ty and introduced a new pro–vice chancellor, chief operating officer, and registrar, among others. One leader threatened to resign unless powers to select top-team members were transferred exclusively to the vice chancellor. Collegiality does not necessarily mean that everyone makes decisions. This assertiveness by British heads is quite recent. Thus, at UK research universities, power to select top management teams is slowly following the US policy. In the United Kingdom, it is more common for heads of new universities (those established from polytechnics after 1992) to have direct powers to hire top-team members. The traditional and largely continuing European approach involves appointment through a process of faculty elections. This practice has been criticized because, again, it substantially weakens presidential powers, inhibits organizational change, and favors the status quo. One former and very experienced US dean said he was strongly opposed to faculty making the selection of provosts or presidents, and he went on to say, “I am against the notion of democracy.” This is noteworthy because many academics construe universities to be collegial and therefore nonhierarchical, with democratic decision-making structures. This former US dean argued that universities are at least as hierarchical as the military, and our obsessive labeling would imply this is the case (“Professor Dr Dr” is not an uncommon title in Germany). Leaders do need power. The executive powers given to university presidents in the United States extend far beyond those conferred on European rectors, although vice chancellors in the United Kingdom are becoming more assertive. The world's outstanding research universities are located in the United States. These top institutions outperform their European counterparts. Presidents having adequate clout in meritocratic organizations may explain some of this difference.