The Caring University: Reimagining the Higher Education Workplace after the Great Resignation

by Kevin R. McClure

How to transform higher education workplaces into environments where all employees can thrive.

Colleges and universities rarely establish working conditions and cultures that prioritize employee well-being. During the pandemic, many staff and faculty members questioned their careers in higher education. Because of this mindset, leaders in higher education must rethink their approaches to attracting, growing, and retaining talent. In The Caring University, Kevin R. McClure describes six organizational changes to create a university dedicated to creating working conditions and cultures in which all employees can flourish.

At the heart of the caring university is the premise that all employees have talent, all employees should be treated as whole people, and all employees deserve to be cared for as essential contributors to organizational success. McClure's proposed changes draw upon wisdom of organizational change theories, decades of scholarship in higher education and social science, as well as site visits to institutions where he conducted more than 100 original interviews with staff, faculty, and administrators.

The Caring University diagnoses major problems in the higher education workplace and offers practical approaches to address them as part of a sustainable change process. The book brings together several strands of inquiry and conversations in practice that have typically been discussed separately—such as burnout, caregiving, and leadership—and weaves them into a cohesive narrative that addresses all employees in higher education. This essential book reimagines the higher education workplace as a site where all employees can thrive.

Genres: Nonfiction, Education, Academic

352 pages, Hardcover

Published July 1, 2025

Reviews

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

The university is its people—you cannot advance one at the expense of the other. [p. 256]

This is a very important book. McClure has been writing on these issues in a very visible way since the COVID-19 pandemic, with some important articles in The Chronicle of Higher Education and Inside Higher Ed. But this book is far more than the sum of those articles, informed by numerous interviews and also extensive literature on leadership and higher education.

McClure develops the concept of “academic capitalism”, which prioritizes revenue and weakens shared governance (p. 46). I would argue that one of the key markers of this has been the rise of the professional administrator class. It used to the case that faculty would assume administrative positions for a time and then return to faculty. Chairs still do this, but it’s no longer the case that we do this with deans, provosts, and presidents. This has increased the distance between faculty and administrators, making their interactions more fraught and hostile.

Academic capitalism prioritizes a ruthless efficiency. It often uses the language of student success, but may only pursue this goal in order to increase enrollment or curry favor with governments, both of which are about increasing revenue. It cuts costs by asking its employees to work longer and harder for no additional compensation, and engages in passion exploitation to get the employees to push harder.

The Caring University does not exploit employees’ desire to serve students through appeals to passion, mission, or vocation. [p. 28]

Modern universities have a demoralized workforce. “Demoralization happens when teachers feel that policies and practices prevent them from upholding the values that brought them to the profession” (p. 25). Teaching larger and larger classes where you can no longer connect with the students the same way, having majors discontinued so that you can only teach introductory courses and can no longer train the next generation of professionals in your field, being censored in your scholarship or teaching and having the university participate in this censorship rather than defend you… all this and more is what modern faculty are dealing with.

McClure quotes Erin Sugrue defining “moral suffering” as “an experience of dissonance between an individual’s moral beliefs, values, and expectations and an experience of moral transgression”, and noting that “experience real psychological and existential pain when they are involved in actions and environments that violate their moral beliefs and expectations” (p. 25).

It’s remarkable that boards of universities consist of big donors, those with political connections, or those elected by a public that has no understanding of the university. Trustees and regents are almost never those with any actual experience in higher education, entirely different from corporate boards that are expected to have competency in their fields. This leads to problems.

As pay for senior administrators keeps increasing at a faster rate than inflation, while faculty and staff salaries do not, it’s important to call that out. Boards will claim it’s justified, but that claim is BS.

The justification for paying senior administrators so much is that it is necessary to recruit and retain talented leaders. Yet that logic is rarely applied down the organizational chart. [p. 164]

McClure importantly points out that throwing money at these undesirable positions is not working. We need to make leadership positions sustainable for those who hold them, and attractive for those with the skill and desire to lead. And we need to train people for leadership, and do so before they assume leadership positions.

Overall, this is actually a hopeful book. Yes, there are many problems, but McClure sees a way forward towards his ideal of The Caring University. And he gives numerous real-world examples of important steps that various universities have taken.

The reason I can’t give this book 5 stars is because McClure buys way too much into relativism and faddish ideas of promoting certain ideas of minoritization at the expense of sense (or indeed a broadly representative portrayal of how minoritized people think). In chapter 5, McClure abandons the scholarly approach he uses in the rest of the book and includes a series of quotes without analyzing them (because it’s an article of faith in Critical Theory that McClure, as a straight white man without disabilities, is disqualified from performing any such analysis).

He recounts the experiences of people “having ideas dismissed, contributions undervalued or credited to someone else” or being passed over for “promotions, awards, fellowships, grants”, etc., saying that this is because of racism, sexism, abilism, and so on (p. 179). It might be, but we’re not allowed to do a statistical analysis to determine if it is. Instead we’re supposed to blindly believe the first-person narratives of minoritized people (although we’re not allowed to similarly believe the first-person narratives of straight, white, cisgender men who also have had ideas dismissed or who have been passed over for promotions and grants). This is not only bad scholarship, but in fact it makes the situation worse even for minoritized people. Because it flies so blatantly in the face of good scholarship and methods for establishing truth, it allows white men to dismiss real problems faced by, say, black women because there is no allowed method of disentangling real problems from mistaken belief. Because of this, we can dismiss it all as mistaken belief.

McClure uncritically quotes someone discussing “Western constructions of epistemology” (p. 192) and some else claiming disability is a social construct, and as a result he can be summarily ignored for this entire chapter. There are a variety of “Western” approaches to epistemology, many of which were independently invented by Indian and Chinese philosophers, because it’s just about thinking clearly about things (e.g., Knowledge: A Very Short Introduction). Modern academic (and particularly scientific) approaches are not natural to anyone, and are no more widespread in the West than anywhere else. And you’d think that someone interested in broadening participation in academia wouldn’t characterize the whole thing as “Western”, which presumably would make it seem an inappropriate place for those with different identities to work.

[Levitatetogether · Rating 3 out of 5]

A frustrating book that I kept abandoning only to come back to out of a sense of obligation. The beginning is a solid overview of the current state of organizational theory specific to American institutions of higher education. However, as the book goes on, it becomes apparent the author is only focused on academic leaders - there is almost no mention of “staff” (i.e., non-faculty) employees other than as passive recipients of efforts by “leaders” to make their lives better. The author also conflates “leadership” with “management,” one of my biggest pet peeves. More specifically, the author does not define “leader” or “leadership” but frequently uses “leader” when they really mean manager. A frustrating, if occasionally useful, book. 3.25 stars rounded down.

[David Smedley · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the best books on higher education I have read, certainly in the past few years and perhaps ever. It is spot on in analysis. It highlights an essential truth: higher education does a poor job at “human resources”, which is to say that in many respects it doesn’t hire well and doesn’t support employees well because it does not think intentionally about doing so. As someone who has worked in higher edification for thirty years, I would completely agree. This book needs to be read by everyone in and interested in higher education.

[Marlena F · Rating 5 out of 5]

As someone who has working in higher education for over 25 years, this book is a must read especially for leaders. There is so much opportunity to transform higher education, not only for students but for the employees also. I resonated more with the staff perspectives, however, I know many of my faculty colleagues that felt the burnout during COVID. Dr. McClure does a fantastic job in conceptualizing higher education in way that would bring about the change that is needed to make a difference for students.

[Laura · Rating 4 out of 5]

The author does a good job of showing why higher education should take a “talent management” approach to building a better work environment for faculty and staff. I found his take on faculty and staff too generous at times-there really are some people taking advantage of universities’ flexible work cultures and offering them even more flexibility seems like potential source of increased stress for the people already picking up their slack.

[Brad Hill · Rating 4 out of 5]

I actually thought this was a good book that really shined a needed light on some of the organizational and structural issues that have and continue to persist at college and universities in the US. I found some really good bits of information and references for my dissertation.

[Joy Matteson · Rating 5 out of 5]

A really important read for anyone in higher ed right now.

[Samantha · Rating 4 out of 5]

One of the better “academic” books I have read related to educating in higher education.