“Should I stay or should I go?”
When The Clash posed that question in 1982, it captured a tension many professionals still feel today.
Many of us asked the same question in 2020, when disruption in higher education was sudden and global. We had no crystal ball then—and we don’t now. Yet here we are again at an inflection point in the United States.
Federal and state policy shifts, geopolitical instability, tightening immigration policies, budget pressures, and growing public skepticism about the value of internationalization have created sustained uncertainty. Leaders find themselves reacting continuously to external pressures while managing lean teams and expanding compliance demands.
For global educators, these pressures are not abstract. They show up in workload, morale, stalled advancement pathways, and increasingly complex career decisions.
Which raises a question many are quietly asking:
Why stay?
Global education has long been mission-driven—rooted in cross-cultural understanding, access, and global engagement. But passion alone can no longer compensate for unclear advancement paths, limited mobility, or roles that risk positioning professionals as generalists without recognized specialization.
If the traditional ladder feels unstable, perhaps it is time to rethink the structure entirely.
From Ladder to Scaffold
What if global higher education is not just a field—but a leadership development laboratory?
International educators routinely cultivate highly transferable capabilities, including leading across cultures, managing complexity, influencing without formal authority, navigating ambiguity and designing systems for diverse stakeholders
These are not peripheral skills. They are foundational leadership competencies relevant across sectors.
Rather than climbing a narrow ladder, professionals can build a scaffold—expanding laterally, deepening strategically, and translating experience across contexts while remaining connected to the global education ecosystem.
Longevity, then, is not about staying in one role. It is about growing across roles, institutions, and even sectors—while retaining a global lens.
Reclaiming Agency in Career Design
In Drive, Daniel Pink argues that autonomy, mastery, and purpose are core drivers of motivation. Global education leaders often have purpose and mastery in abundance. The question is whether they can replicate this in another sector or position.
This moment invites reflection:
- What skills am I truly building?
- How portable are they?
- What kind of leader am I becoming?
- What do I want my career ecosystem—not just my next job—to look like?
At Gateway, we believe these conversations are not optional—they are essential. Career sustainability requires intentional design, not passive endurance.
Whether you remain in your current role, pivot within the field, or translate your experience into new sectors, the decision should be strategic rather than reactive.
The real question may not be “Should I stay or should I go?”
It may be:
How do I design a career that allows me to grow—wherever I am?
