The Crisis of Orientation in Higher Education
Ahmad Tholabi Kharlie
(Professor at UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta, Member of the Higher Education Council, Ministry of Higher Education, Science, and Technology of Indonesia)
Today, higher education institutions are facing transformation pressures unlike anything before. The digital revolution has shifted the structure of knowledge from a hierarchical model to an open network. The globalization of the knowledge economy has created increasingly intense cross-border competition. At the same time, changes in the character of younger generations bring new challenges to academic authority, learning patterns, and institutional legitimacy.
Today’s students live in an information ecosystem that is fluid, fast, and plural. They no longer rely on a single authority to gain knowledge. They are used to accessing learning sources from various digital platforms while also developing more critical perspectives toward formal institutions.
In this situation, the relevance of higher education is no longer determined by the scale of infrastructure or the completeness of facilities but by the leadership’s ability to read historical change.
Crisis of Orientation
The main crisis faced by many universities today relates to leadership orientation in directing and utilizing available resources. Many institutions experience stagnation not because of a lack of funding or academic personnel, but because leadership is trapped in administrative routines. Leadership that focuses too much on bureaucratic procedures often loses sensitivity to broader social changes.
In this context, the statement of Indonesia’s Minister of Religious Affairs, Nasaruddin Umar, at the UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta work meeting in Jakarta (February 14, 2026), gains important intellectual relevance. He emphasized that the transformation of higher education is a historical necessity driven by social change and new generational characteristics, thus requiring academic innovation, improved services, and broader contributions to society.
This statement carries deep epistemological implications. The transformation of higher education cannot be understood merely as structural or administrative change but must be seen as a shift in leadership paradigm. Without leadership transformation, institutional change will only produce shallow procedural reforms.
The history of higher education shows that institutional progress always correlates with the quality of leadership that can read the direction of the times. Leading universities in the world did not emerge solely from administrative policies but from the moral vision of their leaders. They were able to integrate intellectual sophistication with strong value orientation.
In modern leadership studies, James MacGregor Burns, in Leadership (1978), emphasized that transformative leadership works through a leader’s ability to elevate the moral awareness of followers so that organizations move not just from structural compliance but from shared value commitment.
This perspective confirms that the transformation of higher education institutions is essentially a process of changing collective consciousness, not merely administrative restructuring.
Leadership Spirituality
In Islamic intellectual tradition, leadership has never been understood as merely a structure of power but is always placed within the framework of trust (amanah) and moral responsibility. Leadership is both an administrative function and an ethical practice, combining strategic rationality with transcendental awareness.
This perspective is highly relevant in the context of spirituality-based transformative leadership, which emphasizes that a leader carries responsibility not only for organizational performance but also for human dimensions and the values that sustain the institution.
In essence, spirituality in leadership is a deep awareness that power has a transcendental dimension, not just symbolic religiosity or moral rhetoric. A leader carries responsibility within a bureaucratic system while also being connected to historical awareness and human values.
In higher education, leadership spirituality functions as an ethical compass that maintains balance between global competition and the humanitarian mission of education. Without this dimension, institutional transformation risks becoming a technocratic process that loses meaning.
Spirituality-based leadership demands integrity as the main source of legitimacy. Legitimacy no longer relies on formal position but on moral example. A leader becomes a figure who inspires, not merely controls.
This paradigm also emphasizes empowering leadership. Leaders use power to build collective capacity and shape organizational relationships through trust that fosters participation. In such conditions, institutions move through systems supported by shared awareness.
The spiritual dimension also provides reflective depth in decision-making. Leadership develops as a form of rationality grounded in both instrumental and moral dimensions. Every policy is evaluated through efficiency considerations alongside concern for human dignity.
Transformative Leadership
Ultimately, the transformation of higher education is a civilizational process that takes place through institutional strengthening. In this framework, universities become spaces for reproducing intellectual and moral elites for society, so the dynamics within them help determine the nation’s future direction.
Furthermore, changes in higher education institutions can only run effectively when driven by leadership that is visionary, adaptive to generational change, and capable of empowering human resources as the core of institutional progress.
This carries an important strategic message: transformative leadership is not only about managerial ability but also about the capacity to build a vision of civilization. University leaders manage organizations while shaping the intellectual future of society.
From the perspective of the sociology of education, transformative leadership has three main functions.
First, as a producer of vision. Leaders must be able to define the future direction of institutions in the context of global change. Without a clear vision, organizations will be trapped in administrative routines.
Second, as a catalyst for innovation. Transformative leadership creates an organizational climate that encourages creativity and intellectual courage. It transforms bureaucratic culture into a learning culture.
Third, as a guardian of civilizational ethics. Leaders maintain balance between global competition and the humanitarian values of education. In an increasingly pragmatic world, this function becomes crucial.
The university of the future requires leadership that can integrate technology and ethics, rationality and spirituality, and innovation and social responsibility. Without this integration, higher education risks losing its identity as an institution that shapes civilization.
At this point, spirituality-based transformative leadership finds its relevance: returning leadership to its true nature as a moral trust and a historical responsibility in guiding the direction of academic civilization.
This article was published in Disway on Saturday, March 14, 2026.