Purpose: At present, there are no specific frameworks developed to help understand the complexity of change and leadership in higher education. This research investigates an overriding research question “How do stakeholders experience and value change leadership?” The purpose of this paper is to develop and apply a suitable conceptual framework for change leadership and research agenda for future studies, so that new insights into the inter- relationships between organisational context, leadership, culture and change are provided. The change leadership framework incorporates the themes of change drivers, context and staff which were identified as themes in a previous literature review. Secondly, key complexity theory and complexity leadership concepts have been added including emergence, adaptability and alignment. Furthermore, change leadership themes have been added and the cultural competing values of clan, adhocracy, market and hierarchy have been incorporated that link the central change leadership themes to the other primary concepts. Design/methodology/approach- This paper takes a theoretical perspective and builds upon previously published articles in relation to change and leadership in higher education (McSharry, 2022) as well as an analysis of contextual and cultural factors for change in higher education (McSharry, 2023). While complexity theory was used as an initial theoretical lens, the change leadership framework central to this paper was developed by synthesising key concepts from literature and proposes new relationships between these concepts. This framework was then used to interpret findings from a mixed methods study using both qualitative and quantitative research methods. Findings- The proposed conceptual framework attempts to synthesise concepts in literature relating to change and leadership in higher education, in particular the concepts associated with complexity theory, change leadership and culture. Central to this framework is the concept of change leadership. This concept relates directly to four other concepts of continuity, emergence, adaptability and alignment. This framework was used as a lens to gain insights into the broader findings of a mixed methods case study on an emerging technological university and proved to be a valuable tool to help understand the complex relationships between the concepts. Opportunities for further refinement were identified to reduce duplication within the framework and enable a more appropriate separation of the internal and external organisational concepts. Research limitations/implications- The testing of the change leadership framework was limited to one case study in a new technological university. However, it could be a valuable tool to other HEIs and other organisations to help understand the complexity of organisational change leadership and act as a useful tool for continuous professional development. Originality/value- This paper helps to address the complexity of change leadership in higher education by creating and testing a framework that incorporates context, change, leadership characteristics and culture. This integrated framework creates innovative relationships between diverse topics to aid a more holistic understanding of organisational change leadership.