with other business to produce value, in addition to the institution's core teaching and research activity (Crevani et al., 2015). Therefore, the leaders of this field are usually more concerned with improving efficiency and productivity of the overall institute.

Since privatization, there has been a shift in management responsibilities in UK institutions has shifted from government or administrative approach to a pervasive approach, of adopting management culture, since the 1980s (Black, 2015). Leaders in higher education institutions had to consider how to better lead their organizations and identify ways that are most effective in the private setting of the HEI. This was not a simple task, because initially, there was only one private institute in UK, and there was no clear definition of leadership in educational sector, and sometimes pragmatic approach of the leaders, affected the evolution of organizational values and further complicated the scenario in UK (Black, 2015). Also, the Capitalist ideology has been replaced, in private sector, by an alternative concept, leadership, in the educational world. Where, Individual leaders, work as progressive change agent, with the ability to define organizational agendas and provide solutions, unify conflicting interests, and create optimistic and shared values in organizations. As a result, leadership has reintroduced the concept of the individual, powerful heroic leader into situations where traditionally, leadership was carried out by representative political organizations, civil workers, or combined forums (Crevani et al., 2015).

Recently in 2020, the corona virus pandemic has disrupted the interaction between teachers and students of the higher education institutions (HEIs), causing transformations in the whole teaching-learning process and Global HES (Coman et al., 2020). Universities were forced to carry out, their entire academic and other activities with students, by using online platforms, due to strict lockdowns, in Europe, especially. Governments had taken restrictive steps, in order to prevent the virus from spreading and to preserve the whole continuity. Therefore, colleges all around the world adopted online learning, which created massive shift in the sector and created new, unforeseen challenges for the leaders and administrative team of Private Universities (Coman et al., 2020). Hence, leadership is emphasized on the university change agendas, which are said to be the industry solutions for efficiency problems. Also, in an era of change, when higher education institutions are granted formal autonomy, are also expected to participate directly in societal and innovational transformation (Crevani et al., 2015).

Leadership: concepts and theories

Leadership is one of the most observed, yet least understood concepts, on the planet. Where, many distinct theories have been presented by different philosophers and researchers, over the time. According to, (McCleskey, 2014), there is a concept that no one-size-fits-all, this is a suitable approach for leadership. Therefore, there can’t be one universal type of leadership. The role varies according to the situation. Therefore, there are many different leadership styles, where, a competent or effective leader aims to encourages, motivate, and leads his team in a right direction. Where, efforts are made, in order to assist others to acquire their personal or combined goals (Amanchukwu, Stanley and Ololube, 2015). On the other hand, an ineffective or incompetent leader does not contribute to the advancement of the company and can even de-motivate his/her team. Sometimes, the wrong direction can even distract the team, from the achievement of organizational goals. A visionary leader must have a heart and mind full of passion, creativity, adaptability, inspiration, and innovation. He or she must be brave, imaginative, and adventurous, and a change agent, therefore such a leader is also called change-initiating leader (Amanchukwu, Stanley and Ololube, 2015).

Organizational leadership is a set of characteristics and actions, which enable a person to exhibit, interpersonal control over the group of individuals, where the leader's vision and purpose helps to direct and encourage the team, to achieve the leader's preferred or organizational set of goals (Sohmen, 2013). A Leadership is also explained to be one of the most critical aspects for an organization's success. Firms must have a right level of leadership, in order to survive and succeed in the world of increased competition, technology advancements, changing regulatory restrictions, and changing attitudes of workers and clients (Landis, Hill and Harvey, 2014). When a company undergoes change, it is critical that its leadership can meet the challenges and changes. Moreover, the leader's ultimate achievement is to persuade the followers to perform tasks, which seems to be impossible or difficult, in nature. Therefore, leader must take risk, and incorporate change, in order to remain sustainable. Indeed, the best leaders inspire their followers to go above and beyond their own expectations (out-of-the-box), when it comes to acquiring new innovative goals (Tucker, 2008).

One of the most crucial parts of management is the right kind of leadership. This is because leadership is a major aspect that has a significant impact on the overall sustainability of organizations and, even nations. For example, by the strong leadership of Jack Welch and Lee Iacocca, companies like General Electric (GE) and Chrysler had turned around from the edge of getting bankrupt, into two of the world's most successful companies (Odumeru and Ogbonna, 2013). Also, on the wings of excellent leadership, nations like the United States of America, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany have become some of the most prominent nations in the world, today. Strong leaders have proved to be the back bone of any successful organization and country, which show the right path and ensure that the given directions are being followed. Therefore, (Odumeru and Ogbonna, 2013) explained that the process of persuading teams and groups, in order to achieve specific goals, is defined as the process of leadership, where a leader is someone, who can inspire others, to fulfill specific goals, collectively. Furthermore, leadership is an ongoing exercise of influencing and motivating people, both individually and in groups. Also, this process includes setting clear expectations, for those who are willing to follow, where the teams are motivated to transfer the leader's vision into reality, by utilizing their unique characteristics and abilities (Kotter and Cohen, 2012). Leaders help the team to reveal their hidden talents and powers and are given authority and space to practice creativity.  Team is developed and empowered by the leader, with delegated authority and responsibility of different tasks (Sohmen, 2013).

Great man theorists believed that leadership ability/traits are inherent, and that great leaders are born and not made. This philosophy often portrays leaders to have a heroic personality, who are destined to rise and acquire power, when it is required. This form of leadership was especially suitable for military leadership, where leadership was a male trait (Ololube, 2013; Amanchukwu, Stanley and Ololube, 2015). The trait theory is quite like the great man theory, where, it assumes that people are born with certain qualities or attributes that make them better leaders. This theory defines leaders, based on their personal traits (Amanchukwu, Stanley and Ololube, 2015). Trait theories present certain personality or behavioral characteristics, which leaders have in common. But, many researchers, philosophers and theorist started to question this notion, by claiming that if certain attributes are the required fundamental features, to become a leader, then why all people having these traits but are not leaders (Andriukaitienė et al., 2017).

Importance of leadership in Private Higher education Sector of UK

Any sector may face positive and negative externalities, which affect every player in the sector. Similarly, educational organizations’ processes of creating and delivering value for their stakeholders get affected by the external challenges and problems. The Negative issues can even disrupt the process of achieving sustainable development (SD) goals, by affecting the economic, social, and environmental systems (Leal Filho et al., 2020). An effective leader has an ability to influence people, in the way that they want to be guided, in order to achieve desired outcomes. Where, different leadership styles may have an impact on the effectiveness or performance of an educational organization (Nanjundeswaraswamy and Swamy, 2014).

For higher education industry’s leaders, 2020 has proven to be both, a challenging and an exciting period. Currently, higher education administration is expanding, where, more than 7,000 institutions of higher education are expected to employ 13,000 people by the end of 2028 (Eastwood, 2020). Furthermore, as the sector is forced to adopt a more entrepreneurial approach, where many entrepreneurs have joined hands with traditional leaders to change the way, students learn, professors’ style of educating, and even the administration department's work, both on campus and online, by promoting innovation to transform the educational world (Eastwood, 2020). Leadership is a process of social influence, which is based on strong communication skills. This concept emphasis on the leadership efforts and outcomes, including verbal and non-verbal communication, and influence of communication on the followers and supporters (Gigliotti and Ruben, 2017). Therefore, Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) are perceived to play a significant role in maintaining sustainable development goals, as a result of several charters and initiatives, such as the Principles for Responsible Management Education (PRME), supporting them. These institutions have been adapting and redirecting their actions by strengthening the institutional leadership role, promoting welfare of the whole educational system (Leal Filho et al., 2020). 

Suitable Leadership styles in higher education sector

Like all fields, education sector also requires strong leadership role. Higher education sector (HES) has grown to be a competitive global marketplace, and as a result, like any other sector, it is also not exempt to the changes that influence every sector, in the 21st-century. As now, every sector must incorporate global, digital, and dynamic environment changes (Pucciarelli and Kaplan, 2016). Where, academic scholars, opinion leaders, and institutional decision makers can play an active role, in order to create a sustainable academic environment, and always remain vigilant to anticipate how environmental changes would affect the area of higher education, in future. According to (Al-Husseini and Elbeltagi, 2016), leadership style has been identified as the most important factor, affecting innovation because leaders can influence the introduction of ideas, set specific goals, and create a culture for innovation. As in the 20th century, adoption of innovation has become critical for the survival of any organization. Similarly, in the world of higher education, the key success factor of achieving competitive advantage, leadership style has been identified to be the most important factor, as it instigates and promotes innovation (Al-Husseini and Elbeltagi, 2016). Aside from the complex diversification from the traditional structural foundation of HEI, the demands of a globalized market-driven HE sector has accelerated the need for effective and efficient resource planning across the institution planning by the leaders, in both academic and social domains (Black, 2015).

In recent years, there has been an increase of interest, in the role of leaders of the Higher Education (HEI) institutions, owing to HE institutions' influence in developing learners who may later, perform as societal or problem-solving leaders in society. Therefore, the changing shape of HES leadership is required to face the global challenges faced in the sector (Black, 2015). The HEIs consider strategies for "student experience," and the provision of integrated learning, social, and professional services for the students, and a more integrated work arrangement for academic and service- related departments of the HEI (Peach and Gamble, 2011). Since 1990s, there been a shift in UK institutions from administrative point of view, which is supported by various theories, concepts, and philosophies, discussed below:

Since the 19th century, "command-and-control" leadership has expanded, which functions on rules, incentives, and standards, eventually developing educational institutes into quasi-military setups in the 1940s. Where such a management method emphasized on the "machine's" efficiency; managers and teachers’ efficiency and made autocratic decisions. Where, mangers and specialists operated in different functions, and work was constant and repetitive (Black, 2015). In the 1950s, "behavioral" theories were more focused, based on more thorough examinations of human nature, traits, and motivations behind the actions (Duff, 2013). Situational leadership was the new concept, which created a shift in leadership style, based on the ability of the team and educational leader, to act according to the need of time (Duff, 2013).

Later, in the 1970s, "transactional-transformational" methods were introduced. According to, (Black, 2015), educational leaders were analyzed from performance reinforcement, in case of transactional assessment, as well as on recognition and growing followers' performance and attention (transformational leadership). In case of transformational leadership, importance is given to factors like: staff credibility, strong vision, cultural values, expertise, correct judgment/decision making, freedom of experimentation, and staff involvement (Alban-Metcalfe and Mead, 2010). Similarly, appreciative Leadership is a suitable leadership style for educational world, and is unlike any other leadership theory (Orr and Cleveland-Innes, 2015). It is a strength-based approach, that pursuit to find the good in people and organizations, and this role plays an important part in revolutionizing the educational institutes and their people. An appreciative leader, gives credit to his/her employees and promote organizational innovation, work delegation, recognition, and transformation of every person (Orr and Cleveland-Innes, 2015). Over the last 20 years, transformational leadership emphasis on transformational conduct of the followers, where, the leaders are portrayed to be real-life heroes, and they use a shared company culture to change their employees' attitudes and conduct. However, negative consequences may also occur, in the form of restricted communication, impaired problem-solving process (Black, Groombridge, & Jones, 2011). Furthermore, systems thinking style was applied to academic leaders (Jackson, 2016).

According to (Leal Filho et al., 2020), sustainable leadership can be investigated from a theoretical standpoint, to see how different leadership approaches, such as traits/style school, context/situations, and contingency theories, might be linked to sustainable development of the whole higher educational sector. Hence, sustainability leadership, or more specifically, leadership for sustainable environment, can be characterized as a blend of many leadership techniques that can be used in each context, suitable for higher educational sector (HES). In HES, Higher Education Institution (HEIs) also act as sustainable leaders, where leaders must become change agents, and consider, all the demands of current and future generations. Also, the higher educational leaders must engage the entire university system should be gear- up and work together, to educate the students, who will be capable of taking responsibly, in future, lead various types of organizations, and contribute toward future sustainable goals of the society.

According to (Nanjundeswaraswamy and Swamy, 2014), Transformational leadership is suitable for Higher educational sector. Where, both work engagement and overall job contentment of employees; prove to be the predictors of transformational leadership, in the institution. According to the past findings, a competitive and innovative culture has an impact on organizational success. Also, leadership style has a substantive impact on the organizational culture, and therefore, the right mix of leadership style and innovative culture has a positive impact on the organizational performance. According to previous studies, transformational leadership (TL) is the most significant kind of leadership, as it accommodates and caters followers' emotions, values, and creativity, while also encouraging innovation, in the overall organizational culture (Al-Husseini and Elbeltagi, 2016). Team members are more committed to TL, which results in more innovative work and adopting creative strategies for problem solving. Adopting TL practices can lead to members having more faith in their leaders, which can lead to better individual performance, as well as, institution's performance (Chance, 2013). Similarly, DuBrin (2012) explained that transformational leaders increase the employees' abilities, to achieve their goals, by providing them with the knowledge and resources they need to do their tasks. Also, TL promotes inspirational motivation, individualistic consideration, inspirational motivation, and self-confidence among an organization's members, and hence works as a fuel for creativity in the HEIs (Al-Husseini and Elbeltagi, 2016).

Features and challenges faced by the leaders in Private Higher Education Sector (HEP) of UK

Teaching, research, and public service are the three basic goals of private universities. Where, all these missions always had a mutual association and had to be maintained together. This has become even more important in recent years due to increased number of players, increased students, innovation, competition, etc. As the HE sector's environment has become more marketized, its complexity also enhanced, as compared to early 1900s and 2000s (Pucciarelli and Kaplan, 2016). Universities in the United Kingdom have consistent high ranking in the international market, such as:  On QS World Rankings, Times Higher Education Rankings, and Academic Ranking of World Universities, etc. Furthermore, degrees gained in the country are internationally recognized and recommended by the well-known employers (IDP, 2021).

UK Government now believe that private sector of education, is as important as the public universities. Private sector providers skills for the students, according to the market needs and changing skills demands from employers and corporate sector. Higher education institutions (HEIs) are critical for the success of the private educational sector, since they are innovators who create demand for new products and services (Al-Husseini and Elbeltagi, 2016). Although, the private sector is usually dominated by players in the sector, but the UK higher education market has a government influence, as most of the private institutions receive government support and financing. While, the higher education providers that are solely privately owned and do not receive any public financing are referred to be the alternative providers.  In the United Kingdom (UK), the higher education is a devolved policy area, i.e., semi-public, where the public support is provided by independent funds, as well as public funds (Woodfield, 2014).

Also, private institutions are more flexible in delivering different courses and services to the students, and therefore, Government is promoting and positioning this sector, to fulfill continuing demand to study in UK based institutions, from the international students. Where, the higher education system of UK is divided into 5 parts, including: Pre-nursery, primary education, secondary education, Further Education (FE), and the Higher Education (HE). Also, UK education system differs slightly from the European countries like: England, Scotland, and Wales, despite many similarities (Van Bouwel, and Veugelers, 2013). Furthermore, in order to survive, higher education institutions (HEIs) are suggested to act like for-profit businesses, while focusing more on their revenue generation model and strategies (Pucciarelli and Kaplan, 2016). On the other hand, they must also function as non-profit organizations, promoting the public good and acting as knowledge providers. Therefore, HEIs advanced strategies or a matrix model, based on a mix of for-profit and no-for-profit strategies, in order to survive (Pucciarelli and Kaplan, 2016). According to (Hunt and Boliver, 2021), the unexpected closure of higher education providers is unheard for the government financed higher education institutions in the United Kingdom, while exit from market, is typical problem faced by the private higher education providers. Despite multiple variables linked to the higher risk of market exit in the private sector, of the UK higher education industry, the UK government is aggressively pushing the expansion of private higher education providers, due to its importance and contribution (Hunt and Boliver, 2021).

The complexity of leadership in the higher educational sector has increased, due to upcoming challenges. These challenges are related to engagement of different stakeholders, including management, teachers, and students, at different levels and in different levels. also, some issues are related to administrative and staff issues, while some are related to student's concerns (Drew, 2010). In recent decades, the Higher Education sector has experienced several environmental transformations, including market globalization and organizational internationalization, the growth of for-profit private institutions, reduction in state support, and increased number of cross-border academic immigration (Black, 2015). As, the industry experienced the need to adapt to a massive increase in student numbers and the development of a new fee-paying culture, has also changed the leadership expectations, as well. Where, the organizational approach must be more student-focused approach, which contradicts to the traditional inward-approach of the universities, in UK Higher Education institutions (HEI) and therefore, became an important issue, since the 1990s (Black, 2015).

Colleges and universities, both domestically and internationally, face a variety of issues that frequently jeopardize their continued existence. Privatization of higher education, the academic professional crisis, demands for greater accountability, barriers to access, and the need for more agile and innovative change, in the times rapid shifts and competitive global economy are all related to institutions of higher education (HEI) and require global leadership attention (Gigliotti and Ruben, 2017). The increasing challenges faced by the private sector has increased expectation from the higher education leaders, who are required to recognize the requirements, priorities, and perceptions of different stakeholders, who are interested and connected to the colleges and universities (Gigliotti and Ruben, 2017). At the same time, higher education trends identified several challenges, including issues of raising funds, meeting the needs of a diverse student population, preparing graduates for a rapidly changing corporate world. Also, in the times of COVID-19, suddenly and inexplicably the HEI faced a challenge of adapting online and remote working setups, to connect students and teaching staff to work and learn, remotely. Therefore, it is more crucial era, than ever, for higher education executives/leaders, in order to collaborate across departments and to prepare their institutions for current and future success (Eastwood, 2020).

Personal characteristics of a leader and tools used by leaders, in Private Higher education Sector (theories and models) to overcome challenges

In today's environment, an effective leader must be both a learner and a leader, who is always eager to learn new methods, in order to inspire, engage, and empower others (Black, 2015). Leadership has been a famous concept in the domain of social sciences and management, with a long and rich history and a variety of schools of thought, in different eras. Successful leaders, according to the trait school, are born leaders, who have some common characteristics (Kotter and Cohen, 2012). The characteristics and types of leadership have always been under discussion, where, the early leadership studies emphasized on the fundamental concept that shaped the future leadership theories/models. The concept was that exceptional people have a special skill or born characteristics called leadership. The study of leadership characteristics originated from this view of leadership, which was also supported by the great man theory (McCleskey, 2014).

Personal characteristics are behaviors, skills, attitudes, knowledge, are examples of leadership competencies. Where, HEI leaders must strengthen their leadership skills, in order to make their universities and colleges, to survive and develop. Similarly, leadership skills, communication skills, influencing skills, and professional skills are among some of the essential traits and qualities (Shahmandi et al. 2011). Academic leadership roles (such as Deans or Head-masters of School) are different in private sector, with the recurring nature of role-holders (usually a 3-year rotating or a temporary contract). In some cases, academic jobs are typically granted to senior or established professors, of the same university on merit basis. In addition to this, faculty positions, in private sectors are usually, a mix of the roles of teacher, scholar, researcher, and administrative positions, all of which have some type of leadership/managerial responsibility, either officially or unofficially, based on their job description and function (Black, 2015). Therefore, a leadership responsibility for academic institutions, have been found to be subjective, and varies in different peer groups, institutions, research cooperation project teams, and external professional organizations.

While, as per the behavioral thought of school, some characteristics of leadership can be taught and developed. Furthermore, the contingency school of thought believes, that different forms of leadership are used, based on different situational, therefore, a leader must act appropriately, for different situations. In addition to this, relational school of thoughts continued to investigate the context and ideas of leaders, but in terms of their interactions, with other members of their organization. These schools of thoughts expanded the concept of leadership, while maintaining the relevance of the fit between the context/situation and leadership style (Müller, Geraldi, and Turner, 2011). Furthermore, effective leadership in higher education is seen to be the ability of the leader, to navigate and communication with people, according to different challenges, where multiple stakeholders are involved (Gigliotti and Ruben, 2017). In higher education sector, engaging colleagues, and sub-ordinates, the goal is to collaborate to acquire common goals. Hence, these complex activities highlight the significance of communication, in the dynamic world of academic leadership (Gigliotti and Ruben, 2017). As a result, communication acts to be a core proposition, required by higher educational leader, to create academic and social influence, in a broader sense.

Initially, the educational leadership tends to match the idea of an independent, heroic, male leader, based on modern and effective leadership model, which is also, consistent with recent advancements, in the field of leadership studies, which has traditionally been leader-centered, i.e., focused on individual leaders and their personalities, abilities, and actions, thus isolating the phenomena of 'leadership' from its cultural context (Crevani, Ekman, Lindgren and Packendorff, 2015). According to (Shahmandi et al. 2011), the four areas of leadership competencies, required in HES are: Strong personality and adaptive attitude, personal knowledge, administrative expertise, and social responsibility competency. The broad study area of leadership can be classified as both positive and a practical model, depicting leadership as an intrinsically "good" phenomena, that plays a vital role in improving extrinsic environment, including: economic growth and living standards of the society (Crevani et al., 2015).

According to, (Paradeise and Thoenig, 2013), in some semi-private setups, a hierarchical leadership model can be used, where leader enjoys authority, based on his designation. A leader's ability to use authority, based on his/her position, where the leader can assign staff duties, in their areas of expertise. Similarly, there is an individualistic leadership model, where there is only one leader, who continues to function as an individual contributor (DOKUBO, 2019). The third model can be collegial leadership model, which is a leadership approach in which, an open environment is established, for employees to share authority, ideas and collaborate as a team, in order to solve organizational problems (Singh, 2014), which was useful in times of Covid, when the whole university administration, as well as faculty team, worked together to work, effectively (Beauchamp et al., 2021). According to (Taras et al., 2013), collaborative management strategy or leadership model is used to bring teachers, managers, executives, and employees, out of their boundaries to communicated co-ordinate and even collaborate. According to (DOKUBO, 2019), collaboration is necessary, in times of continuous and rapid changes, where collective intelligence, can help in exchange of information, personal development, and enhancing the accountability. As a result of which, team productivity and team engagement may improve, enhancing the overall organizational performance (Taras et al., 2013).

To summarize, successful educational leaders in private institutions, such as deans and heads of departments, need to employ a variety of leadership styles based on the situational model. Where, Telling, selling, participating, and delegating are four main leadership styles, which can help the educational leaders, as per the situation. According to, (Shahmandi et al., 2011), the effective academic leaders must possess leadership skills, in order to fulfill their responsibilities in a research institution, especially, while functioning and incorporate changes in the global environment. To ensure academic leadership effectiveness in private universities, a systematic leadership development program or model can be a useful tool, to overcome industry-related challenges.

Methodology

This section explains the methodology or research strategy used by the researcher, in order to determine the leadership challenges faced by the private sector of HES of UK. This chapter will discuss the research approach, research onion (strategy), research design, data sources, research scope and sampling strategy. Lastly, this section will cover any limitations faced, during the research and ethical implications are considered, during the whole process.

1.      Research approach

The background of this study and the specific topic of research, are usually considered, when choosing the suitable research approach. The research strategy or approach has been defined, to be the plan of action, which aims to provide a new and appropriate direction for the researcher, in order to adopt a relevant and organized path for the research (Haradhan, 2017). In addition to this, (Kumar, 2019) defined research approach to be an extensive strategy/method for gathering data and extracting useful information for desired research. Mostly, there are three kinds of research approaches, i.e., qualitative research approach, quantitative approach, and mixed approach (Creswell and Creswell, 2017).

The qualitative approach is the focus, of this study. Qualitative approach supports Knowledge and theoretical based claims, narratives, expanded ethnographic, realistic, thematic studies and interviews are all part of the qualitative approach, which covers both group and individual interviews, with open-ended questions (Creswell and Creswell, 2017). Furthermore, a qualitative approach is used, to capture in-depth and more extended form, on a specific topic of interest. This approach recognizes the feelings, ideas, opinions, feelings, and experiences of individuals or a small group of people, who represent and depict the emotions, ideas, opinions, feelings, and experiences of a larger group. These feelings, ideas, opinions, feelings, and experiences are equally significant and worthy form of data, as the data collected for a quantitative approach. The researchers, use this method to examine, analyze, and deduce important aspects of an environment, which get ignored in quantitative research, in order to establish a theme or thesis (Rahi, 2017).

2.      Research Onion

Research onion to be a systematic approach to carry out a research methodology (Saunders, Lewis, and Thornhill, 2019), which has six stages, including: Research philosophy, research approach, methodological choices made, research strategy chosen, time span of the study and the data collection and analysis method, as shown in figure 2 (appendix).

a.       Research Philosophy

There are four research philosophies, based on the research onion theory. They are pragmatism, positivism, interpretive, and realism philosophies (Chipwatanga and Benjamin, 2019). Where, Rahi (2017) has provided a list of seven different research-related philosophical theories, including methodology, strategies, ontology, axiology, rhetoric, epistemology, and techniques that use all four perspectives. Furthermore, research philosophy has been defined as the researcher's set of beliefs, values, and conceptions, that are based on human reality, personal knowledge, and ideology (Sutrisna, 2009). This research takes an epistemological philosophical approach, to study the research topic, in which the researcher makes a connection with the subject or the research material, being studied. The philosophy of a research study is focused on ontology and epistemology, which has an impact on the research area and the researcher's role (Mayer, 2015).

Initially, positivism was aimed to be used, where universally applicable beliefs, replication of findings, and controlled testing, are the principles of positivism research, which is used to support explanatory correlations or causal relationships, through quantitative analysis, based on large sample sizes (Park, Konge and Artino, 2020). Due to lack of excess, pragmatic philosophy is adopted by the researcher. Where the researcher believes that there are many alternative ways to interpret the world and responses received in the conduct study, and there is no single point of view, which is credible and could have numerous realities, based on researcher's understanding. As a result, it is suitable for both qualitative and quantitative data studies (Chipwatanga and Benjamin, 2019).

b.      Research Approach

As, discussed above the main research approach is qualitative, for this study, which may be supported by further three types. According to, types of reasoning and theory-making approach include abduction, deduction, and induction. Where, abduction can be used in qualitative data analysis, in order to identify themes, codes, and categories. In qualitative research, abduction contributes in the identification of all interconnected concerns (Lipscomb, 2012). The procedural problem, boundary problem, justification problem, and the descriptive problem, all are focal points of abductive approach (Awuzie, and McDermott, 2017). In this research, the authors' ability to successfully employ the abductive approach, is beyond the scope of this study, which tries to reflect on past researches, secondary information, and online available data.

c.       Method Choices

Initially, a mixed method was recommended, as it is a mixed-method research style, which combines the strengths of quantitative and qualitative research paradigms, both (Ivankova, 2014). This method provides more support in discovering solutions for the real -world problems, including several and credible sources of secondary information (Molina-Azorin, 2012). But, due to limitation of time, the research was qualitative, which provides in-depth research on the subject area, based on other researches, held in UK based private universities (Ojebode et al., 2018).

d.       Research Strategy

The overall direction of the research is provided by the research onion strategy, which include methods like: case studies, experiments, surveys, action research, grounded theory, and ethnography. In this case, systematic literature review and a case study can be used (Sahay, 2016). Where, systematic analysis will be an empirical investigation of the current theories, in the real-life environment, particularly when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not readily visible (Zolfagharian et al., 2019).

Also, it acknowledges the real-life situations, where the phenomena and context are not easily differentiated. The case study deals with a unique issue that relies on many sources of evidence, secondary data, real data, and past researches. Also, support will be taken from earlier theoretical prepositions, in order to carry-out the research analysis. Consequently, when the phenomena and the background are not easily differentiated, a case study is an ideal research technique. Furthermore, the research can refer to one case (single case study) or a small number of instances (comparative case study) in their real-life setting, which will be applied in this case, as the whole UK based HES will be referred in this case study (Wedawatta, Ingirige, and Amaratunga, 2011).

e.      Time Horizon

This layer specifies the research time frame, which can be cross-sectional or short-term studies, where data collection is done, at a given point in time; while in longitudinal studies, data collection is made over a long period of time, in order to compare data (Melnikovas, 2018). In this case, the data will be gathered after privatization of HES, in UK, therefore, the study will be longitudinal, in nature.

f.        Data Collection and data analysis

According to (Walliman, 2015), the data sources can be primary or secondary, while analysis can be qualitative, quantitative, or mixed. In this case, systematic literature review on UK private HES will be used for analysis and preparing an industry specific case study.

3        Primary vs. Secondary

According to (Zikmund, et al. 2013), primary data sources and secondary data sources are the two types of data sources, by which data can be collected, in research. Furthermore, primary data sources are those data sources, from where the researcher obtains the data, by self and directly. On the other hand, the secondary sources are those sources, from which data is gathered, via referring to published data sources such as articles, journals, surveys, newspapers, and websites (Schuurman, 2018).

4        Secondary: published material

Secondary data sources are utilized by researchers, with limited time or resources, although the results are not accurate, but subjective in nature (Johnston, 2017). In this case, due to limited time and lack of access, only secondary data resources have been used. Secondary data has a few disadvantages, for example, the information may be out of date, and hence misleading in depicting today's difficulties (Walliman, 2015). Furthermore, the researcher has no way of verifying the validity of past studies; however, this can be reduced by using credible resources such as scholarly websites and top-ranked databases.

5        Primary: builds on secondary because? What you did, justified - quantitative/qualitative

Due to module constraint, secondary research has been conducted. By conducting a systematic literature review of past studies, a case study has been made, specifically on the UK-based HES, which makes it an extensive and in-depth qualitative research (case study).

6        Scope

The scope of this study covers all secondary data and past researches available on UK Based private universities, colleges, and overall Higher education sector (HES).

7        Limitations

Initially, a primary study was to be conducted, but due to module constraints, secondary study will be conducted, where only credible sources, databases and UK related studies will be included in the analysis part. Also, an interview survey was to be conducted, with different leaders in UK HEIs, but again, due to lack of time and course restriction, only past paper analysis has been included, in the research.

8   Ethics

Ethical consideration is a necessary requirement of any research study. Where, Free will, consent, privacy, and confidentiality of data respondents must be maintained. Furthermore, researchers should not use previous studies, without permission and should present a clear and accurate citation for all the studies and data, been used. Also, there should be no interpretation or data bias, because it is based on previous data and secondary sources, which are easily acquired by the researcher.  Also, the past data is analyzed on personal judgments and understanding of the researcher, so there can be an interpretation bias. Therefore, all these ethical obligations, have been considered, through-out the research. All secondary sources are mentioned and properly cited, in Harvard refencing pattern and have been used to support the analysis part of the case study.

Findings/Analysis

Currently, the higher education sector of UK continues to be the global leader, earning more than £30 billion for the UK economy every year (Deloitte, 2021). However, like all private educational sectors, of world, it also faced different challenges and must address the growing challenges, in a timely manner, in order to remain relevant, up-to-date, innovative, and financially sustainable. This can be done by adopting a customer-centric and scenario-based approach, in order to maintain its position. Over the last 20 years, the higher education sector of UK has experienced a massive transformation, due to rising national and worldwide competition and evolving economic conditions. Higher education institutions (HEIs) have been growing and changing, since privatization. Where, HEIs are establishing large-scale infrastructure projects and refining their organizational methods, which includes efforts to change the overall staff attitudes and behavior (Mowles et al., 2019). This report is an attempt to present a systematic review of the changes occurred in HES, which led challenges for the leaders in UK-based higher education institutions (HEIs), who are trying to 'transform' their institutions by adopting new models to promote innovation and change. Therefore, the case study will focus on different studies held in UK based universities and even those studies, which presented a comparison of UK based HEIs and other country's HEIs.

Leaders in the twenty-first century must handle an increasingly challenging and a more complicated landscape. This means that the issues that individuals and organizations face in the 21st century are very different from old administrators and hence, demand more qualities for the leadership role. Leaders need to be pro in adapting and responding to the constant fluctuations and change, in the sector (Hempsall, 2014). A study was conducted in four different countries of Europe, including UK, Austria, Germany, and Netherlands, in order to analyze five dimension's impacts on the leadership and governance of HEI. The five areas were: academic governance, state regulation, stakeholder's progress, and guidance, managerial governance, and competition (Preymann et al.,2016). Furthermore, the study examines how leadership practices and approaches of different Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in United Kingdom (UK) addressed the current challenges of the European higher education landscape. The goal of the study was to determine and illustrate suitable roles and skills, which are essential, for leaders of a higher education institute (HEI). Furthermore, the review of past studies held in USA, UK and Australia investigated different professional development concepts, programs, and practices, carried out in the higher education sector, in order to discover how these programs supported the leaders.

Similarly, a study was conducted in 12 UK universities, aimed to capture a variety of viewpoints on type of leadership style, which is suitable for the private sector or new era (Bolden, Petrov, and Gosling, 2009). Based on peer review, distributed, or combined leadership is recommended, which is also highlighted by survey conducted in 12 different institutions. According to (Hempsall, 2014), few themes were developed, which revealed that rather than following the 'command and control' models of the past, leadership role must transform, according to changing times and must be built on relationship model. He suggested that the leadership role must be distributed, to incorporate leadership processes and practices, throughout the organization. Also, research was held in UK higher education system, where the aim of the research was to understand the role of leadership, academic leader's functions, leading the HEIs, in terms of strategic planning, financial stability and proper talent and resource management (Bolden et al., 2012). As, HEPs operate in a highly volatile industry, the goal of this study will be to identify significant concerns that have an impact on leadership in the HEP sector, as well as the required leadership characteristics, that can assure the success of private providers (Torlak and Kuzey, 2019).

Changes and challenges faced by HES

The study of leadership in higher education in the United Kingdom emerged to be important, from structural and Cultural Revolution point-of-view. This revolutionizing of universities and their administration began in the 1980s and continues, still. This change includes reforms from 'government and administrative procedures' to 'top management policies', but overall, the shift has been profound. Similar changes have been supported and criticized, both in other nations' higher education sectors (HES). The United Kingdom followed the foot prints of United States, where it forces the public services in the direction of adopting 'New Public Management,' which promoted private-sector and new management approaches (Middlehurst, Goreham, and Woodfield, 2009).

Because of the political, social, and economic changes in educational sector, leadership role in the education sector has always been difficult and challenging (Somma, 2012). Furthermore, the literature on leadership in higher education has primarily focused on institution founders and department leaders and has largely ignored leaders, who inspire teachers and students and the leaders who investigate the areas of community welfare, student services, and admission criteria. Furthermore, the higher education sector (HES) is currently under pressure, due to the dynamic changes, caused by Covid 19, for the overall education environment. Also, HES is dominated by rapid technological change and growing demand, which has increased the demand for right kind of leadership. Therefore, focus of this study is to investigate whether recent changes in the UK's higher education sector, such as the increase in the fee rates, new universities, and online universities have led to increased competition, and whether such competition made leaders to respond these changes (Christensen and Eyring, 2011).

As new changes, features and issues have led the need of specialized leadership for the private and higher education institutions of UK. In the United Kingdom, government financed higher education (HE) institutions have been protected, previously, against any government policy or sudden closure, like in case of uncertain or political turmoil in the country (Hunt and Boliver, 2021). In contrast, the private players have been insecure, and may face problems like: forced market exit, insolvency issues, and voluntary closure. According to a survey, 198 of the 732 private HES providers listed themselves to be operating in the UK in 2014, which had ceased to operate by 2019, which they announced as their market exit and visible abandoned websites, which shows problem in the private sector of education system of UK (Hunt and Boliver, 2021). Furthermore, the discussion of surveys revealed that there is expansion of vocational programs in the higher education sector (private) of UK, which is an integration of HEIs, with other public institutions of the educational system, and other further education and community colleges, which created new challenges and paradigms (Gibb, Haskins, and Robertson, 2013). Furthermore, increased government, more student, and community pressures on higher education system have been causing private universities and colleges to place a larger emphasis on changing the role of leadership. Attempts to adapt higher education theory, which supports leadership in other sectors, have been hugely criticized, for failing to recognize higher education's distinctive role in the development of creative and innovative revolution, which is essential to increase the efficiency of HEIs in UK (Jones, et al. 2014). This requires changes in the leadership models and approaches used by the private sector leaders.

The concept of 'the entrepreneurial university' has been an inspiration for the worldwide research and other forms of literature. Universities of all types, including those having a strong research tradition, and emerging organizations, are all included in the survey held to understand the entrepreneurial university concept (Gibb, Haskins, and Robertson, 2013). This research was a part of the Entrepreneurial University Leadership Program for senior university leaders, which was introduced in 2010, at Oxford University. The National Council for Entrepreneurship in Education and private and public universities of UK were the major partners of this project. The study indicated that the university system has become increasingly diverse both within countries, and on a global level. There are numerous 'types and levels' of universities, each with its own definition of 'excellence' and strategic objectives, where private sector has a growing corporate, technological, and occupational focus (Gibb, Haskins, and Robertson, 2013). Similarly, past practices, control hierarchies, and pressure groups, have a significant influence in regulating and determining the structure of higher education institutions (HEIs), as well as their ability to adapt to change, on a national level. Government education policy frameworks still have a deep influence on private sector. Because of the sector's dependency on the public funding, government bodies in UK still have considerable power over the private institutes (Gibb, Haskins, and Robertson, 2013).

Analysis of necessary skills and competencies required for an educational leader in UK based HES

According to (Preymann et al., 2016), interviews were conducted in UK based universities. Based on the responses received, it was revealed that heads of institutions and heads of courses perform a wide range of tasks. These heads cover a wide variety of responsibilities, which include functions of strategic decision-making to operational tasks, which have both internal and external orientation. According to (Black, 2015), in the climate of continuous change and challenges, HES leaders must use an appropriate leadership behavior, based on the situation and circumstances. Effective leaders are those, who keep exploring new ways of doing things, proactively and remain aware of their own professional requirements and keep implementing them, at work. Leaders must keep improving their own expertise and must concentrate on their people's growth and welfare. They should get updating themselves, in order to guide properly and grasp new technologies and functions (Colvin, and Ashman, 2010). An effective leader understands that there is always room for advancement, which involves patience and concern for others' needs. Therefore, HES leaders of UK are required to move beyond their comfort zone and beyond the organizational competence and adopt new innovative values and must promote proficiency-based learning, in order to promote creativity and awareness, in the whole organization (Black, 2015).

Based on past researches, there is a vast focus on the skills and traits of a leader, underlying the idea that leaders must possess a diverse set of abilities, in order to meet their specific industry related problems, which is supported by the findings of the survey research held in UK and Austria (Preymann et al., 2016). The finding revealed that an academic head needs to have qualities like: research and technical excellence, leadership abilities and experience, social intelligence, teaching competences, strong managerial skills, and certain personal traits/character, that appear to be relatively similar in Austria and the United Kingdom (Preymann et al.,2016). Also, entrepreneurial skills are now necessary for public and private graduates, who might facilitate the needs of educational world in future, as now entrepreneurship and academics sector, goes together (Gibb, Haskins, and Robertson, 2013). According to (Preymann et al.,2016), there are several personality traits of a leader, as shown in Figure 3 (appendix), which are said to be important, which include traits like: empathy, pro-activeness (the ability to make fast and effective decisions), sincerity, self-reflection (reflective skills), self-awareness, and personal integrity. In addition to this, UK respondents suggested that Leaders should have a mature and consistent personality, and may have the following characteristics of determination, confidence, patience, and an urge or willingness to adapt change (Preymann et al., 2016).

Analysis of Structural and organizational changes required in HEIs of UK based organization

The traditional academic-administrative structure has been split and becoming obsolete in the private HES of United Kingdom, as academic leadership duties and roles are becoming more market-oriented and customer-driven (Bolden et al., 2012). Furthermore, middle-level management and leadership roles have increased their strategic decision-making authority. In the United Kingdom, professional managers are now, more likely to assist their heads, with the operational responsibilities in their academic units. This type of service support is not yet available in other European countries, for example: Austrian higher education institutions (Preymann et al., 2016). In contrast to the Austrian HES, UK private HE organizations supported decentralization of professional services, such as HR, Estates, Finance, and IT, having different leaders/heads of each function, while Austrian HEIs prefer to have a centralize role for key managerial activities (Preymann et al.,2016). Also, Middlehurst (2013) argues that traditional university's corporate governance and management frameworks are no longer fit for UK university governance. The traditional university governance models date back to 1900s and are now completely inconsistent and inadequate to address the demands of the era of globalization and the knowledge, technology, communication, and information revolution (McCann, Hutchison, and Adair, 2021).

All external and internal influences, discussed above have shaped changes in university organization and their governance structures, which also caused to modify mission statements and operating strategies of these institutions (Gibb, Haskins, and Robertson, 2013). While, the government remains a major stakeholder in most nations, it has taken a more prescriptive approach to disbursement. Changes in funding modes have lowered the level of regulations in the HES environment. There has been a shift from central or regional public funding, to a growing proportion of funding, from non-direct public sources such as fees, research grants, local development bodies, alumni, industry and social enterprise, contracts, and philanthropic acts (Gibb, Haskins, and Robertson, 2013). To meet up the challenges of the increased competitiveness of both national and worldwide market, UK universities have been investing more resources than before, in creating large-scale organizational change and capital programs. Overall annual surpluses have been reduced, across the sector, and higher education institutions (HEIs) have been forced to increase efficiencies in a fluctuating situation (Mowles et al., 2019).

Over the last two decades, assessments and researches in HE environments, reflected those substantial changes have taken place, especially, in terms of economic reform and control mechanisms (Bolden et al., 2012). These changes were discovered to be linked, to the efforts made by HEIs, in order to reform and reorganize the internal organizational structures, in accordance with the guidelines of the New Public Management concepts. Also, these changes in structures were mainly due to the market and political pressures, demanding universities to be more profit oriented. Where, in comparison to Austria, such pressures appear to be stronger in the private sector of the United Kingdom (Preymann et al., 2016). Based on a comparison survey made by in Austrian and UK based universities revealed some disparities, in the degree of acceptance of change, which has been accepted more in UK (Britain), while defended highly by Austrian based Universities (Preymann et al.,2016).

Furthermore, the funding channels have been a big concern for private UK HES sector. The leaders took initiates and responded to multi-faced funding environment, and try to respond to change with greater speed and agility as the policy environment has also shifted, over the last 20 years. The sector is expected to invest £17.8 billion in infrastructure projects over the next four years, with an average increase of 51%, from the previous years (Mowles et al., 2019). Additionally, when recruitment is done for leadership roles, several leadership skills are analyzed, including strategic thinking, independence, and the ability to deal with conflicts (consensus-orientation, rational discussion, and problem-solving capability), strong communications skills (the ability to inspire, motivate, and persuade others), and decision-making competencies, appear to be essential (Higgins, 2011).

The peer review suggested that a well-established administrative entity is expected to function, efficiently and smoothly, by forming well-established teams, in the supervision of multiple leaders/managers. According to (Preymann et al., 2016), Austrian academics survey warns the institutes; overregulation can restrict the environment of flexibility, creativity, and innovation process. When one considers the many types of HEI institutions in the United Kingdom and universities in Austria, these differences are readily apparent within the HES. The study conducted in Austrian universities concludes that universities should be national, rather than private and must not be regulated by the private sector. While, (Bolden, Petrov, and Gosling, 2008) stated that there is a greater recognition of managerial role, or the need of adopting top-down management, especially within the new universities of UK, as compared to the old universities, which show a preference for collegiality or democratic decision-making style, in the private sector of HES of UK (Preymann et al.,2016).

The change of the higher education is evident in the university sector of UK, since the financial crises of 2009. The UK government is committed to ensure that higher education is available to only the half of the nation's school-aged population. But it will be difficult, for the government to fully support this increased demand. Consequently, a greater emphasis is been given on expanding of the private sector and alternative sources of funding, particularly fees, which are a contentious topic in many nations. As a result, a more competitive market has been developed, to meet the needs of the world, educational needs, and demands of the students. This invited an entrepreneurial response, from educational institutions. Where, private companies and individuals initiate to meet the gap between the educator providers and student consumer group, with many of them increasingly using private debt/funding method (Gibb, Haskins, and Robertson, 2013).

Leadership Style or models used to manage UK-based HEIs and face the challenges of the new era

According to, (Bolden, Petrov, and Gosling, 2009), the findings of the study conducted in 12 UK private universities, revealed that there are two main approaches of leadership, in the private sector. One is distribution or 'devolved strategy' which is based on top-down approach. While, the other one is 'emergent model' which is based on bottom-up approach and uses a horizontal structure. McCann, Hutchison, and Adair (2021), presented that the management of the modern universities are recommended to reinvent their organizational culture, in order to take advantage of advances in information and communications technology, new business processes, professionalization of both academic and support functions. Where, the orientation of twenty-first-century higher education institutions (HEIs) is toward clients, customers, and stakeholders, based on networking, where projects work on relationships, partnerships, and alliances (McCann, Hutchison, and Adair, 2021). Similarly, cooperative/distributed leadership is the most used leadership style, In UK, which indicates that both operational and strategic responsibility are assumed to be important, at all levels. This type of leadership appears to best, in order to satisfy the needs of HEIs, in terms of adaptation and flexibility. As a result, a focus on majority opinion and a collaborative strategy-defining process, or a creating the big picture together strategy is being emphasized in new private universities of UK (Preymann, et al. 2016).

According to the findings of the research held by (Bolden et al., 2012) support the idea of 'social identity' approach, as it is suitable leadership model for the higher education, in which people are not regarded as leaders, unless they are perceived image in their social groups or followers. Leader must lead and work, on behalf of a group, assisting in the formation of group identity, and putting in place procedures and systems, that are in the group's interests. This means that academic leadership is associated with processes of socialization (Bolden et al., 2012), which is contradicted by some studies in the academic research, where leader acquires direct control of academic work and requires a sense of independence, in order to shape out and pursue a change, in the field of academia (Selznick, 2011).

According to (Jones et al. 2014), HES needed a new style of leadership, which embraces more sharing and collaboration of information, rather than individual control and traditional form of management bureaucracy. Therefore, distributed leadership is said to a suitable leadership strategy, for HEIs. A study project was held on academic leadership in UK higher education, where data was collected, by using a multi-method approach that included: an online survey, discussions, and one-on-one interviews, with leaders of HEIs (Bolden et al., 2012). The study included, more than 350 people from 23 UK universities, where the findings revealed that the academics sector recognize "leadership role in actions". This means it should be an on-going process that can provide and protect an environment that allows for productive academic work. Support and develop a sense of shared academic values and identity, in the campus and achieve 'boundary spanning' on behalf of work groups, where each group has distinctive roles. Also, the leaders of all groups must have the ability to create possibilities for external relatedness, get things done through institutional administrations, where colleagues’ team up for broader realms of participation, that supports cross-sectional team work and co-ordination, which promotes sense of unity and teamwork, at all levels (Bolden et al., 2012).

According to (Gibb, Haskins, and Robertson, 2013), the changing environment of UK based HES, is shown in figure 4 (Appendix), which defines that the level of excellence also changed with the changing times. This requires a new role of leaders, which need to be visionary or strategic, according to the needs of the new world. Where, leader needs to create a challenging goal, giving a clear vision for the future, and needs to motivate the people, to accomplish those common goals. Where, the visionary goals are supported by new mission and vision, to provide direction, acting as a guide and a road map that leads to improved overall performance. The employees at all levels must be able to transition/switch from their present/traditional culture to a new strategic model (Antony et al., 2012). No leadership development program can be successful, unless it is recognized and fully supported by the institution's senior executives or his followers. Therefore, leaders must set the path, explain the new direction's purpose, values, and progress process to his/her people (Johnson et al., 2016). Lastly, effective leaders must recognize the performance and appropriateness of the existing model and keep improving and reinforcing more successful improvements/changes (Antony et al., 2012).

Hence, it can be said that like private organizations, now private HEI's, leader must be strategic and an organizational fit, who makes the institute running, from financial point-of-view, student, and social point-of view (Antony et al., 2012). Also, must transform his/her people, to share goals, tasks, and effort. Similarly, a clear strategic implementation strategy, has be to be in place, which can outline specific objectives; and adopt a strong communication plan, with clear instruction and guidance on implementing of a six-sigma model; and a strong system of reward and recognition, which will motivate the employees to acquire their desired goals (Dafouz and Smit, 2020). Furthermore, an effective model to cater all the challenges of the modern time can be deal with strategic partnership and alliance model, where Triple Helix model is suggested for the private HES, where private institutes can make association with private sector, as well as Government to shape up the educational sector of UK (Gibb, Haskins, and Robertson, 2013), as shown in Figure 5 (Appendix).

Conclusion

This is a case study is based on UK HES, which is analyzed based on past studies and data. The United Kingdom's higher education system (HES) is made up of public universities and colleges, where the University of Buckingham served to be the first private university, of the country for decades. However, the higher education sector has grown, all around the world, including n the United Kingdom (UK). In 2020, the United Kingdom is said to be one of the most well-known and well-established higher education systems (HES) of the world, where, more than 2.53 million students get enrolled in UK colleges and universities, every year. United Kingdom's higher education private sector (HEP) is different and demanded, as it consists of professional training and specialized domains, that are not offered by the public universities. Based on researches, held on UK universities, revealed that leadership is a big concern for the academic’s industry. As, the data trends highlighted that the leadership roles were not meeting the level of efficiency required, in the private sector, which created a lot of turmoil for the institutes and the overall industry. Therefore, this case study was aimed to analyze the required set of characteristics, traits and skill sets required, needed to respond to the challenges occurring in the world of knowledge, technology, uncertainty, and continuous change, faced by the private Higher education sector (HEP).

All industries, including the educational sector, require a specialized kind of leadership, which can help the whole industry to grow. HEP is a unique industry, which has its own “dos and don’ts”, which makes it different from other industries, therefore a suitable leader is one who is aware of both the challenges and opportunities of this sector and caters all the external and internal demands. The role of leaders must be visionary, as well as strategic, based on the new demands and new trends, of the sector and world. Where, leader must create an inspiring goal, giving a clear vision for the future, and must motivate the people, in order to accomplish difficult or common goals.

Although, public universities provided most higher education domains in the United Kingdom, but due to lack of funds and resources, the Government could not meet the growing demand of education sector, students, and the industry. Therefore, UK government recognized the importance of the private sector and took initiatives to promote and encourage expansion of private higher education, in UK. In 2016, the government published a white paper, named "Success as a Knowledge Economy", which strengthened the importance of the private higher education sector (HES) and enhanced competition in the industry, which resulted in a more players and choices for the students, at comparatively lower to fair prices. In addition to this, a survey was conducted in 2017, which revealed that there are 813 private institutions in UK. Also, it revealed that the number of enrollments has increased massively, to more than 2.53 million students, in 2020. In 2021, the higher education sector of UK remains to be the global leader, earning more than £30 billion, every year.  As this is a growing and a successful industry, its leadership has also become a vital aspect for the expansion of the industry, and hence leadership roles/positions in higher education, have received a lot of attention, in the field of academics.

According to past researches, it is said that there has been instability in the higher education industry, which needs to be addressed. This requires some tough calls from the overall colleges and universities, as they must understand that with changing dynamics, there is a need to change their thought-process, leadership/senior positions, and old organizational methods, which were used throughout the last decade. Also, the event of Covid has forced them to think and make some abrupt changes, in the overall institutes. Therefore, this case study analyzed different leadership roles, in the past and an in-depth knowledge of the type of leadership strategy/model, academic leaders must adopt, in order to meet the changes, that the educational system faces, and motivate teachers, senior executives and students, to adopt change, in order to survive. Leaders can play a positive role, who can transform the entire institute, by adopting numerous models, and leadership style, which can incorporate innovation and creativity. Innovation is said to be a critical factor, for any industry, but it is highly important, for the field of education. Hence, this case study has highlighted some major issues, faced by the HEP in the United Kingdom (UK) and how innovation and creativity has transformed the entire industry into the world’s best educational industry.

According to research, the first and most important challenge faced by the HEP sector was the traditional mode of education, bureaucratic organizational structure, in-effective practices, and use of obsolete strategies, which do not meet the rapidly changing external environment. In addition to this, the industry appeared to be plagued by concerns of ineffective or incorrect form of leadership, which was not suitable for the new era. Furthermore, the HEP also experienced challenges like: a substantial reduction of funding received from the public sector, conflicting interests of different stakeholders, multiple perspectives of internal and external parties, new opportunities and risks presented by adoption of new technologies of teaching and a constantly changing global economy, which demands more and more from the educational sector. Also, according to some studies, student educational facilities, access to services options, academic affordability, racial prejudice, new investment modes, and the adoption of new technologies are other set of problems, faced by the Higher Education Sector (HES).

Past researches have emphasized on importance of adopting private corporation's business model, to private universities, which were criticized by multiple stakeholders and created various challenges for the leaders, in the past. Also, past studies have recommended that leaders should adopt competitive strategies and convince their people and other stakeholders, the causes and need of change, in order to take every person on board, as it is essential to incorporate change, at all levels. Furthermore, private universities are quite different from the public HES, where a private institute's leader had to focus on vast range of services, including: providing specialized courses, student accommodation services, sports quota/funding, and other financial and administrative services. As a result, the leaders of the private sector had to worry about the whole business model, organizational structure, chain of command and level of authority, due to constant changes, experienced by the private sector and entry of new investors, stakeholders, and players. Similarly, leaders (senior teachers and head of departments) at different levels, need to devise suitable actions to incorporate change, and provide strategic guidelines for their employees and teachers, to bring everyone, on same page and pursue similar goals. Though, the government remains to be one of the major stakeholders of the private sector, it has taken a more flexible approach. Where, a major shift of funding has been noted, i.e., from receiving central or regional public funding, private universities received large proportion of funding, from different sources, like: student fees, University grants, local and international grants, local and CSR funds from companies, donations from alumni, industry, and social enterprises, etc.

As, leadership is widely acknowledged as an important factor in the success or failure of any company. Similarly. this was true in higher education institutions, where leadership and positive influence on the followers (employees), has given academic and administrative success, to many institutions. Where academic leaders encounter a variety of issues, which are directly or indirectly related to the higher education sector (HES). Hence, new leadership models have replaced the capitalist model of education, in UK. Where, individual/private leaders served as progressive change agents, who were able to establish new organizational goals and propose solutions, settled conflicting interests, and were able to foster a culture of shared values, in their organizations, which gave a new sense of identity to the private institutes. Henceforward, in difficult times of transition and competition, innovative leadership style and transformational leadership style has proven to be a useful style or model, which helped the institutes to survive and helped them to achieve a competitive advantage, in the industry. Also, Leadership in HEP, is said to be a social process that relies on effective communication. where leader focuses on effective communication channels, and the impact of communication on followers and other supporters/stakeholders. Therefore, Higher Education Institutions have been playing a key role in achieving sustainable development goals, where leaders redirected their actions, and aimed to improve the welfare of society, by enhancing institutional leadership.

Furthermore, the year of 2020 has proven to be challenging and transformative for the leaders of the higher education industry. Firstly, Covid 19 has disrupted the HEIs, all over the world, and revolutionized the overall teaching world. Also, Higher education is expanding in UK, where, more than 7,000 higher education institutions are estimated to employ 13,000 workers, by 2028. Similarly, this sector was forced to take a more entrepreneurial approach, where one or many entrepreneurs have teamed up to transform the ways of learning, teaching, and even acquiring other services, by incorporating innovative models, to remain sustainable in the dynamic era of change and technology. According to analysis of different studies, the higher education sector (HES) is under pressure, due to Covid 19', where public-funded higher education institutions (HEIs) were safeguarded, due to supporting government policies, though private players, faced uneasiness due to increased criticism, increased debts, low attendance, lack of teachers and resources, which led to forced market withdrawal, insolvency, and voluntary closure cases, in this market. Where a survey discussed in the case study revealed that 198 players, out of the 732 private HEIs, in UK declared to cease their operations in 2019, indicating a crisis case of the private education sector of UK. These new challenges created a complex and first-time situation, for all the leaders in the industry and required an innovative and expert form of leadership.

Initially, trait theories and great man theories were used by past researchers, to analyze the personal characteristics of the leaders, in academic sector. Where, the goal of "great man" or “trait theories” was to determine the personality features that distinguish a leader from his or her followers. Whereas, the Trait theories simply identified the leadership traits; but did not consider a person's unique way of thinking, objectives, social talents, values, experience, vision, or problem-solving capacity. Hence, due to inconsistencies found in these theories, scholars eventually shifted paradigms, in pursuit of new explanations for effective leadership of academia. Therefore, since the 19^th Century, different theories, concepts, and philosophies have been analyzed to support the UK based HEPs. Command-and-control model of leadership was a traditional way of running an educational institute in Europe, where focus was on rules, incentives, and monotonous work, which was also practiced by private HEI's leaders. But due to constant failure of this model, situational leadership model was a novel style, that caused a positive shift in the HES, where the educational leader, was able to respond to the changing circumstances. Furthermore, in 1970s, "transactional-transformational" approaches were introduced. Where, transactional educational leaders were evaluated, on the performance and institute efficiency, while, in the case of transformational leadership, institute's success, as well as people's transformation and growth were focused.

In addition to this, Systems Thinking leader were recommended for HEPs, where the main purpose was to improve the connections between management behavior, rules, organizational structure, decision-making process, combined skills, approaches, and overall results of the organization. Where, the goal of leaders was to "work-on-the-system," which made it significantly innovative and different from the traditional leadership methods: command-and-control, transactional and transformational leaders. Hence, the suitable Leadership frameworks for the Higher Education sector, proposed by past studies, provides a set of characteristics and features for higher education leaders, which include: strong vision and goals identification, hands-on leadership style, incorporating change, involving people in decision making process, and having a two ways communication flow. Furthermore, appreciative Leadership, is expressed to be a model-fit leadership style, for the educational field. It is explained to be a strength-based strategy that aims to find the good in people and was used as a transformational tool in educational institutions, by capitalizing their personnel's skills and talents. Where, appreciative leader acknowledges work of the staff and encourages organizational innovation, task delegation, recognition, and personal growth projects.

Different studies conducted in UK were analyzed in this case study, where different leadership models and styles proved to useful for the advancement of HEPs of UK. First study was conducted in four different countries of Europe, which included UK, as a substantial number of universities lie in England. This study analyzed impact of five factors on the role of leadership and governance of HEI. Where those five factors included: increased competition, corporate governance, state regulations, stakeholder's progress, and policymaking governance. Similarly, a study was conducted, which observed leadership practices in different Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in United Kingdom (UK) and their methods of addressing different challenges of the European higher education industry. Where, the key goal of the study was to exemplify different scenarios and provide a suitable skillset, which are essential, for leaders of a higher education institute (HEI). Furthermore, the review of past studies held in UK, explored different professional development programs, and strategical models, used in the higher education sector, in order to support the leaders.

Furthermore, studies presented that an effective leader, is suitable for academic’s institute, as educational organization always has room for innovation and creativity, which requires a leader to update himself/herself and the team. Therefore, HES leaders of UK are suggested to think out-of-the box and promote technology-based learning and proficiency-based learning, in order to survive for future challenges and unforeseen situations. According to the analysis of past studies, an academic leader must possess specific qualities, including skills of research and technical expertise, leadership abilities and vast experience and knowledge, teaching competences, strong managerial skills, and strong personal characteristics of persuading people to listen to them. Additionally, both public and private leaders have entrepreneurship abilities, which helps them to take risk and invest their time and resources in new projects. Similarly, Empathy, pro-activeness, sincerity, self-reflection, self-awareness, and professional integrity are some of the personality attributes, a leader must have. Furthermore, UK based researches recommend that the leaders should have a mature and consistent behavior. Also, leader must be determined towards the goals, have confidence on the goals and the team, have patience, shows trust, and has a willingness to go out-of-the-box.

Similarly, a study was included, having more than 350 respondents from 23 UK universities. It recognized "leadership role in action" model to be a suitable tool for HEPs.  Where, leadership is an on-going process, and colleagues collaborate, together for accomplishment of shred values and goals. The changing environment of HES necessitates a leadership role to be visionary or strategic. Where the leader must set a difficult goal, provide a clear vision, and persuade the people to achieve those common goals. Where the visionary goals are backed by a new purpose and mission, which serve as a guide for substantial performance. Similarly, a study recommended that six sigma programs will be an effective model for thorough and effective leadership role, where the leader provides a clear implementation policy, a strong communication plan, with guidance on implementing of this model and motivate the workforces to acquire their desired goals. Lastly, an effective model like Triple Helix model is proposed for the private HES, where private institutes can make association with multiple stakeholders, to excel in the industry.

Recommendations

The findings of this study display that leader of institutions and heads of departments are responsible for a wide range of tasks in UK-based universities. These leaders cover a wide range of responsibilities, from strategic decision-making to operational activities, with both an internal and external focus. Therefore, HEIs leaders must adopt ‘situational leadership’ approach and ‘effective leadership’ approaches, to deal with the leadership challenges and organizational changes, occurred due to external pressures and uncertainties, like covid-19. Effective leaders must explore new ways, to cope up with new and existing problems. The leader must remain to be aware of their own professional needs, and industry related needs.

Leaders are recommended to their personal development, as well as development of the whole team and welfare of their people. They must adopt new technology and provide suitable trainings to their people, in order to be up-to-date and ready for the changing dynamics. Furthermore, the leaders must incorporate two-way communication channel, in order to improve communication and management style.

UK HES leaders are suggested to go beyond their comfort zones, and adopt new innovative philosophies, and take innovative measures in order to promote creativity in the institute. Additionally, this study has involved more than 25 studies, to analyze relevant personality traits and models for effective leadership in the UK based HEPs. Based on these studies, it is recommended that:

• Firstly, to become an effective leader, an academic head must have the qualities like: research and technical understanding, leadership experience, social intelligence, teaching competencies, and certain personal traits/character, including: empathy, proactiveness, sincerity, self-reflection, self-awareness, and personal integrity.
• Secondly, the institution must adopt a new and more compatible administrative structure with the changing world and advancement in technology, where HEI’s leader must take multiple stakeholders on board, to remains successful and sustainable (Triple Helix model).
• There is no room for the traditional academic-administrative structure in the private sector. As, HEIs in the today’s world is becoming more market-oriented and customer-driven. Therefore, leaders are suggested to take more technological reforms and restructure policies and must initiate online learning models for HES, in order to remain active in the market.
• Also, the findings suggest decentralized approach is more suitable for the private sector, as compared to centralized approach. Where, each leader can perform tasks, differently and according to his/her team’s and leadership style. The purpose should be to acquire common goals, where each leader provides his/her team to practice innovative ideas, to perform different jobs. Therefore, the HEI is recommended to have a decentralized structure, which has flexibility practices and room for creativity and innovation.
• Similarly, the private sector of the UK, need to embrace a top-down management approach, which show a preference for collegiality or democratic decision-making style. Also, leadership programs are helpful to transform leadership roles, at every level, throughout the academic organization.
• Finally, new leaders need to have a strategic and visionary approach and are recommended to be pro-active and vigilant, per the demands of the new world, such as implementing advanced technologies, online portals, new forms of learning, in their organizations, etc.

Hence, this case study recommends that a leader must identify new goals, provide a clear vision for the future, and motivate the team to achieve those communal objectives, in order to remain sustainable. Where the visionary goals need to be accompanied by supporting mission and vision statements, to provide right direction and sense of unity for everyone. Also, academic leaders must have a social purpose and need to adopt a new strategic and combined model, with taking all internal and external stakeholders on boards, to remain successful, in future. This study will help the new researchers to have a proper understanding of different models and leaderships styles, that are suitable for UK based HEPs, which can help to conduct a quantitative survey in UK or any other country of the world.

References

Alban-Metcalfe, J. and Mead, G., 2010. Coaching for transactional and transformational leadership. Leadership Coaching: Working with Leaders to Develop Elite Performance, pp.211-228.

Al-Husseini, S. and Elbeltagi, I., 2016. Transformational leadership and innovation: a comparison study between Iraq's public and private higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 41(1), pp.159-181.

Al-Husseini, S. and Elbeltagi, I., 2016. Transformational leadership and innovation: a comparison study between Iraq's public and private higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 41(1), pp.159-181.

Amanchukwu, R.N., Stanley, G.J. and Ololube, N.P., 2015. A review of leadership theories, principles and styles and their relevance to educational management. Management, 5(1), pp.6-14.

Amanchukwu, R.N., Stanley, G.J. and Ololube, N.P., 2015. A review of leadership theories, principles and styles and their relevance to educational management. Management, 5(1), pp.6-14.

Andriukaitienė, R., Voronkova, V., Kyvliuk, O., Maksimenyuk, M. and Sakun, A., 2017. Theoretical insights into expression of leadership competencies in the process of management. Problems and Perspectives in Management, (15, Iss. 1 (cont.)), pp.220-226.

Antony, J., Krishan, N., Cullen, D. and Kumar, M., 2012. Lean Six Sigma for higher education institutions (HEIs): Challenges, barriers, success factors, tools/techniques. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management.

Antony, J.S., Cauce, A.M. and Shalala, D.E. eds., 2017. Challenges in higher education leadership: Practical and scholarly solutions. Taylor & Francis.

Antràs, P., 2020. De-Globalization? Global value chains in the post-COVID-19 age (No. w28115). National Bureau of Economic Research.

Awuzie, B. and McDermott, P., 2017. An abductive approach to qualitative built environment research: A viable system methodological exposé. Qualitative research journal.

Beauchamp, G., Hulme, M., Clarke, L., Hamilton, L. and Harvey, J.A., 2021. ‘People miss people’: A study of school leadership and management in the four nations of the United Kingdom in the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 49(3), pp.375-392.

Ben-David, J., 2017. Centers of Learning: Britain, France, Germany, United States. Routledge.

Black, S.A., 2015. Qualities of effective leadership in higher education. Open Journal of Leadership, 4(02), p.54.

Black, S.A., Groombridge, J.J. and Jones, C.G., 2011. Leadership and conservation effectiveness: finding a better way to lead. Conservation Letters, 4(5), pp.329-339.

Bolden, R., Gosling, J., O'Brien, A., Peters, K., Ryan, M.K., Haslam, S.A., Longsworth, L., Davidovic, A. and Winklemann, K., 2012. Academic leadership: Changing conceptions, identities, and experiences in UK higher education. Viewed on: 29^th November, 2021, https://ore.exeter.ac.uk/repository/bitstream/handle/10871/15098/academic_leadership_v1_19312.pdf?sequence=2

Bolden, R., Gosling, J., O'Brien, A., Peters, K., Ryan, M.K., Haslam, S.A., Longsworth, L., Davidovic, A. and Winklemann, K., 2012. Academic leadership: Changing conceptions, identities, and experiences in UK higher education.

Bolden, R., Petrov, G. and Gosling, J., 2008. Developing collective leadership in higher education. Leadership Foundation for Higher Education.

Bolden, R., Petrov, G. and Gosling, J., 2009. Distributed leadership in higher education: Rhetoric and reality. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 37(2), pp.257-277.

Chance, P.L., 2013. Introduction to educational leadership & organizational behavior: Theory into practice. Routledge.

Chandler, N., 2013. Braced for turbulence: Understanding and managing resistance to change in the higher education sector. Management, 3(5), pp.243-251.

Chark, D., 2021. Higher education in the UK - statistics & facts. Statista. Viewed on: 25^th November, 2021, https://www.statista.com/topics/6938/higher-education-in-the-uk/#dossierKeyfigures

Chark, D., 2021. Number of students enrolled in higher education in the United Kingdom from 2009/10 to 2019/20. Statista. Viewed on: 26^th November, 2021,  https://www.statista.com/statistics/875015/students-enrolled-in-higher-education-in-the-uk/

Chipwatanga, T.L. and Benjamin, K., 2019. Impact of Operational Excellence on Organizational Performance: A Case Study of First National Bank Zambia. The International Journal of Business Management and Technology, 3(4), pp.9-22.

Christensen, C.M. and Eyring, H.J., 2011. The innovative university: Changing the DNA of higher education from the inside out. John Wiley & Sons.

Christensen, C.M., Horn, M.B. and Staker, H., 2013. Is K-12 Blended Learning Disruptive? An Introduction to the Theory of Hybrids. Clayton Christensen Institute for Disruptive Innovation.

Colvin, J.W. and Ashman, M., 2010. Roles, risks, and benefits of peer mentoring relationships in higher education. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 18(2), pp.121-134.

Coman, C., Țîru, L.G., Meseșan-Schmitz, L., Stanciu, C. and Bularca, M.C., 2020. Online teaching and learning in higher education during the coronavirus pandemic: students’ perspective. Sustainability, 12(24), p.10367.

Creswell, J.W. and Creswell, J.D., 2017. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach. Sage publications.

Crevani, L., Ekman, M., Lindgren, M. and Packendorff, J., 2015. Leadership cultures and discursive hybridization: On the cultural production of leadership in higher education reforms. International Journal of Public Leadership.

Dafouz, E. and Smit, U., 2020. ROAD-MAPPING English medium education in the internationalized university. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Deloitte, 2021. Challenges ahead for the UK higher education sector. Viewed on: 26^th November, 2021, https://www2.deloitte.com/uk/en/pages/public-sector/articles/challenges-ahead-for-higher-education-sector.html

DOKUBO, O.N., 2019. COORDINATING: A KEY FOR EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP IN HIGHER EDUCATION.

Drew, G., 2010. Issues and challenges in higher education leadership: Engaging for change. The Australian educational researcher, 37(3), pp.57-76.

DuBrin, A.J., 2015. Leadership: Research findings, practice, and skills. Cengage Learning.

Duff, A.J., 2013. Performance management coaching: Servant leadership and gender implications. Leadership & Organization Development Journal.

Eastwood, B., 2020. 8 Essential Traits for Effective Leadership in Higher Education. Viewed on: 28^th November, 2021, https://www.northeastern.edu/graduate/blog/leadership-in-higher-education/

Fields, J., Kenny, N.A. and Mueller, R.A., 2019. Conceptualizing educational leadership in an academic development program. International Journal for Academic Development, 24(3), pp.218-231.

Gibb, A., Haskins, G. and Robertson, I., 2013. Leading the entrepreneurial university: Meeting the entrepreneurial development needs of higher education institutions. In Universities in change (pp. 9-45). Springer, New York, NY.

Gigliotti, R.A. and Ruben, B.D., 2017. Preparing higher education leaders: A conceptual, strategic, and operational approach. Journal of Leadership Education, 16(1), pp.96-114.

Haradhan, M., 2017.Research Methodology. Research Methodology

Hawkins, J.N., 2011. Variations on equity and access in higher education in Asia. In Access, equity, and capacity in Asia-Pacific higher education (pp. 15-29). Palgrave Macmillan, New York.

Hempsall, K., 2014. Developing leadership in higher education: Perspectives from the USA, the UK and Australia. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 36(4), pp.383-394.

Henry, M., Lingard, B., Rizvi, F. and Taylor, S., 2013. Educational policy and the politics of change. Routledge.

Higgins, C.A., 2011. Culture: understanding implications for leadership in context of integration. Library and Archives Canada= Bibliothèque et Archives Canada, Ottawa.

Hunt, S., and Boliver, V., 2019. A Look at Private Higher Education in the UK. Inside Higher ED. Viewed on: 25^th November, 2021, https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/world-view/look-private-higher-education-uk

Hunt, S.A. and Boliver, V., 2021. Private providers and market exit in UK higher education. Higher Education, 81, pp.385-401. Viewed on: 24^th November, 2021, https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10734-020-00546-x

IDP, 2021. Education system in the UK. Viewed on: 24^th November, 2021, https://www.idp.com/india/study-in-uk/education-system/

Ivankova, N.V., 2014. Mixed methods applications in action research. Sage.

Jackson, M.C., 2016. Systems thinking: Creative holism for managers. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Johnson, L., Becker, S.A., Cummins, M., Estrada, V., Freeman, A. and Hall, C., 2016. NMC horizon report: 2016 higher education edition (pp. 1-50). The New Media Consortium.

Johnston, M.P., 2017. Secondary data analysis: A method of which the time has come. Qualitative and quantitative methods in libraries, 3(3), pp.619-626.

Jones, S., Harvey, M., Lefoe, G. and Ryland, K., 2014. Synthesizing theory and practice: Distributed leadership in higher education. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 42(5), pp.603-619.

Kotter, J.P. and Cohen, D.S., 2012. The heart of change: Real-life stories of how people change their organizations. Harvard Business Press.

Kumar, R., 2019. Research methodology: A step-by-step guide for beginners. Sage Publications Limited.

KWIEK, M., 2018. The robust privateness and publicness of higher education.

Landis, E.A., Hill, D., and Harvey, M.R., 2014. A synthesis of leadership theories and styles. Journal of Management Policy and Practice, 15(2), p.97.

Leal Filho, W., Eustachio, J.H.P.P., Caldana, A.C.F., Will, M., Lange Salvia, A., Rampasso, I.S., Anholon, R., Platje, J. and Kovaleva, M., 2020. Sustainability leadership in higher education institutions: An overview of challenges. Sustainability, 12(9), p.3761.

Lipscomb, M., 2012. Abductive reasoning and qualitative research. Nursing Philosophy, 13(4), pp.244-256.

Mayer, I., 2015. Qualitative research with a focus on qualitative data analysis. International Journal of Sales, Retailing & Marketing, 4(9), pp.53-67.

McCann, L., Hutchison, N. and Adair, A., 2021. Calibration of stakeholder influence in the UK higher education sector. Studies in Higher Education, pp.1-22.

McCleskey, J.A., 2014. Situational, transformational, and transactional leadership and leadership development. Journal of business studies quarterly, 5(4), p.117.

McCleskey, J.A., 2014. Situational, transformational, and transactional leadership and leadership development. Journal of business studies quarterly, 5(4), p.117.

Melnikovas, A., 2018. Towards an explicit research methodology: Adapting research onion model for futures studies. Journal of Futures Studies, 23(2), pp.29-44.

Middlehurst, R., 2013. Changing Internal Governance: Are Leadership Roles and Management Structures in United Kingdom Universities Fit for the Future? Higher Education Quarterly, 67(3), pp.275-294.

Middlehurst, R., Goreham, H. and Woodfield, S., 2009. Why research leadership in higher education? Exploring contributions from the UK's leadership foundation for higher education. Leadership, 5(3), pp.311-329.

Molina-Azorin, J.F., 2012. Mixed methods research in strategic management: Impact and applications. Organizational Research Methods, 15(1), pp.33-56.

Mowles, C., Filosof, J., Andrews, R., Flinn, K., James, D., Mason, P. and Culkin, N., 2019. Transformational change in the higher education sector: an inquiry into leadership practice. Research Paper for Advance HE. Viewed on: 1^st December, 2021, https://www.advance-he.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/transformational-change-higher-education-sector

Müller, R., Geraldi, J., and Turner, J.R., 2011. Relationships between leadership and success in different types of project complexities. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 59(1), pp.77-90.

Nanjundeswaraswamy, T.S. and Swamy, D.R., 2014. Leadership styles. Advances in management, 7(2), p.57.

Nica, E., 2013. The importance of leadership development within higher education. Contemporary Readings in Law and Social Justice, (2), pp.189-194.

Odumeru, J.A. and Ogbonna, I.G., 2013. Transformational vs. transactional leadership theories: Evidence in literature. International review of management and business research, 2(2), p.355.

Ojebode, A., Ojebuyi, B.R., Oladapo, O.A. and Oyedele, O.J., 2018. Mono-Method Research Approach and Scholar–Policy Disengagement in Nigerian Communication Research. In The Palgrave Handbook of Media and Communication Research in Africa (pp. 369-383). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.

Ololube, N.P., 2013. Educational management, planning and supervision: model for effective implementation. Owerri, Nigeria: Springfield Publishers.

Orr, T. and Cleveland-Innes, M., 2015. Appreciative leadership: Supporting education innovation. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(4).

Paradeise, C. and Thoenig, J.C., 2013. Academic institutions in search of quality: Local orders and global standards. Organization studies, 34(2), pp.189-218.

Park, Y.S., Konge, L. and Artino, A.R., 2020. The positivism paradigm of research. Academic Medicine, 95(5), pp.690-694.

Peach, D. and Gamble, N., 2011. Scoping work-integrated learning purposes, practices and issues. In Developing learning professionals (pp. 169-186). Springer, Dordrecht.

Preymann, S., Sterrer, S., Aichinger, R. and Gaisch, M., 2016, May. Higher Education Leadership–current practices and challenges in Austria and Britain. In Cross-Cultural Business Conference 2016 (p. 179).

Pucciarelli, F. and Kaplan, A., 2016. Competition and strategy in higher education: Managing complexity and uncertainty. Business Horizons, 59(3), pp.311-320.

Rahi, S., 2017. Research design and methods: A systematic review of research paradigms, sampling issues and instruments development. International Journal of Economics & Management Sciences, 6(2), pp.1-5.

Rahi, S., 2017. Research design and methods: A systematic review of research paradigms, sampling issues and instruments development. International Journal of Economics & Management Sciences, 6(2), pp.1-5.

Sahay, A., 2016. Peeling Saunder's research onion. Research Gate, Art, pp.1-5.

SAUNDERS, M.N., LEWIS, P. and THORNHILL, A., 2019. RESEARCH METHODS. Business Students 8th edition Pearson Education Limited, England.

Schuurman, B., 2020. Research on terrorism, 2007–2016: A review of data, methods, and authorship. Terrorism and Political Violence, 32(5), pp.1011-1026.

Selznick, P., 2011. Leadership in administration: A sociological interpretation. Quid Pro Books.

Shahmandi, E., Silong, A.D., Ismail, I.A., Samah, B.B.A. and Othman, J., 2011. Competencies, roles and effective academic leadership in world class university. International Journal of Business Administration, 2(1), pp.44-53.

Singh, P., 2014. Intervention of transformational collegial leadership to develop human resources. International Business & Economics Research Journal (IBER), 13(1), pp.53-68.

Sohmen, V.S., 2013. Leadership and teamwork: Two sides of the same coin. Journal of IT and Economic Development, 4(2), pp.1-18.

Somma, N., 2012. The Chilean student movement of 2011-2012: challenging the marketization of education. Interface: a journal for and about social movements, 4(2), pp.296-309.

Sutrisna, M., 2009, May. Research methodology in doctoral research: understanding the meaning of conducting qualitative research. In Proceedings of the Association of Researchers in Construction Management (ARCOM) Doctoral Workshop held in Liverpool John Moores University. Conducted by ARCOM Liverpool, UK: ARCOM.

Taras, V., Caprar, D.V., Rottig, D., Sarala, R.M., Zakaria, N., Zhao, F., Jiménez, A., Wankel, C., Lei, W.S., Minor, M.S. and Bryła, P., 2013. A global classroom? Evaluating the effectiveness of global virtual collaboration as a teaching tool in management education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 12(3), pp.414-435.

Torlak, N.G. and Kuzey, C., 2019. Leadership, job satisfaction and performance links in private education institutes of Pakistan. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management.

Tucker, R.B., 2008. Driving Growth Through Innovation: How Leading Firms Are Transforming Their Futures. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Van Bouwel, L. and Veugelers, R., 2013. The determinants of student mobility in Europe: the quality dimension. European Journal of Higher Education, 3(2), pp.172-190.

Walliman, N., 2015. Social research methods: The essentials. Sage.

Walter, E., 2013. 50 Heavyweight Leadership Quotes. Forbes. Viewed on: 23^rd November, 2021, https://www.forbes.com/sites/ekaterinawalter/2013/09/30/50-heavyweight-leadership-quotes/?sh=153078972259

Wedawatta, G.S.D., Ingirige, M.J.B. and Amaratunga, R.D.G., 2011. Case study as a research strategy: Investigating extreme weather resilience of construction SMEs in the UK.

Welch, A., 2011. Higher education in Southeast Asia: Blurring borders, changing balance. Routledge.

Woodfield, S., 2014. Private Higher Education in the United Kingdom: Myths and Realities. Viewed on: 27^th November, 2021, https://ejournals.bc.edu/ojs/index.php/ihe/article/viewFile/5523/4918

Zikmund, W.G., Babin, B.J., Carr, J.C., Adhikari, A. and Griffin, M., 2013. Business Research Methods A South-asian Perspective: Cengage Learning.

Zolfagharian, M., Walrave, B., Raven, R., and Romme, A.G.L., 2019. Studying transitions: Past, present, and future. Research Policy, 48(9), p.103788.