Critical sustainability events and perceived roles of academic leaders at a leading university in sustainability: CIT case study

Critical sustainability events and perceived roles of academic leaders at a leading university in sustainability: CIT case study | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Case Report Critical sustainability events and perceived roles of academic leaders at a leading university in sustainability: CIT case study Anete Veidemane, Daniela Crăciun, Barend van der Meulen This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-4977416/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Published Journal Publication published 28 May, 2025 Read the published version in Discover Sustainability → Version 1 posted 15 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract This case study explores the perceived roles of academic leaders in critical sustainability events at a leading university in sustainability - the University of Auckland (UoA). UoA was selected due to its high position in the Times Higher Education (THE) Impact Ranking (1st in 2019 and 2020) based on its contribution to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Employing the critical incident technique (CIT) through semi-structured interviews, university staff were asked to reflect on the meaning of a sustainable university, critical sustainability events, and the roles of academic leaders in these events. Both central-level and faculty-level leadership were considered. The interviews revealed that while a multi-dimensional and holistic vision of a sustainable university is beneficial for engaging diverse stakeholders, three transformation tensions emerge as the discussion moves from a vision to implementation: priorities (competing sustainability dimensions), pace (desired speed of transformation), and process (desired consultation for transformation). These tensions are displayed in the Triangle of Transformation Tensions. In total, 16 critical events (CEs) were identified by staff predominantly (81%) occurring within the last five years (2019–2023). The majority were internal CEs, initiated by the university (75%) while the two most frequent CEs were external– COVID-19 and THE Impact Ranking. Central-level strategies and policies (e.g., sustainability strategy, flight policy) represented the most common type of CE (25%). Yet these CEs should not be viewed in isolation. Often most recalled CEs, highly visible and centralised, were underpinned by less prominent CEs (e.g., data monitoring). Moreover, the recent change in the central-level leadership, though less frequently recalled as a CE (10%), was mentioned by the majority of interviewees (> 60%). The perceived roles of academic leaders were conceptualised into five categories: no role, support, drive, divert and block , ranging from passive to active leadership roles. The study hypothesizes that staff associate visible leadership roles with invisible leadership stances, which depend on competing priorities , including intrinsic values, external opportunities & pressures, and resource & authority constraints . No single role is optimal in every situation. Rather each role can be utilised to address the transformation tensions ( priorities, pace, process ) in various ways. Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 1. Introduction 1.1. Research gap Recent academic literature tends to emphasize the critical and positive role university leaders can play in sustainability transformations [ 1 – 4 ]. But is their role always critical and mostly positive? How is it perceived on the receiving end, by the staff members? Certainly, the role of academic leaders can be critical in transformation processes yet a broader perspective on various leadership roles may help to better conceptualize change processes. This article explores the roles that academic leaders play in sustainability transformations as perceived by staff members, ranging from having no role to supporting and hindering change. Sustainability as a priority has moved up on the university leaders’ agenda. In a 2021 survey of over 500 academic leaders, more than 75% reported that the importance of sustainability in their departments would grow within the next five years [ 5 ]. The increased importance has also been reflected in the global university rankings. In recent years both the number of sustainability rankings and participation in these rankings amongst higher education institutions (HEIs) have surged. In 2023 more than 1700 universities participated in the 5th edition of Times Higher Education Impact ranking [ 6 ], over 1 400 in the 2nd edition of QS Sustainability ranking [ 7 ], and close to 1200 in the 14th edition of UI Green Metric [ 8 ]. While leadership commitment to sustainability appears to have increased for many universities, the role of leaders in these change processes is often overlooked [ 9 ] and understudied [ 3 , 9 ]. A recent systematic literature review by Azizi [ 3 ] concluded that research on leadership processes in sustainability transitions at HEIs is rare, fragmented, and without references to leadership levels. Moreover, existing studies predominantly focus on the perspectives of leaders [ 1 , 9 , 10 ]) rather than exploring how academic leaders and their roles in sustainability transformations are perceived by other employees. This exploratory study looks at a single university – the University of Auckland - as a case study. The university was selected due to its high performance in two international university sustainability rankings in recent years (2019–2022) - THE Impact Ranking and the QS Sustainability ranking [ 11 , 12 ]. The case study investigates the critical events in HEI's sustainability journey as seen from the perspective of employees and inquiries about the role that academic leaders play in these events. To address the research gap, this paper poses the following research questions (RQ): RQ1a: What is the meaning of a sustainable university as perceived by its staff? RQ1b: What (if any) tensions emerge from differences in the perceived meaning of a sustainable university? RQ2a: Which events are perceived as critical in the sustainability transformation process? RQ2b: What are the perceived roles of academic leaders in critical events of the sustainability transformation processes? The research questions RQ1a, RQ2a and RQ2b were directly posed to interviewees while the insights for RQ1b emerged from the answers to RQ1a and related protocol questions (see the complete interview protocol in Appendix 1). This research addresses the existing research gap in the literature on sustainability leadership in higher education (Azizi, 2022; Filho et al., 2020), particularly focusing on the role of academic leaders. Additionally, it utilises critical incident technique (CIT) in the research area on sustainability transformations in higher education, shedding light on key events in change processes. While the CIT method has been used in various research areas for nearly 70 years, including psychology, marketing, communications, and organisational learning (Butterfield, 2005), its application in sustainability research has been limited (Winter et al., 2006, p.6). The insights from the study can be utilised by academic researchers and academic leaders aiming to better understand the perceived roles of academic leaders in sustainability transformation in HEIs. 1.2. Key concepts The aim of this paper is to shed light on the role of academic leaders in sustainability transformations at higher education institutions through the lens of critical events. The key concepts employed in this paper are 'sustainability’, ‘transformational change’ and 'critical incidents’. The latter has been adapted to ‘critical events for the purpose of this paper to allow for the inclusion of planned events rather than just incidents. 1.2.1 Sustainability The concept of sustainability is said to originate in forestry, emphasising that one should never harvest more than what the forest can yield in new growth [ 13 , 14 ]. First used with this meaning in the German language in 1713 [ 13 , 15 ], the concept became popular in policy-oriented research after the release of the Brundtland Report in 1987 [ 13 , 16 ]. The Brundtland Report coined another popular concept - sustainable development : "development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”[ 16 ]. As Kuhlman and Farrington [ 13 ] emphasized, the report was primarily concerned with "the tension between the aspirations of mankind towards a better life on the one hand and the limitations imposed by nature on the other hand." The definition of sustainable development has evolved over time to include multiple dimensions, most notably social, environmental and economic [ 17 , 18 ]. While this development has been widely acknowledged, it has also been criticised for obscuring “the real contradiction which exists between long-term sustainability and short-term welfare” [ 13 ]. The concepts of sustainability and sustainable development are often used as synonyms [ 19 , 20 ], and since 2015 are frequently connected to Sustainable Development Goals [ 21 – 25 ]. Moreover, in some contexts, sustainability is closely linked to or even interpreted as durability or longevity [ 26 , 27 ], and there is no clear distinction between these concepts [ 26 ]. Some academics have criticised these concepts for being too vague [ 26 , 28 , 29 ], confusing to stakeholders [ 30 ] and “so overused that they are now meaningless and could even be described as clichés” [ 29 ]. Hence, during the interviews for this paper, participants were asked to share their understanding of a sustainable university. Further reflections on this term, and specifically the notion of 'sustainable university', are provided in the analysis of the first research question. As a baseline definition, this paper uses the sustainable development definition proposed by Brundtland, while also recognizing three underlying dimensions of environmental, social and economic sustainability. 1.2.2 Transformational change While a lot has been written about transformational change in various sectors, discussions on the meaning of transformational change are still frequent in academic literature [ 31 – 33 ]. Transformational change, particularly in the higher education sector has been defined as a deep, pervasive, second-order change affecting “strategy, culture, and behaviour of the global higher education, a higher education system, or a higher education institution” [ 33 ]. Second-order change is commonly contrasted with first-order change. First-order change does not alter existing paradigms, but focuses on incremental change within the old system, aiming to improve or develop one or several dimensions within the existing system. Second-order change is more revolutionary and aims to establish new paradigms and world views, affecting multiple levels and dimensions [ 31 ]. While transformational change can be planned by those in positions of formal power, it can also be a result of several emergent changes that become institutionalized over time [ 33 ]. As a second-order change, transformational change aspires to change paradigms across various dimensions and therefore requires inclusive collaboration across stakeholders to establish a shared, positive vision for the future [ 32 ]. Adapting these viewpoints, this paper uses the term transformational change to refer to a holistic change throughout a higher education institution, guided by a collective vision of a desired outcome. In this case, the outcome is centred on being a sustainable university. 1.2.3 Critical incidents Farrell [ 34 ] suggests that a critical incident is any unplanned and unanticipated event that is "vividly remembered" [ 35 ]. These “critical incidents are produced by the way we look at a situation: a critical incident is the interpretation of the significance of an event” [ 36 ]. These incidents can be perceived as either positive or negative as long as they are considered important by participants [ 37 ]. Incidents only become critical when subject to conscious reflection. One can distinguish between two main phases when reflecting on critical incidents: a description phase and an explanation phase. First, in the description phase, the phenomenon is described based on observations. Then, in the explanation phase, the phenomenon is described in terms of its meaning and value to the research participant [ 34 , 36 ]. Contrary to Farrell's definition, both planned and unplanned events are investigated in this case study. Thus, the term 'critical event' rather than 'incident' has been adopted. Such adjustment was deemed necessary for research since the university's efforts to become sustainable are likely to entail at least some planned initiatives, including strategic initiatives. 2. Methodology 2.1. Case study approach This research paper utilizes a case study method, where the University of Auckland (UoA) is considered a critical case study. While case studies are criticised for the limited representativeness of a broader sample lacking external validity [ 38 ], they are also praised for their potential to provide concrete, context-dependent knowledge in a real-life setting [ 39 , 40 ]. Notably, Flyvbjerg [ 40 ] has argued that case studies can play a central role in scientific developments, offering insights into critical, extreme, or paradigmatic cases. Building on the categorization proposed by Flyvbjerg [ 40 ], UoA may be considered a critical case study, i.e. of "strategic importance in relation to the general problem” [ 40 ]. In this case, the general problem can be defined as becoming a sustainable university, and strategic importance arises from the fact that UoA was ranked 1st globally twice (2019, 2020) on its contribution to SDGs while sustainability was not specifically prioritized in the university’s strategies until 2020 by formally appointed leaders. This allows for investigating the roles of academic leaders in becoming a sustainable university. This study aims to identify perceived roles of leadership in sustainability transformations by staff members at the UoA through the lens of the CIT method. In recent years, UoA has consistently ranked highly in global sustainability rankings, attaining 1st place twice in THE Impact Ranking (2019, 2020) and later being ranked within the top 10 either in THE Impact ranking or QS Sustainability ranking (2022) [ 11 , 12 ]. While rankings have limitations as measures of university sustainability performance [ 41 – 44 ], they can provide an international comparison of a point-in-time performance on specific measures (e.g., sustainability) across a large number of HEIs, recognised by other participating universities. At the same time, the differences found in the methodology of various rankings and the participant pool can impact the ranking outcomes [ 44 ]. This can lead to instances when a university scores high in one sustainability ranking but considerably lower in another one. 2.2. Critical Incident Technique The critical incident technique is a qualitative research methodology [ 45 ] used to obtain in-depth knowledge about the subject's responses to selected situations [ 46 ]. First developed by Flanagan in 1954, the original CIT consisted of a "set of procedures for collecting direct observations of human behaviour in such a way as to facilitate their potential usefulness in solving practical problems and developing broad psychological principles" [ 47 ]. Over the last seven decades, CIT has developed to analyse both observable and intangible phenomena, investigating significant occurrences, including events, incidents, processes, or issues identified by interviewees [ 45 , 46 , 48 ]. 2.3. Study design Before conducting the case study, approval for the data management plan was obtained from the ethics committee. The sample consisted of 21 participants interviewed between July and August 2023. Participants were either current university employees ( n = 20) or worked for a closely affiliated organisation ( n = 1). The sample included academic staff (n = 17) from various faculties and administrative staff ( n = 4) from planning and services departments. Two-thirds of the interviews were conducted in person at different UoA campus locations ( n = 14) while the remaining interviews were conducted online ( n = 7). The planned interview duration was 45 minutes while the actual interview duration ranged from 24 min to 84 min with an average interview length of 45 min, using an audio recorder for in-person interviews and a video recorder for online interviews. Each interviewee was assigned a number to serve as an identifier in order to support insights from data obtained while keeping the data strongly pseudonymous. While the numbers are provided for broader, paraphrased insights in the findings and discussion section, the quotes are anonymous to respect the privacy of interviewees. Interviewees for the case study were selected based on their expertise on sustainability-related topics and exposure to the university’s sustainability journey, employing purposeful, non-probability sampling often typical to expert interviews [ 49 , 50 ]. The interviewees were either recommended by the contact person at the host university actively involved in the university's sustainability transformations or identified through the university’s website based on their involvement in sustainability-related researching and teaching. All interviewees were contacted via e-mail. The interviews conducted qualify as expert interviews since all interview participants either worked in sustainability-related operations or were actively engaged in research or teaching on sustainability-related topics. In addition, approximately half of the interviewees had either previously occupied or were in leadership positions at UoA at the time of the interview, having experienced the roles and responsibilities assigned to academic leaders. In social sciences, experts are often seen as the observers and mechanics of causal mechanisms [ 49 , 51 ] and possess knowledge that may not be exclusive to them but is not readily accessible to everybody in the field of study [ 52 ]. When researching sustainability transformations at universities, often only the final outputs are visible (e.g., the release of a sustainability strategy or the establishment of a sustainability hub). The processes that lead to those outcomes are often only accessible through expert or key informant knowledge. The semi-structured interview protocol followed the CIT approach prompting interviewees to reflect on the critical events and evaluate their impact [ 34 , 36 ], including the role and impact of academic leaders in the identified critical events. The complete interview protocol can be found in Appendix A. The interviews were pseudonymised by assigning a number to each interviewee [ 53 ]. The original audio recordings were deleted after completing all transcripts. 2.4. Coding strategy While numerous coding strategies were considered, including the Gioia method [ 54 , 55 ] used for inducing rigour in qualitative research and Deterding and Waters [ 56 ] advice on coding strategies for the 21st century, the optimal approach was found in the Coding Manual for Qualitative Research by Saldana. Following Saldana’s approach, two-cycle coding was used. During the first cycle, a deductive approach was used, combining protocol coding with sub-coding. The protocol coding utilises a preestablished protocol or prescribed system for collecting and coding qualitative data [ 57 ]. In this case, CIT methodology was used to develop an interview protocol and the codes reflected the interview questions (see Appendix 1 for the interview protocol). In sub coding “a second-order tag [is] assigned after a primary code to detail or enrich the code” [ 57 ]. In this research, a subcode reflected a brief answer to the research question. For example, if a respondent, after being asked about critical events, identified COVID-19 as a critical event, then a code in the form of ‘Crit event – Covid’ was used, where ‘Crit event’ was the primary code and ‘Covid’ represented second order tag/sub coding. In the second coding cycle, a pattern coding approach was used where new concepts were aggregated from initially identified codes. Pattern coding identifies emergent themes, grouping codes in “a more meaningful and parsimonious unit of analysis” [ 57 ]. Since this research focused on the role of leaders, the focal point of the second cycle coding was on identifying broader roles of academic leaders in critical events, using dimensions from subcodes. For example, such codes as ‘leaders CE’ with subdimensions ‘- support’, ‘- recognize’, ‘- approve’, ‘- encourage’, ‘- endorse’, ‘- foster’ were placed under an aggregate dimension ‘support’ – a term that appeared more frequently and was more encompassing of other related terms. An overview with examples from the 1st cycle and 2nd cycle coding approaches is provided in Appendix 2. The interviews were conducted by the first author, transcribed using amber script transcription software and coded and analysed using Atlas.ti24. The pre-final version of the article was sent to interviewees for feedback. 3. Findings 3.1. Competing priorities of a sustainable university " Sustainability is something we get tangled in … there's layers and layers of it … and I actually think that that's probably why we have inertia and aren't actually moving to actions because we are trying to respond to so many people's definition of sustainability.” 3.1.1 Defining a sustainable university Transformational change, leading to substantial alterations in core paradigms [ 31 , 33 ] with limited or no prior precedent, often relies on a shared future vision [ 32 ]. Hence, the first research question aimed to explore to what extent staff had a shared vision of a sustainable university. Therefore, interviewees were asked to reflect on what a sustainable university means to them (RQ1) . The insights that emerged highlighted both the strengths and challenges of how a sustainable university is understood and conceptualized. On the one hand, sustainable university was understood as multi-dimensional (4, 5, 6, 11, 14), multi-framework (e.g. SDG dimensions, 3Es – environment, equity, economy) (1, 12, 15), open to different interpretations (14) and dependent on target audience (6, 14). Thus, its strength is rooted in being comprehensive, inclusive and able to create a shared vision for a broad spectrum of stakeholders. On the other hand, the challenges of conceptualizing a sustainable university are inherently linked to its strengths as the broad definition can lead to a lack of focus and difficulty gaining momentum (2), vagueness and ambiguity of the concept, which at times can be strategically (ab)used to please various stakeholders (21) as illustrated in the following quote: “sustainability at one end of the spectrum is about the environmental constraints … but it's used, for example, in the strategic plan in the economic sense as well. … They switch between uses of the word in a way that's ambiguous. I think that it caters to people at either end of the spectrum” . Such broadness of the term can also lead to mission overload (2, 11) since the university is “ trying to respond to so many people's definition of sustainability” , as illustrated in the quote at the start of the section. These challenges, however, may not be easily mitigated since a transformational change relies on the buy-in of a critical mass of people - diverse stakeholders with different priorities. Hence, the collective meaning of a sustainable university is not only comprehensive but also contains dimensions that may contradict each other. The interviews revealed that a sustainable university is expected to take on a wide variety of responsibilities, covering environmental, social, economic, cultural and spiritual dimensions (1, 2, 4, 11, 14), at individual, organizational and societal levels (1, 2, 4, 9). It embeds sustainability in various functions of a university, including teaching, research, outreach, operations and governance (8, 9, 13, 16, 20) and the overall campus culture (11). It focuses on both local and global issues (15, 8), and prioritizes excellence and inclusion (8, 14, 19). A sustainable university addresses current and future societal and research challenges (5, 7, 8, 9), and supports students to succeed in the current job market while becoming responsible future leaders (4, 12, 14, 15). Such a university is a role model (7) and public voice (9, 21) for society, always changing with time (14). Ideally, it’s a living lab (2, 7) where community members can bring their children to engage with the latest developments in science (7). While many dimensions are shared, it’s also noticeable that on the one end of the spectrum, a sustainable university refers to ‘business as usual’ with improved operations, updated curriculum and strong emphasis on financial performance, rankings and attracting international students (1, 6, 7, 8, 17) while on the other end, a more fundamental shift in core values has taken place, emphasising not only sustainability but regeneration, appreciating traditional knowledge and the spiritual dimension of sustainability and embracing sustainability culture in everything that a university does (5, 9, 11, 12, 14, 21). At the same time, interviewees don’t neatly fall into categories along the spectrum but rather have a more pragmatic or idealist vision of sustainability for different dimensions. In essence, the shared vision of a sustainable university is comprehensive and inclusive, reaching a broad range of stakeholders, and essential for a large-scale transformation. However, it runs the risk of losing focus and potentially being too vague, confusing and overused – the challenges widely discussed in academic literature relating to concepts of sustainability and sustainable development (see section 1.2.1 ). The goal of this paper is not to criticise the broadness of the definition but rather to highlight potential challenges that such broadness can create in change processes. Moreover, even when interviewees have a somewhat shared vision of a sustainable university, their views differ with respect to desired priorities, pace and processes towards becoming a sustainable university. A similar conceptualization – scope, pace, process – has been proposed by Dee, Leišytė [ 33 ] to describe characteristics of change processes at universities. These tensions are discussed in the next section. 3.1.2 Triangle of transformation tensions A shared vision of a sustainable university is a good starting point for embarking on a sustainability journey, but insufficient for smooth sailing. A good understanding of tensions arising in change processes can ease the transformation process. Throughout the interviews, three tensions in change processes emerged – priorities, pace and processes (3 Ps). These are depicted in Fig. 1 below – a triangle of transformation tensions (3 Ts). The first tension in sustainability transformations is one of competing priorities. While it’s beneficial for the vision of a sustainable university to be comprehensive, for implementation sustainability dimensions need to be prioritized to allocate resources and develop a timeline. Hence, a source of tension seems to arise when staff agrees that all dimensions of sustainability are important but at times priorities differ substantially per stakeholder (8, 11). This tension was emphasized by numerous interviewees (3, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 22). As one interviewee notes: “So if we remember the main games …. They're always primary. But then around the periphery, around the values we're trying to push towards by far the dominant thing is Māori and Pacific initiatives. And so, it basically just pushes us out.” Others reported feeling a loss of voice and being under the impression that leadership lacks vision (4, 16, 17). When reflecting on various dimensions of a sustainable university, most interviewees emphasized the environmental dimension (81%), followed by social (43%) and economic (29%) dimensions. Interviewees accentuating environmental sustainability, stressed the need to minimize the impact on the environment, often through various operational measures (1–6, 8, 9, 11–16, 18, 20, 21) but also through research (4, 8, 9, 12, 13, 18, 20, 21), education (4, 8, 9, 12, 13, 15, 18, 21) and shift in values (5, 11, 12, 14). Around 43% referred to social, cultural or spiritual dimensions, including themes such as inclusiveness, equity, diversity, workforce being representative of communities, having a sustainability culture, and learning from indigenous perspectives (2, 4–5, 8, 11, 14–15, 19–20). While fewer interviewees referenced the financial or economic sustainability of the university (1–2, 4, 5, 9, 19), several stressed that the financial sustainability of the university has to come first. “Firstly, it has to be financially sustainable … steady stream of students … good and appropriate stream of research income …. So financial sustainability is number one” . Another interviewee noted: “There’s no point if we survive on those other three dimensions, but, oh, we are running a big loss. We can’t survive” . These preferences highlight potential tension with respect to prioritizing various sustainability dimensions. The second tension relates to the pace of change. While some interviewees saw sustainability transformations as fast-moving (6, 20) in the right direction (18, 20) others believed that the pace of change is very slow (3, 11, 15, 17) and a drastic change is needed now (20, 15). Opinions of interviewees ranged from “we are on a path that is mapped and moving fast” to “it’s 10 years too late and … a very soft push instead of meaningful hard drive” . The second tension highlights that the preferred pace may differ substantially between different stakeholders, and the most ambitious and passionate stakeholders might end up feeling disappointed and disengaged, particularly in large organisations that tend to move slower: “I think that's probably to do with it being such a large organization but for anything to happen, for anything to change, … it just takes us a long time to make things happen” . The third tension relates to how the transformation process is organized. In this case study, the emphasis was placed on the staff and student engagement and consultation process. While some staff members felt comfortable aligning with and supporting the transformation plans proposed by the central-level leadership, particularly if the direction and reasoning resonated with them (9, 18), others noted that limited consultation with staff and students has led to disengagement as many voices and perspectives were overlooked (4, 12, 15). One interviewee noted that “there's lots of questions being asked [by staff and students] and answers kind of just being deflected.” Another emphasized that meetings don’t encourage dialogue: “it's a meeting, but it's actually an announcement …. There is no real conversation or engagement.” The lack of consultation can make people feel unappreciated, “deflated” and experience a “loss of voice”. While consultation processes can be both time-consuming, potentially inhibiting the pace of change, and resource-intensive, the third tension highlights that sufficient consultation is important for employee engagement. However, the views on what counts as sufficient might differ. In 2021, all faculties were asked to submit proposals for sustainability strategy. Yet some felt that their voices had been hardly heard and the final document reflected “feel-good intentions” rather than any hard commitments. The above examples intent to highlight that while a shared vision of a sustainable university can be a good starting point, tensions emerge once the vision moves to implementation. This section highlighted three such tensions related to priorities, pace, and processes. The next chapter discusses the critical events identified by interviewees in these transformation processes. 3.2. Critical events in sustainability transformations This section provides an overview of the events that were perceived as critical in the university's sustainability transformations by the interviewees, aiming to answer the second research question (RQ2a). The event was considered critical if it was identified as such by at least two interviewees for recent events (within the last five years) and at least one interviewee for events dating back to more than five years to address recall bias. As can be seen from Fig. 2 , the critical events have been grouped into two main periods – 1990s to 2018 (period I, events identified at least once) and 2019 to 2023 (period II, identified at least twice). Moreover, these events were classified as external if they were not initiated within the university and internal if they were. The majority of the critical events occurred within the last five years and were internal events. Nearly all of these internal events were initiated at the central level and affected the university across faculties. The most frequent event category related to new strategies and policies ( n = 4 ), followed by data monitoring initiatives ( n = 2 ) and new educational programs ( n = 2 ). However, as Fig. 3 indicates, a couple of the most frequently identified critical events were external events. While Fig. 2 identifies the sequence of the events and distinguishes between internal and external events, Fig. 3 provides an overview of the most frequently selected critical compared to the number of times the event was referenced by staff members. Figure 3 provides two numbers: (1) the share of interviewees who identified a certain event as critical (purple bars), (2) the share of interviewees who mentioned the event during the interview (without probing), which includes those who also selected it as critical (grey bars). Both measures are compared to shed light on cases when certain events are not identified as critical but are frequently referenced, comparing their relevance and prevalence amongst the interviewees. As can be seen from Fig. 3, the critical events selected (purple bars) by the largest number of interviewees were COVID-19 (48%), THE Impact Ranking (19%), the university’s travel policy (19%) and its new sustainability strategy released in 2022 (19%). COVID-19 and THE Impact Ranking were both classified as external events while the latter two were considered internal events. In terms of events being mentioned amongst interviewees, the THE Impact ranking was the most frequently mentioned event (86%) followed by COVID-19 (81%), the discussions on travel policy (71%) and the new vice-chancellor (62%). The events most frequently selected as critical, were also more frequently mentioned by the other interviewee, the exception being the appointment of the new vice-chancellor. While frequently mentioned by interviewees, the event was not so often identified as critical. Due to space limitations, only critical events that were mentioned at least twice are displayed on the graph, excluding events from period I . Appendix 3 provides an overview of all the events selected and mentioned by interviewees and reasons why these events were considered critical. Figure 3: Critical events (CE) identified at least twice by % of interviewees (n = 21). Overall, it appears that the most frequently selected critical events affected the whole university, and often multiple dimensions of the university. For example, the most frequently identified critical event - COVID-19 - was said to have an impact on teaching (e.g., it inspired plans for cross-border educational programs in order to attract international students during COVID-19 and reduce student air travel emissions after COVID-19), research and operations (it set precedent for not flying to conferences but joining more conferences online and arguably provided an opportunity to update the travel policy) and governance (it created financial pressure that pushed university to innovate and promote its status as a sustainable university, partially, in order to attract international students to generate revenues). Nonetheless, the majority of the events were internal, most - deliberately advocated by the central leadership. The three most frequently mentioned internal events were travel policy (19%), sustainability strategy (19%) and curriculum transformation framework (14%). These events were also frequently referenced by other interviewees (travel policy − 71%, sustainability strategy – 48%, curriculum transformation framework – 48%). Other key events included the change of vice-chancellor (10%, 62%), bicycle infrastructure projects on campus (10%, 52%), the central level strategy called Taumata Teitei with a strong emphasis on sustainability (10% & 33%), net zero carbon plan for the university to reach carbon neutrality by 2030 (10%, 33%) [ 58 ], sustainability symposium (10%, 10%) to discuss the sustainability strategy and the first certified carbon inventory in 2022 (10, 10%). The insights suggest that both external and internal events play an important part in sustainability transformations. 3.3. Perceived roles of academic leaders in critical events One of the key objectives of the article was to identify the roles of academic leaders in sustainability transformations through the lens of critical events. Building on the insights provided by the interviewees, five roles of academic leaders were identified: no role, support, drive, divert, and block. These roles are conceptualized in Fig. 4 . On the horizontal axis, roles range from passive to active leadership, based on visible behaviours identified by interviewees. On the vertical axis, the roles are arranged from unfavourable to favourable leadership stances. Based on the broader insights from the interviews, it is hypothesized that staff members translate perceived, visible leadership behaviour into a leadership stance. The leadership stance is determined by contextual factors, particularly dynamics of competing priorities and resource & authority constraints. The competing priorities include intrinsic values (4–6, 9, 11–15, 17–21) and extrinsic pressures & opportunities (1, 2, 6–10, 13, 15, 19, 21), reflecting that most priorities including sustainability don’t exist in a vacuum and compete for attention with other priorities (11, 14, 19, 21). It aligns with one of the tensions identified in the triangle of transformation tensions – priorities. The resource and authority constraints highlight that the stance of academic leaders towards their role in the change process will be influenced by access to resources (e.g., money, time, information) ( 2, 3, 8, 10, 13, 14, 18–21) and formal authority to influence decisions (e.g., across faculties, in property services) (3, 4, 7, 8, 12, 15–18). The weights of these factors are likely to differ per context. While the framework aims to be encompassing, given the relatively small sample size of this case study, additional factors might play a role in different contexts. In essence, the framework asserts that a more active perceived leadership role (e.g., drive, block) is translated into a stronger leadership stance (e.g., favourable, unfavourable). As such, the framework relies on a broader principle in a reversed order - the more people, including leaders, care about a transformation, all contextual factors considered, the more willing they are to take an active role in transformation processes. It is important to acknowledge that not all aspects of leadership roles can be neatly represented in the framework. Firstly, the framework conceptualises perceived roles of leaders by staff rather than intended roles by leaders, which may differ since the translation process is rarely completely accurate. However, it is likely that the perceived roles have a greater impact on staff behaviour than leaders’ intended roles, which makes them important to consider in transformation processes. Secondly, this article summarizes the spectrum of perceived roles. However, in practice, the roles of leaders can and often are perceived differently by different staff members, partially due to their individual and subjective experiences with current and past leaders. This was illustrated in one of the critical events - the Sustainability Symposium - where the role was evaluated as largely positive by one interviewee and largely negative by another. Thirdly, while these roles have distinct boundaries in the framework, in practice these boundaries are blurry, generalising approximate zones of these roles. Furthermore, building on the interview insights leaders can occupy multiple roles simultaneously (e.g., for different initiatives). Lastly, while the framework relies on a general assumption that a stronger leadership stance is likely to lead to a more active leadership style, they might choose a less active role if it can provide the desired outcome as more active roles tend to increase both visibility and risks (as explained in the footnote on the previous page). In the following sections, each role will be discussed, supported by evaluations of interviewees of these roles. It is important to note that, while the primary focus of this article was to investigate the role of formally appointed academic leaders, further analysis highlighted that the role of leaders is best conceptualized when thinking of central leadership (vice-chancellor, deputy vice-chancellor, senior management team), middle-level management (heads of schools and departments, deans, vice-deans) and leadership positions in services departments (e.g., property services, strategic planning, international office). When discussing the role of leaders, the focus is predominately on the central level leadership, which was most frequently addressed by interviewees, unless otherwise specified. The roles will be discussed from the most favourable to least favourable stance, starting with ‘drive’ and ending with ‘block’. It is important to note that events may refer to both current as well as past leadership teams. 3.3.1 Drive The swiftness with which change occurred. … The university's drive towards sustainability preceded [name of a vice-chancellor] appointment as vice-chancellor, but she kind of carried on that drive and particularly the Taumata Teitei strategy [the new central level strategy with an emphasis on sustainability] seemed to happen, if I recall , pretty quickly … So, I can't recall the consultation process by which that [Taumata Teitei] was forged. I just remember it being released and kind of broadly agreeing with everything that I read and liking it. Formally appointed academic leaders can be conceptualised as residing within the “drive” role when their stance is favourable, and their leadership style is active. The “drive” role may be beneficial to create momentum through a central mandate, providing a clear direction and signalling the importance of a certain change. It connects dispersed efforts and creates synergies while increasing the pace of change. The events categorized under the leadership role “drive” included the leadership (i) “pushing through” a new strategic plan Taumata Teitei, prioritizing sustainability as part of that plan, (ii) proposing a “curriculum framework transformation” programme that would reflect the new values in Taumata Teitei and embrace transdisciplinarity, (iii) showing commitment to Net Zero Carbon strategy (by 2030). When describing the situations, interviewees used words such as “drive”, “push through” (21), “prioritize” (15),” “commitment” (21, 5), “central mandate” (10) “direct initiative” (15) but also “swift”, “quick”, “clear” (18). Overall, the events within this category made interviewees feel that there is leadership commitment (21, 5) and buy-in (18), the university is going in the right direction (18, 19, 20) and there has been an ideological shift (21). The ‘drive’ role predominantly referred to the central-level leadership. “Drive” as a leadership role can be utilised to steer the ‘anarchic’ ‘oil tanker’ (13, 18) (aka university) in a new direction (18) and coordinate efforts (19). One of the main risks of ‘driving too hard’, is that people in the backseats might feel that their efforts are not being recognized and they are left behind (4, 11, 12, 15, 21). For example, not every interviewee felt as enthusiastic about leadership taking a driving role and questioned the authenticity of this role. Some felt that the new strategy was presented by central leadership as ''here is a new direction for the university and we, the leadership, are going to steer the university in this direction" while in practice the strategy reflected “ the existing interests and focus and energy of the staff who were already doing a lot of this stuff” . On the other hand, some interviewees felt that the voice of the leadership could be more prominent publicly, particularly in addressing the climate crisis and taking a more active role in shaping the future of the city, including urban density, transport planning, speed management and green spaces (9, 13). And yet others felt that the commitment appears authentic since increasingly investments and resources are directed towards stated objectives, sustainability appears in key learning objectives and is rewarded through the type of research people do. “ I think we're starting to see sort of authenticity seep through the system. Um, and it becomes much more integrated and coherent within the institution” (18). It is anticipated that under the ‘drive’ role the transformation priorities are strongly endorsed by leaders, and the pace is fast, but the change process is less inclusive compared to the ‘support’ role. The ’driving’ role takes a strong stance and appears to be more frequently contested. This is why the supporting role of leadership is equally important. 3.3.2 Support I think Covid for the university was empowering … In many areas the university …, faced by a challenge, … did really, really well, particularly in that relational learning space. … Suddenly there were more resources , laptops, etcetera being made available for disadvantaged students. So that was fantastic. … Sustainability is about the environment - Three E's - economy and equity. And I think equity, that's the big one where the university really stepped up its game. Formally appointed academic leaders can be conceptualised as residing within the “support” role when their stance is leaning towards favourable, and their leadership style is in the middle range on the passive-active axis. The events placed under the support category included leadership support to students during COVID-19, providing research grants and investments for sustainability initiatives (9,18), recognizing employee’s time commitment to sustainability work (10), supporting initiatives that promote sustainability ranking (1, 6, 15, 21), encouraging staff to embed sustainability in the curriculum (3, 18), recognizing staff’s vision in strategic documents and development plans (9, 15). These events made interviewees feel that their work is being recognized (10), supported (9,18), and ideas are being heard (9). The words used by interviewees included support (7, 18, 21), recognize (10), approve, encourage, endorse, (18), foster (18, 9), and embrace (9). Here support referred to both central leadership and heads of schools and departments. Support as a leadership role can be utilised for pulling together existing expertise and wisdom (9, 17, 20, 21), collective sense-making (9, 12), buy-in from staff for change efforts (18), and augmenting existing efforts (19, 20). The role can vary from more passive and reactive actions such as granting approval (5, 7) for a bottom-up initiative to seeking advice on major reforms and providing time and resources for such activities (20). The support role is less likely to experience much resistance from employees but might also be less effective in gaining momentum compared to the driving role. It is anticipated that under the ‘support’ role the transformation priorities are endorsed by leaders, the pace is medium, and the change process is relatively inclusive and pays attention to the input of employees. The next role – no role – may sound a bit lazy but comes with some advantages. 3.3.1 No role It's been quite a slow burn rather than individual events, but probably one of the most critical things … would have been … back in the 90s. … There was an appointment made in property services of somebody … very keen on reduction of energy usage and water usage …. [This person] started accumulating data on our usage and challenged us … of the way in which we used our resources …. So … you had an email each month which showed what your energy usage was as a head of school and therefore just planted a seed in mind that you need to be worried about these things. Formally appointed academic leaders are conceptualised as residing within “no role” in the change process when their stance is neutral (neither favourable nor unfavourable) and their leadership style is passive. At the UoA several critical events were mentioned where formally appointed academic leaders played no or minimal role (1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 12). These events were frequently led by a few role models or services departments (e.g., property services, planning). In practice, most of the critical events identified by interviewees in this category (mentioned at least twice) were led by services departments and included carbon inventory (property services), submissions to rankings (property services and planning department), sustainability symposium (planning department) (1, 6, 8). The critical events led by role-models were often recalled only once although not always by role-models themselves. The words used by interviewees to describe the leadership role ranged from interviewees not being able to recall the leadership’s role or not knowing enough about it (3, 5, 8) to leadership having no formal role or say (1, 7), having no time (2), neither supporting nor being a roadblock (5), but possibly having the event “on the radar” (1). As such, without any role, academic leaders were not reported as having any impact. Nonetheless, most likely the central-level leadership provided approvals for initiatives carried out by services departments, but the process was not highly visible and, therefore, was not recalled by interviewees. Hence, in practice, the leadership might have ‘supported’ the initiative but was perceived as having ‘no role’ . Academic leaders can embrace this role when their teams consist of highly motivated, capable and self-driven people. This position can be conducive to change as no roadblocks are put in place. Nonetheless, several interviewees reported structural obstacles when academic leaders were conceptualised as having “no role”. One obstacle was related to middle-level academic leaders (heads of schools, deans) having no formal say in endorsing activities linked to operations that might be conducive to research and teaching such as having living lab roof gardens (e.g., for research) or community gardens at the faculty level (7, 12). The second structural issue was related to the university being highly centralized (4, 15, 17), leading to fewer opportunities and legitimacy to undertake sustainability initiatives at the faculty level (15). On the flipside, another interviewee expressed a view that one can lead from where they are rather than expecting directives from the central leadership (6). It is anticipated that under the ‘no role’ the transformation priorities for leaders have either been long established and institutionalized or have not yet emerged or are just emerging. Hence, the pace of change is non-existent or slow and there is no formal change process in place. 3.3.4 Divert You know, it's not just academic travel, it's the students we depend on. And we knew from a long time ago that sort of 80%, 90%, perhaps, of the university's carbon budget comes from travel. So, of course, [there are] things like waste and buildings and catering which contribute, but travel is the major, the major contributor. … There's lots of us talking about it and a number of rather interesting options began to be explored. But I get a sense that it's just run into the sand . I don't know anything that has really happened after then. … There's not much sign of any significant change.” Formally appointed academic leaders can be conceptualised as residing within the “divert” role when their stance is leaning towards unfavourable, and their leadership style is in the middle range on the passive-active axis. The ‘divert’ role can delay change efforts and scatter focus by taking attention away from the initiative or redirecting it somewhere else. It often serves as an intermediary role before moving into another role (e.g., support or block). The critical events under this role included the travel policy consultation process being perceived as “run(ning) into sand” (13), the request for a bicycle shed going on “for ages” before being rejected in the 1990s (16), “not know[ing] whether the university will agree” (7) to approve research entailing outdoor experiments in a designated place. Other events, not identified as critical, included a lack of response regarding the new wellness building being built over bicycle parking places (21) and difficulty initiating mobility surveys (3). When describing the situations, interviewees used words emphasizing ambiguity and delays in the change processes. For example, ambiguity appears in the following quotes: “despite pointing this out repeatedly, there’s been no real movement on addressing it [loss of bicycle parking]” (21 ), “not much sign of any significant change [regarding travel policy]” (13), “[policy] not very clear [if/how] we’re going to be sustainable” (15), “there's lots of questions being asked and answers kind of just being deflected” (12). Several quotes emphasize delays: “the speed of progress is very slow (3)”, “So much time to get approval … all the time we do not know whether the university will agree, will not agree, agree, will not agree, agree, will not agree, agree …” (7). These quotes suggest a prolonged state of waiting and some level of confusion concerning the expected outcome, occasionally feeling as if one is in a state of limbo. Divert as a leadership role can effectively stall efforts for change by leaving people in a state of unknown, often long enough to lose interest and motivation or become sceptical (11, 12, 15, 16, 17, 21). Moreover, many change processes tend to be delayed naturally in highly bureaucratic organisations such as universities, requiring numerous approvals and having many committees with limited decision-making power (3, 7, 16). This set-up makes it harder to identify a “divert” role. This role appears to be effective also because it’s hard to pin down whether it’s utilised deliberately or unintentionally, and therefore it minimizes the potential for active resistance. For leadership, however, this role is a safer option than the more active ‘block’ role. The ‘divert’ role in these examples happened more often when interviewees tried to engage with central-level leadership or property services rather than their own departments and schools, where communication flows were more direct. It is anticipated that under the ‘divert’ role the transformation priorities are known and not actively disputed by leaders, but the pace of change is slowed down, and the change process is ambiguous, confusing and siloed. 3.3.5 Block Previously, leadership kind of used it [flying] against us … On the fossil fuel divestment question, one of the responses from leadership … was, um, it's hypocritical of you guys to ask us to divest when you fly so much. … So that didn't seem very productive. Also, that was … using it against academics but not actually suggesting or proposing ways of dealing with it.’ Formally appointed academic leaders can be conceptualised as residing within the “block” role when their stance is unfavourable and their leadership style active. Block as a leadership role is often used to halt new initiatives and defend the status quo, particularly when clear demands have emerged from employees or external stakeholders. (8, 16, 21. The events placed under the leadership role “block”, included leadership’s blocking proposals for reduced speeds on the highway (8), fossil fuel divestments (21), reduced air travel at the university proposed under previous leadership (21) and rejecting proposals for bicycle sheds in 90ies (16). When describing the situations, the interviewees used expressions such as being a “roadblock” (21), “defensive” (4), “resistance”, “pushback”, and “reluctance” (20). The events led to interviewees feeling emotions ranging from slight disappointment to feeling a “loss of voice”, perceiving management as being “shortsighted”, having an impression that it’s not possible to make any real change at the university level (16), and feeling cynical (4, 11, 17, 21). Many of these events happened under previous leadership, sometimes even decades ago, and currently bicycle sheds have been installed, the university divested from fossil fuels in 2019, and the travel policy was updated in late 2023 under the new leadership. It was noted that with the new leadership, there has been an “ideological shift”, and more resources were being allocated to sustainability-related topics. One respondent noted that these days rather than actual “opposition”, it’s more of a “reluctance to change”, related to financial considerations and workload while several other interviewees emphasized priority for other causes (11, 13). However, another respondent noted that the new leadership is sometimes too focused on “making everything look beautiful, not admitting any faults …” and becomes quite “defensive” when criticised. Block as a leadership role entails active confrontation, and thus it can be a high-risk and low-reward position for the leadership. However, as insights from the interviews have shown, it allows for protecting practical interests and other strategic priorities such as flying to conferences and recruiting international students – events that have been contested by some interviewees but supported by others (1, 2, 8, 7, 10, 11, 21). At times, blocking can be a positive position, for example, when standing up for vulnerable and minority groups, blocking initiatives that can further inhibit their opportunities. For example, rather than forbidding everyone to fly, the new travel policy recognised that early-stage scholars are in greater need to fly to conferences in order to establish their academic networks [ 59 ] (6, 18, 21). It is anticipated that under the ‘block’ role the transformation priorities are known but actively rejected by leaders, the pace of change is halted (at least temporarily) and rather than engaging in the consultation process with employees the requests for change are ignored. 4. Discussion 4.1. Is there an optimal role for academic leaders? Universities are like oil tankers. … Large institutions that are complex, … slow-moving and hard to change rapidly. … So it takes … determined leadership from the top … and everybody else to buy into that, to shift things. While the quote above points to the value of a ‘determined leadership’, resembling the ‘drive’ role, the insights from interviews suggest that there is no one optimal leadership role but rather different leadership roles address diverse stakeholder needs and transformation tensions. For example, the ‘drive’ role can set clear priorities and fast pace, but the consultation process might not be sufficient, creating resistance and discontent. For example, it can be helpful for creating a central mandate for transdisciplinary structures or connecting faculty staff with services staff, which may not be possible at the faculty level due to authority constraints. On the other hand, the ‘support’ role can be effective in promoting the co-creating of priorities and an inclusive consultation process but at the expense of the pace of change. Nonetheless, the inclusive consultation process might lead to more buy-in and less resistance, potentially accelerating the pace of change at later stages of transformation. ‘No role’ can be effective when academic leaders do not have a strong stance on the topic yet (no clear priorities , process and slow pace ) but are also not against it, creating a space for bottom-up initiatives and motivated role-models to emerge. However, this can become problematic if the topic is perceived as important by staff and students, but academic leaders are not engaging with it. More unfavourable leadership stances are ‘divert’ and ‘block’. However, also these roles can be helpful in the right context. The ‘divert’ role can be helpful when various stakeholder groups (amongst leadership, staff, students) have conflicting views on a topic and academic leaders can deescalate the conflict by delaying the pace of change, having vague and ambiguous consultation process and subsequent decision making and not being clear on their priorities. Unsurprisingly, this role, while helpful for deescalating conflicts, can be very frustrating and demotivating for various stakeholders, reducing their engagement and leading to ‘loss of voice’, minimizing their sense of agency. Lastly, the ’block’ role can be beneficial to signal clear priorities on transformation, for example, by blocking fossil fuel divestments. On the other hand, it can also block proposed speed limits on a highway, signalling very clearly that sustainability is not a priority, halting the pace of change and the process of consultation. Therefore, utilising a mix of leadership roles may be beneficial to address diverse stakeholder needs and transformation tensions. In addition, it’s important to note that the more active leadership roles (e.g., drive, block) can lead to more recognition for leaders but also increase the risk of active resistance, which leaders often like to avoid. 4.2. How is the role of academic leaders linked to university governance? The staff’s preference for leadership roles might be partially influenced by their familiarity with and preference for different governance styles at the university, particularly contrasting collegial and democratic decision-making with managerial style. Historically, universities have been largely led through collegial and democratic decision-making, emphasizing consensus building and majority voting, respectively. However, in the late 20th century a shift towards a more managerial style emerged [ 60 ]. In New Zealand, a shift towards managerialism in higher education took off in the early 90ies with reforms including the massification of education, competitive funding schemes and more power to the vice-chancellor. Consequently, universities became more competitive, placing emphasis on recruiting international students and participating in global league tables while also focusing on cost savings [ 61 ]. Similar sentiment surfaced in some of the interviews, where the university was criticised for becoming too corporate (4, 16, 17) and placing too much emphasis on excelling in international rankings and recruiting international students (11, 13). While collegial and democratic governance views members of academia as active participants in decision-making, managerial leadership emphasizes efficiency and strategic direction, concentrating the decision-making power in the hands of small leadership teams (e.g., deans and rectors). Consequently, the remaining staff is seen more as implementers of decisions rather than decision-making bodies [ 60 ]. Furthermore, it’s been argued that managerialism never replaced other governance styles but was rather added as an additional layer to already well-established governance styles [ 60 , 61 ]. As such, some interviewees might be more aligned with democratic and collegial decision-making while others see benefits in managerial decision-making. When connecting the governance styles with leadership roles, the managerial, top-down governance is more typical of the ‘driving’ role while collegial and democratic governance aligns better with the ‘support’ role. As the quote at the top of this chapter illustrates, there is an appetite for the ‘driving’ role (moving the large, complex oil tanker in a new direction) and numerous interviewees seem to appreciate the increased pace and centralisation of change (6, 8, 10, 18, 19) and some feel that the pace should be increased (3, 15, 20). Others emphasize the need for a more supportive style that emphasizes further consultation and engagement with academic staff (4,11, 12, 13,16,17,21). Interestingly, having these two styles communicated transparently might also help to address the three transformation tensions – priorities, pace and process. Under managerial style, priorities, pace and process are usually determined by the senior leaders. Under a collegial or democratic style, priorities are determined collectively, the process emphasizes consultation, and the pace often depends on the consultation process. Nonetheless, irrespective of the interviewees’ preference for a more managerial and more supportive leadership role, some consistent expectations with respect to leadership roles emerged. These expectations predominantly refer to ‘drive’ and ‘support’ roles. 4.3. Leadership expectations During the interviews, it became clear that there is no optimal leadership role. Sometimes different interviewees would regard the role of leadership as largely positive or negative for the same event. However, the reasoning for why something was seen as largely positive or negative was consistent, where leadership behaviour signalled their priority for sustainability transformation. Three expectations from leadership were identified and are described below. 1. “Walk the talk.” Interviewees generally seemed to agree with the intentions and vision expressed in key strategic documents but were hesitant about the implementation (11, 13, 21). It was emphasized that these documents reflect ‘feel-good intentions’ rather than committing to real actions (17) and it is important to put people in charge and allocate resources (11, 15, 16, 17, 21). Multiple interviewees felt that sustainability is predominantly prioritized to encourage cost-cutting rather than being a genuine institutional priority (e.g., cost-cutting from reduced flying, energy efficiency savings) (7, 16, 17). A commitment in the form of long-term investments in sustainability that go beyond marketable investments was given as examples to help send the opposite message. When leadership invested in buildings or curriculum development, it was seen as sending a strong signal of their commitment. Recognising this expectation can help to address the priority tension as leaders signal their stance through financial commitment. 2. Don’t leave the low-hanging fruits hanging. Several interviewees mentioned seemingly smaller events that appeared to bring many benefits to various stakeholders on campus at relatively low cost but were not taken up. Such events as not installing a bicycle shed, not paying enough attention to water conservation, not addressing recycling on campus, not permitting a food garden, putting obstacles in place for a roof garden, not switching lights off in corridors, and not making buildings sustainable (4, 5, 7, 12, 16, 17) can accumulate in a profound effect and signal that real sustainability culture is not present (4, 11, 12, 15) – not a real priority. Moreover, some interviewees are advising governments and international organizations on how to put these measures in place and when they are rarely consulted at the university level and small-scale initiatives are rejected, it can create a strong dissonance (7, 11, 13). 3. Don’t announce things from an ivory tower. It was noted that good leaders listen to their people rather than announce changes from the top. When management does not properly listen to its staff and tries to portray things as only good, the staff is likely to lose some level of credibility and become sceptical. Several interviewees referred to themselves as being sceptical or cynical regarding the top-down leadership approach (4, 11, 17, 21) while collective sense-making was emphasized as conducive to creating engagement and facilitating change (1, 9). A collective sense making allows leadership to signal that the priorities of their staff are taken seriously. It is important to recognise that academic leadership, particularly central leadership has to balance many competing priorities of various stakeholders under resource constraints. Moreover, the central leadership is held accountable for the financial sustainability of the university, ensuring that the university can properly function and pay out salaries to its staff (4, 10, 19). As such, it may not be possible to solve all tensions yet keeping in mind the above expectations may help to better navigate some of the tensions. 4.4. Limitations and future research This research has methodological and practical limitations that need to be acknowledged to interpret the findings. The research used a case study approach employing CIT methodology with semi-structured interviews. The case study approach is often criticised for a lack of generalisability [ 38 ] due to the specific context of the case study. Indeed, the case study took place in Aotearoa New Zealand, and the university was selected as a strategic case study due to its leading position in THE Impact Ranking in recent years (2019–2023). Hence, the cultural background, geographical location and leading position might have impacted the findings. At the same time, the types of critical events, transformation tensions and leadership roles identified appeared to be sufficiently broad to may be of relevance to other higher education institutions undergoing sustainability transformations. Further research might explore to what extent similar transformation tensions, critical events and leadership roles emerge in other universities, whether new nuances emerge and how the context of the institution might affect these findings. Hence, case studies of other universities, whether they are leading in the sustainability rankings or not, may help to corroborate the findings. Furthermore, CIT methodology has been widely used in various research fields over the last 70 years and is particularly helpful in identifying events that people consider most critical [ 48 ]. In this research, it was used as a lens to identify the roles of academic leaders in critical events without directly inquiring about these leaders. Such an approach allowed capturing events where academic leaders had limited roles or even obstructed the change process. However, the transformation process consists of more than critical events. For example, less frequently mentioned events such as monitoring of carbon emissions may enable more frequently mentioned critical events such as Travel Policy or Net Zero Strategy. In addition, as one of the interviewees noted, change processes can be a ‘slow burn’, sometimes making it hard to point out specific events. If the goal is to understand how the events (in a broad sense) build on top of each other over time, a narrative analysis linked to a timeline might be a more appropriate method. Secondly, in CIT recall bias might be present due to interviewees better remembering more recent events [ 62 ]. Hence, in this research, an event was considered critical if it was identified as such by at least two interviewees in the last five years, and at least one interviewee for events further back. In addition, Butterfield et al. advocate for nine credibility checks when using CIT, particularly helpful for projects that aim to identify categories of critical events and have resources available for multiple researchers to check these categories and conduct a follow-up interview Butterfield, Borgen [ 48 ]. While it was out of scope for this research article due to the focus on leadership roles and practical limitations, it may be of value for future researchers with larger research teams and more time allocated to research. Lastly, due to the limited time for the case study, 21 interviews were conducted. Future research might expand the current sample size (n = 21) and engage with other stakeholder groups such as students. Moreover, it is important to note that interviewees might not feel comfortable discussing sensitive topics such as criticising the role of leadership, particularly on an audio [ 63 ] or a video recorder, potentially affecting the reliability of responses. To mitigate this issue, interviewees were given options to withdraw from the research at any time, participate in the interview without audio or video recording and review and request changes for the draft version of the article. In this research, only the main research questions were shared with interviewees prior to the interview but in future, it might be beneficial to share the complete interview protocol to help interviewees reflect on what information they feel comfortable sharing. 5. Conclusions This research aimed to understand staff’s perceptions of the following research questions: what does a sustainable university mean to its staff (RQ1a); what (if any) tensions emerge from differences in the perceived meaning of a sustainable university (RQ1b); which events are perceived as critical in the university’s sustainability transformation process (RQ2a), and what are the perceived roles of academic leaders in these critical events (RQ2b). Sustainable university was conceptualized as a multi-dimensional, comprehensive, and inclusive concept at individual, organisational and societal levels. While such understanding can help establish a shared vision and engage diverse stakeholders required for transformational change, it can also lead to mission overload and several tensions in the change process. Triangle of transformation tensions identified three such tensions – priorities, pace , and process : Priority tension emerges when stakeholders largely agree on the importance of various sustainability dimensions but not on how they should be prioritized, leaving some staff feeling ‘pushe[ed] out’, experiencing ‘loss of voice’ and reckoning that ‘leadership lacks vision’. Pace tension arises from differences in the desired speed of transformation ranging from staff feeling that they ‘are on a path … and moving fast’ to ‘it’s 10 years too late and … a very soft push’. This tension risks disengaging the more passionate staff, potentially jeopardizing the overall momentum of change. Process tension surfaces when staff has a different preference for the consultation process required for transformation. While some feel comfortable aligning with the central-level visions that resonate with them, others note ‘a lack of dialogue’ as consultation is being replaced with ‘announcements’ disguised as a dialogue. Also, this tension can lead to ‘loss of voice’, feeling not appreciated and ‘deflated’. Being aware of these tensions and providing safe spaces to discuss them while anticipating a plurality of views can help to ease these transformation tensions. Furthermore, the research explored events that were perceived as critical by staff in the university’s sustainability transformation process. The most commonly mentioned critical events were those that affected the whole university and several dimensions of sustainability such as COVID-19 (environment – reduction in flying, equity - providing support to vulnerable students, economic – loss of income for the university), THE Impact ranking (SDG dimensions in teaching, research, outreach), sustainability strategy, and widely disputed travel policy. While the two most frequently mentioned events were classified as external (not initiated by the university), the majority of critical events were internal events (initiated by the university). Most of the critical events identified occurred within the last five years, while a few events took place in the 1990s. Some of this can be attributed to recall bias. To address this, more recent events had to be identified as critical by at least two respondents while events taking place more than five years ago had to be identified by only one interviewee. The insights (see Fig. 2 , Appendix 1) suggest that the sequence of events is important to consider as critical events build on top of each other cumulatively. Overall, it appears that the ability to respond to external events as well as large-scale, centralized internal events (e.g., sustainability strategy, and travel policy) are important to the sustainability transformation process. In addition, the change in leadership, with new leadership emphasizing sustainability as a key priority might have been important for mobilizing resources for these critical events. Lastly, the research aimed to understand the perceived roles of leaders in critical events. These roles were conceptualised along two axes into five main categories: ‘no role’, ‘support’, ‘drive’, ‘divert’, and ‘block’ . The vertical axis represented the perceived leadership stance , ranging from favourable to unfavourable, affected by contextual factors - competing priorities (intrinsic values, extrinsic pressures and opportunities) as well as resource and authority constraints. The horizontal axis represents perceived active versus passive leadership roles . The underlying assumption of the proposed framework suggests that staff members perceive leadership’s behaviour and translate it into a leadership stance. A more active perceived leadership role (e.g., drive, block) acts as a signal for a stronger leadership stance (e.g., favourable, unfavourable) on a change topic. The framework relies on a broader principle in a reversed order, namely the more people, including leaders, care about a transformation, contextual factors considered, the more willing they are to take an active role in transformation processes. However, no one leadership role was found to be optimal as different roles address diverse stakeholder needs and transformation tensions. For example, the ‘drive’ role can increase the pace of change but often at the expense of the consultative process while the ‘support’ role might be particularly beneficial for co-defining priorities through a consultative process . Also ‘block’ role can be beneficial when an active stance is required to indicate priorities on a controversial topic such as fossil fuel divestment. Moreover, ‘no role’ can create space for staff to explore emerging topics without too many constraints. Possibly, the most controversial role is ‘divert’. While it can be beneficial for easing tensions between stakeholders with conflicting interests by de-escalating the pace of change, it can also demotivate and disengage staff often most passionate about the transformation. Hence, using a mix of leadership roles to facilitate diverse stakeholders' needs and transformation tensions is likely to be beneficial for a more inclusive and engaged transformation process. Declarations Ethics approval and consent : The ethics approval was granted by the University of Twente (request nr. 231055) utilising a template following the GDPR rules. All participants completed a consent form prior to the interviews. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interest. Funding: A small internal university research grant intended to advance PhD research was provided by the University of Twente. Author Contribution Author contributions: Conceptualization – all three authors; Methodology – A.V.; Data Collection – A.V.; Formal Analysis – A.V.; Supervision: – B.vdM., D.C.; Writing – Original Draft - A.V.; Writing – review & editing – all three authors. Acknowledgement We thank all the interviewees at the University of Auckland for finding time to share valuable insights for this study. It was a great pleasure talking to you. Data availability: The paper collected data through semi-structured interviews. In alignment with ethics approval, the data is not publicly available to protect the identities of interviewees. References Jongbloed B, Veidemane A. Empowering Deans for Sustainability Transformations at Academic Departments: Obstacles, Strategies and Roadmaps , in Sustainability in Higher Education: Strategies, Performance and Future Challenges . Springer; 2024. pp. 117–40. Leal Filho W, et al. Sustainability leadership in higher education institutions: An overview of challenges. Sustainability. 2020;12(9):3761. Azizi L. Which leadership processes encourage sustainable transitions within universities? Int J Sustain High Educ. 2023;24(1):46–68. Dyer G, Dyer M. Strategic leadership for sustainability by higher education: the American College & University Presidents' Climate Commitment. J Clean Prod. 2017;140:111–6. Jongbloed B, Veidemane A, Bayezid A. Embedding sustainability in academia: Deans as change makers. Survey of Deans. 2021. Times Higher Education. Impact Rankings 2023. 2024 [cited 2024 June 3]; https://www.timeshighereducation.com/impactrankings QS Top Universities. QS World University Rankings: Sustainability 2024. 2023 December 5, 2023 [cited 2024 March 12]; https://www.topuniversities.com/sustainability-rankings UI Green Metric World University Rankings. Overall Rankings 2023. 2024; https://greenmetric.ui.ac.id/rankings/overall-rankings-2023 Leal Filho W et al. Sustainability Leadership in Higher Education Institutions: An Overview of Challenges. SUSTAINABILITY, 2020. 12(9). Blanco-Portela N et al. Sustainability Leaders' Perceptions on the Drivers for and the Barriers to the Integration of Sustainability in Latin American Higher Education Institutions. SUSTAINABILITY, 2018. 10(8). University of Auckland. Annual Report 2022: Improving health and well-being for all . 2022. University of Auckland. Annual Report 2021: Becoming Waipapa Taumata Rau . 2021. Kuhlman T, Farrington J. What is sustainability? Sustain. 2010;2(11):3436–48. Wiersum KF. 200 years of sustainability in forestry: lessons from history. Environ Manage. 1995;19:321–9. Wilderer PA. Sustainable water resource management: the science behind the scene. Sustain Sci. 2007;2(1):1–4. Brundtland GH et al. Our common future . 1987: New York. Fabietti G, Giovannoni E. What is Sustainability? A Review of the Concept and its Applications. Integrated Reporting, DOI, 2014. 10: pp. 978-3. Strange T, Bayley A. Sustainable development: Linking economy. Society, environment, 2008. 141. Ruggerio CA. Sustainability and sustainable development: A review of principles and definitions. Sci Total Environ. 2021;786:147481. Olawumi TO, Chan DW. A scientometric review of global research on sustainability and sustainable development. J Clean Prod. 2018;183:231–50. Armin Razmjoo A, Sumper A, Davarpanah A. Energy sustainability analysis based on SDGs for developing countries. Energy Sour Part A Recover Utilization Environ Eff. 2020;42(9):1041–56. Paoli AD, Addeo F. Assessing SDGs: A methodology to measure sustainability. Athens J Social Sci. 2019;6(3):229–50. Smith MS, et al. Advancing sustainability science for the SDGs. Sustain Sci. 2018;13:1483–7. Barbier EB, Burgess JC. The Sustainable Development Goals and the systems approach to sustainability. Economics. 2017;11(1):20170028. Campagnolo L et al. Assessing SDGs: a new methodology to measure sustainability. 2016. Pater LR, Cristea SL. Systemic definitions of sustainability, durability and longevity. Procedia-Social Behav Sci. 2016;221:362–71. Becker C. Sustainability and longevity: Two sides of the same quality. mental. 2014;20:21–21. Giovannoni E, Fabietti G. What is sustainability? A review of the concept and its applications. Integrated reporting: Concepts and cases that redefine corporate accountability, 2013: pp. 21–40. Fuller RJ. Beyond cliché–reclaiming the concept of sustainability. Australian J Environ Educ. 2010;26:7–18. Sheehy B, Farneti F. Corporate Social Responsibility, Sustainability, Sustainable Development and Corporate Sustainability: What Is the Difference, and Does It Matter? Sustainability. 2021;13(11):5965. Levy A. Second-order planned change: Definition and conceptualization. Organ Dyn. 1986;15(1):5–23. Gass R. What is transformational change. Framing deep change: essays on transformative social change. Center for Transformative Change, Berkeley, California, USA, 2010: pp. 12–14. Dee JR, Leišytė L, van der Meulen BJ. Conceptualizing higher education transformation: introduction to the Research Handbook on the Transformation of Higher Education , in Research Handbook on the Transformation of Higher Education . Edward Elgar Publishing; 2023. pp. 2–22. Farrell TS. Critical incident analysis through narrative reflective practice: A case study. Iran J Lang Teach Res. 2013;1(1):79–89. Brookfield SD. The Skillful Instructor. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 1990. Tripp D. Critical incidents in teaching (classic edition): Developing professional judgement. 1st ed. Routledge; 2011. Winter J, et al. The university as a site for transformation around sustainability. Int J Innov Sustainable Dev. 2015;9(3–4):303–20. Gerring J. Case selection for case-study analysis: Qualitative and quantitative techniques. 2008. Gerring J. Case study research: Principles and practices. Cambridge University Press; 2006. Flyvbjerg B. Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inq. 2006;12(2):219–45. Ragazzi M, Ghidini F. Environmental sustainability of universities: critical analysis of a green ranking. Energy Procedia. 2017;119:111–20. Lauder A, et al. Critical review of a global campus sustainability ranking: GreenMetric. J Clean Prod. 2015;108:852–63. Galleli B, et al. Sustainability university rankings: a comparative analysis of UI green metric and the times higher education world university rankings. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education; 2021. Veidemane A. Education for sustainable development in higher education rankings: Challenges and opportunities for developing internationally comparable indicators. Sustainability. 2022;14(9):5102. Viergever RF. The critical incident technique: method or methodology? Qual Health Res. 2019;29(7):1065–79. Gremler DD. The Critical Incident Technique , in Wiley Encyclopedia of Management , C.L. Cooper, N. Lee, and A.M. Farrell, Editors. 2015. Flanagan JC. The critical incident technique. Psychol Bull. 1954;51(4):327. Butterfield LD, et al. Fifty years of the critical incident technique: 1954–2004 and beyond. Qualitative Res. 2005;5(4):475–97. Von Soest C. Why do we speak to experts? Reviving the strength of the expert interview method. Perspect Politics. 2023;21(1):277–87. Tansey O. Process tracing and elite interviewing: a case for non-probability sampling. Methoden der vergleichenden Politik-und Sozialwissenschaft: Neue entwicklungen und anwendungen, 2009: pp. 481–496. Elster J. A plea for mechanisms. Social mechanisms: An analytical approach to social theory, 1998. 49. Meuser M, Nagel U. The expert interview and changes in knowledge production , in Interviewing experts . Springer; 2009. pp. 17–42. Hintze M, El K, Emam. Comparing the benefits of pseudonymisation and anonymisation under the GDPR. J Data Prot Priv. 2018;2(2):145–58. Magnani G, Gioia D. Using the Gioia Methodology in international business and entrepreneurship research. Int Bus Rev. 2023;32(2):102097. Gioia DA, Corley KG, Hamilton AL. Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational Res methods. 2013;16(1):15–31. Deterding NM, Waters MC. Flexible coding of in-depth interviews: A twenty-first-century approach. Volume 50. Sociological methods & research; 2021. pp. 708–39. 2. Saldaña J. The coding manual for qualitative researchers . Second edition ed. 2013, Los Angeles: SAGE Publications. University of Auckland. Te Taumata Tukuwaro-kore: Net Zero Carbon Strategy . 2022. University of Auckland. Travel Policy. 2023 November 1, 2023; https://www.auckland.ac.nz/en/about-us/about-the-university/policy-hub/enabling-environment/finance-capital-risk/travel/travel-policy.html Välimaa J, Uljens M, Elo J. Understanding Higher Education Decision-Making and Educational Practice as Interrelated and Historically Framed Phenomena—A Non-affirmative Take , in Multilevel Pedagogical Leadership in Higher Education: A Non-Affirmative Approach . Springer International Publishing Cham; 2024. pp. 115–29. Shore C. After neoliberalism'? The reform of New Zealand's university system. Learning under neoliberalism: Ethnographies of governance in higher education, 2015. 1: p. 30. Gremler DD. The critical incident technique in service research. J service Res. 2004;7(1):65–89. Rutakumwa R, et al. Conducting in-depth interviews with and without voice recorders: a comparative analysis. Qualitative Res. 2020;20(5):565–81. Times Higher Education. Impact Ranking 2020. 2020 [cited 2020 23 July, 2020]; https://www.timeshighereducation.com/rankings/impact/2020/overall#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/undefined Times Higher Education. Impact Rankings 2019. 2019 [cited 2024 June 3]; https://www.timeshighereducation.com/rankings/impact/2019/overall Ministry for the Environment. Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Bill: Summary. Wellington; 2019. University of Auckland. Te Rautaki Aronga Toitū Sustainability Strategy . 2022. University of Auckland. Curriculum Framework Transformation Progress. 2023; https://teachwell.auckland.ac.nz/announcements/curriculum-transformation-framework-progress-3/ Ingenio. Dawn of a new era , in Ingenio . 2019, University of Auckland: Auckland. pp. 26–27. University of Auckland. Taumata Teitei. Vision 2030 and Strategic Plan 2025 . 2021. Toitū, Envirocare. Organisation Audit Report - Toitū carbonreduce certification programmes verification . 2022. Footnotes Informed consent forms aligned with GDPR regulations and the home university's template. Prior to interviews, a written or oral consent was obtained from interviewees while acknowledging that participants can withdraw from the study at any stage or refuse to answer any questions, they do not feel comfortable with. One of the recommended interviewees worked for an affiliated organization responsible for valorizing the university’s research, including sustainability research. For example, “(2,5,7)” indicates that a certain statement is supported by 3 interviewees, denoted with numbers 2, 5 and 7. Any names mentioned during the interview were anonymised in transcripts besides references to role models, which were pseudonymized. The roles and responsibilities of participants were retained in the transcripts to explore their potential impact on event selection and perception of leaders. The event regarding (lack of) bicycle infrastructure in period one was merged with the event regarding bicycle infrastructure in period II due to the same focus of both events. It is possible that if leaders can achieve the desired result with less effort, they might utilise a less active role since active roles tend to increase both visibility and risks (more desirable for drive than block). However, as a general trend, the relationships displayed in the graph above should hold. The travel policy was eventually finalized on the university’s website a couple of months after the research visit. All the critical events listed in the Appendix 3 have been identified as critical by at least two interviewees except for three events taking place in 1990s. These events, while identified only once, were included to mitigate recall bias favouring more recent events. The events in this category reflect how many interviewees mentioned the events identified as critical. It includes the interviewees that identified the event as critical as well as those who mentioned it without identifying it as critical, comparing it’s relevance and prevalence in the interviews. The event related to bicycle infrastructure has been merged, combining events reported in period I (1x) and II (1x) due to their similar nature. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files Appendix.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Published Journal Publication published 28 May, 2025 Read the published version in Discover Sustainability → Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 16 Sep, 2024 Reviewers agreed at journal 16 Sep, 2024 Reviews received at journal 15 Sep, 2024 Reviewers agreed at journal 12 Sep, 2024 Reviews received at journal 11 Sep, 2024 Reviews received at journal 11 Sep, 2024 Reviews received at journal 10 Sep, 2024 Reviewers agreed at journal 06 Sep, 2024 Reviewers agreed at journal 05 Sep, 2024 Reviewers agreed at journal 04 Sep, 2024 Reviewers agreed at journal 03 Sep, 2024 Reviewers invited by journal 03 Sep, 2024 Editor assigned by journal 02 Sep, 2024 Submission checks completed at journal 31 Aug, 2024 First submitted to journal 26 Aug, 2024 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-4977416","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Case Report","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":354501328,"identity":"72e397a8-fc79-4b54-bff5-ecc0c2dcd620","order_by":0,"name":"Anete Veidemane","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Twente, Transformation \u0026 Society (KiTeS)","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Anete","middleName":"","lastName":"Veidemane","suffix":""},{"id":354501333,"identity":"b311d788-1e70-4f77-ac04-29b2b72e9cd6","order_by":1,"name":"Daniela Crăciun","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Twente, Transformation \u0026 Society (KiTeS)","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Daniela","middleName":"","lastName":"Crăciun","suffix":""},{"id":354501334,"identity":"4e190b90-8d1f-451a-b3af-33d707b172fc","order_by":2,"name":"Barend van der Meulen","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Twente, Transformation \u0026 Society (KiTeS)","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Barend","middleName":"van der","lastName":"Meulen","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2024-08-26 10:55:15","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4977416/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4977416/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[{"content":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-025-01185-x","type":"published","date":"2025-05-28T15:56:56+00:00"}],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":66929655,"identity":"06c1bae6-e66d-4982-97dd-e8c4221ba102","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-10-18 06:47:30","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":87229,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eTriangle of transformation tensions\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4977416/v1/1e6b0f9d77b0e4ade44728b4.png"},{"id":66929649,"identity":"866d22a9-e9c3-4396-862a-42705f217c89","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-10-18 06:47:29","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":86627,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eCritical events on a timeline\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4977416/v1/bab6b3e7f0f23ac44e1a8416.png"},{"id":66930440,"identity":"5019fef6-c477-4d66-9cf2-ed886442450b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-10-18 06:55:29","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":76792,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eCritical events (CE) identified at least twice by % of interviewees (n=21).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4977416/v1/34451a03e26cfe79d7e7c0c5.png"},{"id":66929653,"identity":"bf545a2b-ee1d-4b03-bdd3-fc45b0a712ae","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-10-18 06:47:30","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":146032,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePerceived leadership roles in transformation processes\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4977416/v1/dcb0edb0d14fad65c7d4d861.png"},{"id":83783532,"identity":"c527a525-a5df-434f-9af0-c91c40e3dee7","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-06-02 16:11:33","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1407460,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4977416/v1/03cf2e5d-e0da-4b77-b5bd-0184172b3815.pdf"},{"id":66929650,"identity":"18acbaf9-e71d-4242-855f-c90cab5e7a96","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-10-18 06:47:29","extension":"docx","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":35132,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Appendix.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4977416/v1/46b768291f57cc466db88dd9.docx"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Critical sustainability events and perceived roles of academic leaders at a leading university in sustainability: CIT case study","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec2\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e1.1. Research gap\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eRecent academic literature tends to emphasize the critical and positive role university leaders can play in sustainability transformations [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR2 CR3\" citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e]. But is their role always critical and mostly positive? How is it perceived on the receiving end, by the staff members? Certainly, the role of academic leaders can be critical in transformation processes yet a broader perspective on various leadership roles may help to better conceptualize change processes. This article explores the roles that academic leaders play in sustainability transformations as perceived by staff members, ranging from having no role to supporting and hindering change.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSustainability as a priority has moved up on the university leaders\u0026rsquo; agenda. In a 2021 survey of over 500 academic leaders, more than 75% reported that the importance of sustainability in their departments would grow within the next five years [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e]. The increased importance has also been reflected in the global university rankings. In recent years both the number of sustainability rankings and participation in these rankings amongst higher education institutions (HEIs) have surged. In 2023 more than 1700 universities participated in the 5th edition of Times Higher Education Impact ranking [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e], over 1 400 in the 2nd edition of QS Sustainability ranking [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e], and close to 1200 in the 14th edition of UI Green Metric [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhile leadership commitment to sustainability appears to have increased for many universities, the role of leaders in these change processes is often overlooked [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e] and understudied [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e]. A recent systematic literature review by Azizi [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e] concluded that research on leadership processes in sustainability transitions at HEIs is rare, fragmented, and without references to leadership levels. Moreover, existing studies predominantly focus on the perspectives of leaders [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e]) rather than exploring how academic leaders and their roles in sustainability transformations are perceived by other employees.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis exploratory study looks at a single university \u0026ndash; the University of Auckland - as a case study. The university was selected due to its high performance in two international university sustainability rankings in recent years (2019\u0026ndash;2022) - THE Impact Ranking and the QS Sustainability ranking [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e]. The case study investigates the critical events in HEI's sustainability journey as seen from the perspective of employees and inquiries about the role that academic leaders play in these events. To address the research gap, this paper poses the following research questions (RQ):\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cul\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eRQ1a: What is the meaning of a sustainable university as perceived by its staff?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eRQ1b: What (if any) tensions emerge from differences in the perceived meaning of a sustainable university?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eRQ2a: Which events are perceived as critical in the sustainability transformation process?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eRQ2b: What are the perceived roles of academic leaders in critical events of the sustainability transformation processes?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/ul\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe research questions RQ1a, RQ2a and RQ2b were directly posed to interviewees while the insights for RQ1b emerged from the answers to RQ1a and related protocol questions (see the complete interview protocol in \u003cspan refid=\"Sec32\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003eAppendix\u003c/span\u003e 1). This research addresses the existing research gap in the literature on sustainability leadership in higher education (Azizi, 2022; Filho et al., 2020), particularly focusing on the role of academic leaders. Additionally, it utilises critical incident technique (CIT) in the research area on sustainability transformations in higher education, shedding light on key events in change processes. While the CIT method has been used in various research areas for nearly 70 years, including psychology, marketing, communications, and organisational learning (Butterfield, 2005), its application in sustainability research has been limited (Winter et al., 2006, p.6). The insights from the study can be utilised by academic researchers and academic leaders aiming to better understand the perceived roles of academic leaders in sustainability transformation in HEIs.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e1.2. Key concepts\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe aim of this paper is to shed light on the role of academic leaders in sustainability transformations at higher education institutions through the lens of critical events. The key concepts employed in this paper are 'sustainability\u0026rsquo;, \u0026lsquo;transformational change\u0026rsquo; and 'critical incidents\u0026rsquo;. The latter has been adapted to \u0026lsquo;critical events for the purpose of this paper to allow for the inclusion of planned events rather than just incidents.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e1.2.1 Sustainability\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe concept of \u003cem\u003esustainability\u003c/em\u003e is said to originate in forestry, emphasising that one should never harvest more than what the forest can yield in new growth [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e]. First used with this meaning in the German language in 1713 [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e], the concept became popular in policy-oriented research after the release of the Brundtland Report in 1987 [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e]. The Brundtland Report coined another popular concept - \u003cem\u003esustainable development\u003c/em\u003e: \"development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs\u0026rdquo;[\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e]. As Kuhlman and Farrington [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e] emphasized, the report was primarily concerned with \"the tension between the aspirations of mankind towards a better life on the one hand and the limitations imposed by nature on the other hand.\"\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe definition of sustainable development has evolved over time to include multiple dimensions, most notably social, environmental and economic [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e]. While this development has been widely acknowledged, it has also been criticised for obscuring \u0026ldquo;the real contradiction which exists between long-term sustainability and short-term welfare\u0026rdquo; [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e]. The concepts of sustainability and sustainable development are often used as synonyms [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e], and since 2015 are frequently connected to Sustainable Development Goals [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR22 CR23 CR24\" citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e]. Moreover, in some contexts, sustainability is closely linked to or even interpreted as durability or longevity [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e], and there is no clear distinction between these concepts [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSome academics have criticised these concepts for being too vague [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e], confusing to stakeholders [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e] and \u0026ldquo;so overused that they are now meaningless and could even be described as clich\u0026eacute;s\u0026rdquo; [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e]. Hence, during the interviews for this paper, participants were asked to share their understanding of a sustainable university. Further reflections on this term, and specifically the notion of 'sustainable university', are provided in the analysis of the first research question. As a baseline definition, this paper uses the sustainable development definition proposed by Brundtland, while also recognizing three underlying dimensions of environmental, social and economic sustainability.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e1.2.2 Transformational change\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhile a lot has been written about transformational change in various sectors, discussions on the meaning of transformational change are still frequent in academic literature [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR32\" citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e31\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e]. Transformational change, particularly in the higher education sector has been defined as a deep, pervasive, second-order change affecting \u0026ldquo;strategy, culture, and behaviour of the global higher education, a higher education system, or a higher education institution\u0026rdquo; [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e]. Second-order change is commonly contrasted with first-order change. First-order change does not alter existing paradigms, but focuses on incremental change within the old system, aiming to improve or develop one or several dimensions within the existing system. Second-order change is more revolutionary and aims to establish new paradigms and world views, affecting multiple levels and dimensions [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e31\u003c/span\u003e]. While transformational change can be planned by those in positions of formal power, it can also be a result of several emergent changes that become institutionalized over time [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e]. As a second-order change, transformational change aspires to change paradigms across various dimensions and therefore requires inclusive collaboration across stakeholders to establish a shared, positive vision for the future [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e]. Adapting these viewpoints, this paper uses the term transformational change to refer to a holistic change throughout a higher education institution, guided by a collective vision of a desired outcome. In this case, the outcome is centred on being a sustainable university.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e1.2.3 Critical incidents\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eFarrell [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e34\u003c/span\u003e] suggests that a critical incident is any unplanned and unanticipated event that is \"vividly remembered\" [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e35\u003c/span\u003e]. These \u0026ldquo;critical incidents are produced by the way we look at a situation: a critical incident is the interpretation of the significance of an event\u0026rdquo; [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e]. These incidents can be perceived as either positive or negative as long as they are considered important by participants [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e37\u003c/span\u003e]. Incidents only become critical when subject to conscious reflection.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOne can distinguish between two main phases when reflecting on critical incidents: a description phase and an explanation phase. First, in the description phase, the phenomenon is described based on observations. Then, in the explanation phase, the phenomenon is described in terms of its meaning and value to the research participant [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e34\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e]. Contrary to Farrell's definition, both planned and unplanned events are investigated in this case study. Thus, the term 'critical event' rather than 'incident' has been adopted. Such adjustment was deemed necessary for research since the university's efforts to become sustainable are likely to entail at least some planned initiatives, including strategic initiatives.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"2. Methodology","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.1. Case study approach\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis research paper utilizes a case study method, where the University of Auckland (UoA) is considered a critical case study. While case studies are criticised for the limited representativeness of a broader sample lacking external validity [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e38\u003c/span\u003e], they are also praised for their potential to provide concrete, context-dependent knowledge in a real-life setting [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e39\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e40\u003c/span\u003e]. Notably, Flyvbjerg [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e40\u003c/span\u003e] has argued that case studies can play a central role in scientific developments, offering insights into critical, extreme, or paradigmatic cases. Building on the categorization proposed by Flyvbjerg [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e40\u003c/span\u003e], UoA may be considered a critical case study, i.e. of \"strategic importance in relation to the general problem\u0026rdquo; [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e40\u003c/span\u003e]. In this case, the general problem can be defined as becoming a sustainable university, and strategic importance arises from the fact that UoA was ranked 1st globally twice (2019, 2020) on its contribution to SDGs while sustainability was not specifically prioritized in the university\u0026rsquo;s strategies until 2020 by formally appointed leaders. This allows for investigating the roles of academic leaders in becoming a sustainable university.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study aims to identify perceived roles of leadership in sustainability transformations by staff members at the UoA through the lens of the CIT method. In recent years, UoA has consistently ranked highly in global sustainability rankings, attaining 1st place twice in THE Impact Ranking (2019, 2020) and later being ranked within the top 10 either in THE Impact ranking or QS Sustainability ranking (2022) [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e]. While rankings have limitations as measures of university sustainability performance [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR42 CR43\" citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e41\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e44\u003c/span\u003e], they can provide an international comparison of a point-in-time performance on specific measures (e.g., sustainability) across a large number of HEIs, recognised by other participating universities. At the same time, the differences found in the methodology of various rankings and the participant pool can impact the ranking outcomes [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e44\u003c/span\u003e]. This can lead to instances when a university scores high in one sustainability ranking but considerably lower in another one.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.2. Critical Incident Technique\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe critical incident technique is a qualitative research methodology [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e45\u003c/span\u003e] used to obtain in-depth knowledge about the subject's responses to selected situations [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e46\u003c/span\u003e]. First developed by Flanagan in 1954, the original CIT consisted of a \"set of procedures for collecting direct observations of human behaviour in such a way as to facilitate their potential usefulness in solving practical problems and developing broad psychological principles\" [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e47\u003c/span\u003e]. Over the last seven decades, CIT has developed to analyse both observable and intangible phenomena, investigating significant occurrences, including events, incidents, processes, or issues identified by interviewees [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e45\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e46\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e48\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.3. Study design\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e Before conducting the case study, approval for the data management plan was obtained from the ethics committee.\u003ca class=\"FNLink\" href=\"#Fn1\" id=\"#FNLinkFn1\"\u003e\u003c/a\u003e The sample consisted of 21 participants interviewed between July and August 2023. Participants were either current university employees (\u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;20) or worked for a closely affiliated organisation (\u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1).\u003ca class=\"FNLink\" href=\"#Fn2\" id=\"#FNLinkFn2\"\u003e\u003c/a\u003e The sample included academic staff \u003cem\u003e(n\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;17) from various faculties and administrative staff (\u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4) from planning and services departments. Two-thirds of the interviews were conducted in person at different UoA campus locations (\u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;14) while the remaining interviews were conducted online (\u003cem\u003en\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;7). The planned interview duration was 45 minutes while the actual interview duration ranged from 24 min to 84 min with an average interview length of 45 min, using an audio recorder for in-person interviews and a video recorder for online interviews. Each interviewee was assigned a number to serve as an identifier in order to support insights from data obtained while keeping the data strongly pseudonymous. While the numbers are provided for broader, paraphrased insights in the findings and \u003cspan refid=\"Sec23\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003ediscussion\u003c/span\u003e section, the quotes are anonymous to respect the privacy of interviewees.\u003ca class=\"FNLink\" href=\"#Fn3\" id=\"#FNLinkFn3\"\u003e\u003c/a\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eInterviewees for the case study were selected based on their expertise on sustainability-related topics and exposure to the university\u0026rsquo;s sustainability journey, employing purposeful, non-probability sampling often typical to expert interviews [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e49\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e50\u003c/span\u003e]. The interviewees were either recommended by the contact person at the host university actively involved in the university's sustainability transformations or identified through the university\u0026rsquo;s website based on their involvement in sustainability-related researching and teaching. All interviewees were contacted via e-mail. The interviews conducted qualify as expert interviews since all interview participants either worked in sustainability-related operations or were actively engaged in research or teaching on sustainability-related topics. In addition, approximately half of the interviewees had either previously occupied or were in leadership positions at UoA at the time of the interview, having experienced the roles and responsibilities assigned to academic leaders.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn social sciences, experts are often seen as the observers and mechanics of causal mechanisms [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e49\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e51\u003c/span\u003e] and possess knowledge that may not be exclusive to them but is not readily accessible to everybody in the field of study [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e52\u003c/span\u003e]. When researching sustainability transformations at universities, often only the final outputs are visible (e.g., the release of a sustainability strategy or the establishment of a sustainability hub). The processes that lead to those outcomes are often only accessible through expert or key informant knowledge.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe semi-structured interview protocol followed the CIT approach prompting interviewees to reflect on the critical events and evaluate their impact [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e34\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e], including the role and impact of academic leaders in the identified critical events. The complete interview protocol can be found in \u003cspan refid=\"Sec32\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003eAppendix\u003c/span\u003e A. The interviews were pseudonymised by assigning a number to each interviewee [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e53\u003c/span\u003e]. The original audio recordings were deleted after completing all transcripts.\u003ca class=\"FNLink\" href=\"#Fn4\" id=\"#FNLinkFn4\"\u003e\u003c/a\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.4. Coding strategy\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhile numerous coding strategies were considered, including the Gioia method [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e54\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e55\u003c/span\u003e] used for inducing rigour in qualitative research and Deterding and Waters [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e56\u003c/span\u003e] advice on coding strategies for the 21st century, the optimal approach was found in the Coding Manual for Qualitative Research by Saldana. Following Saldana\u0026rsquo;s approach, two-cycle coding was used. During the first cycle, a deductive approach was used, combining protocol coding with sub-coding. The protocol coding utilises a preestablished protocol or prescribed system for collecting and coding qualitative data [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e57\u003c/span\u003e]. In this case, CIT methodology was used to develop an interview protocol and the codes reflected the interview questions (see \u003cspan refid=\"Sec32\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003eAppendix\u003c/span\u003e 1 for the interview protocol). In sub coding \u0026ldquo;a second-order tag [is] assigned after a primary code to detail or enrich the code\u0026rdquo; [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e57\u003c/span\u003e]. In this research, a subcode reflected a brief answer to the research question. For example, if a respondent, after being asked about critical events, identified COVID-19 as a critical event, then a code in the form of \u0026lsquo;Crit event \u0026ndash; Covid\u0026rsquo; was used, where \u0026lsquo;Crit event\u0026rsquo; was the primary code and \u0026lsquo;Covid\u0026rsquo; represented second order tag/sub coding.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn the second coding cycle, a pattern coding approach was used where new concepts were aggregated from initially identified codes. Pattern coding identifies emergent themes, grouping codes in \u0026ldquo;a more meaningful and parsimonious unit of analysis\u0026rdquo; [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e57\u003c/span\u003e]. Since this research focused on the role of leaders, the focal point of the second cycle coding was on identifying broader roles of academic leaders in critical events, using dimensions from subcodes. For example, such codes as \u0026lsquo;leaders CE\u0026rsquo; with subdimensions \u0026lsquo;- support\u0026rsquo;, \u0026lsquo;- recognize\u0026rsquo;, \u0026lsquo;- approve\u0026rsquo;, \u0026lsquo;- encourage\u0026rsquo;, \u0026lsquo;- endorse\u0026rsquo;, \u0026lsquo;- foster\u0026rsquo; were placed under an aggregate dimension \u0026lsquo;support\u0026rsquo; \u0026ndash; a term that appeared more frequently and was more encompassing of other related terms. An overview with examples from the 1st cycle and 2nd cycle coding approaches is provided in \u003cspan refid=\"Sec32\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003eAppendix\u003c/span\u003e 2. The interviews were conducted by the first author, transcribed using amber script transcription software and coded and analysed using Atlas.ti24. The pre-final version of the article was sent to interviewees for feedback.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"3. Findings","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1. Competing priorities of a sustainable university\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e\"\u003cem\u003eSustainability is something we get tangled in \u0026hellip; there's layers and layers of it \u0026hellip; and I actually think that that's probably why we have inertia and aren't actually moving to actions because we are trying to respond to so many people's definition of sustainability.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1.1 Defining a sustainable university\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTransformational change, leading to substantial alterations in core paradigms [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e31\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e] with limited or no prior precedent, often relies on a shared future vision [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e]. Hence, the first research question aimed to explore to what extent staff had a shared vision of a sustainable university. Therefore, interviewees were asked to reflect on \u003cem\u003ewhat a sustainable university means to them (RQ1)\u003c/em\u003e. The insights that emerged highlighted both the strengths and challenges of how a sustainable university is understood and conceptualized. On the one hand, sustainable university was understood as multi-dimensional (4, 5, 6, 11, 14), multi-framework (e.g. SDG dimensions, 3Es \u0026ndash; environment, equity, economy) (1, 12, 15), open to different interpretations (14) and dependent on target audience (6, 14). Thus, its strength is rooted in being comprehensive, inclusive and able to create a shared vision for a broad spectrum of stakeholders.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOn the other hand, the challenges of conceptualizing a sustainable university are inherently linked to its strengths as the broad definition can lead to a lack of focus and difficulty gaining momentum (2), vagueness and ambiguity of the concept, which at times can be strategically (ab)used to please various stakeholders (21) as illustrated in the following quote: \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;sustainability at one end of the spectrum is about the environmental constraints \u0026hellip; but it's used, for example, in the strategic plan in the economic sense as well. \u0026hellip; They switch between uses of the word in a way that's ambiguous. I think that it caters to people at either end of the spectrum\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e. Such broadness of the term can also lead to mission overload (2, 11) since the university is \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003etrying to respond to so many people's definition of sustainability\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e, as illustrated in the quote at the start of the section. These challenges, however, may not be easily mitigated since a transformational change relies on the buy-in of a critical mass of people - diverse stakeholders with different priorities. Hence, the collective meaning of a sustainable university is not only comprehensive but also contains dimensions that may contradict each other.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe interviews revealed that a sustainable university is expected to take on a wide variety of responsibilities, covering environmental, social, economic, cultural and spiritual dimensions (1, 2, 4, 11, 14), at individual, organizational and societal levels (1, 2, 4, 9). It embeds sustainability in various functions of a university, including teaching, research, outreach, operations and governance (8, 9, 13, 16, 20) and the overall campus culture (11). It focuses on both local and global issues (15, 8), and prioritizes excellence and inclusion (8, 14, 19). A sustainable university addresses current and future societal and research challenges (5, 7, 8, 9), and supports students to succeed in the current job market while becoming responsible future leaders (4, 12, 14, 15). Such a university is a role model (7) and public voice (9, 21) for society, always changing with time (14). Ideally, it\u0026rsquo;s a living lab (2, 7) where community members can bring their children to engage with the latest developments in science (7).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhile many dimensions are shared, it\u0026rsquo;s also noticeable that on the one end of the spectrum, a sustainable university refers to \u0026lsquo;business as usual\u0026rsquo; with improved operations, updated curriculum and strong emphasis on financial performance, rankings and attracting international students (1, 6, 7, 8, 17) while on the other end, a more fundamental shift in core values has taken place, emphasising not only sustainability but regeneration, appreciating traditional knowledge and the spiritual dimension of sustainability and embracing sustainability culture in everything that a university does (5, 9, 11, 12, 14, 21). At the same time, interviewees don\u0026rsquo;t neatly fall into categories along the spectrum but rather have a more pragmatic or idealist vision of sustainability for different dimensions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn essence, the shared vision of a sustainable university is comprehensive and inclusive, reaching a broad range of stakeholders, and essential for a large-scale transformation. However, it runs the risk of losing focus and potentially being too vague, confusing and overused \u0026ndash; the challenges widely discussed in academic literature relating to concepts of sustainability and sustainable development (see section \u003cspan refid=\"Sec4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1.2.1\u003c/span\u003e). The goal of this paper is not to criticise the broadness of the definition but rather to highlight potential challenges that such broadness can create in change processes. Moreover, even when interviewees have a somewhat shared vision of a sustainable university, their views differ with respect to desired \u003cem\u003epriorities, pace\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eprocesses\u003c/em\u003e towards becoming a sustainable university. A similar conceptualization \u0026ndash; scope, pace, process \u0026ndash; has been proposed by Dee, Leišytė [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e] to describe characteristics of change processes at universities. These tensions are discussed in the next section.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1.2 Triangle of transformation tensions\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eA shared vision of a sustainable university is a good starting point for embarking on a sustainability journey, but insufficient for smooth sailing. A good understanding of tensions arising in change processes can ease the transformation process. Throughout the interviews, three tensions in change processes emerged \u0026ndash; priorities, pace and processes (3 Ps). These are depicted in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e below \u0026ndash; a triangle of transformation tensions (3 Ts).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe first tension in sustainability transformations is one of competing priorities. While it\u0026rsquo;s beneficial for the vision of a sustainable university to be comprehensive, for implementation sustainability dimensions need to be prioritized to allocate resources and develop a timeline. Hence, a source of tension seems to arise when staff agrees that all dimensions of sustainability are important but at times priorities differ substantially per stakeholder (8, 11). This tension was emphasized by numerous interviewees (3, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 22). As one interviewee notes: \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;So if we remember the main games \u0026hellip;. They're always primary. But then around the periphery, around the values we're trying to push towards by far the dominant thing is Māori and Pacific initiatives. And so, it basically just pushes us out.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e Others reported feeling a loss of voice and being under the impression that leadership lacks vision (4, 16, 17). When reflecting on various dimensions of a sustainable university, most interviewees emphasized the environmental dimension (81%), followed by social (43%) and economic (29%) dimensions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eInterviewees accentuating environmental sustainability, stressed the need to minimize the impact on the environment, often through various operational measures (1\u0026ndash;6, 8, 9, 11\u0026ndash;16, 18, 20, 21) but also through research (4, 8, 9, 12, 13, 18, 20, 21), education (4, 8, 9, 12, 13, 15, 18, 21) and shift in values (5, 11, 12, 14). Around 43% referred to social, cultural or spiritual dimensions, including themes such as inclusiveness, equity, diversity, workforce being representative of communities, having a sustainability culture, and learning from indigenous perspectives (2, 4\u0026ndash;5, 8, 11, 14\u0026ndash;15, 19\u0026ndash;20). While fewer interviewees referenced the financial or economic sustainability of the university (1\u0026ndash;2, 4, 5, 9, 19), several stressed that the financial sustainability of the university has to come first. \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;Firstly, it has to be financially sustainable \u0026hellip; steady stream of students \u0026hellip; good and appropriate stream of research income \u0026hellip;. So financial sustainability is number one\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e. Another interviewee noted: \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;There\u0026rsquo;s no point if we survive on those other three dimensions, but, oh, we are running a big loss. We can\u0026rsquo;t survive\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e. These preferences highlight potential tension with respect to prioritizing various sustainability dimensions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe second tension relates to the pace of change. While some interviewees saw sustainability transformations as fast-moving (6, 20) in the right direction (18, 20) others believed that the pace of change is very slow (3, 11, 15, 17) and a drastic change is needed now (20, 15). Opinions of interviewees ranged from \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;we are on a path that is mapped and moving fast\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e to \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;it\u0026rsquo;s 10 years too late and \u0026hellip; a very soft push instead of meaningful hard drive\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e. The second tension highlights that the preferred pace may differ substantially between different stakeholders, and the most ambitious and passionate stakeholders might end up feeling disappointed and disengaged, particularly in large organisations that tend to move slower: \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;I think that's probably to do with it being such a large organization but for anything to happen, for anything to change, \u0026hellip; it just takes us a long time to make things happen\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe third tension relates to how the transformation process is organized. In this case study, the emphasis was placed on the staff and student engagement and consultation process. While some staff members felt comfortable aligning with and supporting the transformation plans proposed by the central-level leadership, particularly if the direction and reasoning resonated with them (9, 18), others noted that limited consultation with staff and students has led to disengagement as many voices and perspectives were overlooked (4, 12, 15). One interviewee noted that \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;there's lots of questions being asked [by staff and students] and answers kind of just being deflected.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e Another emphasized that meetings don\u0026rsquo;t encourage dialogue: \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;it's a meeting, but it's actually an announcement \u0026hellip;. There is no real conversation or engagement.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e The lack of consultation can make people feel unappreciated, \u0026ldquo;deflated\u0026rdquo; and experience a \u0026ldquo;loss of voice\u0026rdquo;. While consultation processes can be both time-consuming, potentially inhibiting the pace of change, and resource-intensive, the third tension highlights that sufficient consultation is important for employee engagement. However, the views on what counts as sufficient might differ. In 2021, all faculties were asked to submit proposals for sustainability strategy. Yet some felt that their voices had been hardly heard and the final document reflected \u0026ldquo;feel-good intentions\u0026rdquo; rather than any hard commitments. The above examples intent to highlight that while a shared vision of a sustainable university can be a good starting point, tensions emerge once the vision moves to implementation. This section highlighted three such tensions related to priorities, pace, and processes. The next chapter discusses the critical events identified by interviewees in these transformation processes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.2. Critical events in sustainability transformations\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis section provides an overview of the events that were perceived as critical in the university's sustainability transformations by the interviewees, aiming to answer the second research question (RQ2a). The event was considered critical if it was identified as such by at least two interviewees for recent events (within the last five years) and at least one interviewee for events dating back to more than five years to address recall bias. As can be seen from Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e, the critical events have been grouped into two main periods \u0026ndash; 1990s to 2018 (period I, events identified at least once) and 2019 to 2023 (period II, identified at least twice). Moreover, these events were classified as external if they were not initiated within the university and internal if they were. The majority of the critical events occurred within the last five years and were internal events. Nearly all of these internal events were initiated at the central level and affected the university across faculties. The most frequent event category related to new strategies and policies (\u003cem\u003en\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4\u003c/em\u003e), followed by data monitoring initiatives (\u003cem\u003en\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2\u003c/em\u003e) and new educational programs (\u003cem\u003en\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2\u003c/em\u003e). However, as Fig.\u0026nbsp;3 indicates, a couple of the most frequently identified critical events were external events.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhile Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e identifies the sequence of the events and distinguishes between internal and external events, Fig.\u0026nbsp;3 provides an overview of the most frequently selected critical compared to the number of times the event was referenced by staff members. Figure\u0026nbsp;3 provides two numbers: (1) the share of interviewees who identified a certain event as critical (purple bars), (2) the share of interviewees who mentioned the event during the interview (without probing), which includes those who also selected it as critical (grey bars). Both measures are compared to shed light on cases when certain events are not identified as critical but are frequently referenced, comparing their relevance and prevalence amongst the interviewees.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAs can be seen from Fig.\u0026nbsp;3, the critical events selected (purple bars) by the largest number of interviewees were COVID-19 (48%), THE Impact Ranking (19%), the university\u0026rsquo;s travel policy (19%) and its new sustainability strategy released in 2022 (19%). COVID-19 and THE Impact Ranking were both classified as external events while the latter two were considered internal events. In terms of events being mentioned amongst interviewees, the THE Impact ranking was the most frequently mentioned event (86%) followed by COVID-19 (81%), the discussions on travel policy (71%) and the new vice-chancellor (62%). The events most frequently selected as critical, were also more frequently mentioned by the other interviewee, the exception being the appointment of the new vice-chancellor. While frequently mentioned by interviewees, the event was not so often identified as critical. Due to space limitations, only critical events that were mentioned at least twice are displayed on the graph, excluding events from period I\u003ca class=\"FNLink\" href=\"#Fn5\" id=\"#FNLinkFn5\"\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. \u003cspan refid=\"Sec32\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003eAppendix\u003c/span\u003e 3 provides an overview of all the events selected and mentioned by interviewees and reasons why these events were considered critical.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eFigure 3: Critical events (CE) identified at least twice by % of interviewees (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;21).\u003c/em\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e Overall, it appears that the most frequently selected critical events affected the whole university, and often multiple dimensions of the university. For example, the most frequently identified critical event - COVID-19 - was said to have an impact on teaching (e.g., it inspired plans for cross-border educational programs in order to attract international students during COVID-19 and reduce student air travel emissions after COVID-19), research and operations (it set precedent for not flying to conferences but joining more conferences online and arguably provided an opportunity to update the travel policy) and governance (it created financial pressure that pushed university to innovate and promote its status as a sustainable university, partially, in order to attract international students to generate revenues).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eNonetheless, the majority of the events were internal, most - deliberately advocated by the central leadership. The three most frequently mentioned internal events were travel policy (19%), sustainability strategy (19%) and curriculum transformation framework (14%). These events were also frequently referenced by other interviewees (travel policy \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;71%, sustainability strategy \u0026ndash; 48%, curriculum transformation framework \u0026ndash; 48%). Other key events included the change of vice-chancellor (10%, 62%), bicycle infrastructure projects on campus (10%, 52%), the central level strategy called Taumata Teitei with a strong emphasis on sustainability (10% \u0026amp; 33%), net zero carbon plan for the university to reach carbon neutrality by 2030 (10%, 33%) [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR58\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e58\u003c/span\u003e], sustainability symposium (10%, 10%) to discuss the sustainability strategy and the first certified carbon inventory in 2022 (10, 10%). The insights suggest that both external and internal events play an important part in sustainability transformations.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.3. Perceived roles of academic leaders in critical events\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eOne of the key objectives of the article was to identify the roles of academic leaders in sustainability transformations through the lens of critical events. Building on the insights provided by the interviewees, five roles of academic leaders were identified: no role, support, drive, divert, and block. These roles are conceptualized in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e. On the horizontal axis, roles range from passive to active leadership, based on visible behaviours identified by interviewees. On the vertical axis, the roles are arranged from unfavourable to favourable leadership stances. Based on the broader insights from the interviews, it is hypothesized that staff members translate perceived, visible leadership behaviour into a leadership stance. The leadership stance is determined by contextual factors, particularly dynamics of competing priorities and resource \u0026amp; authority constraints. The competing priorities include intrinsic values (4\u0026ndash;6, 9, 11\u0026ndash;15, 17\u0026ndash;21) and extrinsic pressures \u0026amp; opportunities (1, 2, 6\u0026ndash;10, 13, 15, 19, 21), reflecting that most priorities including sustainability don\u0026rsquo;t exist in a vacuum and compete for attention with other priorities (11, 14, 19, 21). It aligns with one of the tensions identified in the triangle of transformation tensions \u0026ndash; priorities. The resource and authority constraints highlight that the stance of academic leaders towards their role in the change process will be influenced by access to resources (e.g., money, time, information) ( 2, 3, 8, 10, 13, 14, 18\u0026ndash;21) and formal authority to influence decisions (e.g., across faculties, in property services) (3, 4, 7, 8, 12, 15\u0026ndash;18). The weights of these factors are likely to differ per context. While the framework aims to be encompassing, given the relatively small sample size of this case study, additional factors might play a role in different contexts.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn essence, the framework asserts that a more active perceived leadership role (e.g., drive, block) is translated into a stronger leadership stance (e.g., favourable, unfavourable). As such, the framework relies on a broader principle in a reversed order - the more people, including leaders, care about a transformation, all contextual factors considered, the more willing they are to take an active role in transformation processes.\u003ca class=\"FNLink\" href=\"#Fn6\" id=\"#FNLinkFn6\"\u003e\u003c/a\u003e It is important to acknowledge that not all aspects of leadership roles can be neatly represented in the framework. Firstly, the framework conceptualises perceived roles of leaders by staff rather than intended roles by leaders, which may differ since the translation process is rarely completely accurate. However, it is likely that the perceived roles have a greater impact on staff behaviour than leaders\u0026rsquo; intended roles, which makes them important to consider in transformation processes. Secondly, this article summarizes the spectrum of perceived roles. However, in practice, the roles of leaders can and often are perceived differently by different staff members, partially due to their individual and subjective experiences with current and past leaders. This was illustrated in one of the critical events - the Sustainability Symposium - where the role was evaluated as largely positive by one interviewee and largely negative by another. Thirdly, while these roles have distinct boundaries in the framework, in practice these boundaries are blurry, generalising approximate zones of these roles. Furthermore, building on the interview insights leaders can occupy multiple roles simultaneously (e.g., for different initiatives). Lastly, while the framework relies on a general assumption that a stronger leadership stance is likely to lead to a more active leadership style, they might choose a less active role if it can provide the desired outcome as more active roles tend to increase both visibility and risks (as explained in the footnote on the previous page).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn the following sections, each role will be discussed, supported by evaluations of interviewees of these roles. It is important to note that, while the primary focus of this article was to investigate the role of formally appointed academic leaders, further analysis highlighted that the role of leaders is best conceptualized when thinking of central leadership (vice-chancellor, deputy vice-chancellor, senior management team), middle-level management (heads of schools and departments, deans, vice-deans) and leadership positions in services departments (e.g., property services, strategic planning, international office). When discussing the role of leaders, the focus is predominately on the central level leadership, which was most frequently addressed by interviewees, unless otherwise specified. The roles will be discussed from the most favourable to least favourable stance, starting with \u0026lsquo;drive\u0026rsquo; and ending with \u0026lsquo;block\u0026rsquo;. It is important to note that events may refer to both current as well as past leadership teams.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.3.1 Drive\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eThe swiftness with which change occurred. \u0026hellip; The university's\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003edrive\u003c/b\u003e \u003cem\u003etowards sustainability preceded [name of a vice-chancellor] appointment as vice-chancellor, but she kind of carried on that\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003edrive\u003c/b\u003e \u003cem\u003eand particularly the Taumata Teitei strategy [the new central level strategy with an emphasis on sustainability] seemed to happen, if I recall\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cb\u003epretty quickly\u003c/b\u003e \u003cem\u003e\u0026hellip; So, I can't recall the consultation process by which that [Taumata Teitei] was forged. I just remember it being released and kind of broadly agreeing with everything that I read and liking it.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFormally appointed academic leaders can be conceptualised as residing within the \u0026ldquo;drive\u0026rdquo; role when their stance is favourable, and their leadership style is active. The \u0026ldquo;drive\u0026rdquo; role may be beneficial to create momentum through a central mandate, providing a clear direction and signalling the importance of a certain change. It connects dispersed efforts and creates synergies while increasing the pace of change. The events categorized under the leadership role \u0026ldquo;drive\u0026rdquo; included the leadership (i) \u0026ldquo;pushing through\u0026rdquo; a new strategic plan Taumata Teitei, prioritizing sustainability as part of that plan, (ii) proposing a \u0026ldquo;curriculum framework transformation\u0026rdquo; programme that would reflect the new values in Taumata Teitei and embrace transdisciplinarity, (iii) showing commitment to Net Zero Carbon strategy (by 2030). When describing the situations, interviewees used words such as \u0026ldquo;drive\u0026rdquo;, \u0026ldquo;push through\u0026rdquo; (21), \u0026ldquo;prioritize\u0026rdquo; (15),\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;commitment\u0026rdquo; (21, 5), \u0026ldquo;central mandate\u0026rdquo; (10) \u0026ldquo;direct initiative\u0026rdquo; (15) but also \u0026ldquo;swift\u0026rdquo;, \u0026ldquo;quick\u0026rdquo;, \u0026ldquo;clear\u0026rdquo; (18). Overall, the events within this category made interviewees feel that there is leadership commitment (21, 5) and buy-in (18), the university is going in the right direction (18, 19, 20) and there has been an ideological shift (21). The \u0026lsquo;drive\u0026rsquo; role predominantly referred to the central-level leadership.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026ldquo;Drive\u0026rdquo; as a leadership role can be utilised to steer the \u0026lsquo;anarchic\u0026rsquo; \u0026lsquo;oil tanker\u0026rsquo; (13, 18) (aka university) in a new direction (18) and coordinate efforts (19). One of the main risks of \u0026lsquo;driving too hard\u0026rsquo;, is that people in the backseats might feel that their efforts are not being recognized and they are left behind (4, 11, 12, 15, 21). For example, not every interviewee felt as enthusiastic about leadership taking a driving role and questioned the authenticity of this role. Some felt that the new strategy was presented by central leadership as \u003cem\u003e''here is a new direction for the university and we, the leadership, are going to steer the university in this direction\"\u003c/em\u003e while in practice the strategy reflected \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003ethe existing interests and focus and energy of the staff who were already doing a lot of this stuff\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e. On the other hand, some interviewees felt that the voice of the leadership could be more prominent publicly, particularly in addressing the climate crisis and taking a more active role in shaping the future of the city, including urban density, transport planning, speed management and green spaces (9, 13). And yet others felt that the commitment appears authentic since increasingly investments and resources are directed towards stated objectives, sustainability appears in key learning objectives and is rewarded through the type of research people do. \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eI think we're starting to see sort of authenticity seep through the system. Um, and it becomes much more integrated and coherent within the institution\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e (18). It is anticipated that under the \u0026lsquo;drive\u0026rsquo; role the transformation priorities are strongly endorsed by leaders, and the pace is fast, but the change process is less inclusive compared to the \u0026lsquo;support\u0026rsquo; role. The \u0026rsquo;driving\u0026rsquo; role takes a strong stance and appears to be more frequently contested. This is why the supporting role of leadership is equally important.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec19\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.3.2 Support\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eI think Covid for the university was empowering \u0026hellip; In many areas the university \u0026hellip;, faced by a challenge, \u0026hellip; did really, really well, particularly in that relational learning space. \u0026hellip; Suddenly there were \u003cb\u003emore resources\u003c/b\u003e, laptops, etcetera being \u003cb\u003emade available\u003c/b\u003e for disadvantaged students. So that was fantastic. \u0026hellip; Sustainability is about the environment - Three E's - economy and equity. And I think equity, that's the big one where the university \u003cb\u003ereally stepped up\u003c/b\u003e its game.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFormally appointed academic leaders can be conceptualised as residing within the \u0026ldquo;support\u0026rdquo; role when their stance is leaning towards favourable, and their leadership style is in the middle range on the passive-active axis. The events placed under the support category included leadership support to students during COVID-19, providing research grants and investments for sustainability initiatives (9,18), recognizing employee\u0026rsquo;s time commitment to sustainability work (10), supporting initiatives that promote sustainability ranking (1, 6, 15, 21), encouraging staff to embed sustainability in the curriculum (3, 18), recognizing staff\u0026rsquo;s vision in strategic documents and development plans (9, 15). These events made interviewees feel that their work is being recognized (10), supported (9,18), and ideas are being heard (9). The words used by interviewees included support (7, 18, 21), recognize (10), approve, encourage, endorse, (18), foster (18, 9), and embrace (9). Here support referred to both central leadership and heads of schools and departments.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSupport as a leadership role can be utilised for pulling together existing expertise and wisdom (9, 17, 20, 21), collective sense-making (9, 12), buy-in from staff for change efforts (18), and augmenting existing efforts (19, 20). The role can vary from more passive and reactive actions such as granting approval (5, 7) for a bottom-up initiative to seeking advice on major reforms and providing time and resources for such activities (20). The support role is less likely to experience much resistance from employees but might also be less effective in gaining momentum compared to the driving role. It is anticipated that under the \u0026lsquo;support\u0026rsquo; role the transformation priorities are endorsed by leaders, the pace is medium, and the change process is relatively inclusive and pays attention to the input of employees. The next role \u0026ndash; no role \u0026ndash; may sound a bit lazy but comes with some advantages.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec20\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.3.1 No role\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIt's been quite a slow burn rather than individual events, but probably one of the most critical things \u0026hellip; would have been \u0026hellip; back in the 90s. \u0026hellip; There was an \u003cb\u003eappointment made in property services\u003c/b\u003e of somebody \u0026hellip; very keen on reduction of energy usage and water usage \u0026hellip;. [This person] started accumulating data on our usage and \u003cb\u003echallenged us\u003c/b\u003e \u0026hellip; of the way in which we used our resources \u0026hellip;. So \u0026hellip; you had an email each month which showed what your energy usage was as a head of school and therefore just planted a seed in mind that you need to be worried about these things.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFormally appointed academic leaders are conceptualised as residing within \u0026ldquo;no role\u0026rdquo; in the change process when their stance is neutral (neither favourable nor unfavourable) and their leadership style is passive. At the UoA several critical events were mentioned where formally appointed academic leaders played no or minimal role (1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 12). These events were frequently led by a few role models or services departments (e.g., property services, planning). In practice, most of the critical events identified by interviewees in this category (mentioned at least twice) were led by services departments and included carbon inventory (property services), submissions to rankings (property services and planning department), sustainability symposium (planning department) (1, 6, 8). The critical events led by role-models were often recalled only once although not always by role-models themselves. The words used by interviewees to describe the leadership role ranged from interviewees not being able to recall the leadership\u0026rsquo;s role or not knowing enough about it (3, 5, 8) to leadership having no formal role or say (1, 7), having no time (2), neither supporting nor being a roadblock (5), but possibly having the event \u0026ldquo;on the radar\u0026rdquo; (1). As such, without any role, academic leaders were not reported as having any impact. Nonetheless, most likely the central-level leadership provided approvals for initiatives carried out by services departments, but the process was not highly visible and, therefore, was not recalled by interviewees. Hence, in practice, the leadership might have \u003cem\u003e\u0026lsquo;supported\u0026rsquo;\u003c/em\u003e the initiative but was perceived as having \u003cem\u003e\u0026lsquo;no role\u0026rsquo;\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAcademic leaders can embrace this role when their teams consist of highly motivated, capable and self-driven people. This position can be conducive to change as no roadblocks are put in place. Nonetheless, several interviewees reported structural obstacles when academic leaders were conceptualised as having \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;no role\u0026rdquo;.\u003c/em\u003e One obstacle was related to middle-level academic leaders (heads of schools, deans) having no formal say in endorsing activities linked to operations that might be conducive to research and teaching such as having living lab roof gardens (e.g., for research) or community gardens at the faculty level (7, 12). The second structural issue was related to the university being highly centralized (4, 15, 17), leading to fewer opportunities and legitimacy to undertake sustainability initiatives at the faculty level (15). On the flipside, another interviewee expressed a view that one can lead from where they are rather than expecting directives from the central leadership (6). It is anticipated that under the \u0026lsquo;no role\u0026rsquo; the transformation priorities for leaders have either been long established and institutionalized or have not yet emerged or are just emerging. Hence, the pace of change is non-existent or slow and there is no formal change process in place.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec21\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.3.4 Divert\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYou know, it's not just academic travel, it's the students we depend on. And we knew from a long time ago that sort of 80%, 90%, perhaps, of the university's carbon budget comes from travel. So, of course, [there are] things like waste and buildings and catering which contribute, but travel is the major, the major contributor. \u0026hellip; There's lots of us talking about it and a number of rather interesting options began to be explored. But I get a sense that it's just \u003cb\u003erun into the sand\u003c/b\u003e. I \u003cb\u003edon't know\u003c/b\u003e anything that has really happened after then. \u0026hellip; There's \u003cb\u003enot much sign of\u003c/b\u003e any significant change.\u0026rdquo; \u003ca class=\"FNLink\" href=\"#Fn7\" id=\"#FNLinkFn7\"\u003e\u003c/a\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFormally appointed academic leaders can be conceptualised as residing within the \u0026ldquo;divert\u0026rdquo; role when their stance is leaning towards unfavourable, and their leadership style is in the middle range on the passive-active axis. The \u0026lsquo;divert\u0026rsquo; role can delay change efforts and scatter focus by taking attention away from the initiative or redirecting it somewhere else. It often serves as an intermediary role before moving into another role (e.g., support or block). The critical events under this role included the travel policy consultation process being perceived as\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;run(ning) into sand\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e (13), the request for a bicycle shed going on \u0026ldquo;for ages\u0026rdquo; before being rejected in the 1990s (16), \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;not know[ing] whether the university will agree\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e(7) to approve research entailing outdoor experiments in a designated place. Other events, not identified as critical, included a lack of response regarding the new wellness building being built over bicycle parking places (21) and difficulty initiating mobility surveys (3).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhen describing the situations, interviewees used words emphasizing ambiguity and delays in the change processes. For example, ambiguity appears in the following quotes: \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;despite pointing this out repeatedly, there\u0026rsquo;s been no real movement on addressing it [loss of bicycle parking]\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e(21\u003cem\u003e), \u0026ldquo;not much sign of any significant change [regarding travel policy]\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e(13), \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;[policy] not very clear [if/how] we\u0026rsquo;re going to be sustainable\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e(15), \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;there's lots of questions being asked and answers kind of just being deflected\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e(12). Several quotes emphasize delays: \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;the speed of progress is very slow (3)\u0026rdquo;, \u0026ldquo;So much time to get approval \u0026hellip; all the time we do not know whether the university will agree, will not agree, agree, will not agree, agree, will not agree, agree \u0026hellip;\u0026rdquo; (7).\u003c/em\u003e These quotes suggest a prolonged state of waiting and some level of confusion concerning the expected outcome, occasionally feeling as if one is in a state of limbo.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDivert as a leadership role can effectively stall efforts for change by leaving people in a state of unknown, often long enough to lose interest and motivation or become sceptical (11, 12, 15, 16, 17, 21). Moreover, many change processes tend to be delayed naturally in highly bureaucratic organisations such as universities, requiring numerous approvals and having many committees with limited decision-making power (3, 7, 16). This set-up makes it harder to identify a \u0026ldquo;divert\u0026rdquo; role. This role appears to be effective also because it\u0026rsquo;s hard to pin down whether it\u0026rsquo;s utilised deliberately or unintentionally, and therefore it minimizes the potential for active resistance. For leadership, however, this role is a safer option than the more active \u0026lsquo;block\u0026rsquo; role. The \u0026lsquo;divert\u0026rsquo; role in these examples happened more often when interviewees tried to engage with central-level leadership or property services rather than their own departments and schools, where communication flows were more direct. It is anticipated that under the \u0026lsquo;divert\u0026rsquo; role the transformation priorities are known and not actively disputed by leaders, but the pace of change is slowed down, and the change process is ambiguous, confusing and siloed.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec22\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.3.5 Block\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003ePreviously, leadership kind of used it [flying] against us \u0026hellip; On the fossil fuel divestment question, one of the responses from leadership \u0026hellip; was, um, it's hypocritical of you guys to ask us to divest when you fly so much. \u0026hellip; So that didn't seem very productive. Also, that was \u0026hellip; using it against academics but not actually suggesting or proposing ways of dealing with it.\u0026rsquo;\u003c/em\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFormally appointed academic leaders can be conceptualised as residing within the \u0026ldquo;block\u0026rdquo; role when their stance is unfavourable and their leadership style active. Block as a leadership role is often used to halt new initiatives and defend the status quo, particularly when clear demands have emerged from employees or external stakeholders. (8, 16, 21. The events placed under the leadership role \u0026ldquo;block\u0026rdquo;, included leadership\u0026rsquo;s blocking proposals for reduced speeds on the highway (8), fossil fuel divestments (21), reduced air travel at the university proposed under previous leadership (21) and rejecting proposals for bicycle sheds in 90ies (16). When describing the situations, the interviewees used expressions such as being a \u0026ldquo;roadblock\u0026rdquo; (21), \u0026ldquo;defensive\u0026rdquo; (4), \u0026ldquo;resistance\u0026rdquo;, \u0026ldquo;pushback\u0026rdquo;, and \u0026ldquo;reluctance\u0026rdquo; (20). The events led to interviewees feeling emotions ranging from slight disappointment to feeling a \u0026ldquo;loss of voice\u0026rdquo;, perceiving management as being \u0026ldquo;shortsighted\u0026rdquo;, having an impression that it\u0026rsquo;s not possible to make any real change at the university level (16), and feeling cynical (4, 11, 17, 21). Many of these events happened under previous leadership, sometimes even decades ago, and currently bicycle sheds have been installed, the university divested from fossil fuels in 2019, and the travel policy was updated in late 2023 under the new leadership. It was noted that with the new leadership, there has been an \u0026ldquo;ideological shift\u0026rdquo;, and more resources were being allocated to sustainability-related topics. One respondent noted that these days rather than actual \u0026ldquo;opposition\u0026rdquo;, it\u0026rsquo;s more of a \u0026ldquo;reluctance to change\u0026rdquo;, related to financial considerations and workload while several other interviewees emphasized priority for other causes (11, 13). However, another respondent noted that the new leadership is sometimes too focused on \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;making everything look beautiful, not admitting any faults \u0026hellip;\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e and becomes quite \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;defensive\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e when criticised.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBlock as a leadership role entails active confrontation, and thus it can be a high-risk and low-reward position for the leadership. However, as insights from the interviews have shown, it allows for protecting practical interests and other strategic priorities such as flying to conferences and recruiting international students \u0026ndash; events that have been contested by some interviewees but supported by others (1, 2, 8, 7, 10, 11, 21). At times, blocking can be a positive position, for example, when standing up for vulnerable and minority groups, blocking initiatives that can further inhibit their opportunities. For example, rather than forbidding everyone to fly, the new travel policy recognised that early-stage scholars are in greater need to fly to conferences in order to establish their academic networks [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR59\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e59\u003c/span\u003e] (6, 18, 21). It is anticipated that under the \u0026lsquo;block\u0026rsquo; role the transformation priorities are known but actively rejected by leaders, the pace of change is halted (at least temporarily) and rather than engaging in the consultation process with employees the requests for change are ignored.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4. Discussion","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec24\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.1. Is there an optimal role for academic leaders?\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUniversities are like oil tankers. \u0026hellip; Large institutions that are complex, \u0026hellip; slow-moving and hard to change rapidly. \u0026hellip; So it takes \u0026hellip; determined leadership from the top \u0026hellip; and everybody else to buy into that, to shift things.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhile the quote above points to the value of a \u0026lsquo;determined leadership\u0026rsquo;, resembling the \u0026lsquo;drive\u0026rsquo; role, the insights from interviews suggest that there is no one optimal leadership role but rather different leadership roles address diverse stakeholder needs and transformation tensions. For example, the \u0026lsquo;drive\u0026rsquo; role can set clear priorities and fast pace, but the consultation process might not be sufficient, creating resistance and discontent. For example, it can be helpful for creating a central mandate for transdisciplinary structures or connecting faculty staff with services staff, which may not be possible at the faculty level due to authority constraints. On the other hand, the \u0026lsquo;support\u0026rsquo; role can be effective in promoting the co-creating of \u003cem\u003epriorities\u003c/em\u003e and an inclusive consultation \u003cem\u003eprocess\u003c/em\u003e but at the expense of \u003cem\u003ethe pace\u003c/em\u003e of change. Nonetheless, the inclusive consultation \u003cem\u003eprocess\u003c/em\u003e might lead to more buy-in and less resistance, potentially accelerating the \u003cem\u003epace\u003c/em\u003e of change at later stages of transformation. \u0026lsquo;No role\u0026rsquo; can be effective when academic leaders do not have a strong stance on the topic yet (no clear \u003cem\u003epriorities\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eprocess\u003c/em\u003e and slow \u003cem\u003epace\u003c/em\u003e) but are also not against it, creating a space for bottom-up initiatives and motivated role-models to emerge. However, this can become problematic if the topic is perceived as important by staff and students, but academic leaders are not engaging with it.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMore unfavourable leadership stances are \u0026lsquo;divert\u0026rsquo; and \u0026lsquo;block\u0026rsquo;. However, also these roles can be helpful in the right context. The \u0026lsquo;divert\u0026rsquo; role can be helpful when various stakeholder groups (amongst leadership, staff, students) have conflicting views on a topic and academic leaders can deescalate the conflict by delaying the pace of change, having vague and ambiguous consultation process and subsequent decision making and not being clear on their priorities. Unsurprisingly, this role, while helpful for deescalating conflicts, can be very frustrating and demotivating for various stakeholders, reducing their engagement and leading to \u0026lsquo;loss of voice\u0026rsquo;, minimizing their sense of agency. Lastly, the \u0026rsquo;block\u0026rsquo; role can be beneficial to signal clear priorities on transformation, for example, by blocking fossil fuel divestments. On the other hand, it can also block proposed speed limits on a highway, signalling very clearly that sustainability is not a priority, halting \u003cem\u003ethe pace\u003c/em\u003e of change and the \u003cem\u003eprocess\u003c/em\u003e of consultation. Therefore, utilising a mix of leadership roles may be beneficial to address diverse stakeholder needs and transformation tensions. In addition, it\u0026rsquo;s important to note that the more active leadership roles (e.g., drive, block) can lead to more recognition for leaders but also increase the risk of active resistance, which leaders often like to avoid.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec25\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.2. How is the role of academic leaders linked to university governance?\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe staff\u0026rsquo;s preference for leadership roles might be partially influenced by their familiarity with and preference for different governance styles at the university, particularly contrasting collegial and democratic decision-making with managerial style. Historically, universities have been largely led through collegial and democratic decision-making, emphasizing consensus building and majority voting, respectively. However, in the late 20th century a shift towards a more managerial style emerged [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e60\u003c/span\u003e]. In New Zealand, a shift towards managerialism in higher education took off in the early 90ies with reforms including the massification of education, competitive funding schemes and more power to the vice-chancellor. Consequently, universities became more competitive, placing emphasis on recruiting international students and participating in global league tables while also focusing on cost savings [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e61\u003c/span\u003e]. Similar sentiment surfaced in some of the interviews, where the university was criticised for becoming too corporate (4, 16, 17) and placing too much emphasis on excelling in international rankings and recruiting international students (11, 13).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhile collegial and democratic governance views members of academia as active participants in decision-making, managerial leadership emphasizes efficiency and strategic direction, concentrating the decision-making power in the hands of small leadership teams (e.g., deans and rectors). Consequently, the remaining staff is seen more as implementers of decisions rather than decision-making bodies [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e60\u003c/span\u003e]. Furthermore, it\u0026rsquo;s been argued that managerialism never replaced other governance styles but was rather added as an additional layer to already well-established governance styles [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e60\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e61\u003c/span\u003e]. As such, some interviewees might be more aligned with democratic and collegial decision-making while others see benefits in managerial decision-making.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhen connecting the governance styles with leadership roles, the managerial, top-down governance is more typical of the \u0026lsquo;driving\u0026rsquo; role while collegial and democratic governance aligns better with the \u0026lsquo;support\u0026rsquo; role. As the quote at the top of this chapter illustrates, there is an appetite for the \u0026lsquo;driving\u0026rsquo; role (moving the large, complex oil tanker in a new direction) and numerous interviewees seem to appreciate the increased pace and centralisation of change (6, 8, 10, 18, 19) and some feel that the pace should be increased (3, 15, 20). Others emphasize the need for a more supportive style that emphasizes further consultation and engagement with academic staff (4,11, 12, 13,16,17,21). Interestingly, having these two styles communicated transparently might also help to address the three transformation tensions \u0026ndash; priorities, pace and process. Under managerial style, priorities, pace and process are usually determined by the senior leaders. Under a collegial or democratic style, priorities are determined collectively, the process emphasizes consultation, and the pace often depends on the consultation process.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eNonetheless, irrespective of the interviewees\u0026rsquo; preference for a more managerial and more supportive leadership role, some consistent expectations with respect to leadership roles emerged. These expectations predominantly refer to \u0026lsquo;drive\u0026rsquo; and \u0026lsquo;support\u0026rsquo; roles.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec26\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.3. Leadership expectations\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eDuring the interviews, it became clear that there is no optimal leadership role. Sometimes different interviewees would regard the role of leadership as largely positive or negative for the same event. However, the reasoning for why something was seen as largely positive or negative was consistent, where leadership behaviour signalled their priority for sustainability transformation. Three expectations from leadership were identified and are described below.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e1. “Walk the talk.”\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInterviewees generally seemed to agree with the intentions and vision expressed in key strategic documents but were hesitant about the implementation (11, 13, 21). It was emphasized that these documents reflect \u0026lsquo;feel-good intentions\u0026rsquo; rather than committing to real actions (17) and it is important to put people in charge and allocate resources (11, 15, 16, 17, 21). Multiple interviewees felt that sustainability is predominantly prioritized to encourage cost-cutting rather than being a genuine institutional priority (e.g., cost-cutting from reduced flying, energy efficiency savings) (7, 16, 17). A commitment in the form of long-term investments in sustainability that go beyond marketable investments was given as examples to help send the opposite message. When leadership invested in buildings or curriculum development, it was seen as sending a strong signal of their commitment. Recognising this expectation can help to address the \u003cem\u003epriority\u003c/em\u003e tension as leaders signal their stance through financial commitment.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e2. Don’t leave the low-hanging fruits hanging.\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSeveral interviewees mentioned seemingly smaller events that appeared to bring many benefits to various stakeholders on campus at relatively low cost but were not taken up. Such events as not installing a bicycle shed, not paying enough attention to water conservation, not addressing recycling on campus, not permitting a food garden, putting obstacles in place for a roof garden, not switching lights off in corridors, and not making buildings sustainable (4, 5, 7, 12, 16, 17) can accumulate in a profound effect and signal that real sustainability culture is not present (4, 11, 12, 15) \u0026ndash; not a real \u003cem\u003epriority.\u003c/em\u003e Moreover, some interviewees are advising governments and international organizations on how to put these measures in place and when they are rarely consulted at the university level and small-scale initiatives are rejected, it can create a strong dissonance (7, 11, 13).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e3. Don’t announce things from an ivory tower.\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIt was noted that good leaders listen to their people rather than announce changes from the top. When management does not properly listen to its staff and tries to portray things as only good, the staff is likely to lose some level of credibility and become sceptical. Several interviewees referred to themselves as being sceptical or cynical regarding the top-down leadership approach (4, 11, 17, 21) while collective sense-making was emphasized as conducive to creating engagement and facilitating change (1, 9). A collective sense making allows leadership to signal that the \u003cem\u003epriorities\u003c/em\u003e of their staff are taken seriously.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIt is important to recognise that academic leadership, particularly central leadership has to balance many competing priorities of various stakeholders under resource constraints. Moreover, the central leadership is held accountable for the financial sustainability of the university, ensuring that the university can properly function and pay out salaries to its staff (4, 10, 19). As such, it may not be possible to solve all tensions yet keeping in mind the above expectations may help to better navigate some of the tensions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec30\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.4. Limitations and future research\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis research has methodological and practical limitations that need to be acknowledged to interpret the findings. The research used a case study approach employing CIT methodology with semi-structured interviews. The case study approach is often criticised for a lack of generalisability [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e38\u003c/span\u003e] due to the specific context of the case study. Indeed, the case study took place in Aotearoa New Zealand, and the university was selected as a strategic case study due to its leading position in THE Impact Ranking in recent years (2019\u0026ndash;2023). Hence, the cultural background, geographical location and leading position might have impacted the findings. At the same time, the types of critical events, transformation tensions and leadership roles identified appeared to be sufficiently broad to may be of relevance to other higher education institutions undergoing sustainability transformations. Further research might explore to what extent similar transformation tensions, critical events and leadership roles emerge in other universities, whether new nuances emerge and how the context of the institution might affect these findings. Hence, case studies of other universities, whether they are leading in the sustainability rankings or not, may help to corroborate the findings.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFurthermore, CIT methodology has been widely used in various research fields over the last 70 years and is particularly helpful in identifying events that people consider most critical [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e48\u003c/span\u003e]. In this research, it was used as a lens to identify the roles of academic leaders in critical events without directly inquiring about these leaders. Such an approach allowed capturing events where academic leaders had limited roles or even obstructed the change process. However, the transformation process consists of more than critical events. For example, less frequently mentioned events such as monitoring of carbon emissions may enable more frequently mentioned critical events such as Travel Policy or Net Zero Strategy. In addition, as one of the interviewees noted, change processes can be a \u0026lsquo;slow burn\u0026rsquo;, sometimes making it hard to point out specific events. If the goal is to understand how the events (in a broad sense) build on top of each other over time, a narrative analysis linked to a timeline might be a more appropriate method. Secondly, in CIT recall bias might be present due to interviewees better remembering more recent events [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e62\u003c/span\u003e]. Hence, in this research, an event was considered critical if it was identified as such by at least two interviewees in the last five years, and at least one interviewee for events further back. In addition, Butterfield et al. advocate for nine credibility checks when using CIT, particularly helpful for projects that aim to identify categories of critical events and have resources available for multiple researchers to check these categories and conduct a follow-up interview Butterfield, Borgen [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e48\u003c/span\u003e]. While it was out of scope for this research article due to the focus on leadership roles and practical limitations, it may be of value for future researchers with larger research teams and more time allocated to research.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eLastly, due to the limited time for the case study, 21 interviews were conducted. Future research might expand the current sample size (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;21) and engage with other stakeholder groups such as students. Moreover, it is important to note that interviewees might not feel comfortable discussing sensitive topics such as criticising the role of leadership, particularly on an audio [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e63\u003c/span\u003e] or a video recorder, potentially affecting the reliability of responses. To mitigate this issue, interviewees were given options to withdraw from the research at any time, participate in the interview without audio or video recording and review and request changes for the draft version of the article. In this research, only the main research questions were shared with interviewees prior to the interview but in future, it might be beneficial to share the complete interview protocol to help interviewees reflect on what information they feel comfortable sharing.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"5. Conclusions","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis research aimed to understand staff\u0026rsquo;s perceptions of the following research questions: what does a sustainable university mean to its staff (RQ1a); what (if any) tensions emerge from differences in the perceived meaning of a sustainable university (RQ1b); which events are perceived as critical in the university\u0026rsquo;s sustainability transformation process (RQ2a), and what are the perceived roles of academic leaders in these critical events (RQ2b).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSustainable university was conceptualized as a multi-dimensional, comprehensive, and inclusive concept at individual, organisational and societal levels. While such understanding can help establish a shared vision and engage diverse stakeholders required for transformational change, it can also lead to mission overload and several tensions in the change process. Triangle of transformation tensions identified three such tensions \u0026ndash; \u003cem\u003epriorities, pace\u003c/em\u003e, and \u003cem\u003eprocess\u003c/em\u003e:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cul\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003ePriority tension\u003c/em\u003e emerges when stakeholders largely agree on the importance of various sustainability dimensions but not on how they should be prioritized, leaving some staff feeling \u0026lsquo;pushe[ed] out\u0026rsquo;, experiencing \u0026lsquo;loss of voice\u0026rsquo; and reckoning that \u0026lsquo;leadership lacks vision\u0026rsquo;.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003ePace tension\u003c/em\u003e arises from differences in the desired speed of transformation ranging from staff feeling that they \u0026lsquo;are on a path \u0026hellip; and moving fast\u0026rsquo; to \u0026lsquo;it\u0026rsquo;s 10 years too late and \u0026hellip; a very soft push\u0026rsquo;. This tension risks disengaging the more passionate staff, potentially jeopardizing the overall momentum of change.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eProcess tension\u003c/em\u003e surfaces when staff has a different preference for the consultation process required for transformation. While some feel comfortable aligning with the central-level visions that resonate with them, others note \u0026lsquo;a lack of dialogue\u0026rsquo; as consultation is being replaced with \u0026lsquo;announcements\u0026rsquo; disguised as a dialogue. Also, this tension can lead to \u0026lsquo;loss of voice\u0026rsquo;, feeling not appreciated and \u0026lsquo;deflated\u0026rsquo;.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/ul\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBeing aware of these tensions and providing safe spaces to discuss them while anticipating a plurality of views can help to ease these transformation tensions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFurthermore, the research explored events that were perceived as critical by staff in the university\u0026rsquo;s sustainability transformation process. The most commonly mentioned critical events were those that affected the whole university and several dimensions of sustainability such as COVID-19 (environment \u0026ndash; reduction in flying, equity - providing support to vulnerable students, economic \u0026ndash; loss of income for the university), THE Impact ranking (SDG dimensions in teaching, research, outreach), sustainability strategy, and widely disputed travel policy. While the two most frequently mentioned events were classified as external (not initiated by the university), the majority of critical events were internal events (initiated by the university). Most of the critical events identified occurred within the last five years, while a few events took place in the 1990s. Some of this can be attributed to recall bias. To address this, more recent events had to be identified as critical by at least two respondents while events taking place more than five years ago had to be identified by only one interviewee. The insights (see Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan refid=\"Sec32\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003eAppendix\u003c/span\u003e 1) suggest that the sequence of events is important to consider as critical events build on top of each other cumulatively. Overall, it appears that the ability to respond to external events as well as large-scale, centralized internal events (e.g., sustainability strategy, and travel policy) are important to the sustainability transformation process. In addition, the change in leadership, with new leadership emphasizing sustainability as a key priority might have been important for mobilizing resources for these critical events.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eLastly, the research aimed to understand the perceived roles of leaders in critical events. These roles were conceptualised along two axes into five main categories: \u003cem\u003e\u0026lsquo;no role\u0026rsquo;, \u0026lsquo;support\u0026rsquo;, \u0026lsquo;drive\u0026rsquo;, \u0026lsquo;divert\u0026rsquo;, and \u0026lsquo;block\u0026rsquo;\u003c/em\u003e. The vertical axis represented the perceived \u003cem\u003eleadership stance\u003c/em\u003e, ranging from favourable to unfavourable, affected by contextual factors - competing priorities (intrinsic values, extrinsic pressures and opportunities) as well as resource and authority constraints. The horizontal axis represents perceived active versus passive \u003cem\u003eleadership roles\u003c/em\u003e. The underlying assumption of the proposed framework suggests that staff members perceive leadership\u0026rsquo;s behaviour and translate it into a leadership stance. A more active perceived leadership role (e.g., drive, block) acts as a signal for a stronger leadership stance (e.g., favourable, unfavourable) on a change topic. The framework relies on a broader principle in a reversed order, namely the more people, including leaders, care about a transformation, contextual factors considered, the more willing they are to take an active role in transformation processes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHowever, no one leadership role was found to be optimal as different roles address diverse stakeholder needs and transformation tensions. For example, the \u0026lsquo;drive\u0026rsquo; role can increase the \u003cem\u003epace\u003c/em\u003e of change but often at the expense of the consultative \u003cem\u003eprocess\u003c/em\u003e while the \u0026lsquo;support\u0026rsquo; role might be particularly beneficial for co-defining \u003cem\u003epriorities\u003c/em\u003e through a consultative \u003cem\u003eprocess\u003c/em\u003e. Also \u0026lsquo;block\u0026rsquo; role can be beneficial when an active stance is required to indicate \u003cem\u003epriorities\u003c/em\u003e on a controversial topic such as fossil fuel divestment. Moreover, \u0026lsquo;no role\u0026rsquo; can create space for staff to explore emerging topics without too many constraints. Possibly, the most controversial role is \u0026lsquo;divert\u0026rsquo;. While it can be beneficial for easing tensions between stakeholders with conflicting interests by de-escalating the \u003cem\u003epace\u003c/em\u003e of change, it can also demotivate and disengage staff often most passionate about the transformation. Hence, using a mix of leadership roles to facilitate diverse stakeholders' needs and transformation tensions is likely to be beneficial for a more inclusive and engaged transformation process.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eEthics approval and consent\u003c/b\u003e: The ethics approval was granted by the University of Twente (request nr. 231055) utilising a template following the GDPR rules. All participants completed a consent form prior to the interviews.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003ch2\u003eCompeting interests:\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe authors declare no competing interest.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eFunding:\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eA small internal university research grant intended to advance PhD research was provided by the University of Twente.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eAuthor contributions: Conceptualization \u0026ndash; all three authors; Methodology \u0026ndash; A.V.; Data Collection \u0026ndash; A.V.; Formal Analysis \u0026ndash; A.V.; Supervision: \u0026ndash; B.vdM., D.C.; Writing \u0026ndash; Original Draft - A.V.; Writing \u0026ndash; review \u0026amp; editing \u0026ndash; all three authors.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgement\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eWe thank all the interviewees at the University of Auckland for finding time to share valuable insights for this study. It was a great pleasure talking to you.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eData availability:\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe paper collected data through semi-structured interviews. In alignment with ethics approval, the data is not publicly available to protect the identities of interviewees.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJongbloed B, Veidemane A. \u003cem\u003eEmpowering Deans for Sustainability Transformations at Academic Departments: Obstacles, Strategies and Roadmaps\u003c/em\u003e, in \u003cem\u003eSustainability in Higher Education: Strategies, Performance and Future Challenges\u003c/em\u003e. Springer; 2024. pp. 117\u0026ndash;40.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLeal Filho W, et al. Sustainability leadership in higher education institutions: An overview of challenges. Sustainability. 2020;12(9):3761.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAzizi L. Which leadership processes encourage sustainable transitions within universities? Int J Sustain High Educ. 2023;24(1):46\u0026ndash;68.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDyer G, Dyer M. Strategic leadership for sustainability by higher education: the American College \u0026amp; University Presidents' Climate Commitment. J Clean Prod. 2017;140:111\u0026ndash;6.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJongbloed B, Veidemane A, Bayezid A. \u003cem\u003eEmbedding sustainability in academia: Deans as change makers. Survey of Deans.\u003c/em\u003e 2021.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTimes Higher Education. Impact Rankings 2023. 2024 [cited 2024 June 3]; \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.timeshighereducation.com/impactrankings\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.timeshighereducation.com/impactrankings\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eQS Top Universities. QS World University Rankings: Sustainability 2024. 2023 December 5, 2023 [cited 2024 March 12]; \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.topuniversities.com/sustainability-rankings\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.topuniversities.com/sustainability-rankings\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUI Green Metric World University Rankings. Overall Rankings 2023. 2024; \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://greenmetric.ui.ac.id/rankings/overall-rankings-2023\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://greenmetric.ui.ac.id/rankings/overall-rankings-2023\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLeal Filho W et al. Sustainability Leadership in Higher Education Institutions: An Overview of Challenges. SUSTAINABILITY, 2020. 12(9).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBlanco-Portela N et al. Sustainability Leaders' Perceptions on the Drivers for and the Barriers to the Integration of Sustainability in Latin American Higher Education Institutions. SUSTAINABILITY, 2018. 10(8).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUniversity of Auckland. \u003cem\u003eAnnual Report 2022: Improving health and well-being for all\u003c/em\u003e. 2022.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUniversity of Auckland. \u003cem\u003eAnnual Report 2021: Becoming Waipapa Taumata Rau\u003c/em\u003e. 2021.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKuhlman T, Farrington J. What is sustainability? Sustain. 2010;2(11):3436\u0026ndash;48.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWiersum KF. 200 years of sustainability in forestry: lessons from history. Environ Manage. 1995;19:321\u0026ndash;9.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWilderer PA. Sustainable water resource management: the science behind the scene. Sustain Sci. 2007;2(1):1\u0026ndash;4.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBrundtland GH et al. \u003cem\u003eOur common future\u003c/em\u003e. 1987: New York.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFabietti G, Giovannoni E. \u003cem\u003eWhat is Sustainability? A Review of the Concept and its Applications.\u003c/em\u003e Integrated Reporting, DOI, 2014. 10: pp. 978-3.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eStrange T, Bayley A. \u003cem\u003eSustainable development: Linking economy.\u003c/em\u003e Society, environment, 2008. 141.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRuggerio CA. Sustainability and sustainable development: A review of principles and definitions. Sci Total Environ. 2021;786:147481.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOlawumi TO, Chan DW. A scientometric review of global research on sustainability and sustainable development. J Clean Prod. 2018;183:231\u0026ndash;50.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eArmin Razmjoo A, Sumper A, Davarpanah A. Energy sustainability analysis based on SDGs for developing countries. Energy Sour Part A Recover Utilization Environ Eff. 2020;42(9):1041\u0026ndash;56.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePaoli AD, Addeo F. Assessing SDGs: A methodology to measure sustainability. Athens J Social Sci. 2019;6(3):229\u0026ndash;50.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSmith MS, et al. Advancing sustainability science for the SDGs. Sustain Sci. 2018;13:1483\u0026ndash;7.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBarbier EB, Burgess JC. The Sustainable Development Goals and the systems approach to sustainability. Economics. 2017;11(1):20170028.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCampagnolo L et al. \u003cem\u003eAssessing SDGs: a new methodology to measure sustainability.\u003c/em\u003e 2016.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePater LR, Cristea SL. Systemic definitions of sustainability, durability and longevity. Procedia-Social Behav Sci. 2016;221:362\u0026ndash;71.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBecker C. Sustainability and longevity: Two sides of the same quality. mental. 2014;20:21\u0026ndash;21.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGiovannoni E, Fabietti G. \u003cem\u003eWhat is sustainability? A review of the concept and its applications.\u003c/em\u003e Integrated reporting: Concepts and cases that redefine corporate accountability, 2013: pp. 21\u0026ndash;40.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFuller RJ. Beyond clich\u0026eacute;\u0026ndash;reclaiming the concept of sustainability. Australian J Environ Educ. 2010;26:7\u0026ndash;18.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSheehy B, Farneti F. Corporate Social Responsibility, Sustainability, Sustainable Development and Corporate Sustainability: What Is the Difference, and Does It Matter? Sustainability. 2021;13(11):5965.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLevy A. Second-order planned change: Definition and conceptualization. Organ Dyn. 1986;15(1):5\u0026ndash;23.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGass R. \u003cem\u003eWhat is transformational change.\u003c/em\u003e Framing deep change: essays on transformative social change. Center for Transformative Change, Berkeley, California, USA, 2010: pp. 12\u0026ndash;14.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDee JR, Leišytė L, van der Meulen BJ. \u003cem\u003eConceptualizing higher education transformation: introduction to the Research Handbook on the Transformation of Higher Education\u003c/em\u003e, in \u003cem\u003eResearch Handbook on the Transformation of Higher Education\u003c/em\u003e. Edward Elgar Publishing; 2023. pp. 2\u0026ndash;22.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFarrell TS. Critical incident analysis through narrative reflective practice: A case study. Iran J Lang Teach Res. 2013;1(1):79\u0026ndash;89.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBrookfield SD. The Skillful Instructor. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 1990.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTripp D. Critical incidents in teaching (classic edition): Developing professional judgement. 1st ed. Routledge; 2011.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWinter J, et al. The university as a site for transformation around sustainability. Int J Innov Sustainable Dev. 2015;9(3\u0026ndash;4):303\u0026ndash;20.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGerring J. \u003cem\u003eCase selection for case-study analysis: Qualitative and quantitative techniques.\u003c/em\u003e 2008.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGerring J. Case study research: Principles and practices. Cambridge University Press; 2006.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFlyvbjerg B. Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inq. 2006;12(2):219\u0026ndash;45.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRagazzi M, Ghidini F. Environmental sustainability of universities: critical analysis of a green ranking. Energy Procedia. 2017;119:111\u0026ndash;20.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLauder A, et al. Critical review of a global campus sustainability ranking: GreenMetric. J Clean Prod. 2015;108:852\u0026ndash;63.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGalleli B, et al. Sustainability university rankings: a comparative analysis of UI green metric and the times higher education world university rankings. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education; 2021.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVeidemane A. Education for sustainable development in higher education rankings: Challenges and opportunities for developing internationally comparable indicators. Sustainability. 2022;14(9):5102.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eViergever RF. The critical incident technique: method or methodology? Qual Health Res. 2019;29(7):1065\u0026ndash;79.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGremler DD. \u003cem\u003eThe Critical Incident Technique\u003c/em\u003e, in \u003cem\u003eWiley Encyclopedia of Management\u003c/em\u003e, C.L. Cooper, N. Lee, and A.M. Farrell, Editors. 2015.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFlanagan JC. The critical incident technique. Psychol Bull. 1954;51(4):327.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eButterfield LD, et al. Fifty years of the critical incident technique: 1954\u0026ndash;2004 and beyond. Qualitative Res. 2005;5(4):475\u0026ndash;97.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVon Soest C. Why do we speak to experts? Reviving the strength of the expert interview method. Perspect Politics. 2023;21(1):277\u0026ndash;87.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTansey O. \u003cem\u003eProcess tracing and elite interviewing: a case for non-probability sampling.\u003c/em\u003e Methoden der vergleichenden Politik-und Sozialwissenschaft: Neue entwicklungen und anwendungen, 2009: pp. 481\u0026ndash;496.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eElster J. \u003cem\u003eA plea for mechanisms.\u003c/em\u003e Social mechanisms: An analytical approach to social theory, 1998. 49.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMeuser M, Nagel U. \u003cem\u003eThe expert interview and changes in knowledge production\u003c/em\u003e, in \u003cem\u003eInterviewing experts\u003c/em\u003e. Springer; 2009. pp. 17\u0026ndash;42.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHintze M, El K, Emam. Comparing the benefits of pseudonymisation and anonymisation under the GDPR. J Data Prot Priv. 2018;2(2):145\u0026ndash;58.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMagnani G, Gioia D. Using the Gioia Methodology in international business and entrepreneurship research. Int Bus Rev. 2023;32(2):102097.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGioia DA, Corley KG, Hamilton AL. Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational Res methods. 2013;16(1):15\u0026ndash;31.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDeterding NM, Waters MC. Flexible coding of in-depth interviews: A twenty-first-century approach. Volume 50. Sociological methods \u0026amp; research; 2021. pp. 708\u0026ndash;39. 2.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSalda\u0026ntilde;a J. \u003cem\u003eThe coding manual for qualitative researchers\u003c/em\u003e. Second edition ed. 2013, Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUniversity of Auckland. \u003cem\u003eTe Taumata Tukuwaro-kore: Net Zero Carbon Strategy\u003c/em\u003e. 2022.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUniversity of Auckland. Travel Policy. 2023 November 1, 2023; \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.auckland.ac.nz/en/about-us/about-the-university/policy-hub/enabling-environment/finance-capital-risk/travel/travel-policy.html\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.auckland.ac.nz/en/about-us/about-the-university/policy-hub/enabling-environment/finance-capital-risk/travel/travel-policy.html\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eV\u0026auml;limaa J, Uljens M, Elo J. \u003cem\u003eUnderstanding Higher Education Decision-Making and Educational Practice as Interrelated and Historically Framed Phenomena\u0026mdash;A Non-affirmative Take\u003c/em\u003e, in \u003cem\u003eMultilevel Pedagogical Leadership in Higher Education: A Non-Affirmative Approach\u003c/em\u003e. Springer International Publishing Cham; 2024. pp. 115\u0026ndash;29.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShore C. \u003cem\u003eAfter neoliberalism'? The reform of New Zealand's university system.\u003c/em\u003e Learning under neoliberalism: Ethnographies of governance in higher education, 2015. 1: p. 30.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGremler DD. The critical incident technique in service research. J service Res. 2004;7(1):65\u0026ndash;89.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRutakumwa R, et al. Conducting in-depth interviews with and without voice recorders: a comparative analysis. Qualitative Res. 2020;20(5):565\u0026ndash;81.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTimes Higher Education. Impact Ranking 2020. 2020 [cited 2020 23 July, 2020]; \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.timeshighereducation.com/rankings/impact/2020/overall#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/undefined\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.timeshighereducation.com/rankings/impact/2020/overall#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/undefined\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTimes Higher Education. Impact Rankings 2019. 2019 [cited 2024 June 3]; \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.timeshighereducation.com/rankings/impact/2019/overall\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.timeshighereducation.com/rankings/impact/2019/overall\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMinistry for the Environment. Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Bill: Summary. Wellington; 2019.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUniversity of Auckland. \u003cem\u003eTe Rautaki Aronga Toitū Sustainability Strategy\u003c/em\u003e. 2022.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUniversity of Auckland. Curriculum Framework Transformation Progress. 2023; \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://teachwell.auckland.ac.nz/announcements/curriculum-transformation-framework-progress-3/\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://teachwell.auckland.ac.nz/announcements/curriculum-transformation-framework-progress-3/\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIngenio. \u003cem\u003eDawn of a new era\u003c/em\u003e, in \u003cem\u003eIngenio\u003c/em\u003e. 2019, University of Auckland: Auckland. pp. 26\u0026ndash;27.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUniversity of Auckland. \u003cem\u003eTaumata Teitei. Vision 2030 and Strategic Plan 2025\u003c/em\u003e. 2021.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eToitū, Envirocare. \u003cem\u003eOrganisation Audit Report - Toitū carbonreduce certification programmes verification\u003c/em\u003e. 2022.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"},{"header":"Footnotes","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e Informed consent forms aligned with GDPR regulations and the home university's template. Prior to interviews, a written or oral consent was obtained from interviewees while acknowledging that participants can withdraw from the study at any stage or refuse to answer any questions, they do not feel comfortable with.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e One of the recommended interviewees worked for an affiliated organization responsible for valorizing the university\u0026rsquo;s research, including sustainability research.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e For example, \u0026ldquo;(2,5,7)\u0026rdquo; indicates that a certain statement is supported by 3 interviewees, denoted with numbers 2, 5 and 7.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e Any names mentioned during the interview were anonymised in transcripts besides references to role models, which were pseudonymized. The roles and responsibilities of participants were retained in the transcripts to explore their potential impact on event selection and perception of leaders.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e The event regarding (lack of) bicycle infrastructure in period one was merged with the event regarding bicycle infrastructure in period II due to the same focus of both events.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e It is possible that if leaders can achieve the desired result with less effort, they might utilise a less active role since active roles tend to increase both visibility and risks (more desirable for drive than block). However, as a general trend, the relationships displayed in the graph above should hold.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e The travel policy was eventually finalized on the university\u0026rsquo;s website a couple of months after the research visit.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e All the critical events listed in the \u003cspan refid=\"Sec32\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003eAppendix\u003c/span\u003e 3 have been identified as critical by at least two interviewees except for three events taking place in 1990s. These events, while identified only once, were included to mitigate recall bias favouring more recent events.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e The events in this category reflect how many interviewees mentioned the events identified as critical. It includes the interviewees that identified the event as critical as well as those who mentioned it without identifying it as critical, comparing it\u0026rsquo;s relevance and prevalence in the interviews.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e The event related to bicycle infrastructure has been merged, combining events reported in period I (1x) and II (1x) due to their similar nature.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"discover-sustainability","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"disu","sideBox":"Learn more about [Discover Sustainability](https://www.springer.com/43621)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"Discover Sustainability","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Discover Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4977416/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4977416/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThis case study explores the perceived roles of academic leaders in critical sustainability events at a leading university in sustainability - the University of Auckland (UoA). UoA was selected due to its high position in the Times Higher Education (THE) Impact Ranking (1st in 2019 and 2020) based on its contribution to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Employing the critical incident technique (CIT) through semi-structured interviews, university staff were asked to reflect on the meaning of a sustainable university, critical sustainability events, and the roles of academic leaders in these events. Both central-level and faculty-level leadership were considered.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe interviews revealed that while a multi-dimensional and holistic vision of a sustainable university is beneficial for engaging diverse stakeholders, three transformation tensions emerge as the discussion moves from a vision to implementation: \u003cem\u003epriorities\u003c/em\u003e (competing sustainability dimensions), \u003cem\u003epace\u003c/em\u003e (desired speed of transformation), and \u003cem\u003eprocess\u003c/em\u003e (desired consultation for transformation). These tensions are displayed in the Triangle of Transformation Tensions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn total, 16 critical events (CEs) were identified by staff predominantly (81%) occurring within the last five years (2019\u0026ndash;2023). The majority were internal CEs, initiated by the university (75%) while the two most frequent CEs were external\u0026ndash; COVID-19 and THE Impact Ranking. Central-level strategies and policies (e.g., sustainability strategy, flight policy) represented the most common type of CE (25%). Yet these CEs should not be viewed in isolation. Often most recalled CEs, highly visible and centralised, were underpinned by less prominent CEs (e.g., data monitoring). Moreover, the recent change in the central-level leadership, though less frequently recalled as a CE (10%), was mentioned by the majority of interviewees (\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;60%).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe perceived roles of academic leaders were conceptualised into five categories: \u003cem\u003eno role, support, drive, divert\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eblock\u003c/em\u003e, ranging from passive to active leadership roles. The study hypothesizes that staff associate visible leadership roles with invisible leadership stances, which depend on \u003cem\u003ecompeting priorities\u003c/em\u003e, including intrinsic values, external opportunities \u0026amp; pressures, and \u003cem\u003eresource \u0026amp; authority constraints\u003c/em\u003e. No single role is optimal in every situation. Rather each role can be utilised to address the transformation tensions (\u003cem\u003epriorities, pace, process\u003c/em\u003e) in various ways.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Critical sustainability events and perceived roles of academic leaders at a leading university in sustainability: CIT case study","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2024-10-18 06:47:25","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4977416/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2024-09-16T07:23:12+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"52535690907320295726991570467398011235","date":"2024-09-16T06:13:33+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2024-09-16T01:59:00+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"6710476552237712490441474964163042596","date":"2024-09-12T09:16:21+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2024-09-12T02:33:10+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2024-09-11T09:08:13+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2024-09-10T17:24:10+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"166935425126165266210118112570450371705","date":"2024-09-06T07:13:52+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"75274421780820576178009199121232634357","date":"2024-09-06T02:20:32+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"116651379349794237162681429886350140430","date":"2024-09-04T16:32:52+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"148880996297014431137071960602667452059","date":"2024-09-03T07:43:03+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2024-09-03T04:40:50+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2024-09-02T11:18:20+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2024-08-31T06:39:38+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Discover Sustainability","date":"2024-08-26T10:53:51+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"discover-sustainability","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"disu","sideBox":"Learn more about [Discover Sustainability](https://www.springer.com/43621)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"Discover Sustainability","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Discover Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"2cf18aa0-bd26-4d3d-9505-918710c4b7c7","owner":[],"postedDate":"October 18th, 2024","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"published-in-journal","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-06-02T16:09:20+00:00","versionOfRecord":{"articleIdentity":"rs-4977416","link":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-025-01185-x","journal":{"identity":"discover-sustainability","isVorOnly":false,"title":"Discover Sustainability"},"publishedOn":"2025-05-28 15:56:56","publishedOnDateReadable":"May 28th, 2025"},"versionCreatedAt":"2024-10-18 06:47:25","video":"","vorDoi":"10.1007/s43621-025-01185-x","vorDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-025-01185-x","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-4977416","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-4977416","identity":"rs-4977416","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"qtupq5eGEP_6zYnWcrvyt","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}