<%BANNER%>

The Relationship Between Personality Traits and Leadership Styles between Selected Community College Workforce Developme...

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0042796/00001

Material Information

Title: The Relationship Between Personality Traits and Leadership Styles between Selected Community College Workforce Development Leaders and Coorporate Executives
Physical Description: 1 online resource (106 p.)
Language: english
Creator: YANKOWY,BARBARA JOANNE
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2011

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: BUSINESS -- COMMUNICATION -- COMMUNITY -- HIGHER -- PERSONALITY -- WORKFORCE
Human Development and Organizational Studies in Education -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Higher Education Administration thesis, Ed.D.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of Doctor of Education THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PERSONALITY TRAITS AND LEADERSHIP STYLES OF SELECTED COMMUNITY COLLEGE WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT EXECUTIVES AND CORPORATE EXECUTIVES By Barbara J. Yankowy May 2011 Chair: Dale F. Campbell Major: Higher Education Administration Because community colleges contend with continuous high rate of retirements, endless turnover, and organizational challenges, these institutions of higher learning must proactively identify the leadership skills and personality traits of current leaders. Higher education faces numerous challenges, including declining budgets, limited resources, and increases in student populations. To maneuver through these rocky waters, future leaders must possess outstanding leadership traits. There is limited empirical research on the personality styles of community college workforce administrators, community college business officers, and corporate executives. Using the Wave? personality assessment to identify these groups? leadership traits, institutions might be able to determine the crucial qualities of effective leaders, and then use this information to development successful internal and external higher education leadership programs. The Wave? assessment revealed minor differences in the leadership characteristics of community college workforce administrators, community college business officers, and corporate workforce executives. There were moderate differences among the three groups, and all three groups had high mean Sten scores in creating innovation, and low Sten scores in communicating with people. Results from my study can be used to identify the essential characteristics of effective leaders, incorporate ways to foster these traits in leadership development program participants, and provide other enhancements for leadership development, such as mentoring and coaching. The research further suggests that organizations should invest in leadership programs and pay close attention to the critical traits needed in the highly skilled professions such as workforce. Further, leadership development programs should consider communication, developing and maintaining relationships, and enhancing other soft skills, such as emotional intelligence, as key components. Developing effective communication skills is particularly important, since scores in this area were quite low. It is possible that the current economy, along with the typical challenges of community colleges, contributed to the low-to-average communication score results. Also, leaders may not have the skills to be successful in the current community college climate, a potential basis for future research. As community colleges continue to serve area residents, especially in providing workforce education and training, future leaders should possess skills like resource identification, communication, and emotional intelligence. These skills, in addition to other personality and leadership traits, are investigated in my study, and models of this concept are discussed. ?
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by BARBARA JOANNE YANKOWY.
Thesis: Thesis (Ed.D.)--University of Florida, 2011.
Local: Adviser: Campbell, Dale F.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2011
System ID: UFE0042796:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0042796/00001

Material Information

Title: The Relationship Between Personality Traits and Leadership Styles between Selected Community College Workforce Development Leaders and Coorporate Executives
Physical Description: 1 online resource (106 p.)
Language: english
Creator: YANKOWY,BARBARA JOANNE
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2011

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: BUSINESS -- COMMUNICATION -- COMMUNITY -- HIGHER -- PERSONALITY -- WORKFORCE
Human Development and Organizational Studies in Education -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Higher Education Administration thesis, Ed.D.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of Doctor of Education THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PERSONALITY TRAITS AND LEADERSHIP STYLES OF SELECTED COMMUNITY COLLEGE WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT EXECUTIVES AND CORPORATE EXECUTIVES By Barbara J. Yankowy May 2011 Chair: Dale F. Campbell Major: Higher Education Administration Because community colleges contend with continuous high rate of retirements, endless turnover, and organizational challenges, these institutions of higher learning must proactively identify the leadership skills and personality traits of current leaders. Higher education faces numerous challenges, including declining budgets, limited resources, and increases in student populations. To maneuver through these rocky waters, future leaders must possess outstanding leadership traits. There is limited empirical research on the personality styles of community college workforce administrators, community college business officers, and corporate executives. Using the Wave? personality assessment to identify these groups? leadership traits, institutions might be able to determine the crucial qualities of effective leaders, and then use this information to development successful internal and external higher education leadership programs. The Wave? assessment revealed minor differences in the leadership characteristics of community college workforce administrators, community college business officers, and corporate workforce executives. There were moderate differences among the three groups, and all three groups had high mean Sten scores in creating innovation, and low Sten scores in communicating with people. Results from my study can be used to identify the essential characteristics of effective leaders, incorporate ways to foster these traits in leadership development program participants, and provide other enhancements for leadership development, such as mentoring and coaching. The research further suggests that organizations should invest in leadership programs and pay close attention to the critical traits needed in the highly skilled professions such as workforce. Further, leadership development programs should consider communication, developing and maintaining relationships, and enhancing other soft skills, such as emotional intelligence, as key components. Developing effective communication skills is particularly important, since scores in this area were quite low. It is possible that the current economy, along with the typical challenges of community colleges, contributed to the low-to-average communication score results. Also, leaders may not have the skills to be successful in the current community college climate, a potential basis for future research. As community colleges continue to serve area residents, especially in providing workforce education and training, future leaders should possess skills like resource identification, communication, and emotional intelligence. These skills, in addition to other personality and leadership traits, are investigated in my study, and models of this concept are discussed. ?
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by BARBARA JOANNE YANKOWY.
Thesis: Thesis (Ed.D.)--University of Florida, 2011.
Local: Adviser: Campbell, Dale F.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2011
System ID: UFE0042796:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

1 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PERSONALITY TRAITS AND LEADERSHIP STYLES OF SELECTED COMMUNIT Y COLLEGE WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT EXECUTIVES AND CORPORATE EXECUTIVES By BARBARA JOANNE YANKOWY A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIV ERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2011

PAGE 2

2 2011 Barbara J. Yankowy

PAGE 3

3 To my parents William and Nancy

PAGE 4

4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First, I thank my higher power whom I choose to call God. One of my greatest aspirations was to obtain a college education. It is obvious that through His grace I have been taken to a much higher level. During this program, I have grown spiritually, prof essionally, and perso nally. I sincere ly thank my parents who have always been loving and supportive. My friends and colleagues who have shared this experience were a great support and encourag ement I bestow deep and special thanks to Dr. Dale F. Campbell for his cont inuo us support and faith in my performance. His tremendous encouragement followed me throughout my experience as a doctoral student and the dissertation process. I appreciate his mentorship and am eternally grateful for having had the experience of working w ith him. I also thank my advisory committee, Dr. David S. Honeyman, Dr. Lynne H. Leverty, and Dr. Bernard Oliver for their willingness to shar e their expertise and assistance. Many thanks go out to Dr. Matthew J. Basham for his mentorship and friendship and especially h is patience and genuine interest in my success I would also like to acknowledge my dear friend and colleague Glenn B. Miller for his support and kindness. Together we faced th many challenges and hur d les O ur faith in ded ication to and support of each other made this all possible. A nd a special thanks also goes out to Terri Daniels, my friend and colleague who has endured this entir e experience with me. I could no t have gone another step without her.

PAGE 5

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 4 LIST OF TABLES ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 8 LIST OF FIGURES ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 9 ABSTRACT ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 10 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 12 Succession in Leadership ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 13 Institutional Challenges ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 15 Entrepreneurship ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 16 Leadership Development and Preparation ................................ ................................ .............. 17 Personality Traits and Leadership ................................ ................................ .......................... 18 Statement of the Problem ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 20 Purpose of the Study ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 21 Research Question ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 22 Research Hypotheses ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 22 Definitions of Terms ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 22 Significance of the Study ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 23 Limitations ................................ ................................ ................................ .............................. 24 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 25 Leadership Succession ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 25 Succession at All Levels of Leadership ................................ ................................ .................. 27 Chief Administrators ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 27 Community College Faculty ................................ ................................ ............................ 28 Institutional Challenges ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 29 Entrepreneurship ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 30 Entrepreneurial University ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 31 Leadership Preparation ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 33 Doctoral Programs ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 34 Investing in Leadership ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 36 Personality Traits and Leadership Styles ................................ ................................ ................ 38 Personality Traits ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 39 Leadership Styles ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 40 Big Five Theory ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 41 Thinking Style ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 42 Leadership and Community College Presidents ................................ .............................. 43 Presidential Reflection on Leadership Style ................................ ................................ .... 44

PAGE 6

6 3 METHODOLOGY ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 46 Research Methodology ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 46 Research Framework ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 46 Purpose of the Study ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 47 Research Question ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 47 Research Hypotheses ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 47 The Sample Population ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 48 Research Instrument ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 48 Instrument Validity and Reliabili ty ................................ ................................ ........................ 49 Data Collection ................................ ................................ ................................ ....................... 50 Data Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 50 4 RESULTS ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................... 52 Descriptive Data ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 52 Descriptive Data Results ................................ ................................ ................................ 52 Descriptive Data Analysis Results ................................ ................................ .................. 54 Research Hypothesis One ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 55 Research Hypothesis Two ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 55 Research Hypothesis Three ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 56 5 CONCLUSION ................................ ................................ ................................ ....................... 72 Findings ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 72 Conclusion ................................ ................................ ................................ .............................. 75 Discussion ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................... 77 Implications for Higher Education ................................ ................................ ......................... 78 For Future Research ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 80 APPENDIX: THE SCALE DESCRIPTIONS ................................ ................................ ............... 82 Thought Cluster ................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 82 Analytical Dimension ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 82 Factual Dimension ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 82 Rational Dimension ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 83 Learning Oriented Dimension ................................ ................................ ......................... 83 Practically Minded Dimens ion ................................ ................................ ........................ 83 Insightful Dimension ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 84 Inventive Dimension ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 84 Abstract Dimension ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 84 Strategic Dimension ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 85 Influence Cluster ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 85 Interactive Dimension ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 85 Engaging Dimension ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 86 Self promoting Dimension ................................ ................................ .............................. 86 Convincing Dimension ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 86

PAGE 7

7 Articulate Dimension ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 87 Challenging Dimension ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 87 Purposeful Dimension ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 87 Directing Dimension ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 88 Empowering Dimension ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 88 Adaptability Cluster ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 89 Self assured Dimension ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 89 Composed Dimension ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 89 Resolving Dimension ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 89 Positive Dimension ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 90 Change Oriented Dimension ................................ ................................ ........................... 90 Receptive Dimension ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 90 Attentive Dimension ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 90 Accepting Dimension ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 91 Involving Dimension ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 91 Delivery Cluster ................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 91 Reliable Dimension ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 92 Meticulous Dimension ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 92 Conforming Dimension ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 92 Organized Dimension ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 93 Principled Dimension ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 93 Activity Oriented Dimension ................................ ................................ .......................... 93 Dynamic Dimension ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 94 Enterprising Dimension ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 94 Striving Dimension ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 94 REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................ 100 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 106

PAGE 8

8 LIST OF TABLES Table page 4 1 Psychometric profile descriptive data. ................................ ................................ ............... 57 4 2 Competencies profile descriptive data. ................................ ................................ .............. 58 4 3 Comparison of three highest/lowest mean Sten scores for psychometric profile. ............. 58 4 5 One way ANOVA results of psychometric profile dimensions. ................................ ....... 59 4 6 Pairwise comparisons of psychometric profile variables using Tukey Kramer method. ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................... 60 4 7 One way ANOVA results of competency profile dimensions ................................ ......... 69 4 7 Continued. ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 70

PAGE 9

9 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page A 1 Thought cluster sections, dimensions, and facets. ................................ ............................. 96 A 2 Influence cluster sections, dimensions, and facets. ................................ ............................ 97 A 3 Adaptability cluster, sections, dimensions, and facets. ................................ ...................... 98 A 4 Delivery cluster sections, dimensions, and facets. ................................ ............................. 99

PAGE 10

10 Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of Doctor of Education T HE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PERSONALITY TRAITS AND LEADERSHIP STYLES OF SELECTED COMMUNITY COLLEGE WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT EXECUTIVES AND CORPORATE EXECUTIVES By Barbara J. Yankowy May 2011 Chair: Dale F. Campbell Major: Higher Education Administration Beca use community colleges contend with cont inuous high rate of re tirements, endless turnover and organizational challeng es these institutions of higher learning must proactively identify the leadership skills and personality traits of current leaders. High er education face s numerous challenges including declining budgets, limited resources, and increase s in student population s To maneuver through these rocky waters, future leaders must possess outstanding leadership traits There is limited empirical res earch on the personality styles of community college workforce administrators community college business officers, and corporate executives Using t he W ave personality assessment to i dentif y leadership traits institutions m ight be able to determine the crucial qualities of effective leaders and then use this information to development successful internal and external higher education leadership programs. The W ave assessment revealed minor differences in the leadership characteristics of community college workforce administrators community college business officers, and corporate workforce executives There were moderate differences among the three groups and

PAGE 11

11 a ll three groups had high mean S ten scores in creating innovation, and low S te n scores in communicating with people. Results from my study can be used to identify the essential characteristics of effective leader s incorporate ways to foster these traits in leadership development program participants and provide other enhance ments for leadership development such as mentoring and coaching. The research further su ggests that organizations should invest in leadership programs and pay close attention to the critical traits needed in the highly skilled professions such as workforce. Fu rther, leadership development programs should consider communication, developing and maintaining relationships, and enhancing other soft skills such as emotional intelligence as key components. Developing effective communication skills is particularly i mportant, since scores in this area were quite low. It is possible that the current economy along with the typical challenges of community colleges contributed to the low to average communication score results. Also, leaders may not have the skills to be successful in the current community college climate, a potential basis for future research. As community college s continue to serve area residents especially in providing workforce education and training, future leaders should possess skills like resou rce identif ication communication, and emotional intelligence. These skills, in a ddition to other personality and leadership traits are investigated in my study and m odels of this co ncept are discussed.

PAGE 12

12 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION The mass attrition and ex odus of retiring baby boomers has affected corporate businesses, leaving a gap in leadership and leadership development initiatives. The massive turnovers catapulted the concept of leadership development to the top of business agendas. Companies such as Levi Strauss, Kodak, Zenith, Firestone, Timex, Nestl U.S. Steel, Polaroid, Sears, and IBM are some examples of corporations suffering through this phenomenon because of modest leadership planning or lack thereof. Even though these companies fores aw the eminent mass turnovers, they only planned modest lea dership development initiatives to secure their futures Daniels, 2009 ). U.S. businesses, industries, schools, and the professions need to equip themselves to face future challenges and changes by deve loping leaders who successfully (Gardner, 2006, p. 1). The extant literature in the community college arena predicts that there is a deficiency of qualified candidates to replace the large number of co mmunity college presidents expected to retire in the near future (Keim & Murray 2008). Though anticipated retirements will create leadership opportunities for a new generation, not enough education professionals possess the leadership qualities equated w ith community college leadership (Riggs, 2009). The leadership crisis cont inues to worsen in the community college system as a result of the high number of retirements among presidents, senior administrators, and faculty leaders. In addition to the succ ession of community college leadership, few studies have addressed the need for leadership development programs specifically geared toward community college leaders (Bisbee, 2007). Using a retrospective dataset, my study identified profiles of current com munity college administrators that might be used as prototypes to develop future leaders. Specifically my study

PAGE 13

13 i dentif ied the relationships between personality traits and leadership s tyles of selected community college workforce development executives ( CCWDEs) and corporate executives. Workforce development is one area where institutional programs are expected to meet the demands. Community colleges active ly establishing partnerships with business and industry, fostering innovative programs to meet the needs. Hence workforce development initiatives play an active role in the future of community colleges ( Basham Campbell, & Mendoza 2008 ) Since c ommun ity colleges experience d this evolu tion workforce innovation is now pa rt of the mission s to provid e programs and a path of vocation to serve the needs of low income adults (Jacobs & Dougherty, 2006). With the shift from a manufacturing driven economy to an information driven economy, community colleges have b ecome the primary tool for workforce development (Friedel, 2008). Succession in Leadership According to research, a mass exodus of community college leadership is expected within the next few years. The baby boomer generation comprise s 78.2 million Americ ans born between 1946 and 1964. With over 70 million baby boomers in the workforce and only 55 million Generation Xers to replace them, the estimated cost of losing an employee is 50 3 00 % Therefore, s uccession planning is crucial to both short term and long term success in many industries, including community colleges. In my study, s uccession planning in community college administration focus ed on developing and attracting new leaders as well as quantifying the severity of the succession planning conundrum for com munity college adm inistration (Leubsdorf, 2006). Baby boomers have f uel ed the workforce for decades, cont ribut ing their time and labor ; however, they are retiring in waves. In m any community colleges a portion of the current baby boomer administrators and faculty were initially employed in the earl y 1960s 1970s part ially

PAGE 14

14 because of the increase d number of public community c olleges across the nation. From 1988 2000, community college growth has decreased to l ess than 1% ( Ful ton Calkins & Milling, 2005). But a sizable void will open in both labor market s and community college administrations due to baby boomers Between 2004 and 2014, an estimated over 6,000 jobs in postseconda ry administration will be vacated (Leub s dorf, 2006). This reality indicates t he urgent need to retain older leaders while concurrently developing and attracting new leaders (Salopek, 2006, p 23). communit y college administration s In the next few years, a significant number of community college leaders will be needed, included approximately 700 presidents and campus heads, 1 800 upper level administrators, and 30,000 faculty members ( Ful ton Calkins & Mill ing, 2005). In 2001, the American Association for Community Colleges reported national survey results indicating that 45% of the presidents who responded planned to retire by 2007. In another survey, Weisman and Vaughan (200 6 ) indicated that the percenta ge of president retirees would increase to 79% by 2012 (Romero, 2004, p. 34). While community college presidents are retiring at an alarming rate, Chief Academic Officers (CAO) and faculty also fall into this category of attrition as fewer faculty membe rs are voluntarily applying for department chair positions. Hesitancy to assum e administrative positions seems prevalent at all leadership levels and this reticence can also be attributed to external factors, as higher education leadership may be discour aging individuals from seeking administrative positions. Historically community colleges have played a pivotal role in workforce development. However, with the sometimes uneasy existence of workforce education and the decisions to offer training for high skilled jobs as opposed to serving low needs, community

PAGE 15

15 college leaders do not know wh at direction such programs should take T he unclear future of the labor market coupled with the demands of the other missions of community colleges, m eans that administrators need to be equipped with versatile leadership strengths (Jacobs & Dougherty, 2006). Both the lack of urgency and lack of current community college leaders to fill the succession planning needs of administration s signals a problem f or community college administrations if action is not taken The ramifications of this situation will present unique institutional challenges. Institutional Challenges In addition to succession planning challenges cont emporary community college leaders are pressure d by various internal and external institutional challenges Some of the internal challenges include facilities in need of upgrades increasing retirements, decreased funding, economic turmoil, employee attrition, the influx of academically un derprepared students and rapid technology changes ( Basham et al. 2008; Basham & Mathur 2010 ; Doane & Pusser, 2005; Zaharia & Gibert, 2005). The numerous external challenges include lagging sociopolitical forc es and despite a lack of financial resources the expectation to function at an exceptional level. T he increased student diversity also requires that community college leaders possess a broaden set of interpersonal skills and cultural competencies Therefore, higher education has a growing need fo r entrepreneurialism (Basham, 2 007 ). When t he internal and external institution al challenges coalesce, the result compounds the succession planning problem for community college administrators Studies have stated that ensur ing an ample supply of effective and effic ient community college leaders requires research intended to better understand current leaders (Bisbee, 2007). Finding workforce development

PAGE 16

16 leaders to serve community colleges adds a nother level of challenge, as this position requires a skill not general ly vital to other administrative positions entrepreneurship Entrepreneurship Community colleges have long been regarded for their entrepreneurialism and ability to help the community and workforce solve problems through training or other means. Community college workforce departments resulted from the increase of programs involving external relations with the community and workforce relationships that will not wane anytime soon. At the 2010 Community College Futures Assembly building and maintaining re lationships with the community and workforce was rated one of the top six critical issues in the planning, governance, and finance category and workforce d evelopment category (Basham Campbell, & Garcia 2010). T he entrepreneurial branch of community colle ges developed from need for a ssistance. Since the early 1900 s and the development of vocational training acts, such as the Vocational Act of 1917 and the Higher Education Reauthorization Act of 1965 ( the G.I. Bill ) community colleges have met the needs of business es industr ies and communit ies through entrepreneurial efforts including workforce development. If community colleges did not tak e advantage of these entrepreneurial endeavors, other entities most likely would have As an exam ple, for profit educational institutions are increasingly devoted to vocati onal and career training needs. On demand skills training, cont ract training, and preparing students for the workforce are growing a reas of community college s The community colle ge is noted for providing flexibility and promptly responding to business and industry training needs serving as a mechanism that transition s students to hi gh skilled jobs (Vaughn, 2000). According to the r esearchers e ntrepreneurial organizations and adm inistrators must actively choose risk taking, trust, and passion as well as cultivating insatiable appetite s for

PAGE 17

17 change, thriv ing on creative problem solving, and relying on courageous leadership. Higher education institutions will be shaped by people wi th unique talents and abilities who can identify in novative responses to environmental challenges who possess a sense of purpose and have an Greene, & Jones 2006, p. 2). Th ese charac teristics embod y the essence of workforce development in community colleges. Leadership Development and Preparation As previously mentioned, a variety of institutional challenges creat e a large problem for community colleges, including workforce developme nt, the entrepreneurial branch. These problems are not unique to education but t he cont inued success of higher education institutions depends on staffing key positions at all levels with effective, competent leaders. Although the roles and responsibilit ies of community college leaders have changed over the past 30 years and will cont inu ally evolve no documentation currently exists about the restructuring of university higher education leadership programs to prepare students for community college leaders hip positions (Brown, Mar tinez & Daniel 2002). In 1995 the University of Florida Department of Education Leadership, Administration and Policy sponsored what became the annual Community College Futures Conference in Orlando, Florida. On average, 60 select chancellors, board of trustee members, presidents, and senior vice presidents from around the United States identify the top issues facing community colleges in that ye ar Results appear to reaffirm the issues determined at past Community College F utures Conferences such as innovation, entrepreneurialism, collaboration with business and industry, and finding new revenue streams. Perhaps s uch constituents of community college leadership should be modeled and studie d in profe ssional development prog rams (Campbell & Basham, 2008).

PAGE 18

18 One current leadership development training program for senior level civil servants is t he Federal Executive Institute of Charlottesville Virginia which shares knowledge about and insight of generational awareness, especia lly generational differences in characteristics, values, and motivations. Exploring a new way of thinking that incorporates the critical differences in generations and harness es best characteristic s could foster a successful corpora te environment (Salopek, 2006). Advanced degrees alone do not provide sufficient preparation for community college administrators. Some researchers have recommended that graduate degree preparation should be augmented by leadership development activities su ch as mentoring, internships, and professional development (Hull & Keim, 2007) Organizations also must invest in developing future cadres of leaders, particularly during times as challenging as the current economic climate Some studies have shown that i nvestments in leadership development have such benefits as improv ing financial performance, attract ing and retain ing skilled individuals, influenc ing motivation, and strengthen ing the function. Research by Bersin and Associates shows that p roviding leadership development for internal staff is more effective than hiring externally. Companies with strategic approaches to leadership development are 64% more effective at increasing the quality of their leadership pipeline, 73% more effective at improving overall employee retention, and 67% more effective at increasing the engagement, retention, and teamwork of leaders (Center for Creative Leadership, 2008) Though cultivating leaders benefit s institutions, understanding personality traits and l eadership styles of both seasoned and incoming leaders may also cont ribute to the development of leadership programs. Personality Traits and Leadership Various models depict perceptions of personality and how personality relates to leadership. In the last 10 15 years the Five Factor Model (FFM) a hierarchical model of personality traits

PAGE 19

19 framed much personality trait research ( Korn r & model (2005) the FFM is a n established tool used to discern the best explanation of personality analysis, portraying traits like extroversion, agreeableness, neuroticism, conscientiousness, and openness to new experience s Five major leadership theories t rait theory, power and in fluence theory, behavioral theory, symbolic and cultural theory, and cont ingency theory h ave also been used in leadership stud ies The FFM resulted from several decades of factor analytic research on trait personality. In his work, Goldberg stated that t he five d im ensions of rating personality could serve as a framework for many personality theories (Zhang & H uang 2001 ). Therefore, the F FM serve d as the foundational personality model for my study. B ehavioral leadership theory proposes that leadership tr aits are not innate but may be fostered through teaching and experience. Lussier and Achua (20 10 ) investigated trait theory, a belief system suggesting that some individuals have attributes that are inherent to effective leaders. Personality development is thought to result from a combination of environmental and genetic factors. Personality traits have been defined as dimensions of individual differences in tendencies to show consistent patterns of thoughts, feelings, and actions. Many studies have doc umented that personality traits are remarkably sta ble, have a significant hereditar y component, and have behavioral implications t hat is, they influence what situations a person might enter in, behavior in any situation and which situations persons are mo tivated to enter and participat e in ( Korn r & Nordevik, 2004, p. 49). Therefore both the behavioral and trait theories were investigated in my literature review Finally, the literature illustrates that three leadership behavior dimensions determ ine l eadership effectiveness t ask oriented, relationship oriented, and change development. The

PAGE 20

20 i ndividuals who scored high in all three dimensions have also been predicted to have high leadership performance regardless of situa tion ( Korn r & Nordvik, 200 4). Statement of the Problem Since the 1990s, t he anticipated retirements of presidents and their executive officers has been a critical issue for community colleges. Colleges are particularly vulnerable because the retirement wave also includes adminis trative professionals in highly skilled areas. The nature work has change d dramatically ; h ence colleges must include leadership development in their strategic planning and dec ision making (Campbell, 2006). The eges as with other industries, now face unprecedented challenges from both internal and external forces In the past five years, student enrollments have escalated. College leaders have struggled to meet demand while dealing with state budget cuts, limi ted facilities, faculty turnover, rising technology costs and increasing numbers of students who need remedial work before they can t ake college level classes (Boggs, 2004). However, many current community college employees are not accept ing the challeng es and seizing the opportunities of be com ing an administrator. Despite the growth of e ducation and training programs in the public and private sector s more programs addressing a wider variety of skill sets are needed to meet these challenges and fill lea dership positions in community colleges Without these opportunities, community colleges may be headed for failure. Though some leadership skills are typically established on the job, exceptional candidates that already possess exceptional skills are nee ded to in low, middle, and higher management. Though a breadth of research acknowledges the succession of community college presidents existing research fails to indicate if the succession extends to all levels of community college administration s (Keim & Murray 2008).

PAGE 21

21 A lack of succession preparation for community college administration leadership at all levels may widen the leadership gap even further. The workforce development departments of community colleges are considered the entrepreneurial arm of the se institution s but initiatives to develop or recruit talent in this vital department have not been made a priority Thus community colleges must establish leadership preparation programs and ensur e that these programs address what all levels of c ommunity college leadership need Since these problems are creating shortages for community college administrators and workforce development departments and since the workforce development department is the entrepreneurial department of community colleges similar to the corporate entity This correlation creates opportunit ies to investigate the similarities and differences between CCWDEs and corporate executives (Barnett, 2005; Jacobs & Dougherty, 2006; S alopek, 20 06 ; Zaharia & Gibert, 2005). Purpose of t he Study The purpose of my study wa s to explore the relationships between the leadership styles and personality traits of corporate executives and commun ity college workforce executives. My study exten d s previous research conducted on the 21 st Century Lea der Profile examin ing other senior executive leadership roles (Campbell, 2006). This information could serve a two fold purpose First, the information can serve as a foundation for leadership development programs, designed to highlight the crucial skil ls needed to effectively lead and operate academic departments. Such information could both develop future community college leaders and enhance skills Second, the information can demonstrate whether or not a corporate leader could succ e ed in a leadership position in a community college workforce development department. In some respects the potential success of a n executive in a corporate leadership position is also part of my study However, that aspect was not a desired practica l outcome, considering the supporting literature and need.

PAGE 22

22 Research Question What is the relationship between leadership styles and personality traits of community college workforce development executives, community college business officers, and corporate executives? Research Hypothes e s H 1 : There will be no differences between leadership styles and personality traits of community college w o rkforce development executives and corporate executives H 2 : There will be no differences between leadership styles an d personality traits of community college business officers and corporate executives H 3 : There will be no differences between leadership styles and personality traits of community college workforce development executives and community college business off icers. Definition s of Terms C OMMUNITY COLLEGE A regionally accredited institution of higher education that offers the associate s degree as its highes C OMMUNITY C OLLEGE B USINESS O FFICERS (CCBO S ) T he professional organizat ion that support s the professional business operations staff of community colleges in the United States and Canada. C ORPORATE E XECUTIVES The executive level professionals of a transportation corporation. L EADERSHIP CHARACTERI STIC T he features of the Wa ve Psychometric Profile which includ e the ability to perform intellectual or cognitive tasks. L EADERSHIP TRAIT T he features of the Wave Personal Report, which includ e applying expertise, accomplishing objectives and demonstrating potential. M IDLEVEL LEADERS The community college d irectors, deans and academic department chairs. P ERSONALITY TRAITS The dimensions of individual differences characterized by the display of emotions through thought patterns, thoughts, feelings, and actions (McCrae & Co sta, 19 89 p. 23). S AVILLE C ONSULTING W AVE An assessment tool developed by Saville Consulting Group Ltd. (SC G ) t hat includes a Personal Report and Psychometric Profile and two subscales leadership characteristics and leadership competencies.

PAGE 23

23 S ENIOR A DMINISTRATORS A group of executives that includes Chief Academic Officers (CAO), Chief Instructional Officers (CIO), and Chief Financial Officers (CFO). Significance of the Study Though much has been written about leadership in business management, littl e research has been conducted about academic leadership. The literat ure also states that administrators at all levels are reti r ing in the near future creating a community college leadership shortage In addition to this some professionals working in edu cation have no interest in advancing into leadership positions ( Garza Mitchell & Eddy, 2008). C CWDE positions may be more high ly specialized than other administrative positions. Co rporate executives appear to have several crucial skills for success in the ir work environments such as innovation, strateg y risk taking, and the ability to lead and adapt to change. Sampling community college and corporate executi ves in the workforce profession c ould yield profiles for use as a benchmark for factors of profes sional development initiatives (Berry, Hammons, & Denny, 200 1 ). With community colleges serving as key provider s of workforce education and focusing on training and development for vocational and technical education, special attention must be paid to hig hly skilled and specialized leadership professions ( Campbell, 2006 ; Friedel, 2008). A better understanding of th ese types of professions is necessary as the community college primarily serves nontraditional student s who desire degree and certificate pr ograms that will facilitate immediate employment. I f advanced degrees alone do not provide adequate knowledge of the leadership skills needed for these positions, and if there is a n increase in leadership succession and a decrease in the number of qualifie d a pplicants then leadership styles and effectiveness become top priorities (Hull & Keim, 2007). A n exploratory investigation of leadership styles and personality traits of CCWDEs and corporate executives how they compare and contrast w ill pre sent needed

PAGE 24

24 information about effective leadership, as well as the attributes that should be highlighted in profes sional development and workforce development curriculum. Limitations My study used a small sample size and study participant selection was limited to co mmunity co llege workforce ad ministrators at a public, four year institution and corporate executives Therefore, the findings will not appl y to four year universities, private colleges or K 12 schools Since the study was conducted in the United States, it cannot be generalized to educational entities outside of the United States. Lastly, the study used data collected in 2006, which was based on perceptions I ssues facing the participants have changed over the past few years, such as the ec onomic downturn and other challenges

PAGE 25

25 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW This chapter discusses relevant literature on of community college leadership succession and leadership characteristics. The sections include literature pertaining to leadership successi on in general succession at all levels of community college leadership, institutional challenges, entrepreneur ship leadership preparation, and personality traits and leadership styles. Leadership Succession The organization al talent gap has been an issue for several years. In a survey, 54% of the respondents, consisting of large and midrange companies in North America claim ed th ey lack sufficient internal candidates with adequate skills to succeed their current executives and managers. (Pace, 2010). A pparently, the gap phenomenon impacts both corporations and higher education. Many perceive c ommunity colleges as responsive and innovative organizations within the higher education industry. response to rapidly evolving workforce nee ds, shifting legislative requirements, and new competitors in the postsecondary marketplace draws on nimble, responsive, and fluid systems These systems cater to short term cont inuous learning needs for students in all stages of life needs that include flexible curricul a innovative programs that serve a dynamic versatile population, and funding challenges (Malm, 2008). The baby boomer administrators are retiring in massive waves and higher education is not immune to the effects of their departures S ome researchers have predicted turnover as high as 75% by 2011 in education alone (Basham, Stader, & Bishop 2009). In the late 1990s predictions regarding the approaching leadership crisis only focused on community colleges in Pacific regions. However, further research now indicates that the crisis will affect all American community colleges. These studies predict retirements between 45% and 85% among

PAGE 26

26 community college presidents, potentially leaving a void in leadership mentor ing for new and upcoming leaders (Keim & Murray 2008). For example, a n Iowa University study of 415 community college presidents, represent ing 38.2% of the national total, found that 79% will retire by 2012 and 8 4% by 2016 (Duree, 2008, p. 1). In 2001, the American Association f or Community Colleges (AACC) announced results of a national survey indicat ing that 45% of the 249 presidents who responded planned to retire by 2007 (Shults) A year later, additional research revealed that 79% of 661 community college presidents respond ing to the survey planned to retire in 10 years or less (Rom ero, 2004, p. 32). Weisman and Vaughn (2006) replicated the study, and their findings indicated that 84% of 545 responding presidents planned to retire in 10 years or less and 56% planned to ret ire in 6 years or less (Keim & Murray 2008, p. 117). Based on these survey results, succession will most likely impact community colleges across the nation. However, since California houses the largest community college system in the country leadership retirement has a more profound effect High turnover rates in leadership characterize California c ommunity colleges. For example, as a strategy t o maintain chancellor positions, institutions have offered generous pay increases and leadership planning i nitiatives (Ashburn, 2007). In other research, Campbell, Syraj, and Morris (2010) found that the community college administrative shortage will also impact specialized administrative positions such as registrar and financial aid director. Additionally, the skills and competencies needed for such position s are expanding, creating a greater challeng e for institutions to locate candidates to f ill these positions (Campbell, Syraj, & Morris 2010). Succession planning is widely accepted in the business world and while community colleges value the process it is not always implemented. T o prepare for future leadership,

PAGE 27

27 current leaders must develop partnerships with community colleges and other professional organizations, establish leadership development progr ams, provide graduate and certificate programs that target specialized skills needed by future leaders, and implement succession planning processes This process includes establishing a vision ; review ing long term goals and revising them as needed ; develop ing a broad succession planning process ; examin ing the organizational culture and potential changes ; recognize the leadership skills and attributes needed for the future ; and review leadership pr ograms within the organization ( Fulton Calkins & Milling, 200 5 ; Campbell et al 2010 ). Succession at All Levels of Leadership Succession in community college leadership spans all levels of administration (Patton, 2004, p.16) including six senior administrator positions that lead to the presidency: c hief a cademic o fficer (CAO), chief f inancial o fficer (CFO) s tudent a ffairs o fficer (SAO) d irector of c ont inuing e ducation, b usiness and i ndustry l iaison, and o ccupational/ v ocational e ducation l eader (Shults, 2001, p. 2). Research by AACC and others estimate s that 700 new community college presidents and campus heads, 1,800 new upper level administrators, and 30,000 new faculty members will be needed in the next decade (Patton, 2004, p. 2). The CAO position is known as a stepping stone to the presidency. Other college and campus presidents as well as c hief i nstructional o fficers (CIOs) are also known as paths to the presidency (Ashburn, 2007). But a growing number of C AOs are leaving their positions without enough qualified individuals possessing sufficient leadershi p skills to replace them (Ashburn, 2007). Chief Administrators While increasing numbers of community college presidents reach retirement age, CAOs are also approaching retirement and may assume the presidency. A report that examined eight listings in the Higher Education Directory stated that approximately 19% of CAOs left their

PAGE 28

28 positions each year. This was compared to 16% of SAOs and 14% of CFOs and presidents. In 1996, 68% of CEOs stated that they plan ned to retire within 10 years; this increased to 84% in 2006 (Weisman & Vaug hn, 2006, p. 2). Retirement is not the only reason community college leaders leave their positions. Other factors that lead to departure s include burnout, feeling unappreciated, and the pressures of organizational change. Furt her because the role has become so complex, the number of interested candidates has decreased. C AO s, once thought to be the foremost successors to the presidency, no longer want to becom e president s (Ris a cher, 2004, p.437). Although reasons for this interest deficit vary, certain responsibilities make the presidency less appealing, such as the emphasis on fundraising, high visibility, extensive time and travel commitments, and lack of opportunities to cont inue research activities. Unlike the president, the CAO not consumed by fundraising and satisfying outside constituent groups (Ris a cher, 2004). Community College Faculty The results of a study by Berry et al. (2001) stated that 64% ( N = 330) of faculty members indicated that they anticipated retiring within 10 years (p. 130). Three concerns influence faculty retirement : access to health insurance, loss of peer communication, and other career opportunities. Some faculty avoid the administrative ladder and choos e to remain in the classroom (Riggs 200 9 ). Nevertheless, f aculty are a vital component of community college leadership. Thus, it is not uncommon for faculty to assume higher level positions such as academic chair, chief administrators, and other positions that can le ad to serving as college presiden ts (Riggs, 200 9 ). The profile of community college faculty has significantly changed. In the National Studies of Postsecondary Faculty (NSOPF), female faculty increased from 38% in 1988 to 51% in 1999. In 1999, 30% of ful l time faculty were at least 55 years old and 52% of respondents

PAGE 29

2 9 between the ages of 55 and 64 planned to retire by 2004. According to the 2001 AACC survey, 36% of presidents expect ed at least 25% of their faculty to retire by 2006 (Shults, 2001, p. 5). The majority of presidents a rou nd 86% h eld a faculty position at some point prior to becoming president. Considering t he number of faculty who were expected to retire by 2006, most would not make succeed to presidency, or even fill an administra tive posi tion (Schults, 2001). Institutional Challenges Because of the declining economy academic institutions are under scrutiny, creating a rise in public accountability and a demand that should be clearly defined. C ont emporary education fac es increasing uncertainty, instability, competitiveness, and scarcity of resources (Smith & Adams 2008). The volume of tasks and expectations placed on leaders hinders strategic planning initiatives which perpetuates a cycle that places leaders in const ant crisis management situations (Harris 2009). In addition, community college leaders face challenges like buildings in need of updates massive retirements, decreased funding, economic turmoil, employee attrition, and the influx of academically underpr epared students ( Basham et al. 2008; Basham & Mathur, 2010 ; Doane & Pusser, 2005 ; Zaharia & Gibert, 2005 ). Over six million community college students as well as millions students at other types of institutions and organizations are pursuing some occupa tional course of study. These noncredit courses entail cont inuing education and job training. Hence community colleges not only offer associate and bac degrees but also a plethora of workforce development programs (Jacobs & Dougherty, 200 6). To cater to the market economy, some colleges hav e created cont inuing education, industry representation, and technology centers. This shift increase d the number of nonacademic managers and administrators entering the leadership structure of higher educatio n institutions (Zaharia & Gibert, 2005).

PAGE 30

30 E ntrepreneurship Academic entrepreneurship in its narrowest sense involves the creation of new ventures by university and college faculty, administrators, and students. More broadly, academic entrepreneurship see ks to establish connections across disciplines between student and academic affairs and between the campus and community. Academic entrepreneurship draws on the spirit of innovation, creativity, and opportunit y and imitates entrepre neurial activity as a means to provide students with rich learning experience s (Bardaglio, 2005 p. 18 ). Colleges play a fundamental role in education and training, research and utilization of results though industrial cooperation, and regional and local development. The academy and economy work together to meet the demands of a knowledge based society and enterprises and businesses play an essential role in this endeavor (Zaharia & Gibert, 2005). The Community College Futures Assembly identified entre preneurialism and innovation as critical issues for that industry mission s have shifted, expand ing into increased education for certification education and training as well as collaborating and developing partnerships with local busi ness (Basham et al 20 08 ). Despite the growth of entrepreneurship efforts among colleges and universities, nonprofit colleges are still considered the experts in generating revenue and accomplishing desired educational outcomes. However over the past fe w decades, some higher education institutions have gained attention for their entrepreneurial approaches to research funding, partnerships with for profit organizations and businesses, cont ract education, and the development of cont inuing education (Doane & Pusser, 2005). The declining econom y drives colleges to vie more aggressively for financial resources, students, and faculty. Community colleges also offer vocational and technical certificate and degree programs, competing directly with their for prof it

PAGE 31

31 counterparts whose main focus tends to be career education (Breneman, 2005). In the cont ext of higher education, entrepreneurialism is an example of global ization (Barnett, 2005, p. 51). Ithaca College a predominantly undergraduate institution found e d The New American Colleges and Universities, a national consortium whose vision is to combine liberal arts and professional education, placing a strong emphasis on experimental le arning and civic engagement. The goal of this model is to produce students who are equipped to solve real world problems while concurrently promoting community and global citizenship (Bardaglio, 2005). H igher education institutions are expected to meet the demands which include preparing future employees for a global economy Workforce development becomes a key factor in this mission, as c ommunity colleges active ly establish partnerships with business and industry and foster innovative programs to meet the needs. These activities requir e college s to have an entrepreneurial spirit ( Basham et al 20 10 ; Friedel, 2008). Entrepreneurial University Within corporations, advocacy is a general and commonplace practice Corporate leaders advocate for ideas and issues that promote profitability, quality, and performance (London, 2008). As higher education becom es more akin to the business arena academic leaders must foster a sense of movement and change and take risks, while at the same time risking reputation and possible finan cial difficulty. T o becom e an entrepreneurial university, risk is necessary. Risk can manifest in different areas s uch as capital intellectual, eco nomic, and staff attrition, along with the awareness that some changes are irreversible (Barnett, 2005). Some researchers propose a direct relationship between risk propensity an d entrepreneurial intentions. Individuals with high risk propensity comfortably handle risk and do not perceive certain situations as risky (Zhao, Seibert, & Hills 2005). The entrepreneurial university tak es a risky course of action possibility ri sking more than it realizes and perhaps morphing into a completely different

PAGE 32

32 institution ( London, 2008 ). Zhao, Seibert and Hills ( 2005 ) listed other individual characteristics that motivate advocacy such as co nviction about caring for others, self confidence, self efficacy, communicatio n, and transformational skills. Self efficacy a n individual construct influence s persistence and performance in a range of cont ext s. An important component of social cognitive theory concerns the malleability of self efficacy judgments and the process of judgment form ation According to social cognitive theory efficacy can be influenced through four p rocesses: enactive mastery, role modeling and vicarious experience, (Zhao et al. 2005). For profit institutions have embraced the risks of entrepreneurial universi ties, positioning these entities as significant competitor s of public higher education institutions. One way for profit schools have embraced risk is by establishing an array of credited degree programs that offer classes structured to suit the non traditi onal student. a variety of a learning environments flexible schedules, and c ourse delivery methods, such as online, hybrid, and face to face The versatile offerings of for profit institutions captured the open marke t of cont inuing education ( Barnett, 2005; Breneman, 2005). Traditional higher education institutions no longer meet the needs of a modern institution and are being replaced by a more cooperate management model. Under these circumstances, h igher education institutions will be characterized by the increasing influence of external stakeholders, particularly those that influence institutional funding place a strong emphasis on strategic planning at an instructional level, and will advocate for the adoption a nd adapt at ion of attitudes and techniques characteristic of corporations (Yie lder & Colding, 2004, p. 318).

PAGE 33

33 Leadership Preparation In this world of information superhighways, consumerism, calls for increased accountability, and costs of education rising a cademic leadership has become more complex and multidimensional (Bisbee, 2007, p.77). While numerous studies focus on leadership succession at community colleges, there is paucity of research on community college leadership programs and preparation for su ch roles (Hull & Keim, 2007, p. 689). In the next 10 years, community colleges will need to replace 800 of their 1,150 current presidents. Yet the preparation of presidents and other community college leaders has declined and the number of people prepare d to step into leadership roles at higher levels, including the presidency has dramatically diminished (McPhail, Robinson, & Scott 2008, p. 363). For many years, some colleges have not given much attention to succession planning or developing new leader s; others colleges create d stockpiles of leadership candidates with out sufficient internal leadership positions for all of these candidates Both of these actions resulted in a small leadership pool creat ing a problem not only for educational administr ators but also for those in the entrepreneurial departments of community colleges (Basham et al 2009). Community college leaders appear to acquir e their skills primarily through on the job training, professional development, and mentoring. Some adminis trators have developed their skills incrementally, using previous positions to hone skills required for higher level administrative positions (McNair, 2010). To ensure that individuals are being prepared for community college leadership positions, the A AC C facilitated several leadership development efforts including identifying existing leadership preparation programs by level of degree required and maintaining a list of graduate programs, both of which are available on their W ebsite (Romano, Townsend, & Mamiseishvili 2009). Vaughn (200 0 ) predict ed that there will and only 30% of

PAGE 34

34 the se vacancies m ight be filled (Peterman, 2002, p. 546). Peterman (2002) s uggests the following str ategies to prepar e future community college leaders : (a) each community college president in the nation should serve as a mentor for at least one individual, (b) graduate programs in higher education should enroll individuals referred by the president, and (c) states should cooperate to offer graduate education (Peterman, 2002). The largest administrative group in higher education might be d epartment chairs The se administrators must juggle numerous roles and responsibilities despite the lack of training offered i n leadership or management (Whitsett 2007). Many who become community college department chair s are un prepared for the long hours, multiple demands, and cont inuous change. Factors that can hinder success are the skills and knowledge brought from previous faculty roles, the unfamiliarity of the new position, and the methods used for learning responsibilities. S ome community college chairs learn these skills by observing their colleagues (Smith & Stewart, 1999 ) With the challenges of finding effective and efficient leaders for all levels of academic leadership, additional research is needed to better understand how current leaders are identified a nd trained (Bisbee, 2007). Doctoral Programs A mple opportunities exist for community college administrators to pursue doctoral degree s in education administration and leadership. Such programs focus on community college leadership or higher education leadership in general Though these programs respon d to local needs leadership must be consider ed from a broader perspective, preparing graduates for potential administrative challenges applicable to any U.S. region (McNair, 2010). Doctoral degrees were once considered a passport to community college leadership, which l ed to increased enrollments in these programs. Percentages of two year college presidents with doctorates range d from 44% in 1960 to 76% in the mid 1980s and 87% in 2005 (Hull & Keim,

PAGE 35

35 2007). In a follow up an alysis, a study of prospective of community c ollege leadership surveyed 1 700 community college administrators across 14 position titles. Presidents were more likely to hold a doctora l degree than those responding (86% versus 79.3%). A higher percentage of presidents in 2000 had PhDs (50%) than the 1985 respondent group (39.5%). Men were somewhat more likely than women to hold a PhD than an EdD (Amey, VanDerLinden, & Brown 2002, p. 576 ). The number of advanced degrees conferred in community college administration decreased 78% bet ween 1983 and 19 97 (McPhail et al 2008, p. 363). Some institutions are address ing the succession of community college presidents and vice presidents by offering presidential two year programs with online classes about topics like budgeting, strategies and interpe rsona l skills (Bagnato, 2004). Additionally, t he impact of these programs on college students attitudes toward the community college and the ne cessary leadership skills ha d rarely if ever, been studied (Romano et al 2009). To address this issue, 18 communi ty college institutions participated in a survey depicting a demographic profile of doctoral students and their attitude s toward the community college and competencies needed for community college leadership. O f the respondents ( n = 153), 79.7% indicated that they learned their skills by working at a community college, 62.7% in the classroom environment and/or as a professor, and 56.3% via their assignments connected with their classes (Romano et al 2009). Researchers have argued that graduate programs alone are inadequate preparation for administrative positions and that the research component of graduate programs is inappropriate for the field Therefore graduate programs should include practical applicable curricula, augmented with case studies and other leadership dev elopment activities (Romano et al 2009). Other components that can be in corporated into leadership programs are pre and p o stassessments including individ ualized plans for improvement, cohort

PAGE 36

36 program s learning gains tracking and mentorship provision all of which contribute to effective learning, development, and preparation of future lea ders (Campbell et al 2010). Investing in Leadership To sustain growth, there must be a path to leadership, including a development plan highlighting career progression. C orporations even offer coaching and training for their employees, hoping to add value to their organizations. Forty percent of survey respondents plan to hire future leaders within their companies, and 23% plan to recruit outside of their organizations (Pace, 2010). Despite a growing and ongoing debate about whether hir ing leaders internally or externally is preferable community colleges often seek to promote internal candidates as leader s. One way to groom potent ial leaders is to provide them with training, support, and encouragement. Some institutions are taking responsibility for developing and launching their own leadership programs, with customized curriculum leading to a masters or doctoral degree in communi ty college leadership, online leadership courses, day long retreats, and one year programs which includ e mentor ing and weekly workshops Future leaders need opportunities to learn and develop their skills by participating in internships and mentorships th at focus on skill development (Bisbee, 2007 ; Campbell et al 2010 ). Human resources departments must face the challenge of identifying leaders within their own organizations. To ensure quality leade r ship organizations need to examine their existing tra ining and development programs and consider delivery method trends and performance consulting, as well as identify ing effective leadership training that produces results, and evaluat ing those results (Bos, 2007). The AACC replicated Shult s (2001) researc h on leadership development as a strategy to close the leadership gap and prepare future leaders for community college presidency and other executive positions. The purpose of the study was to explore the issue of leadership succession.

PAGE 37

37 Findings indicat ed that not only were presidency position s affected by succession and lack of preparation, but highly skilled professional positions would also suffer from the leadership gap Further more, at the time of the study, no direct career paths were available fo r highly skilled professional positions, leaving a void in th at area (Campbell, 2006). The AACC identified several high priority managerial skills for community college leaders: (a) planning and organizing, (b) quality orientation, (c) specialist knowledg e, (d) problem solving and analysis, (e) strategic, and (f) motivation (Campbell, 2006). Additional activities beneficial to leadership development that should be inc luded in leadership development programs are mentoring, on the job experience, and networ king (McNair, Duree, & Ebbers 2010). Many schools have developed programs to grow their own leaders by establishing conferences, seminars, and training opportunities for middle and/ or lower management. Schools that have initiated these programs include G eorgia Perimeter College and Daytona Beac h Community College (Basham et al 2009). The University of Florida Department of Education Leadership, Administration and Policy sponsor s the annual Community College Futures Conference in Orlando, Florida. A n average of 60 select chancellors, board of trustee members, presidents, and senior vice presidents from around the United States attend the conference, participat ing in discussions to identify the top issues facing community colleges (Basham et al 2009). There are also career building options for midcareer college professionals. In the Massachusetts Community College Leadership Academy experienced faculty are invited to speak to a group of fellows chosen from around the state. Participants can earn gra duate credit by attending the seminars (Bagnato, 2004). In identifying the career paths of presidents, 22% were promoted into the presidency from within their present institution s an additional 66% were

PAGE 38

38 hired into their current positions from other commu nity colleges, and the remainder moved into a presidency position from other sectors (Amey et al 2002). Personality Traits and Leadership Styles Measuring the psychological characteristics of individuals began with Hippocrates in 400 BC, when he tried t o define four basic temperament types, each caused by a predominant body fluid or h u mour sanguine (optimistic), black bile caused melanchol y (depress ion ), yellow bile made a person choleric (irritable), and phlegm correlated with being phlegmatic (listless and sluggish). In the 19 th century, Sir Francis Galton first attempted to measure mental abilities by discriminating between stimuli and collating the results, a practice still prevalent today (Murphy, 2005). Though using personality assessments to make hiring decisions has been criticized for many years, the strategy appears to be increasingly popular and prevalent especially in the workplace. Particular jobs may have specific roles wit hin an organization. Determining the work and management styles needed for such positions can allow employers to identify what criterion would allow a candidate to excel in that position. Personality tests can assist with this process (Berry et al. 200 8 ). Forty percent of medium size companies reported using personality questionnaires to assist with interviewing and hiring. In the same report, only 4% of community colleges used this method. As a long term strategy for hiring administrators, p ersonali ty assessments ultimately save the college money especially since c hoosing the right person for an administrative position is crucial for the future. Though no candidate selection method is perfect, colleges should use multiple methods to maxi mize validity and make effective hiring decisions (Campbell, 2009 ).

PAGE 39

39 Personality Traits When determin ing s one commo nsensical approach would be to ask the person To find out how people feel, what they experience what th ey remember, what their emotions and motives are like, and the ir reasons for acting as they do, a simple method is to ask them (Bernard, Walsh, & Mills 2005, p. 40). The concept of personality includes how individuals interact with others, what their typ ical problem solving methods are and how they react in the presence of difficult and unusual problems and situations (Balkis & Isiker, 2005, p. 286). Thus personality types refer to people with similar intra individual organizations of their experience s and behavior s Even so empirical research over the last 50 years has treated personality almost exclusively from a variable centered perspective such as the F FM (Asendorpf, 2002, p. s1). Previous trait studies lacked theoretical explanation s for the co rrelation between certain traits and potential aptitude in leadership roles Traits can potential ly explain why people seek leadership positions and why they act as they do in these positions (Hendricks & Payne 2007, p. 318). The consistency of personal ity types is far from perfect. Consistency is difficult to achieve because studies may differ in language, culture, selectivity and sample size, instrument used self report, and method for deriving personality types (Asendorp f 2002). Carl Jung (1875 19 61) developed a personality typology that distinguishe d introversion and extroversion. Extroverts prefer to associate with people, to be involved in activities, and are enthusiastic about the external world. On the cont rary, introverts prefer the interna l world of thoughts, feelings, fantasies, and dreams (Boeree, 2006). According to Jung, a person functions in four basic ways: (a) sensing getting information by looking and listening ; (b) thinking, decision making, rational and evaluative thinking ; (c) intuiting like sensing, perception skills ;

PAGE 40

40 differences in personality traits, one must consider the three central supertraits that Eysenick (1990) identifies a s introversion versus extroversion, neuroticism, and psychoticism (Sato, 2005). Today, researchers still develop questionnaires based on these pe rsonality traits (Sato, 2005). Leadership Styles Traits such as intelligence, toughness, determination, flexib ility and vision are traditionally known as ideal for leadership. However studies indicate that emotional intelligence a soft skill, may be a key attribute for successful leader ship (Basham & Mathur, 2010). Fulton Calkins and Milling (2005) identified crucial leadership traits essential for future leaders : (a) learn ing from the past while embracing the future, (b) enrich ing the inward journey, (c) leading from core values, (d) having a vision and enriching connections, (e) search ing for talent, (f) pla nning succession and provid ing leadership opportunities, (g) keep ing faculty a ware of new processes and changes, (h) seek ing and maintain ing business and industry connections, (i) mak ing students the prim ary focus, and (j) prepar ing for the future workforc e. Organizations need frontline and middle managers to accept leadership accountability for driving results, managing teams, developing talent, and leading change. Though technological skills are useful and expected in leaders, more organizations are focu sing on leaders who have the potential to develop and maintain relationships (Bos, 2007). In researching traits, leadership effectiveness is defined as both influencing a group toward a common goal and accepting consequences for actions (Hendricks & Payne, 2007). Leadership traits that are paramount to producing a trusting and collaborative environment are executive leadership styles, reflecting change, authority though influence, autonomy, and maintaining core academic values and mission (Smith & A dams 2008). Creators of the authentic leadership construct claim that there is a decrease in ethical leadership and that existing frameworks are in sufficient for developing future leaders. U ltimately the goal is to train and develop leaders who will fo ster positive

PAGE 41

41 environments and conduct business i n an ethical manner (Cooper, S c and ura & Schriesheim 2005). Big Five Theory The Big Five theory is a taxonomy of personality traits a coordinate system that maps which traits go together. The Big Five are an empirically based phenomenon, not a theory of personality. The Big Five factors were discovered through a statistical procedure called factor analysis which was used to analyze how various personality traits correlated in humans (Srivastava, 2009, p. 2). The Big Five personality dimension is a scale that consists of 40 adjectives and is an abbre 100 adjectives using a 5 point accuracy scale. The theory identifies five broad factors of personality traits e xtraversion, agree ableness, conscientiousness, n euroticism, and openness to experience (Srivastava, 2009). This personality model is well established and frequently used to measure personality on a global level. Personality has been used to understand leadership because be havior is a function of personality; what people do is a function of who they are (Strang & Kuhnert, 2009). Hendricks and Payne (2007) examined traits as mediators of relationships between distal traits and leadership effectiveness focusing on goal orien tation, motivation to lead, and leadership self efficacy, cont rol ling for the Big Five personality traits. Goal orientation was positively related to leadership self efficacy suggesting that individuals with leadership goal orientation more likely want t o lead because they feel obligated to le ad (Hendricks & Payne, 2007). Ones Viswesaran, and Dilchert (2005) are known as provide rs of the best personality analysis explanation, portraying traits such as extroversion, conscientiousness, and openness to exp erience. The five primary leadership theories t rait theory, power and influence theory, behavioral theory, symbolic and cultural theory, and cont ingency theory h ave also been used in the study of

PAGE 42

42 leadership. B ehavioral leadership theory proposes that lea dership traits are not innate but must be fostered through te aching and experience (Ones, Viswesaran, & Dilchert 2005). Compared to other theories, the Big Five has been known to provide concise information regarding personality analysis. On this scale, l eaders typically score higher in extroversion, conscientiousness, and openn ess to experience ( Won 2006). The Big Five, or Five Factor Model was coined by Lew Goldberg and originally associated with studies of personality traits used in natural language The term Five Factor Model has been more commonly associated with studies of traits that use personality questionnaires (Srivastava, 2009, p. 2). The FFM has been used to assess desirable personality and work outcomes such as job performance a nd satisfaction. More recently, the FFM has been used to predict less desired personality characteristics and job outcomes, highlighting dysfunctional behavior and performance ( De Fruyt et al 2009). The F FM was formulated by McCrae and Costa (1990) T he theory includes a number of propositions about the nature, origins, and development of personality traits, and about the relation ship of traits to many of the other personality variables. The FFM presents a biological account of personality traits in which learning and experience have little if any influenc e on the Big Five (Srivastava, 2009 ). Thinking Style Thinking style is defined as a preferred way of t hinking (Balkis & Isiker, 2005). The theory of mental self government addresses different thin king styles. The metaphor mental self government portray s the way the human mind works. Just as there are different ways to govern society, there are different ways to manag e managing daily thinking styles that fall along five dimensions. These function s includ e the legislative, executive, and judicial styles ; forms including the hierarchical, oligarchic, monarchic, and anarchic styles ; levels

PAGE 43

43 incl uding the global and local styles ; scopes including the internal and external styles ; and learning including the liberal and conservatives styles of mental self government (Zhang & Huang, 2001, p. 466). Thinking styles depend on time, situations, and cultu re. There are two types of thinking styles T he first creativity is more complex ( e g. l egislative, judicial, and liberal ) and the second style is more simplistic ( e g. executive and conservative ) (Zhang & Huang, 2001). P ractical research exists th at investigates thinking styles and personality types. Thinking style and personality type a ffect decision making, judgment, evaluation, problem solving, and communication (Balkis & Isiker, 2005). The literature supports that some thinking styles and per sonality types are significantly corre lated (Balkis & Isiker, 2005). Leadership and Community College Presidents Malm (2008) observed organizational challenges and uncertainties by observing six community college presidents through guided conversations fo r the purpose of identifying organizational pressures, change processes, and leadership approaches. Participants defined leadership as mobilizing people to a common goal, vision risk taking, providing direction, accountability, and personal responsibilit y. Three leadership approaches are highlighted s ituational, collaborative, and directive. Situational leadership is an approach that varies from institution to institution depending on organizational changes and relationship dynamics between the leaders and others. The presidents described the collaborative approach as visionary, empower ing and inclusi ve The goal of this approach is to build consensus, maintain flexibility, and communicat e Two of the presidents used the directive approach in certai n situations. This leadership approach is affiliated with power and how the leader used that power at their institution. In this particular case, the community college presidents obtained their leadership skills through personal and professional experien ce, participating in formal and

PAGE 44

44 informal training, leadership assessments, observing successful leaders, and interviewing for presid ent positions at various institutions (Malm, 2008). Presidential Reflection on Leadership Style Previous s tudies have inve s ti gated community college presidential traits and characteristics. However, few studies have examined presidential reflection. In a 2007 study by Stoeckel and Davies, eight community college presidents were interviewed. Three major characteristics emerged m indfulness, discovery, and authenticity. Mindfulness is a deliberate attentiveness to the internal and external environment, people, and Socratic dialogue. Discovery involves a self exploratory journey to achieve personal understanding by paying attent ion to origins and values, personal growth, and vulnerability and struggle. The presidents demonstrated authenticity, searching for personal growth based on self understanding. Actions are measured by values and being consistent in the process (Stoeckel & Davies, 2007). Additionally, t he presidents felt their behavior revealed their authentic selves. S elect ing and priz ing values was inadequate ; the presidents felt they had to act on what they cherished. Expressions of authenticity were critical to merg ing the themes of mindfulness and discovery in their self reflection s In acting on their values, presidents t ransformed self reflection from an intellectual exercise in to meaningful expression. Authenticity was based on individual presidential values an d institutional values (Stoeckel & Davies, 2007 p. 908). The AACC identified four traits of effective leaders q uiet confidence, willingness to learn from mistakes, excellent communication skills, and ability to replenish oneself through relaxation (Patton 2004). Campbell et al. (2010) authored an update of the AACC research identifying valuable competencies for community colleges: (a) organizational strategy, (b) resource management, (c) communication, (d) collaboration, (e) advocacy, and (f) profession alism. Results from a national study of community college presidents, conducted by

PAGE 45

45 McNair (2010) corroborated the competencies identified by the AACC R espondents agree d that the six competencies we re valuable for leadership prepara tion and should be considered when cr eating leadership development programs. Though anal ytical skills and reasoning have been traditionally considered the most essential leadership traits, emotional intelligence is perhaps a mo re important and preferred sk ill one that elevates outstanding leaders above average leaders Self awareness, self regulation, motivation, sympathy, and social interaction are the attributes of emotional intelligence. Individuals can improve emotional intelligence by committing to the learning process and receiving support and executi ve coaching (Campbell et al 2010). Authentic leadership is thought to be necessary for successful function al leaders. Authentic leaders are described as confident, hopeful, optimistic, resilient, a nd of high moral character. Like social intelligence, authenticity is desired in leadership posi tions (Cooper et al 2005). Finally, c orresponding with the AACC research, resource management is identified as one of the most important skills needed in co mmunity college leadership. Aspiring leaders need to develop skills in budgeting and other fiscal issues, knowledge of local and state funding, and technical nuances of budgets (McNair et al 2010).

PAGE 46

46 CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY In this chapter an overview of the research methodology precedes a description of purpose of my study, the research question, the research hypothes e s, the sample population, the research framework, the research instrument, the data collection and the data analysis to be used in my stud y. Research Methodology My study employs quantitative analysis as the primary research methodology. The research design examin ed the relationships among three groups using a one time administered assessment. The three groups were CCWDEs from a national community college workforce organization, community college business officers, and corporate executives from a transportation compa ny located in Florida My study design wa s retrospective using a post hoc dataset. T he data was collected during a previou s administration of the W ave personality assessment which measured personality characteristics of community college administrators. The dependent variables leadership characteristics and leadership competencies we re ordinal and categorical a nd the in dependent variable wa s leadership level. Research Framework Constructivism, one of several interpretivist paradigms, concern s the ways people construct their worlds. Constructivist researchers investigate meanings about broad concepts such as cultural va lues, or more specific issues or ideas, such as the possible features of a dynamic, creative public library in the future and how to create it. There are two major constructivist approaches one focusing on individual, personal constructions and the other on shared meanings which reflect social constructions (Williamson, 2006, p. 85). Positivist appro aches to the social sciences assume things can be studied as hard facts and the

PAGE 47

47 relationship s among these facts can be established as scientific laws. For positivists, such laws have the status of truth and social objects can be studied in a similar manner as natural objects. The basic reasoning of positivism assumes that an objective reality exists one that is independent of human behavior and is theref ore not a creation of the h uman mind. Auguste Comte suggest ed that all real knowledge should be derived from human observation of objective reality (Crossan, 2003, p. 49). The design of my study is based on positivism. Purpose of the Study The purpose of my study wa s to determine if differences exist among CCWDEs CCBOs and corporate executives Th e information derived from this exploration could serve as a guiding factor in the creation of leadership development programs, which would be designed to highl ight the crucial skills needed to effectively lead and operate higher education institutions Such information could also enhance skills and develop fu ture community c ollege leaders. Research Question What is the relationship between lea dership styles and personality traits of community college workforce development executives, community college business officers, and corporate executives? Research Hypothes e s H 1 : There will be no differences between leadership styles and personality trait s of community college w o rkforce development executives and corporate executives H 2 : There will be no differences between leadership styles and personality traits of community college business officers and corporate executives. H 3 : There will be no differ ences between leadership styles and personality traits of community college workforce development executives and community college business officers.

PAGE 48

48 The Sample Population The sample population w as composed of executives from both community colleges and th e co rporate realm. The first group comprised CCWDEs from across the United States ( N = 27), who also maintained membership in the national community college workforce development organization. The titles of those individuals included: Assistant Dean of C ontinuing Education and Workforce Development; Assistant Dean of Economic Development; Associate Vice President of Workforce Development; Business and Industry Training Director; Dean of Continuing Education and Workforce Development; Dean of Corporate and Continuing Education; Dean of Corporate Services; Director of the Adult Education Center; Director of Workforce Training; Executive Director, Center for Professional Development; Executive Director, Center for Workforce Solutions; Personal and Professiona l Development Director; Vice President of Workforce Development; and Vice Provost for Economic and Workforce Development. The second group comprised corporate executives from a transportation corporation located in Florida ( N = 21). The corporate executiv es e xecutiv es, e xecutive m anager s, h uman r esources personnel, and v ice p residents The third group community college business officers ( N = 24), represent ed personnel from community college business operations offices. This group include d chief executive officers, chief business officers, controllers/accountants, administrative services officers, purchasing personnel, information technology personnel, and auxiliary services officers. Research Instrument The W ave personality assessment ins trument was used for my research. The instrument was developed by Peter Saville of Saville Consulting Group Ltd. (SCG) utilizing more than 30 years of research and development in industrial organizational psychology assessments (Basham,

PAGE 49

49 2007, p.61) Th e W ave instrument is proprietary and protected under copyright laws, both within the United States and internationally ; therefore, t he entire assessment cannot be presented in my paper. However, t he theoretical constructs and reporting mechanisms can be presented. T he W ave is the latest design of the newest generation of behavioral questionnaires p. 34). The Saville Consulting W ave Professional Styles d evelopment program specifically focuse s on creating cutting edge assessments. The W ave is grounded in the theories of the Five Factor Model that measures 108 facets using nine point Likert type normative scale items (very strongly disagree, strongly disagree, disagree, slightly disagree, unsure, slightly agree, agree, strongly agree, a nd very strongly agree). The W ave questionnaire measures personal motives, talents, competency potential, and preferred culture, an integrated model that captures individual development and fosters career planning and performance management. The assessme nt consists of 215 questions divided into 12 competencies and 36 characteristics, measures 108 behavioral facets (Figures A 1 A 4) After finishing the assessment, which takes approximately 40 minutes, the participant receives a personal re port (Saville, MacIver, & Kurz 2009). Instrument Validity and Reliability The W ave draws on items from a database of over 5,000 questions to assess talent and motive in a way that directly links to competencies and job performance. The W ave has strong reliabilities averaging 0.86 and optimized validity through the use of normative and ipsative response formats. Validity with managers and professionals average d 0.46. In a 2008 validation study, W ave Professional Styles outperformed the OPQ32i NEO PI R Hogan Person ality Inventory, and 16PF on both work competencies and overall global measures o f performance (S aville et al., 2009).

PAGE 50

50 The WAVE has been correla ted against the 16PF the Myers Briggs Type Indicator the Gordon Personal Profile Inventory and the D I SC. The WAVE is a valid instrument based on construct validity. Reliability and validity of the W ave has been consistent over time and is resilient to the flaws of personality testing such as overcoming issues of self rated scales and mode of delivery, and maintains validity regardless of culture and language differences. Based on the history of the W ave as a robust instrument, I selected it as the assessment tool for my study (Basham, 2007). The dynamic normative and ipsative format cou pled with invited and supervised online access reduces the risk of dishonest results. Also, normative and ipsative results work in concert with rating acquiescence and response consistency to detect dish onesty easily (S aville et al. 2009). Data Collecti on In July and October 2006 S CG f acilitated a train the trainer session in Jacksonville Florida. Participants from fifteen community colleges in 12 states and affiliate councils from the AACC were invited to participate in the norming process. The onli ne questionnaire was available between August and December 2006 and a personal report was provided at the end of the data collection process. Privacy and anonymity was assured following the ethical standards of the American Psychological Association. S CG agreed to release a small subset of data for the purpose of dissertation research provided that the company was granted the first viewing right s of the final product after the dissertation defense (Basham, 2007). Data Analysis Results from the W ave Ps ychometric Profile are presented in the Expert Report. The 9 point Likert responses are converted into standardized S ten scores that allow ordinal data to be interpreted with the standardized bell curve scoring system. With this conversion, 68% of candid ate scores fall within one standard deviation of the mean ( M = 5), and scores within the 1

PAGE 51

51 9 ). The data was examined to determine if pairwise comparisons and relationships e xist ed for the leadership characteristics among the three groups. The data indicated that this was the case, so comparisons among individual traits w ere examined to determine strength and direction of those relationships. Overall the results provided s ufficient support for my research questions and hypothes e s. This chapter presented the research methodology, purpose of my study, the research question, the research hypothes e s, the sample population, the research framework, the research instrument, the da ta collection and the data analysis used in my study. T he next chapter presents the data analysis results.

PAGE 52

52 CHAPTER 4 RESULTS In this chapter the data analysis results of the descriptive data, analysis of variance (ANOVA), and follow up procedures are pr esented The data was analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 17.0 software. These analysis technique s were selected to demonstrate the strength and directions of any relationships between the personality traits and leadership styles of CCWDEs and corporate executives. The Tukey Kramer method was preferred i n conjunction with ANOVA to determine which means we re significantly different from one another. This method compared all possible pairs (pairwise comparisons c omparing entities in pairs ) of means for all three groups with a distribution similar to the t test. Results provide a narrower confidence limit, which is more powerful than Scheff Descriptive Data The means and standard deviations for the CCW DEs CCBO s and corporate executives are presented in Table 4 1 (Psychometric Profile descriptive data) and Table 4 2 (Competency Profile descriptive data ). Th e descriptive data results and analysis of the results are discussed next. Descriptive Data Resul ts The data for the CCWDEs appear ed to be distributed normall y with no large deviations ( Tables 4 1 and 4 2). The three highest mean S ten scores of leadership Psychometric Profile data for CCWDEs were striving ( M = 8.00 ), strategic ( M = 7.85), and direc ting ( M = 7.67 ). The three lowest mean S ten scores of leadership Psychometric Profile data for CCWEs were challenging ( M = 4.33), rational ( M = 4.96 ), and resolving ( M = 4.96) (Table 4 3) The three highest mean S ten scores of leadership Competency Profi le data for CCWDEs were achieving

PAGE 53

53 success ( M = 7.96 ) providing leadership ( M = 7.63), creating innovation ( M = 7.41 ). The three lowest mean S ten scores of leadership Competency Profile data for CCWDEs were executing assignments ( M = 5.33), providing supp ort ( M = 5.89) and communicating with people ( M = 5.96) (Table 4 4) The data for CCBOs appear ed evenly distributed with no large deviations ( Tables 4 1 and 4 2). The highest mean S ten scores of leadership Psychometric Profile data for CCBOs were strate gic ( M = 7.08), change oriented ( M = 6.92), and empowering ( M = 6.75). The three lowest mean S ten scores of leadership Psychometric Profile data for CCBOs were accepting ( M = 4.75), co nforming ( M = 4.92), and engaging ( M = 4.96) (Table 4 3) The three hi ghest S ten scores of leadership Competency Profile data for CCBOs were creating innovation ( M = 6.88), evaluating problems ( M = 6.75), and achieving success ( M = 6.71). The three lowest S ten scores of leadership Competency Profile data for CCBOs were comm unicating with people ( M = 5.42), executing assignments ( M = 5.42), and providing support ( M = 5.46) (Table 4 4) The data for corporate executives appear ed normally distributed with no large deviations ( Tables 4 1 and 4 2). The three highest mean S ten s cores of leadership Psychometric Profile data for corpor ate executives were analytical ( M = 8.20 ), abstract ( M = 7.30), and rational ( M = 7.10 ). The three lowest mean S ten scores of leadership Psychometric Profile data for corporate executives were engagi ng ( M = 4.20), self promoting ( M = 4.25), and attentive ( M = 4.95) (Table 4 3) The three highest mean S ten scores of leadership Competency Profile data for corporate executives were evaluating problems ( M = 8.05) creating innovation ( M = 6.80 ) and maki ng judgments ( M = 7.45) The three lowest mean S ten scores of leadership Competency Profile data for corporate exec utives were com municating with people ( M = 4.25 ) providing support ( M = 5.30), and projecting confidence ( M = 5.85 ) (Table 4 4)

PAGE 54

54 Descriptiv e Data Analysis Results When comparing the three groups some similarities and differences were noted in the descriptive data, which are discussed herein. The similarities and differences among the psychometric data will be discussed first followed by th e competencies data and a summary. In the psychometric data there were almost no personality trait s shared among the three groups (Table 4 3), except for being strategic ( a common trait of CCWDEs [ M = 7.85 ] and CCBOs [ M = 7.08 ] ). However, b eing strategic was high rated in the corporate executive group ( M = 7.08). This finding d id not prevent the assertion that this wa s a high rated personality trait similarly found among all three groups. Likewise, being engaging wa s one of the lower self rated personali ty traits shared among the three groups. Since the mean S ten score of each group equaled or almost equaled the mean S ten of 5.00, there was no cause to find was a personality trait lacking in any of the groups The trait happen ed to be t he lowest rated and t he other personality traits we re rated higher. Nevertheless, the competencies data revealed several shared competencies ( Table 4 4) But t hese results might be attributed to the smaller number of variables in the competency section ( 12 rather than 36) The competencies data show ed similarities among all three groups for creating innovation communicating with people, and providing support. T he CCWDEs tended to rate themselves more positively or rate themselves higher on many of the l eadership characteristics as evidenced by the mean S ten scores ( Table 4 1 and Table 4 2). In the CCWDE mean scores there we re 10 mean S ten scores above 7.00, representing a pproximately one standard deviation from the mean S ten score of 5.00, whereas the re we re no mean S ten scores above 7.00 for the corporate executive group and only one mean S ten score above 7.00 for the CCBOs group In cont rast, there we re no mean S ten scores below on e standard deviation for the group s which suggest ed similarities amo ng the groups, although

PAGE 55

55 conclusions c ould not be drawn from the mean S ten scores. Thus, further analysis using tests to compare the strengths and directions among the mean S ten scores was c onducted Research Hypothesis One The first h ypothesis examined th e relationship between personality traits and leadership styles of CCWDEs and corporate executives. This hypothesis was analyzed using descriptive statistics, t tests, one way ANOVA, and post hoc tests. H 1 : There will be no differences between leadership styles and personality traits of community college workforce development executives and corporate executives For hypothesis one, the ANOVA results ( Table 4 5) show ed that corporate executi ves significantly differed in 2 of the 36 dimensions of the psycho metr ic profile rational and resolving ( p < 0 .0 5) did not significantly differ in any of the 12 dimensions of the competency profile ( Table 4 6) C CWDEs significantly differed in 4 of the 36 dimensions of the psychometric profile d irecting, accepting, sel f assured ( p < 0 .05) and striving ( p < 0 .00) (Table 4 5) and in 2 of the 12 dimensions o f the competency profile achieving success and providing leadership ( p < 0 .0 5) ( Table 4 6). Research Hypothesis Two The second research h ypothesis examined the relat ionship between personality traits and leadership styles of CCBOs and corporate executives. This hypothesis was analyzed using descriptive statistics, t tests, one way ANOVA, and post hoc tests. H 2 : There will be no differences between leadership styles a nd personality traits of commu nity college business officers and corporate executives There were differences between CCBOs and corporate executives in 2 of the 36 dimensions of the psychometric profile empowering and composed ( p < 0 .0 5) ( Table 4 5).

PAGE 56

56 C CB Os ( Table 4 5) differed in 4 of the 36 dimensions of the psychometric pro file practically minded analytical, factual, and co nforming ( p < 0 .0 5) and in 1 of the 12 dimens ions of the competency profile e valuating problems ( p < 0 .05) ( Table 4 6). Research Hypothesis Three The third h ypothesis examined the relationship between personality traits and leadership styles of CCWDEs and CCBOs This hypothesis was analyzed using descriptive statistics, t tests, one way ANOVA, and post hoc tests. H 3 : There will be no differences between leadership styles and personality traits of community college workforce development executives and community college business officers. C CWDEs ( Table 4 5) differed from CCBOs in 6 of the 36 dimensions of the psychom etric profile d irecting empowering, articulate, self promoting, striving, and enterprising ( p < 0 .0 5), and in 2 of the 12 dimensions of the competency profile achieving success ( p < 0 .0 5) and providing leadership ( p < 0 .01) (Table 4 6) C CBOs ( Table 4 5) differed from CCWDEs in 5 of the 36 dimensions of the psychometric profile abstract, analytical, challenging, meticulous, and co nforming ( p < 0 .0 5) rational ( p < 0 .000), and did not score significantly higher in any of the 12 dimensions of the competency profile ( Tabl e 4 6).

PAGE 57

57 Table 4 1. Psychometric profile desc riptive data CC WDEs CCBOs Corporate executives ( n = 27) ( n = 24) ( n = 20) Psychometric profile M SD M SD M SD Inventive 6.89 1.72 6.58 2.00 5.65 2.08 Abstract 6.11 1.60 6.58 1.67 7.30 1.75 Str ategic 7.85 1.83 7.08 1.67 6.90 2.05 Insightful 6.93 1.38 6.08 1.44 7.05 1.54 Practically m inded 5.56 1.50 4.79 1.79 6.35 1.76 Learning o riented 6.11 1.60 6.54 1.82 6.60 1.64 Analytical 6.48 1.81 6.58 1.98 8.20 1.85 Factual 5.96 2.03 5.29 1 .85 6.70 1.72 Rational 4.96 1.87 6.29 1.92 7.10 1.07 Purposeful 6.74 1.58 6.29 1.63 5.75 1.68 Directing 7.67 1.24 6.33 1.66 6.50 1.40 Empowering 6.93 1.44 6.75 1.70 5.45 1.23 Convincing 5.59 2.00 5.96 1.94 5.70 1.89 Challenging 4.33 1.92 5.29 1.57 5.70 2.18 Articulate 6.85 1.73 6.25 1.51 5.55 2.04 Self p romoting 5.52 1.93 5.00 1.35 4.25 1.48 Interactive 5.52 1.91 5.46 1.41 5.00 1.84 Engaging 5.30 1.77 4.96 1.76 4.20 1.85 Involving 5.33 1.69 5.92 2.22 5.55 1.90 Attentive 5. 48 1.97 5.42 1.69 4.95 1.79 Accepting 6.07 1.77 4.75 1.57 5.50 1.70 Resolving 4.96 1.32 6.00 1.69 5.30 1.53 Self a ssured 6.70 1.75 5.42 1.93 6.05 1.85 Composed 6.37 1.57 6.54 1.89 5.20 1.79 Receptive 6.04 2.14 5.33 1.46 6.40 1.88 Positive 6.07 2.29 5.42 1.35 5.50 2.40 Change o riented 6.33 1.71 6.92 1.67 6.60 1.57 Organized 6.56 1.42 5.88 2.13 5.75 1.94 Principled 6.78 1.63 6.17 1.83 6.90 1.52 Activity o riented 5.96 1.58 5.92 1.56 5.85 1.87 Dynamic 7.56 2.45 6.17 2.06 6.10 2.00 Striving 8.00 1.24 6.00 1.87 6.75 1.29 Enterprising 7.07 1.82 6.29 2.10 5.05 1.32 Meticulous 5.19 1.73 5.50 2.04 6.54 1.19 Reliable 5.96 1.87 5.67 1.90 5.55 1.85 Co nforming 4.63 1.55 4.92 1.93 6.25 2.02 Note. Equal variances assumed df = 36

PAGE 58

58 Table 4 2. Competencies profile desc riptive data CCWD Es CCBOs Corporate executives ( n = 27) ( n = 24) ( n = 20) Competencies profile M SD M SD M SD Achieve s uccess 7.96 1.65 6.71 2.14 6.20 1.44 Adjust to c hange 7.19 1.78 6.63 1.58 6.50 1.54 Communicate 5.96 1.89 5.42 1.56 4.25 1.74 Creating i nnovation 7.41 1.74 6.88 1.94 6.80 2.02 Evaluate p roblems 6.44 1.76 6.75 1.96 8.05 1.39 Executing a ssignments 5.33 1.82 5.42 2.10 6.00 1.84 Make j udgments 7.33 1.30 6.58 1.84 7.45 1.47 Presenting i nformation 6.89 1.53 6.50 1.72 6.05 1.85 Projecting c onfidence 6.78 1.28 6.58 1.77 5.85 2.08 Providing l eadership 7.63 1.21 6.54 1.64 6.05 1.39 Providing s upport 5.89 1.76 5.46 1.93 5.30 2.00 Structuring t asks 7.2 6 1.48 6.13 2.23 6.30 2.00 Note Equal variances assumed, df = 36. Table 4 3. Comparison of three highest / lowest mean S ten scores for psychometric profile CC WDEs CCBOs Corporate executives Psychometric profile M Psychometric profile M Psychometric profile M Highest 1 striving 8.00 strategic 7.08 analytical 8.20 2 strategic 7.85 change oriented 6.92 abstract 7.30 3 directing 7.67 empowered 6.75 rational 7.10 Lowest 34 challenging 4.33 accepting 4.75 engaging 4.20 35 rational 4.96 co nforming 4.92 self promoting 4.25 36 resolving 4.96 engaging 5.96 attentive 4.95 Tabl e 4 4. Comparison of three highest / lowest mean S ten scores for competencies profile CC WDEs CCBOs Corporate execut ives Competencies profile M Competencies profile M Competencies profile M Highest 1 achieving success 7.96 creating innovation 7.08 evaluating problems 8.20 2 p roviding leadership 7.63 evaluating problems 6.75 m aking judgm ents 7.45 3 creating innovation 7.41 achieving success 6.71 creating innovation 6.80 Lowest 10 e xecuting assignments 5.33 communication 1 5.42 communication 1 4.25 11 p roviding support 5.89 e xecuting assignments 5.42 p roviding support 5.30 12 communication 1 5.96 providing support 5.46 p rojecting confidence 5.85 1 commun i catin g with people

PAGE 59

59 Table 4 5 One w ay ANOVA results of psychometric profile dimensions Section Dimension F (1, 52) p M SD Imaginative Inventive 2.494 0.090 6.440 1.962 Abstract 2.929 0.060 6.610 1.711 Strategic 1.841 0.167 7.320 1.865 Investigative Insightful 3.078 0.053 6.680 1.491 Practically minded 4.721 0.012* 5.520 1.764 Learning oriented 0.621 0.540 6.390 1.677 Evaluat i ve Analytical 5.704 0.005* 7.000 2.000 Factual 3.041 0.054 5.940 1.941 Rational 9.503 0.000* 6.010 1.901 Assertive Purposeful 2.134 0.126 6.310 1.653 Directing 6.485 0.003* 6.890 1.545 Empowering 6.439 0.003* 6.450 1.593 Impact ful Convincing 0.230 0.795 5.750 1.933 Challenging 3.316 0.042* 5.040 1.953 Articulate 3.176 0.048* 6.280 1.806 Sociable Self promoting 3.484 0.036* 4.990 1.686 Interactive 0.581 0.562 5.350 1.725 Engaging 2.197 0.119 4.870 1.820 Support ive Involving 0.579 0.563 5.590 1.932 Attentive 0.547 0.581 5.310 1.817 Accepting 3.923 0.024* 5.460 1.755 Resilien t Resolving 3.066 0.053 5.410 1.555 Self assured 3.111 0.051 6.080 1.895 Composed 3.746 0.029* 6.100 1.81 4 Flexible Receptive 1.911 0.156 5.900 1.883 Positive 0.771 0.467 5.690 2.047 Change oriented 0.788 0.459 6.610 1.652 Structure d Organized 1.376 0.260 6.100 1.845 Principled 1.282 0.284 6.610 1.677 Activity oriented 0.027 0.974 5 .920 1.637 Drive n Dynamic 3.479 0.036* 6.680 2.279 Striving 1.694 0.000* 6.970 1.707 Enterprising 7.298 0.001* 6.240 1.953 Conscientious Meticulous 3.243 0.045* 5.650 1.774 Reliable 0.311 0.734 5.750 1.857 Co nforming 4.928 0.010 5.190 1.922

PAGE 60

60 Table 4 6 P airwise comparisons of psychometric profile variables using Tukey Kramer method Group I J I J 95% Confidence interval Dependent variable Var1 Var2 Var3 Mean d ifference S E p Lower Upper Inventive CC WD E CCBO 1.239 0.567 .081 0.12 2.60 Corp 0.306 0.539 .838 0.99 1.60 CCBO CC WD E 1.239 0.567 .081 2.60 0.12 Corp 0.933 0.582 .250 2.33 0.46 Corp CC WD E 0.306 0.539 .838 1.60 0.99 CCBO 0.933 0.582 .251 0.46 2.33 Abstract CC WD E CCBO 1.189 0.491 .047* 2.37 0.01 Corp 0.472 0.467 .573 1.59 0.65 CCBO CC WD E 1.189 0.491 .047* 0.01 2.37 Corp 0.717 0.504 .336 0.49 1.93 Corp CC WD E 0.472 0.467 .573 0.65 1.59 CCBO 0.717 0.504 .336 1.93 0.49 Strategic CC WD E CCBO 0.952 0.544 .194 0.35 2.25 Corp 0.769 0.517 .304 0.47 2.01 CCBO CC WD E 0.952 0.544 .194 2.25 0.35 Corp 0.183 0.558 .942 1.52 1.15 Corp CC WD E 0.769 0.517 .304 2.01 0.47 CCBO 0.183 0.558 .942 1.15 1.52 Insightful CC WD E CCBO 0.124 0.427 .955 1.15 0.90 Co rp 0.843 0.406 .103 0.13 1.82 CCBO CC WD E 0.124 0.427 .955 0.90 1.15 Corp 0.967 0.438 .078 0.08 2.02 Corp CC WD E 0.843 0.406 .103 1.82 0.13 CCBO 0.967 0.438 .078 2.02 0.08

PAGE 61

61 Table 4 6 Continued. Group I J I J 95% Confidence interval Dependent variable Var1 Var2 Var3 Mean d ifference S E p Lower Upper Practically m inded CC WD E CCBO 0.794 0.495 .250 1.98 0.39 Corp 0.764 0.470 .243 0.36 1.89 CCBO CC WD E 0.794 0.495 .250 0.39 1.98 Corp 1.558 0.508 .009* 0.34 2.77 C orp CC WD E 0.764 0.470 .243 1.89 0.36 CCBO 1.558 0.508 .009* 2.77 0.34 Learning o riented CC WD E CCBO 0.489 0.498 .590 1.68 0.70 Corp 0.431 0.473 .636 1.56 0.70 CCBO CC WD E 0.489 0.498 .590 0.70 1.68 Corp 0.058 0.511 .993 1.17 1.28 Cor p CC WD E 0.431 0.473 .636 0.70 1.56 CCBO 0.058 0.511 .993 1.28 1.17 Analytical CC WD E CCBO 1.719 0.554 .008* 3.05 0.39 Corp 0.102 0.527 .980 1.36 1.16 CCBO CC WD E 1.719 0.554 .008* 0.39 3.05 Corp 1.617 0.569 .016* 0.25 2.98 Corp CC WD E 0. 102 0.527 .980 1.16 1.36 CCBO 1.617 0.569 .016* 2.98 0.25 Factual CC WD E CCBO 0.737 0.557 .387 2.07 0.60 Corp 0.671 0.529 .418 0.60 1.94 CCBO CC WD E 0.737 0.557 .387 0.60 2.07 Corp 1.408 0.571 .042* 0.04 2.78 Corp CC WD E 0.671 0.529 .41 8 1.94 0.60 CCBO 1.408 0.571 .042* 2.78 0.04

PAGE 62

62 Table 4 6 Continued. Group I J I J 95% Confidence interval Dependent variable Var1 Var2 Var3 Mean d ifference S E p Lower Upper Rational CC WD E CCBO 2.137 0.503 .000* 3.34 0.93 C orp 1.329 0.478 .019 2.47 0.18 CCBO CC WD E 2.137 0.503 .000* 0.93 3.34 Corp 0.808 0.516 .267 0.43 2.05 Corp CC WD E 1.329 0.478 .019* 0.18 2.47 CCBO 0.808 0.516 .267 2.05 0.43 Purposeful CC WD E CCBO 0.991 0.480 .105 0.16 2.14 Corp 0.449 0 .456 .589 0.64 1.54 CCBO CC WD E 0.991 0.480 .105 2.14 0.16 Corp 0.542 0.492 .517 1.72 0.64 Corp CC WD E 0.449 0.456 .589 1.54 0.64 CCBO 0.542 0.492 .517 0.64 1.72 Directing CC WD E CCBO 1.167 0.424 .020* 0.15 2.18 Corp 1.333 0.403 .004* 0. 37 2.30 CCBO CC WD E 1.167 0.424 .020* 2.18 0.15 Corp 0.167 0.435 .922 0.88 1.21 Corp CC WD E 1.333 0.403 .004* 2.30 0.37 CCBO 0.167 0.435 .922 1.21 0.88 Empowering CC WD E CCBO 1.476 0.437 .003* 0.43 2.52 Corp 0.176 0.416 .906 0.82 1.17 CCBO CC WD E 1.476 0.437 .003* 2.52 0.43 Corp 1.300 0.449 .014* 2.37 0.23 Corp CC WD E 0.176 0.416 .906 1.17 0.82 CCBO 1.300* 0.449 .014* 0.23 2.37

PAGE 63

63 Table 4 6 Continued. Group I J I J 95% Confidence interval Dependent varia ble Var1 Var2 Var3 Mean d ifference S E p Lower Upper Convincing CC WD E CCBO 0.107 0.577 .981 1.49 1.27 Corp 0.366 0.548 .783 1.68 0.95 CCBO CC WD E 0.107 0.577 .981 1.27 1.49 Corp 0.258 0.592 .900 1.68 1.16 Corp CC WD E 0.366 0.548 .783 0.95 1.68 CCBO 0.258 0.592 .900 1.16 1.68 Challenging CC WD E CCBO 1.367 0.558 .044* 2.70 0.03 Corp 0.958 0.531 .175 2.23 0.31 CCBO CC WD E 1.367 0.558 .044* 0.03 2.70 Corp 0.408 0.573 .757 0.96 1.78 Corp CC WD E 0.958 0.531 .175 0.31 2.23 C CBO 0.408 0.573 .757 1.78 0.96 Articulate CC WD E CCBO 1.302 0.517 .037* 0.06 2.54 Corp 0.602 0.492 .443 0.58 1.78 CCBO CC WD E 1.302 0.517 .037* 2.54 0.06 Corp 0.700 0.531 .390 1.97 0.57 Corp CC WD E 0.602 0.492 .443 1.78 0.58 CCBO 0.700 0.531 .390 0.57 1.97 Self p romoting CC WD E CCBO 1.269 0.481 .027* 0.12 2.42 Corp 0.519 0.457 .496 0.58 1.61 CCBO CC WD E 1.269 0.481 .027* 2.42 0.12 Corp 0.750 0.493 .288 1.93 0.43 Corp CC WD E 0.519 0.457 .496 1.61 0.58 CCBO 0.750 0.493 .288 0.43 1.93

PAGE 64

64 Table 4 6 Continued. Group I J I J 95% Confidence interval Dependent variable Var1 Var2 Var3 Mean d ifference S E p Lower Upper Interactive CC WD E CCBO 0.519 0.512 .571 0.71 1.74 Corp 0.060 0.487 .992 1.11 1.23 C CBO CC WD E 0.519 0.512 .571 1.74 0.71 Corp 0.458 0.525 .659 1.72 0.80 Corp CC WD E 0.060 0.487 .992 1.23 1.11 CCBO 0.458 0.525 .659 0.80 1.72 Engaging CC WD E CCBO 1.096 0.528 .102 0.17 2.36 Corp 0.338 0.502 .780 0.87 1.54 CCBO CC WD E 1.0 96 0.528 .102 2.36 0.17 Corp 0.758 0.542 .347 2.06 0.54 Corp CC WD E 0.338 0.502 .780 1.54 0.87 CCBO 0.758 0.542 .347 0.54 2.06 Involving CC WD E CCBO 0.217 0.573 .924 1.59 1.16 Corp 0.583 0.545 .536 1.89 0.72 CCBO CC WD E 0.217 0.573 .92 4 1.16 1.59 Corp 0.367 0.588 .808 1.78 1.04 Corp CC WD E 0.583 0.545 .536 0.72 1.89 CCBO 0.367 0.588 .808 1.04 1.78 Attentive CC WD E CCBO 0.531 0.540 .589 0.76 1.82 Corp 0.065 0.513 .991 1.16 1.29 CCBO CC WD E 0.531 0.540 .589 1.82 0.76 Corp 0.467 0.554 .678 1.79 0.86 Corp CC WD E 0.065 0.513 .991 1.29 1.16 CCBO 0.467 0.554 .678 0.86 1.79

PAGE 65

65 Table 4 6 Continued. Group I J I J 95% Confidence interval Dependent variable Var1 Var2 Var3 Mean d ifference S E p Lower Upper Accepting CC WD E CCBO 0.574 0.497 .485 0.62 1.77 Corp 1.324 0.473 .018* 0.19 2.46 CCBO CC WD E 0.574 0.497 .485 1.77 0.62 Corp 0.750 0.511 .312 0.47 1.97 Corp CC WD E 1.324 0.473 .018* 2.46 0.19 CCBO 0.750 0.511 .312 1.97 0.47 Reso lving CC WD E CCBO 0.337 0.446 .731 1.40 0.73 Corp 1.037 0.424 .044* 2.05 0.02 CCBO CC WD E 0.337 0.446 .731 0.73 1.40 Corp 0.700 0.457 .283 1.80 0.40 Corp CC WD E 1.037 0.424 .044* 0.02 2.05 CCBO 0.700 0.457 .283 0.40 1.80 Self assured CC WD E CCBO 0.654 0.543 .455 0.65 1.95 Corp 1.287 0.516 .040* 0.05 2.52 CCBO CC WD E 0.654 0.543 .455 1.95 0.65 Corp 0.633 0.557 .495 0.70 1.97 Corp CC WD E 1.287 0.516 .040* 2.52 0.05 CCBO 0.633 0.557 .495 1.97 0.70 Composed CC WD E CCBO 1.1 70 0.515 .067 0.06 2.41 Corp 0.171 0.490 .935 1.35 1.00 CCBO CC WD E 1.170 0.515 .067 2.41 0.06 Corp 1.342 0.529 .036* 2.61 0.07 Corp CC WD E 0.171 0.490 .935 1.00 1.35 CCBO 1.342 0.529 .036* 0.07 2.61

PAGE 66

66 Table 4 6 Continued. Group I J I J 95% Confidence interval Dependent variable Var1 Var2 Var3 Mean d ifference S E p Lower Upper Receptive CC WD E CCBO 0.363 0.549 .786 1.68 0.95 Corp 0.704 0.522 .373 0.55 1.95 CCBO CC WD E 0.363 0.549 .786 0.95 1.68 Corp 1.067 0. 563 .148 0.28 2.42 Corp WFD 0.704 0.522 .373 1.95 0.55 CCBO 1.067 0.563 .148 2.42 0.28 Positive CC WD E CCBO 0.574 0.606 .612 0.88 2.03 Corp 0.657 0.578 .492 0.72 2.04 CCBO CC WD E 0.574 0.606 .612 2.03 0.88 Corp 0.083 0.622 .990 1.41 1 .57 Corp CC WD E 0.657 0.576 .492 2.04 0.72 CCBO 0.083 0.622 .990 1.57 1.41 Change o riented CC WD E CCBO 0.267 0.489 .849 1.44 0.90 Corp 0.583 0.465 .425 1.70 0.53 CCBO CC WD E 0.267 0.489 .849 0.90 1.44 Corp 0.317 0.502 .803 1.52 0.89 Corp CC WD E 0.583 0.465 .425 0.53 1.70 CCBO 0.317 0.502 .803 0.89 1.52 Organized CC WD E CCBO 0.806 0.541 .303 0.49 2.10 Corp 0.681 0.515 .388 0.55 1.91 CCBO CC WD E 0.806 0.541 .303 2.10 0.49 Corp 0.125 0.556 .972 1.46 1.21 Corp CC WD E 0 .681 0.515 .388 1.91 0.55 CCBO 0.125 0.556 .972 1.21 1.46

PAGE 67

67 Table 4 6 Continued. Group I J I J 95% Confidence interval Dependent variable Var1 Var2 Var3 Mean d ifference S E p Lower Upper Principled CC WD E CCBO 0.122 0.493 .967 1.3 0 1.06 Corp 0.611 0.469 .398 0.51 1.73 CCBO CC WD E 0.122 0.493 .967 1.06 1.30 Corp 0.733 0.506 .322 0.48 1.95 Corp CC WD E 0.611 0.469 .398 1.73 0.51 CCBO 0.733 0.506 .322 1.95 0.48 Activity o riented CC WD E CCBO 0.113 0.490 .971 1.06 1.29 Corp 0.046 0.466 .995 1.07 1.16 CCBO CC WD E 0.113 0.490 .971 1.29 1.06 Corp 0.067 0.503 .990 1.27 1.14 Corp CC WD E 0.046 0.466 .995 1.16 1.07 CCBO 0.607 0.503 .990 1.14 1.27 Dynamic CC WD E CCBO 1.456 0.650 .072 0.10 3.01 Corp 1.389 0.618 .070 0.09 2.87 CCBO CC WD E 1.456 0.650 .072 3.01 0.10 Corp 0.067 0.667 .995 1.66 1.53 Corp CC WD E 1.389 0.618 .070 2.87 0.09 CCBO 0.067 0.667 .995 1.53 1.66 Striving CC WD E CCBO 1.250 0.441 .016* 0.19 2.31 Corp 2.000 0.419 .000* 1. 00 3.00 CCBO CC WD E 1.250 0.441 .016 2.31 0.19 Corp 0.750 0.452 .229 0.33 1.83 Corp CC WD E 2.000 0.419 .000* 3.00 1.00 CCBO 0.750 0.452 .229 1.83 0.33

PAGE 68

68 Table 4 6 Continued. Group I J I J 95% Confidence interval Dependen t variable Var1 Var2 Var3 Mean d ifference S E p Lower Upper Enterprising CC WD E CCBO 2.024 0.530 .001* 0.75 3.29 Corp 0.782 0.504 .274 0.43 1.99 CCBO CC WD E 2.024 0.530 .001* 3.29 0.75 Corp 1.242 0.544 .065 2.55 0.06 Corp WFD 0.782 0.504 274 1.99 0.43 CCBO 1.242 0.544 .065 0.06 2.55 Meticulous CC WD E CCBO 1.265 0.507 .040* 2.48 0.05 Corp 0.315 0.482 .791 1.47 0.84 CCBO CC WD E 1.256 0.507 .040* 0.05 2.48 Corp 0.950 0.521 .169 0.30 2.20 Corp CC WD E 0.315 0.482 .791 0.84 1 .47 CCBO 0.950 0.521 .169 2.20 0.30 Reliable CC WD E CCBO 0.413 0.553 .737 0.91 1.74 Corp 0.296 0.526 .840 0.96 1.56 CCBO CC WD E 0.413 0.553 .737 1.74 0.91 Corp 0.117 0.568 .977 1.48 1.24 Corp CC WD E 0.296 0.526 .840 1.56 0.96 CCBO 0 .117 0.568 .977 1.24 1.48 Co nforming CC WD E CCBO 1.620 0.538 .010* 2.91 0.33 Corp 0.287 0.511 .841 1.51 0.94 CCBO CC WD E 1.620 0.538 .010* 0.33 2.91 Corp 1.333 0.552 .048* 0.01 2.66 Corp CC WD E 0.287 0.511 .841 0.94 1.51 CCBO 1.333 0.5 52 .048* 2.66 0.01

PAGE 69

69 Table 4 7 One w ay ANOVA results of competency profile dimensions 95% Confidence i nterval Variable Pop 1 Pop2 Pop3 Mean d ifference S E p Lower Upper Achieving s uccess CC WD E CCBO 1.763 0.525 .004* 0.51 3.02 Corp 1.255 0 .499 .038* 0.06 2.45 CCBO CC WD E 1.763 0.525 .004 3.02 0.51 Corp 0.508 0.539 .651 1.80 0.78 Corp CC WD E 1.255 0.499 .038* 2.45 0.06 CCBO 0.508 0.539 .615 0.78 1.80 Adjusting to c hange CC WD E CCBO 0.685 0.486 .342 0.48 1.85 Corp 0.560 0 .462 .450 0.55 1.67 CCBO CC WD E 0.685 0.486 .342 1.85 0.48 Corp 0.125 0.499 .966 1.32 1.07 Corp CC WD E 0.560 0.462 .450 1.67 0.55 CCBO 0.125 0.499 .966 1.07 1.32 Comm unicating CC WD E CCBO 1.713 0.514 .004* 0.48 2.94 with people Corp 0.54 6 0.489 .507 0.63 1.72 CCBO CC WD E 1.713 0.514 .004* 2.94 0.48 Corp 1.167 0.528 .507 0.63 0.10 Corp CC WD E 0.546 0.489 .004 2.94 0.64 CCBO 1.167 0.528 .076 0.10 2.43 Creating i nnovation CC WD E CCBO 0.607 0.557 .523 0.73 1.94 Corp 0.532 0.530 .576 0.74 1.80 CCBO CC WD E 0.607 0.557 .523 1.94 0.73 Corp 0.075 0.572 .991 1.44 1.29 Corp CC WD E 0.532 0.530 .576 1.80 0.74 CCBO 0.075 0.572 .991 1.29 1.44

PAGE 70

70 Table 4 7 Continued. 95% Confidence i nterval Variable Pop 1 Pop 2 Pop3 Mean d ifference S E p Lower Upper Evaluating p roblems CC WD E CCBO 1.606 0.514 .007* 2.84 0.37 Corp 0.306 0.488 .807 1.48 0.86 CCBO CC WD E 1.606 0.514 .007* 0.37 2.84 Corp 1.300 0.527 .042* 0.04 2.56 Corp CC WD E 0.306 0.488 .807 0.86 1 .48 CCBO 1.300 0.527 .042* 2.56 0.04 Executing a ssignments CC WD E CCBO 0.667 0.568 .473 2.03 0.69 Corp 0.083 0.540 .987 1.38 1.21 CCBO CC WD E 0.667 0.568 .473 0.69 2.03 Corp 0.583 0.583 .579 0.81 1.98 Corp CC WD E 0.083 0.540 .987 1.21 1.38 CCBO 0.583 0.583 .579 1.98 0.81 Making judgments CCW D E CCBO 0.117 0.456 .965 1.21 0.98 Corp 0.750 0.434 .202 0.29 1.79 CCBO CCW D E 0.117 0.456 .965 0.98 1.21 Corp 0.867 0.468 .161 0.26 1.99 Corp CCW D E 0.750 0.434 .202 1.79 0.29 CCBO 0.867 0.468 .161 1.99 0.26 Presenting information CCW D E CCBO 0.839 0.498 .218 0.35 2.03 Corp 0.389 0.473 .691 0.75 1.52 CCBO CCW D E 0.839 0.498 .218 2.03 0.35 Corp 0.450 0.511 .654 1.67 0.77 Corp CCW D E 0.389 0.473 .691 1.52 0. 75 CCBO 0.450 0.511 .654 0.77 1.67

PAGE 71

71 Table 4 7 Continued. 95% Confidence i nterval Variable Pop 1 Pop2 Pop3 Mean d ifference S E p Lower Upper Projecting confidence CCW D E CCBO 0.928 0.502 .162 0.28 2.13 Corp 0.194 0.478 .913 0.95 1.34 C CBO CCW D E 0.928 0.502 .162 2.13 0.28 Corp 0.733 0.515 .335 1.97 0.50 Corp CCW D E 0.194 0.478 .913 1.34 0.95 CCBO 0.733 0.515 .335 0.50 1.97 Providing leadership CCW D E CCBO 1.580* 0.419 .001 0.58 2.58 Corp 1.088* 0.398 .022 0.13 2.04 CCBO CCW D E 1.580* 0.419 .001 2.58 0.58 Corp 0.492 0.430 .491 1.52 0.54 Corp CCW D E 1.088* 0.398 .022 2.04 0.13 CCBO 0.492 0.430 .491 0 54 1.52 Providing support CCW D E CCBO 0.589 0.557 .544 0.75 1.92 Corp 0.431 0.530 .697 0.84 1.70 CCBO CCW D E 0.589 0.557 .544 1.92 0.75 Corp 0.158 0.572 .959 1.53 1.21 Corp CCW D E 0.431 0.530 .697 1.70 0.84 CCBO 0.158 0.572 .959 1.21 1.53 Structuring tasks CCW D E CCBO 0.959 0.563 .212 0.39 2.31 Corp 1.134 0.536 .094 0.15 2.42 CC BO CCW D E 0.959 0.563 .212 2.31 0.39 Corp 0.175 0.578 .951 1.21 1.56 Corp CCW D E 1.134 0.536 .094 2.42 0.15 CCBO 0.175 0.578 .951 1.56 1.21

PAGE 72

72 CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION This research explored differences in leadership styles among community colleg e workforce development executives (CCWDEs) community college business officers (CCBOs) and corporate executives. By understanding the se differences, community colleges can develop meaningful and productive professional development and leadership progra ms to foster grow th in existing and future leaders, particularly in the area of workforce development. The W ave instrument was used to identify personality differences among three groups of leaders, CCWDEs, CCBO s and corporate executives. There were mod erate significant comparisons among the three groups. Stronger significant scores were found in the areas of striving, enterprising, rational, and co nfo rm ing Further implications of this data are disc ussed in the next section. Findings Moderate d ifferen ces in personality traits and leadership styles were found on the 36 dimensions of the W ave psychometric profil e and the 12 dimensions of the competenc ies profile. Overall, the results did not sufficiently indicate that one particular group would best se rve in a workforce leadership role Each group appeared to have few similarities in personality traits and leadership styles. Though some valuable differences emerged in the data these were not enough to conclude that a corporate executive or existing c ommunity college leader would be best suited for a pos ition in workforce leadership. Some of the data aligned with prior research using the W ave T he CCWDE group scored higher on the dimension of striving while the CCBO and corporate executive group had a higher mean S ten score on the dimension of analytical. On the contrary with prior W ave research, the CCBO group had a lower mean S ten score in co nforming Also similar to previous research

PAGE 73

73 using the W ave the CCBO group reflected low scores for co mmunicating with people. In the case of my study, all three groups were similar in this category. Further, r esearch performed by the AACC identified analytical and strategic as two vital dimensions for managerial competencies T he study c onducted by Iowa State University concluded that community college leaders were less likely to be equipped with the necessary skill sets for organizational strategy, resource management planning and organizing categories similar to those identified by the AACC. This information directly correlates with the data of my study where none of the three groups maintained a significant sc ore in the organized dimension. Surprisingly, CCWDEs and CCBO s appear ed to have dissimilar skill sets. One might assume that both community college groups would have similar personality and leadership styles but that is contrary to the findings of my study C CBOs need adequate skills to manage fiscal and budgetary responsibilities while the CCWDEs are responsible for building partnerships and maintaining contacts, both of which are essential for s uccessful operat ion in the workforce environment. Therefore, it is no surprise that the CCWDE group scored higher in the dimensions of enterprising and providing leadership, which ar e useful skills to perform the duties and responsibilities required to meet the demands. In addition to using ANOVA and post hoc tests, a comparison of the three highest and lowest mean S ten scores for both the psychometric and competenc ies prof iles was generated for all three groups. In the psychometric profile, CCWDE s score d high in the striving dimension CC BO s scored high in the strategic dimension, and corporate execut ives scored high in the analytical dimension On the competenc ies profil e, all three groups reflected hi gh mean S ten

PAGE 74

74 scores in creating in novation and low mean S ten scores in communication and providing support. Supported by Campbell (2006) and results from the Community College Futures Assembly, innovation and entrepreneuria lism are critical issues for community colleges, and communication is one of the essential managerial skills for community college leaders. Findings may also indicate that both community college groups share some common profiles, but ultimately, both pos itions have different responsibilities and may require different skill set s Fulton Calkins and Milling (2005) identified essential traits for future leaders Some of the findings in my research do not align with the theory. T o become an effecti ve leader, especially in the area of workforce, one must focus on maintaining and enriching connections with business and industry. erhaps all three groups are deficient in these areas though this is a careful assumption Bos (2007) state d the importance of future leaders technological skills, but that more organizations are focusing on leaders who have the potential to develop and maintain relationships. Further, according to Basham et a l (2010) th e mission of community colleges has shifted expand ing certification education training and collaborating partnerships with local business, the latter of which would require strong communication between the institution and the partner. Hence, if higher ed ucation institutions focus on fostering skills that enable leaders to dev elop and maintain relationships, helping to establish a common goal and vision with the general populous then relationship building should be a key component of leadership developme nt. Based on my research, each group evidently has a unique set of personality traits and leadership styles. The duties and responsibilities of such administrators, combined with the ir working environment s, may have influenced the results of my study. It would not be accurate to conclude that one group is better suited for an administrative position in c ommunity college

PAGE 75

75 workforce development Perhaps each group has something unique to offer to the workforce profession. However, because of the complex is sues facing community colleges, along with the challenges of providing opportunities for the community as well as balancing daily operations and managing a variety of departmental staff, a corporate executive might not easily transition into and function in such a n environment The literature addresses the importance of communication and building relationships both inside and outside the community college setting. Emotional intelligence is also one of the most sought after leadership qualities. All thr ee groups reflected lower mean scores in the area of communicating with people. Because these results are based on self report ed information one cannot presume that none of the groups would prosper in this area. Participants possibly overlooked and/or d etermined this construct compared to other constructs. Investing in leadership development is one recommend results especially as such programs pertain to future leaders. Some components of leadership development programs include mentoring, shadowing, and providing real life scenarios. Relationship building and effective communication should be infused into leadership development curriculum as well, especially since both paradigms are pr ioritized in the pertinent literature. Concl usion Difficult circumstances such as a declining economy, high turnover, attrition, and personnel who may not wish to enter leadership positions remain issue s for community colleges across the nation F or com munity colleges to both survive and succe ed they must recruit train and nurture the effective leaders. With the impending leadership gap, lack of preparation and leadership talent, and the ever increasing challenges that must be faced community colleg es should have measures in place to prepare future leaders These measures should particular ly

PAGE 76

76 focus on developing workforce leaders, since the mission of recruitment and retention has shifted to expanding partnerships and offering programs that train and certify students for the workforce. Future leaders in side or outside higher education should have the necessary skills to lead effectively and efficiently. Though institution s and businesses may share a vision and certain goals, difference in ratings on some of the leadership competencies among higher education institutions and corporate entities causes some concern While secession in community college leadership rapidly approach es, and many current higher education professionals are not prepared to hand le th e complexities of such roles, organizations should invest in developing leadership programs to be tter prep are and retain future leaders. From the leadership development p erspective institutions should consider incorporating leadership development pr ograms with professional development practices, fusing mentorship and entrepreneurial opportunities while focusin g on honing soft skills, such as effective communication emotional intelligence, and relationship building and maintenance Developing effec tive communication skills is especially important, since scores in this area were low. However, the communication scores may have been impacted by economic factors, along with the typical challenges of community colleges. Regardless, the low scores indic ate that leaders may not have the skills to succe ed in a modern community college climate, which is a basis for future research. As part of probationary period after accepting an administrative position they could shadow their seasoned counte rparts, studying their leadership style s and learning more about the institution as a whole. With respect to higher education leadership graduate and postgraduate programs, internships should be part of the curriculum, utilizing leadership development str ategies and exposing students to the dynamics of higher education leadership.

PAGE 77

77 Incorporating assessments such as the W ave or other similar tools can help identify characteristics needed to become an effective leader. As community colleges continue to per severe through the turbulent waters of leadership succession, a leveled economy, and the continuous demands of the community, they should rise to meet the challenge of developing future workforce leaders. Though a seemingly daunting task, this goal can be reached; historically, community colleges have weathered many storms. Community colleges can prepare their future leaders to succe ed in even the most complex areas of higher education such as workforce development Discussion My research creates an awar eness of the differences in leadership characteristics amon g CCWDEs CCBOs, and corporate executives and t he W ave assessment tool facilitated this increased understand ing Comparisons such as th ose in my study can serve as a benchmark for developing lea dership programs, paying particular attention to the critical skills needed by professionals working in specialized areas such as workforce development Even in their initial stages of existence community colleges persevered meeting the needs of a nati onwide population and weathering the considerable challenges faced by institutions to this day. This is especially important when addressing future leadership succession specifically in higher education. As noted in the literature, chief academic office rs, chief financial officers, and similar leadership professionals are currently retiring or planning to retire at alarming rates According to Basham et al., these rates could reach as high as 75% by 2011 (Basham et al., 2009). This information provides only one critical reason to justify invest ing in leadership succession planning. For decades, corporate entities and their business counterparts have compet ed for revenue and partnerships, demonstrat ing entrepreneurial behavior by maintaining a competitive edge.

PAGE 78

78 Such behavior would then require one to make sound judgments based on facts, thinking clearly, and using reason and logic to propel initiatives to the next level. For profit higher education institutions have practic ed this behavior consistently since career education has historically been their main focus. The economic decline should inspire community colleges to act more aggressively, gaining entrepreneurial status in research funding, partnerships with local business, and offering voc ational, technical, two year, and four year ce rtificate and degree programs. My study introduced a variety of information related to personality traits and leadership styles. Because each group appeared to possess different rather than similar qualities, leadership skills may be fostered through experience instead of relying on the idea that leadership skills are innate and thus unable to be fully developed through external endeavors Core leadership competencies would grow and mature over time as oppos ed to what skills can be acquired in short term leadership program s The question still remain s as to whether or not corporate executive s or existing community college leader s are better suited for administrative position s in workforce development. Deter mining that one group would excel over the other is a casual assumption since the profiles of these two groups demonstrated few significant differences. Implications for Higher Education The findings of my study support the critical need to prepare future community college administrators, who must handle the complex environment s of and challenges faced by community colleges. Like business and industry, community colleges should prioritize leadership development and use assessments that determine p ersonality characteristics and leadership traits to foster in future leaders. T he convoluted and dynamic environment s of community college s call for leadership to recognize and act on the increasing budget constraints, the evolving workforce needs, and th e learning needs of c ommunity college students along with the responsibility of preparing students from vari ous ethnic and socioeconomic background s

PAGE 79

79 Therefore, leadership program s comprised of lessons specific to workforce development should be availabl e to those interested in entering that field In terms of entrepreneurialism, community colleges should consider tailoring leadership development programs to reflect the AACC identified competencies, especially communication and location of resources, bot h vital skills for CCWDEs Effective skills in these areas may facilitate high quality business partnerships which are needed to provide successful workforce development programs for students. Higher education i nstitutions can benefit from researching t he entrepreneurial activities of other institutions, to seek both ideas and inspiration Hiring someone from the corporate realm may seem like a logical solution to staff a community college workforce development department. H owever this solution has it s caveats. C orporate executi ve s may not be as adept in leading staff, faculty, and students as their CCWDE c ounterpart s Moreover, lacking skills in attentiveness, communication, and engaging hamper s the ability to reach various goals, many of which require exceptional interpersonal skills. However, further individual assessment is required to provide more information on this matter, since my rese arch used a small sample size. R eflecting on the F FM assessment ( De Fruyt et al. 2009), h igher education institutions should identify less desir able leadership behaviors and use that information to improve career coaching programs and in pr edicting hiring trajectories. A proactive approach to addressing the paucity of research in leadership d evelopment and preparation could spawn the creation of leadership development curriculum Focal areas of this curriculum could includ e entrepreneurship, communication skills, and mentorship The emotional intelligence construct as noted by Campbell ( 200 6 ) and Basham and Mathur ( 2010) may be worth investigating. According to the literature about emotional intelligence that trait is perhaps the most essential

PAGE 80

80 for successful leadership Training, development, mentoring, and coaching programs should not only address common leadership skills such as rational, analytical, vision, and communication, but also address leadership soft s kills, s uch as emotional intelligence. For Future Research Work style profiles can be excellent tool s to develop benchmarks fo r leadership positions. Historically empirical research on personality treated the concept as a single variable, not considering the complexity or providing theoretical explanation s Similar studies have highlighted leadership styles, suggesting that so me individuals are innately equipped to be effective leaders. One approach to ensuring proper leadership selection is to develop clear expectations for workforce development positions, enhancing baseline profiles of existing and future leadership position s. Another approach is to see how a candidate s background relates t o the community college position he/she hopes to procure Future research can replicate and extend my study by expanding the sample size and scope of the geographic location. Demographic data could be extended to include age, ethnicity, years of professional exper ience, and level of education, in addition to considering educational background s other than academic. M ore refined research could expand the population to include professionals from both public and private institutions. The lower scores in communication impl y that leadership development programs should include modules and activities based on communication, relating to others, and maintaining relationships. Though the succession rates have significantly impact ed community colleges, their presidents may delay filling some vacan cies, because of the current economic strain in the United States As a result, future leaders may be burdened with increased responsibilities outside the realm s of their already taxing position s Further, contrary to high succession rates, the current economic crisis might force baby boomers to re tain their leadership positions longer than

PAGE 81

81 anticipated, based on previous research and survey results The li terature for my study was collected before the economic downturn, so a future study could highlight the longevity of those remaining in their leadership positions and how professional development can be improved in the current economy. Further research co uld of the economic crisis My study could be replicated using a variety of assessment instruments to avoid potential bias and to determine the critical traits needed to succeed under the pressures of a ssuming additional leadership duties With the continuous economic decline and the challenges fac ing comm u nity colleges, future leaders must possess the leadership skills needed to successfully bring community colleges to the next level. Communication and relationship building are valuable leadership assets, and these skills should be taught and practiced in leadersh i p development. Com munity colleges lead the way in developing the future workforce, creating a dire situation if community college administra tive positions particularly in workforce development remain either vacant or are filled with people lacking essential leadership traits. Therefore, community colleges, as well as the residents and bu sinesses they serve, should strive together to build up future leade rs, helping to cultivate the potential of these individuals and ensure the survival of the community college as an institution.

PAGE 82

82 APPENDIX THE SCALE DESCRIPTIONS T he W ave co nsists of four clusters t hought, influence, adaptability, and delivery. Each cluster is divided into three sections, with three dimensions per section and three facets per dimension yielding a total of 12 sections, 36 dimensions and 108 facets (Figures A 1 A 4) Thought Cluster The thought cluster ( Figure A 1) is composed of evaluative, investigative and imaginative sections which consist of the analytical, factual, rational, learning oriented, practically minded, insightful, inventive, abstract, and strategic dimensions (Figure A 1) Analytical Dimension The analytical dimension is composed of proble m solving, analyzing information, and probing facets. More than half of the benchmark group scored high in the analytical dimension enjoy, and consider them selves good at, analyzing information; see themselves as having a great aville et al., 200 9 ). If someone scores high on the analytical dimension he/she will likely score high on being rational ( r = 0.50) and abstract ( r = 0.48). Factual Dimension The factual dimension is composed of written communication, logical, and fact finding facets. More than half of the benchmark group scored high in the factual dimension making this e. understand the logic behind an argument; go to some lengths to ensure that they have all the aville et al. 200 9 ). The factual dimension does not correlat e with an y other dimensions.

PAGE 83

83 Rational Dimension The rational dimension is composed of number fluency, technology aware, and objective facets. More than half of the benchmark group scored high in the rational dimension making High sco interested in, and regard themselves as well versed in information technology; rely heavily on aville et al., 200 9 ). If someone scores high on the rational dimension he/she will likely score high on being analytical ( r = 0.50). In this dimension, m aville et al. 200 9 ). Learning Oriented Dimension The learning oriented dimension is c omposed of open to learning, learning by reading, and quick learning facets. More than half of the benchmark group scored high in the learning oriented dimension actively seek oppor tunities for learning new things; enjoy, and believe they learn a great deal aville et al. 200 9 ). If someone scores high on the learning oriented dimension he/she will likely score high o n being abstract ( r = 0.51). In this dimension, y ounger people tend to report higher scores (SD diff = 0.36) aville et al. 200 9 ). Practically Minded Dimension The practically minded dimension is composed of being practical, learning by doing, and com mon sense focused facets. More half of the benchmark group scored high in the practically minded dimension practical work; enjoy, and consider themselves good at, practical task s; much prefer to learn by aville et al. 200 9 ). The practically minded dimension does not correlate to any other dimensions

PAGE 84

84 Insightful Dimension The insightful dimension is composed of the discerning, seeking improve ment, and intuitive facets. More than half of the benchmark group scored high in the insightful dimension the core of a problem; have a constant need to impro ve things and believe they are good at identifying ways in which things can be improved; very much trust their intuition about whether aville et al. 200 9 ). If someone scores high on the insightful dimension he/she will likely score h igh on strategic ( r = 0.44) and inventive ( r = 0.41). Inventive Dimension The inventive dimension is composed of the creative, original, and radical facets. Less than 40% of the benchmark group scored high in the inventive dimension t produce lots of ideas; are confident in their ability to generate unusual ideas; favor radical a ville et al. 200 9 ). If someone scores high on the inventive dimension he/she will likely score high on being strategic ( r = 0.49), abstract ( r = 0.44) and insightful ( r = 0.41) and is likely to score low on being co nforming ( r = 0.50). If someone sc ores in the moderate range on the inventive dimension he/she will likely score high on being change oriented ( r = 0.36), empowering ( r = 0.34), dynamic ( r = 0.31), learning oriented ( r = 0.31), convincing ( r = 0.31), and an alytical ( r = 0.30). Abstract Di mension The abstract dimension is composed of the conceptual, theoretical, and learning by thinking facets. About half of the benchmark group scored high in the abstract dimension developing concepts; develop concepts well; apply theories a lot; like applying theories and believe they do this

PAGE 85

85 aville et al. 200 9 ). If someone scores high on the abstrac t dimension he/she will likely score high on being learning oriented ( r = 0.51), analytical ( r = 0.48), and inventive ( r = 0.33). Strategic Dimension The strategic dimension is composed of the developing strategy, visionary, and forward thinking facets. About half of the benchmark group scored high in the strategic dimension derive real satisfaction from this; need to have, and feel able to create, an inspiri ng vision for the future; think long aville et al. 200 9 ). If someone scores high on the strategic dimension he/she will likely score high on being inventive ( r = 0.49), insightful ( r = 0.44), dynamic ( r = 0.41 ), striving ( r = 0.41), and empowering ( r = 0.40) and is likely to be low on co nforming ( r = 0.38). Influence Cluster The influence cluster is composed of sociable, impactful, and assertive sections, which consist of the purposeful, directing, empowering, convincing, challenging, articulate, self promoting, interactive, and engaging dimensions (Figure A 2) Interactive Dimension The interactive dimension is composed of networking, talkative, and lively facets. More than half of the benchmark group scored high in the interactive dimension making this a aville et al. 200 9 ). If someone scores high on the interactive dimension he/she will likely score high on engaging ( r = 0.58) and self promoting ( r = 0.43).

PAGE 86

86 Engaging Dimension The engaging dimension is composed of establishing rapport, friendship seeking, and initial impr ession facets. About half of the benchmark group scored high in the engaging dimension people; have limited interest in making new friends; are unlikely to make a strong first aville et al. 2006). If someone scores high on the engaging dimension he/she will likely score hi gh on interactive ( r = 0.58). Self p romoting Dimension The self promoting dimension is composed of immodest, attention seeking, and pra ise seeking facets. About half of the benchmark group scored high in the self promoting dimension ention; like to be, and often find themselves, the center of attention; have a strong need for praise and seek praise when they have aville et al. 200 9 ). If someone scores high on the self promoting dimension he/she is very likely to score high on being interactive ( r = 0.43). The o verall low self rating in this dimension indicates that most people view self promoting as a negative trait (S aville et al. 200 9 ). Convincing Dimension The convincing dimension is composed of persuasive, negotia t ory and asserting views facets. About half of the benchmark group scored high in the convincing dimension making this see themselves as very persuasive; wan t to get the best deal and believe they negotiate well; are aville et al. 200 9 ). If someone scores high on the convincing dimension he/she will likely score high on

PAGE 87

87 c hallenging ( r = 0.55), enterprising ( r = 0.47), purposeful ( r = 0.45), and directing ( r = 0.42), but is moderately likely to score low on being co nforming ( r = 0.30). In this dimension, m ales aville et al. 200 9 ) Articulate Dimension The articulate dimension is composed of giving presentations, eloquent, and socially confident facets. More than half of the benchmark group scored high in the articulate dimension High scorers presentations; enjoy explaining things and consider that they do this well; enjoy meeting and are aville et al. 200 9 ). The articulate dimension does not correlat e with any other di mensions. Challenging Dimension The challenging dimension is composed of challenging ideas, prepared to disagree, and argumentative facets. About half of the benchmark group scored high in the challenging dimension High ideas; want people to know when they disagree with them and are open in voicing (S aville et al. 200 9 ). If someone score s high on the challenging dimension he/she is moderately likely to score low on being co nforming ( r = 0.31). Purposeful Dimension The purposeful dimension is composed of decisive, making decisions, and definite facets. More than half of the benchmark gr oup scored high in the purposeful dimension making this a responsibility for, and are prepared to make, big decisions; hold definite opinions on most issues and r aville et al. 200 9 ). If someone scores high on the purposeful

PAGE 88

88 dimension he/she will likely score high on being directing ( r = 0.50), convincing ( r = 0.45), and dynamic ( r = 0.45), likely to score low on being involving ( r = 0 .30), and very likely to score low on being co nforming ( r = 0.40). In this dimension, m ales (SD diff = 0.47) and older aville et al. 200 9 ). Directing Dimension The directing dimension is composed of leade rship oriented, CCBO seeking, and coordinating people facets. About half of the benchmark group scored high in the directing dimension see leadership as one of their ke y strengths; are very much inclined to take CCBO of things; aville et al. 200 9 ). If someone scores high on the directing dimension he/she will likely score high on being empowering ( r = 0.55), purposeful ( r = 0.50), dynamic ( r = 0.47), convincing ( r = 0.42), and enterprising ( r = 0.40), but is moderately likely to score low on being co nforming ( r = 0.31). Empowering Dimension The empowering dimension is composed of motivating others, inspiring, and encouraging facets. Less than half of the benchmark group scored high in the empowering dimension other people and consider themselves adept at finding ways to do this; want, and believe they are aville et al. 200 9 ). If someone scores high on the empowering dimension he/she will likely score high on being directing ( r = 0.55) and strategic ( r = 0.40), and is likely to score low on being co nforming ( r = 0.30).

PAGE 89

89 Adaptability Cluster The adaptability cluster is composed of resilient, flexible, and support ive sections which consist of the self assured, composed, resolving, p ositive, change oriented, receptive, attentive, involving, and accepting dimensions (Figure A 3) Self a ssured Dimension The self assured dimension is composed of self confident, self valuing, and self directing facets. More than half of the benchmark gro up scored high in the inventive dimension making confident; feel very positive about themselves; have a strong sense of their own worth; feel in CCBO aville et al. 200 9 ). The se lf assured dimension does not correlat e with any other dimensions. Composed Dimension The composed dimension is composed of calm, poised, and copes with pressure facets. About half of the benchmark group scored high in the composed dimension making this a aville et al. 200 9 ). If someone scores high on the composed dimension he/she wi ll likely score highly on being change oriented ( r = 0.43) and is moderately likely to score low on being co nforming ( r = 0.39). In this dimension, m ales report higher scores than females ( aville et al. 200 9 ). Resolving Dimension Th e resolving dimension is composed of conflict resolution, handling angry people, and coping with upset people. About half of the benchmark group scored high in the resolving dimension reements; consider themselves effective at calming angry people down; believe they cope well with people

PAGE 90

90 aville et al. 200 9 ). If someone scores high on the resolving dimension he/she will likely score high on being attentive ( r = 0.46). Positive Dimension The positive dimension is composed of optimistic, cheerful, and buoyant facets. About half of the benchmark group scored high in the positive dimension attribute. (S aville et al. 200 9 ). The positive dimension does not correlat e with any other dimensions. Change Oriented Dimension The change oriented dimension is composed of accepting challenges, accepting change, and tolerant of u ncertainty facets. About half of the benchmark group scored high in the change oriented dimension adapt readily to new situations; are positive about and cope well with change; cop e well with aville et al. 200 9 ). If someone scores high on the change oriented dimension he/she will likely score high on being composed ( r = 0.43). Receptive Dimension The receptive dimension is composed of receptive to feedback, open to criticism, and feedback seeking facets. More than half of the benchmark group scored high in the receptive dimension others; encourage people to criticize their approach; a ctively seek feedback on their aville et al. 200 9 ). The receptive dimension does not correlat e with any other dimensions and y ounger people report higher scores (SD diff = aville et al. 200 9 ). Attentive Dimension The attentive dimension is composed of empathic, listening, and psychologically minded facets. About half of the benchmark group scored high in the attentive dimension making this a

PAGE 91

91 understanding how others are feeling; regard themselves as good listeners; are interested in, and aville et al. 200 9 ). If someone scores high on the attentive dimension he/she will likely score high on being accepting ( r = 0.53), involving ( r = 0.51), and resolving ( r = 0.46). In this dimension, f emales report higher scores than males (SD aville et al. 200 9 ). Accepting Dimension The accepting dimension is com posed of trusting, tolerant, and considerate facets. About attribute. conside aville et al. 200 9 ). If someone scores high on the accepting dimension he/she will likely score highly on being involving ( r = 0.53) and attentive ( r = 0.52). Involving Dimension The involving dimension is composed of team o riented, democratic, and decision sharing facets. More than half of the benchmark group scored high in the involving dimension making full account of othe aville et al. 200 9 ). If someone scores high on the involving dimension he/she will likely score high on accepting ( r = 0.53) and attentive ( r = 0.51), but is moderat ely likely to score low o n being purposeful ( r = 0.30). Delivery Cluster The delivery cluster is composed of conscientious, structured, and driven sections, which consist of the reliable, meticulous, conforming, organized, principled, activity oriented, d ynamic, enterprising, and striving dimensions (Figure A 4)

PAGE 92

92 Reliable Dimension The reliable dimension is composed of meeting deadlines, finishing tasks, and punctual facets. About half of the benchmark group scored high in the reliable dimension making t his a aville et al. 2006). If someone scores high on the reliable dimension he/she will lik ely score highly on being organized ( r = 0.60), meticulous ( r = 0.48), and co nforming ( r = 0.47). Meticulous Dimension The meticulous dimension is composed of quality oriented, thorough, and detailed facets. Less than half of the benchmark group scored hi gh in the meticulous dimension making this a quality; want things done properly and consider themselves very thorough in their approach; see themselves as h aville et al. 2006). If someone scores high on the meticulous dimension he/she will likely score high on being organized ( r = 0.50), reliable ( r = 0.48), and co nforming ( r = 0.42). Co nforming Dimension The co nforming dimensi on is composed of rule bound, following procedures, and risk a d verse facets. Less than half of the benchmark group scored high in the change oriented dimension strictly to (S aville et al. 2006). If someone scores high on the co nforming dimension he/she will likely score high on being reliable ( r = 0.43), organized ( r = 0.42), and meticul ous ( r = 0.42) and is moderately likely to score low on being composed ( r = 0.39), strategic ( r = 0.38), dynamic ( r = 0.37), directing ( r = 0.31), challenging ( r = 0.31), empowering ( r = 0.30), convincing ( r =

PAGE 93

93 0.30), and enterprising ( r = 0.30). In this dimension, f emales report higher scores than males (SD aville et al. 2006). Organized Dimension The organize d dimension is composed of self organized, planning, and prioritizing facets. Less than half of the benchmark group score d high in the organized dimension making this a aville et al. 2006). If someone scores high on the organized di mension he/she will likely score highly on being reliable ( r = 0.60), meticulous ( r = 0.50), and co nforming ( r = 0.42). Principled Dimension The principled dimension is composed of proper, discreet, and honoring commitments facets. About half of the benc hmark group scored high in the principled dimension making this in an ethical fashion; consider maintaining confidentiality to be among their key strengths and can be relied upon to be discreet; view themselves as honoring the commitments they have aville et al. 200 9 ). The principled dimension does not correlate with any other dimensions. The overall high self rating in this dimension indicates t hat most people view being principled as a positive trait (S aville et al. 200 9 ). Activity Oriented Dimension The activity oriented dimension is composed of quick working, busy, and multitasking facets. About half of the benchmark group scored high in the activity oriented dimension cope well with multi aville et al. 200 9 ). The activity oriented dimension does not

PAGE 94

94 correlat e with other dimensions and f (S aville et al. 200 9 ). Dynamic Dimension The dynamic dimension is composed of energetic, initiating, and action oriented facets. More than half of the benchmark group scored high in the dynamic dim ension making this a impatient to get things started and good at starting things off; are focused on making things aville et al. 200 9 ). If someone scores high on the dynamic dimension he/she will likely score high on being directing ( r = 0.47), purposeful ( r = 0.45), striving ( r = 0.42), enterprising ( r = 0.42), and strategic ( r = 0.41), but is moderately likely to b e low on co nforming ( r = 0.37). Enterprising Dimension The enterprising oriented dimension is composed of competitive facets. About half of the benchmark group scored high in the enterprising dimension itive, with a strong need to win; believe they are good at, and derive real satisfaction from, identifying business opportunities; see themselves aville et al. 200 9 ). If someone scores high on the enterprising dimension he/she will likely score high on striving ( r = 0.53), convincing ( r = 0.47), dynamic ( r = 0.42), and directing ( r = 0.40), and is moderately likely to score low on co nforming ( r = 0.30). In this dimension, m (S aville et al. 200 9 ). Striving Dimension The striving dimension is composed of ambitious, results driven, and persevering facets. More than half of the benchmark group scored high in the striving dimension making this a High sco

PAGE 95

95 attach great importance to achieving outstanding results and believe they do so; are very aville et al. 200 9 ). If someone scores high on the st riving dimension he/she will likely score high on being enterprising ( r = 0.53), dynamic ( r = 0.42), and strategic ( r = 0.41). In this dimension, m ales report higher scores (SD (S aville et al. 200 9 ).

PAGE 96

96 CLUSTER Sections Dimensions Facet s THOUGHT Evaluation Analytical Problem solving Analyzing information Probing Factual Written communication Logical Fact finding Rational Number fluency Technology aware Obje ctive Judgment Learning Oriented Discerning Seeking improvement Intuitive Practically Minded Practical Learning by doing Common sense focused Insightful Open to learning Learning b y reading Quick learning Vision Inventive Creative Original Radical Abstract Conceptual Theoretical Learning by thinking Strategic Developing strategy Visionary Forwa rd thinking Figure A 1. Thought cluster sections, dimensions, and facets.

PAGE 97

97 CLUSTER Sections Dimensions Facets INFLUENCE Sociable Interactive Immodest Attention seeking Praise seeking Engaging Networking T alkative Lively Interactive Establishing rapport Friendship seeking Initial impression Impactful Convincing Persuasive Negotiatory Asserting views Articulate Challenging ideas Prepared to disagree Argumentative Challenging Giving presentations Eloquent Socially confident Assertive Purposeful Decisive Making decisions Definite Directing Leadership orie nted CCBO seeking Coordinating Empowering Motivating others Inspiring Encouraging Figure A 2. Influence cluster sections, dimensions, and facets.

PAGE 98

98 CLUSTER Sections Dimensions Facets ADAPTABILITY Res ilient Self assured Conflict resolution Handling angry people Coping with upset people Composed Self confident Self valuing Self directing Resolving Calm Poised Copes with pressure Flexible Positive Receptive to feedback Open to criticism Feedback seeking Change Oriented Optimistic Cheerful Buoyant Receptive Accepting challenges Accepting change Tolerant of uncertainty Supportive Attentive Team oriented Democratic Decision sharing Involving Empathic Listening Psychologically minded Accepting Trusting Tolerant Considerate Fi gure A 3 Adaptability cluster, sections, dimensions, and facets.

PAGE 99

99 CLUSTER Sections Dimensions Facets DELIVERY Conscientious Reliable Quality oriented Thorough Detailed Meticulous Meeting deadlines Finish ing tasks Punctual Conforming Rule bound Following procedures Risk adverse Structured Organized Self organized Planning Prioritizing Principled Proper Discreet Honori ng commitments Activity Oriented Quick working Busy Multitasking Driven Dynamic Energetic Initiating Action oriented Enterprising Ambitious Results driven Persevering Striving Competitive Entrepreneurial Selling Figure A 4. Delivery cluster sections, dimensions, and facets.

PAGE 100

100 REFERENCES Amey, M. J., VanDer Linden, K. E., & Brown, D. F. (2002). Perspectives on community college leadership: Twenty ye ars in the making. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 26 573 589. Asendorpf, J. B. (2002). The puzzle of personality types [Editorial] European Journal of Personality, 16 (1) S1 S 5. doi: 10.1002/per.446 Ashburn, E. (2007 September 14 ). Wave of leaders retirements hits C alif 2 year colleges. The Chronicle of Higher Education 54 (3), A1 A21. Bagna to, K. (2004 August 26 ). Brave new leadership : With community college presidents access institution to do? Leadership programs just might be the answer Black I ssues in H igher E ducation, 14 28 31. Balkis, M. & Isiker, G. B. (2005). The relationship between thinking styles and personality types. Social Behavior and Personality : an international journal 33 283 94. B ardaglio, P. W. (2005). Sustainability thinking and entrepreneurship: A case study. Peer Review 7 (3), 18 20. Higher Education Management and Policy 17 (3 ), 43 58 Basham, M. J. (2007). C ognitive application of personality testing: Measuring (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3299337) Basham, M J., Campbell, D. F., & Garcia, E. (2010). Stop the presses! Using the journalism field as a case study to help community college administrators today. Community College Journal of Research and Practice 34 (1 2 ), 175 79. doi: 10.1080/10668920903385947 Bas ham, M. J., Campbell, D. F., & Mendoza, P. (2008 November ). Critical issues facing : A summary of the Community College Futures Assembly 2008 Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 32 (11), 857 870. Basham, M., J. & Mathur, R. P. (2010). Dynamic leadership development in community college administration: theories applications, and implications. New Directions for Community Colleges 149 25 3 2. doi: 10.1002/cc.392 Basham, M. J., Stader, D. L., & Bishop, H. N. (20 09 March ). How pathetic is your hiring process? An application of the L practices. Community College Journal of Research and Practice 33 (3 4 ) 363 3 85. Bernard, L. C., Walsh, R. P., & Mills, M. (2005). As k once, may tell: Comparative validity of self rating and objective measurement of the Big Five personality factors. Counseling and Clinical Psychology Journal, 2 (1), 40 57.

PAGE 101

101 Berry, L. H., Hammons, J. O., & Denny, G. S. (2001). Faculty retirement turnover in community colleg es: A real or imagined problem? Community College Journal of Research and Practic e 25 (2) 123 136. Bisbee, D. C. (2007). Looking for leaders: C urrent practices in leadership identifica tion in higher education. Planning and Changing 38 (1 2 ) 77 88. Boeree, C. G. (2006). Personality t heories Retrieved October 30, 2009 from http://www.ship.edu/%7Ecgboeree/jung.html Boggs, G. R. (2004). Community colleges in a perfect storm. Change, 36 (6), 6 11. Bos, J. (2007 November 19 ). Top trends in traini ng and leadership development. Retrieved November 3, 2009 from http:// www.workforce.com Breneman, D. W. (2005). Entrepreneurship in higher education. New Directions for Higher Education 1 29 3 9. doi: 10.1002/he.168 Brown, L., Mar tinez M. C. & Daniel, D. (2002). Community college leadership preparation: Changing needs, current pe rceptions, and recommendations. Community College Review 30 (1) 45 73. Cam pbell, D. F. (2006). The new leadership gap : Shortages in administrative positions Community College Journal 76 (4), 10 14. Campbell, D. F. (2009). Your next leader : Piecing together the executive search process Community College Journal 79 (6), 34 35. C ampbell, D. F., Syraj, S., & Morris, P. A. (2010). Minding the gap: Filling a void in community college lea dership development. New Directions for Community Colleges 149 33 39. doi: 10.1002/cc.393 Center f or Creative Leadership (2008). Driving performan ce: Why leadership development matters in difficult times. Retrieved October 6, 2009 from http:// www.cc l .org Cooper, C D., S c andura, T. A., & Schriesheim, C. A. (2005). Looking forward but learning from our past: Potential challenges to developing authen tic leadership theory and authentic leaders. The Leadership Quarterly 16 (3) 475 493. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.03.008 Crossan, F. (2003). Research philo sophy : T owards an understanding. Nurse Researcher, 11 (1), 46 55. De Fruyt, F., De Clercq, B. J., Mill er, J., Rolland, J P., Jung, S C., Taris, R., Furnham, A., & Van H i el, A. (2009). Assessing personality at risk in perso nnel selection and development. European Journal of Personality 23 (1) 51 69. doi: 10.1002/per.703

PAGE 102

102 Doane, D. J. & Pusser, B. (2005, Sp ring). Entrepreneurial organization at the academic core: The case of s ummer sessions. New Directions for Higher Education 129 43 5 4 doi: 10.1002/he.171 Duree, C. (2008) Iowa State study of community college presidents finds national shortage on horizo n Retrieved September 18, 2009 from http://www.news.iastate.edu/news/2008/jul/ ccleadership.shtml Eysenick H. J. (1990). Biological dimensions of personality. In L. A. Pervin ( Ed.) Handbook of p ersonality: Theory and r esearch ( pp. 244 276 ) New York, NY: Guilford. Flannigan, S. L ., Greene, T. G., & Jones, B. R. (2006). Setting the stage for action: Entrepreneurship at work. In J. E. Roueche & B. R. Jones (Eds.), The e ntrepreneu rial c ommunity c ollege (pp. 1 12 ) Washington DC : Community College Press. Friedel, J. N. (2008). The effect of the community college workforce development mission on governance. New Directions for Community Colleges 141 45 55. doi: 10.1002/cc.314 Fulto n Calkins, P. & Milling, C. (2005). Community college leadership: An art to be practiced: 2010 and beyond. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 29 (3) 233 250. doi: 10.1080/10668920590901176 Gardner, H. (2006). Five minds for the future Bo ston MA: Harvard Business School Press. Garza Mitchell, R. L. & Eddy, P. L. (2008). In the middle: C areer pathways of midlevel community college leaders. Community College Journal of Research and Practice 32 (10) 793 811. doi: 10.1080/10668920802325739 Harris, A. (2009). Leadership suc c ession. School Leadership & Management 29 (5), 421 423. doi: 10.1080/13632430903152245 Hendricks J. W. & Payne, S. C. (2007). Beyond the B ig F ive: Leader goal orientation as a predictor of leadership effectiveness. Human Performance 20 317 343. Hull, J. R. & Keim, M. C. (2007). Nature and status of community college leadership development programs. Community College Journal of Research and Practice 31 (9) 689 702. doi: 10. 1080/10668920600851621 Jacobs, J. & Dougherty K. J. (2006). The uncertain future of the community college workforce development mission. New Directions for Community Colleges 136 53 6 2. doi: 10.1002/cc.259 Keim, M. C. & Murray, J. P. (2008). b ackgrounds. Community College Review 36 (2) 116 132. doi: 10.1177/0091552108324657 Korn r, H. & Nordvik, H. (2004). Personality traits in leadership behavior. Scandinavian Journal of Psycholog y 45 (1) 49 54. doi: 10.1111/j.1467 9450.2004.00377.x

PAGE 103

103 London, M. (2008). Leadership and a dvocacy: Dual roles for corporate social responsibility and social entrepreneurship. Organizational Dynamic s 37 (4), 313 326 doi: 10.1016/j.orgdyn.2008.07.003 Lussier, R. N. & Achua, C. F. (20 10 ). Leadership: Theory, applicati on, skill development (4 th ed.) Mason, OH : Cengage Leubsdorf, B. (2006). ment may create talent squeeze. The Chronicle of Higher Education 53 (2), A51. Malm, J. R. (2008). Six community college presidents: O rganizational pressures, change processe s and approaches to leadership. Community College Journal of Research and Practic e 32 (8) 614 628. doi: 10.1080/10668920802103813 McRae, R. R. & Costa, P. T. (1989). Reinterpreting the Myers Briggs Type Indicator from the perspective of the F i ve F actor M odel of personality. Journal of Personality, 57 (1), 17 40 McNair, D. E. (2010). Preparing community college leaders: The AACC core competencies for effective leadership and doctoral education. Community College Journal of Research and Practice 34 (1 2 ) 199 217. doi: 10.1080/10668920903388206 McNair, D E., Duree, C. A., & Ebbers, L. (201 1 ) If I knew then what I know now: Using the leadership competencies developed by the American A ssociation of C ommunity C olleges to prepare community college p residents. Community College Review 39 (1) 3 25. doi: 10.1177/0091552110394831 McPhail, C. J., Robinson, M., & Scott, H. (2008). The cohort leadership development model: Student perspectives. Community College Journal of Research and Practice 32 ( 4 & 6) 362 374. doi: 10.1080/10668920201884539 Murphy, N. (2005 November 18 ). Psychometrics: M aking waves. IRS Employment Review, 835 44 48 Basham, M. J. (2007). C ognitive application of personality testing: Measuring colleges (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3299337) Gender in community college administration (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses da tabase. (UMI No. 3355975) Ones, D. S., Viswes v aran, C., & Dilchert, S. (2005). Personality at work: R aising awareness and correcting misconceptions. Human Performance 18 (4), 389 404. Pace, A. (2010 February ). Develo p ing the leaders of tomorrow today. Tra ining and Development 64 (2), 18

PAGE 104

104 Patton, M. (2004 January 20 ). Initiative seeks to inform and prepare new leaders. Community College Times p. 18 Retrieved October 5, 200 9 from http://www.ccleadership.org/ Pet erman, D. S. (2002 July ). Is there a crisis in leade rship in the community college ? Community College Journal of Research and Practice 26 (6) 541 547. Riggs, J. (2009). Leadership, change and th e future of community colleges. Academic Leadership Journal 7 (1) Re trieved September 18, 2009 from http://www.academicleadership .org/emprical_research/581.html Risacher, J. (200 4 ). The extent to which four year college presidents who prev iously served as senior student affairs officers report having the characteristics of effective presidents. NASPA Journal 41 (3) 436 451. Romano, R. M., Townsend, B., & Mamiseishvili, K. (2009). Leaders in the making: Profile and perceptions of students in commu nity college doctoral programs. Community College Journal of Research and Practice 33 (3 4 ) 309 320. doi: 10.1080/10668920802580499 Romero, M. (2004). Who will lead our community colleges? Change 36 ( 6 ) 30 34. Salopek, J. J. (2006). Leadership f or a n ew age. Tr aining and Development 60 (6), 22 23. Sato, T. (2005). The Eysenck Personality Q uestionnaire brief version: Factor structure and reliability. The Journal of Psychology, 139 (6), 545 552. Saville, P. MacIver, R., & Kurz, R. (20 09). Saville C onsulting W ave P rofessional S tyles handbook. Retrieved November 1, 2009 from h ttp://www.savilleconsulting.com Shults, C. (2001). The critical impact of impending retirements of community college leadership W ashington DC : Community College Press Smith, A. B. & Stewart, G. A. (1999). A statewide survey of new department chairs: Their experiences and needs in learning their roles. New Directions for Community Colleges, 105 29 36. doi: 10.1002/cc.10504 Smith, D. & Adams, J. (2008). Academics or executives? Co ntinuity and change in the roles of pro vice chancellors. Higher Education Quarterly 6 2 (4), 340 357. doi: 10.1111/j.1468 2273.2008.00403.x Srivastava, S. (2009). Measuring the B ig F ive personality factors Retri e ved October 30, 2009 from http://www .uoregon.edu/ ~s anjay/bigfive.html Stoeckel, P. R., & Davies, T. G. (2007). Reflective leadership by selected community college presidents. Community Coll ege Journal of Research and Practice 31 (11) 895 912. doi: 10.1080/10668920600932876

PAGE 105

105 Strang, S. E. & Kuhnert, K. W. (2009). Personality and leadership developmental levels as predictors of leader performance. The Leadership Quarterly 20 421 433. doi: 1 0.1016/j.leaqua.2009.03.009 Vaughan, G. B. (2000). The community college s tory Washington DC : Community College Press. Weisman, L. M. & Vaughan, G. B. (2006). The commu nity college presidency: 2006 Washington, DC: Community College Press. Re trieved Sep tember 18, 2009 from http:// www.acc.nche.edu/aaccbriefs Whitsett, G. (2007). Perceptions of leadersh ip styles of department chairs. College Student Journal 41 (2) 274 286. Williamson, K. (2006). Research i n constructivist frameworks using ethnographic t echniques. Library Trends 55 (1), 83 101. Won, H. (2006). Links between personalities and leadership perceptions in problem solving groups. The Social Science Journal 43 (4) 659 672. doi: 10.1016/j.soscij.20 06.08.017 Yielder, J. & Codling, A. (2004). Management and leadership in the cont emporary university. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 26 (3), 315 328. Zaharia, S., & Gibert, E. (2005). The entrepreneurial university in the knowledge soci ety. Higher Education in Europe 30 (1) 31 40. Zhang, L F & Huang, J. (2001). Thinking styles and the five factor model of personality. European Journal of Personality 15 (6) 465 476. doi: 10.1002/per.429 Zhao, H., Seibert, S. E., & Hills, G. E. (2005). The m ediating role of self efficacy in the development of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Applied Psychology 90 ( 6 ) 1265 1272.

PAGE 106

106 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Barbara Yankowy received her associate s degree from Florida State College at Jacksonville. She c ontinued her education at the University of North Florida where she ea rned a bac ducation. During her college career, Yankowy was employed at Florida State College at Jacksonville where she has supported the community college mission for the past fifteen years. She earned her doctorate in higher education a dministration from the U niversity of Florida in 2011.