Aug. 24, 2026
By Holly Lithgow
The growing number of Interim and Acting Vice-Chancellors has attracted understandable attention. At least fifteen UK universities have found themselves with an Interim or Acting Vice-Chancellor in the last eighteen months, while Times Higher Education has reported that more than a quarter of Universities UK members changed their Vice-Chancellor during 2025 or are expected to do so in 2026.
Those figures would have been remarkable only a few years ago. Today, they are fast becoming a commonplace feature of the higher education landscape.
Yet while it is typically Vice-Chancellor appointments that make the headlines, they are part of a much broader trend.
Institutions are thinking differently under times of pressure
From conversations with governing bodies and senior leaders over the past few years, it has become increasingly apparent that institutions are thinking differently about executive leadership during periods of transition. Interim leadership is becoming an ever more important feature of university executive teams.
Across the sector, governing bodies are turning to experienced interim leaders not only for Vice-Chancellor appointments, but also for Chief Operating Officers, Finance Directors, Registrars, Pro Vice-Chancellors and other executive roles. This reflects more than leadership turnover; it shows how institutions are responding to a progressively complex operating environment.
Universities are navigating significant financial pressures, changing student recruitment patterns, increasing regulatory expectations, and rapid technological change. Against this backdrop, governing bodies are understandably taking longer to consider the leadership capabilities their institutions will need for the next decade, rather than simply the next few years.
With that context in mind, the growing use of interim leadership may not be a sign of indecision, it could indicate more considered governance. Rather than feeling compelled to make a permanent appointment quickly, governing bodies are creating the time and space to clarify institutional priorities before committing to a leader who will, hopefully, be in post for many years.
A mandate to deliver change
Interim leaders are frequently external appointments, bringing an independent perspective and specific experience to help institutions navigate periods of uncertainty or with a clear mandate to transform and to drive change. Whether addressing financial sustainability, leading organisational restructuring, reviewing operating models, or strengthening institutional performance, interim executives are often expected to tackle some of the most difficult challenges facing an institution. These programmes are not always popular, but they are often necessary. An experienced interim leader can bring the objectivity, resilience and focus needed to make difficult decisions, creating the conditions for a permanent successor to inherit an institution that is better positioned to focus on long-term strategy and growth.
That evolution raises some interesting questions about how leadership itself is changing.
A lack of imagination?
In a recent conversation, one experienced university leader remarked that some of the current interim appointments displayed "a lack of imagination in the sector." While perhaps an intentionally provocative observation, it raises an interesting point.
If interim appointments become the default response to uncertainty, there is a risk that institutions delay more fundamental conversations about their future direction or the kind of leadership they really need. Are governing bodies becoming more cautious in their decision-making? Has the market for permanent Vice-Chancellors become more challenging? Or are universities simply recognising that different phases of an institution's development require different kinds of leadership?
The answer is likely to be a combination of all three.
From my perspective, the conversation has undoubtedly shifted – the question is no longer, "Who should be the next Vice-Chancellor?". But rather, "What leadership does this institution need now? What will it need next? And how can an interim appointment support that transition?", requiring a different approach to leadership planning.
What does this tell us about the sector?
Whether the current rise in interim leadership proves to be a temporary response to an exceptionally challenging period or becomes a more permanent feature of university governance remains to be seen. What is becoming more evident, however, is that interim leaders are no longer just filling gaps. They are now routinely being appointed as strategic leaders, tasked with providing stability, delivering change and preparing institutions for their next chapter.
The institutions that emerge strongest from the current period of uncertainty are likely to be those that view interim leadership not as a pause between permanent appointments, but as a deliberate opportunity to strengthen the organisation and define the leadership it will need for the future.
Whether responding to an unexpected leadership gap or bringing in specialist expertise to support a period of transformation, our Higher Education specialists work hand in hand with Norman Broadbent’s Interim Practice to support institutions with their leadership needs. To discuss a requirement, contact me, Holly Lithgow or David Curtis, Partner within our Interim Practice.