Navigating the Search for Tomorrow’s HBCU Leaders

July 30, 2026 – Amanda Washington Lockett is president of TM² Executive Search (TM²) and a dedicated scholar-practitioner with over a decade of experience in higher education and strategy development. Her research and practice focus on innovations in higher education, transformative leadership and institutional sustainability.

TM² Executive Search specializes in providing exemplary executive talent acquisition consultation for Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), Predominantly Black Institutions, and other organizations looking to attract highly qualified, motivated, accomplished diverse candidates at all levels of the administration. The firm focuses on filling C-suite leadership positions, including presidents, chancellors, and board directorships.

Hunt Scanlon Media recently sat down with Ms. Washington Lockett to discuss the evolving demands of presidential leadership at historically Black colleges and universities, the qualities boards are prioritizing in today’s search process, and the strategies institutions are using to identify leaders equipped to navigate a rapidly changing higher education landscape.

Amanda, what are the most common priorities boards identify when launching a presidential search, and how do those priorities differ among HBCUs?

Historically Black Colleges and Universities are institutions with deep roots, loyal communities, and a track record of impact that any incoming president will be expected to honor and build on. That context shapes what a board looks for when a search begins. In our work at TM², we often hear similar priorities: fundraising capacity and donor relationships, external visibility, mission fluency, technology readiness, and the competence to navigate complex funding environments. The particularities unique to each HBCU matter when it comes to board priorities in a presidential search. The institution’s private or public designation, geographic location, student population, financial condition, endowment strength, and religious affiliation are just a few data points that determine the board’s priorities, and no two HBCU searches are the same.

What are schools currently seeking?

What we know with certainty, across every board we have worked with, is that they are all looking for the same thing at the core: vision coupled with a proven skillset. The best HBCU presidents do not rest on what was built before them. They keep building, widening the path for those who will come after. These are leaders who can stand inside 150 years of institutional history and still keep eyes on the next 150 years. The greatest presidents at the helm of HBCUs plant seeds for trees under which they know they may never sit in service of a mission that has always been bigger than the person leading it. Finding that person, for that institution, at that exact moment in its history is what TM² was built to do.

How do you engage key stakeholders—including trustees, faculty, students, alumni, and donors—throughout the search process to ensure alignment and confidence in the outcome?

At TM², stakeholder engagement is the foundation of every search we run. From the moment we begin, we are in deep, intentional conversation with every constituent group, including trustees, faculty, students, alumni, and donors. We do not collect their input and then move on; we treat every constituent as a partner in the process. What they share in a listening session, what they hope for, what they have seen, and what they need from the next leader shape nearly every decision we make throughout the process. The best searches are not simply about delivering a candidate to a board. They are about ensuring that an entire community feels heard, represented, and confident in who comes next. That is the standard we hold ourselves to at TM².

Looking ahead, what leadership challenges will define the next generation of HBCU presidents, and how should institutions assess candidates’ readiness to address them?

The next generation of HBCU presidents will step into institutions that are, by every measurable indicator, on the rise. Applications are up. Philanthropy is paying attention. The national conversation about what an HBCU education is worth has shifted in ways that would have been hard to predict ten years ago. The challenge is finding a leader who can hold it and push it further. Artificial intelligence is the most immediate frontier. HBCUs are already in this space. The question is no longer whether they belong in the AI conversation. They do. The question is whether the next president can move their institution from interest to infrastructure, building the academic culture, faculty capacity, and industry partnerships that make it real for students. That is leadership. Philanthropy is changing, too. Major donors are paying attention to HBCUs in ways they were not a generation ago. The next generation of HBCU presidents must know how to meet that moment, not just by closing a gift but by building relationships that grow endowments over time and give an institution the financial foundation to lead rather than react. In that way, fundraising is not something you hand off; it is something you own.

So how do we assess whether a candidate is ready?

The best, most relevant questions speak to candidates’ demonstrative data. In other words, evidence. We ask how this person led when resources were scarce, and the path was unclear. We ask what exists now that did not exist before they arrived. We ask where the candidates have been and what they have done. At TM², we believe the best indicator of what a leader will do is what they have already done. The record tells the story. Our job is to read it well.

How have the qualities colleges and universities look for in senior leaders changed in recent years?

The qualities institutions seek in senior leaders have shifted in ways that reflect the compounding pressures now defining the sector. For much of higher education’s modern history, the ideal candidate was evaluated primarily on academic credentials, institutional pedigree, and a linear trajectory through the faculty and administrative ranks. That profile has not become irrelevant, but it has become incomplete. Today’s institutions seek a more composite leader. Financial fluency has moved from a secondary competency to a foundational expectation. Presidents are now evaluated on their ability to think strategically about resource allocation, engage governing boards on long-term fiscal sustainability, and work in genuine partnership with their chief financial officers. Institutions are also broadening their definition of who qualifies. Search committees are increasingly open to candidates whose pathways did not follow traditional academic trajectories, provided they demonstrate genuine mission alignment and the relational capacity to lead within higher education’s distinctive culture. The margin for a misaligned leadership appointment has narrowed considerably. Institutions cannot easily absorb the cost of a senior leader who possesses the right résumé but lacks the judgment and adaptability the moment requires. Getting the right leader in the right seat is no longer simply an organizational priority but a strategic imperative.

What trends are you seeing in the higher education talent market right now?

TM² Executive Search is observing several notable shifts in the higher education talent market that have meaningful implications for how institutions plan for and execute leadership transitions. Sitting leaders are demonstrating a heightened reluctance to leave stable positions. The financial uncertainty of prospective institutions has introduced a level of professional risk that candidates are weighing more carefully than in previous cycles. For many experienced leaders, the calculus of a career move has changed. The opportunity to lead a new institution must now compete with the very real concern that the environment they are stepping into may not be positioned to support their success. The sector is also experiencing a higher volume of unplanned leadership transitions than in prior years. Institutions are increasingly turning to interim appointments as a bridge while permanent searches are organized and conducted. Both trends underscore a broader truth. In the current environment, leadership continuity is not guaranteed. The institutions that plan ahead and approach every search with strategic intentionality will be the ones best positioned to lead through uncertainty.

What leadership issue will most define the future of higher education?

The single greatest leadership challenge facing higher education today is the growing gap between what institutions cost to operate and what students and families can afford to pay. Everything else flows from that. Tuition increases have reached their limits. Enrollment is declining. Students and families are making different choices. And the institutions that have not yet moved from awareness to action are running out of time to do so deliberately. The institutions that navigate this moment well will not be the ones that cut the most. They will be the ones that lead the best.