A Systematic Review of Leadership Development Programs for Faculty Members in Higher Education Institutions: A PRISMA-Based Review
Saumya Agarwal
What the paper says
Leadership development has emerged as a critical strategy for strengthening academic governance and institutional effectiveness in higher education. Despite the growing investment in faculty leadership development programmes, empirical evidence on their outcomes remains fragmented. This systematic review synthesizes and advances empirical research on the effectiveness of leadership development programs for faculty members in higher education institutions. Following PRISMA 2020 reporting standards, a comprehensive search was conducted across Scopus, Web of Science, ERIC, Emerald Insight, and Google Scholar. After rigorous screening and eligibility assessment, 32 empirical studies were included in the final synthesis. The findings were analyzed thematically to identify dominant leadership outcomes and programme impacts. The review reveals that leadership development programmes contribute significantly to the enhancement of faculty communication skills, strategic decision-making, collaborative leadership practices, leadership identity formation, and engagement in institutional governance. Programmes incorporating experiential learning, mentoring, reflective practice, and institutional alignment demonstrate stronger and more sustainable outcomes. However, the evidence base is limited by methodological inconsistencies, a lack of longitudinal evaluation, and the underrepresentation of studies from developing country contexts. This review contributes to higher education policy and management literature by consolidating existing empirical evidence, identifying persistent research gaps, and highlighting the governance-level implications of faculty leadership development. The findings underscore the need for context-sensitive, methodologically robust, and strategically integrated leadership development initiatives to support sustainable leadership capacity in higher education institutions.
Evidence weight
Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40
| F · citation impact | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
| M · momentum | 0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07 |
| V · venue signal | 0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03 |
| R · text relevance † | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.