Leading From Where You Stand: Rethinking Academic Leadership in Learning and Teaching

Recently, I had the opportunity to co-convene the Higher Education Practice & Learning Symposium. Our keynote speaker, Bruce Mackh, shared a deceptively simple reminder that resonated throughout the day: “we are all leaders.”

That statement has stuck with me not because it was provocative, but because it expressed something many of us feel but seldom put into words. Higher education has historically linked leadership to titles, such as dean, director, chair, or deputy. However, when we emphasise learning and teaching, the most impactful leadership frequently occurs outside formal meetings or official roles. It manifests in classrooms, discussions about curriculum design, feedback exchanges, and countless small decisions that influence student learning.

Leadership is not the domain of the few. It is the everyday practice of many.

Leadership Is a Practice, Not a Position

When leadership is viewed as a practice rather than just a position of formal authority, we notice it everywhere. An educator who redesigns an assessment to be more authentic demonstrates leadership. An educator who creates a relational connection with students is leading. A colleague who challenges an inherited practice or shares a new approach is also leading.

Leadership in learning and teaching is demonstrated whenever an educator chooses curiosity over compliance, reflection over repetition, and student needs over convenience. These actions shape culture. They influence colleagues. They improve learning. None of these require a title. Leadership here is relational, intentional, and grounded in care.

The Paradox of Positional Leadership

And yet, as many academics discover when they step into formal leadership roles in learning and teaching, positional authority does not always translate into greater impact. In fact, the paradox is often the opposite.

A lecturer or unit convenor often feels immense agency. They can shift their teaching immediately, respond directly to student needs, and experiment freely.

But stepping into roles such as course chair, academic lead, or associate dean shifts the terrain. The work becomes broader, and with that, it also becomes slower, more procedural, and heavily shaped by constraints outside their control.

What we talk about less often is that positional leadership depends not only on the individual but also on the culture and leadership environment surrounding them. Their ability to make an impact greatly depends on whether those above and around you create the space—structurally, politically, culturally—for meaningful educational leadership to take place.

When this environment is supportive, leaders can drive innovation, build collaboration, and strengthen learning systems. But sometimes that space narrows instead of widening.

There is also a persistent tendency towards the “busy work” of academia. The reports, compliance, governance loops, and constant administrative demands drain the air that leadership needs. Leaders become accountable for processes rather than practice. The desire to improve learning and teaching remains, yet the structures inhibit rather than enable.

In these moments, formal leadership can feel more constraining than empowering.
This doesn’t diminish the value of positional roles; it simply underscores that leadership is relational and contextual, shaped as much by the system as by the individual.

Collective Leadership Makes the Biggest Difference

Because no single person can transform learning and teaching alone, the most powerful form of leadership is collective. It emerges when educators at all levels work together as a connected community of practice.

Collective leadership recognises that:

everyone contributes to the student learning experience
innovation emerges from conversation, not command
influence spreads through modelling and trust
leadership strengthens when it is shared, not centralised

When many people take small, aligned actions, the learning culture shifts more deeply and sustainably than any single leader could orchestrate.

Influence Is the Most Powerful Form of Leadership

If positional leadership shapes structures, influence shapes culture, and culture is what students feel most. Influence is built relationally through authenticity, trust, and consistently modelling good practice.

Influential educators lead when they:

Reflect openly on successes and failures
Invite students into co-design
Encourage colleagues to experiment
Advocate for compassion and evidence-based pedagogy
Prioritise inclusivity and learner-centred design

These everyday acts accumulate. They ripple outward. They create the conditions in which good practice becomes normalised, and leadership becomes part of the collective fabric rather than the privilege of the few.

A Call to Lead At Every Level

If you have ever adjusted your teaching because students needed something different, you have led.
If you have collaborated to improve a unit, you have led.
If you have questioned an outdated assumption about learning or teaching, you have led.

Leadership in learning and teaching starts with intention, not a title. It begins with a conscious choice to foster learning environments through care, curiosity, and influence.

Formal leadership roles may extend your reach, but they also reshape it — and at times, can hinder the very impact you hoped to make. What matters most is not where you sit in the organisational chart, but how you choose to act.

When we view leadership as a practice, it becomes shared, relational, and grounded in a commitment to student learning. We start to build a culture where leadership is not just for the few, but can be embraced by everyone. Genuine progress happens when educators at all levels recognise their ability to influence, inspire, and lead from where they currently stand.

Five Reflection Questions

Where in your current work do you already demonstrate leadership, even informally?
What is one small act of influence you could take this week to improve learning or support a colleague?
How do you experience the difference between positional authority and everyday influence in your context?
Who around you is modelling quiet leadership, and how might you recognise or support them?
What might shift in your institution if everyone viewed themselves as a leader in learning and teaching?