Leadership Characteristics of Workforce Development Administrators in Community Colleges

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Leadership Characteristics of Workforce Development Administrators in Community Colleges
Physical Description:
1 online resource (100 p.)
Language:
english
Creator:
Lebesch,Anna M
Publisher:
University of Florida
Place of Publication:
Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date:

Thesis/Dissertation Information

Degree:
Doctorate ( Ed.D.)
Degree Grantor:
University of Florida
Degree Disciplines:
Higher Education Administration, Human Development and Organizational Studies in Education
Committee Chair:
Campbell, Dale F
Committee Members:
Honeyman, David S
Wood, R. Craig
Leverty, Lynn H

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
administration -- college -- leadership -- vocational
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:
The community college environment is a complex and ever-changing system that requires effective leadership. The leadership characteristics in community colleges have been investigated substantially with studies primarily focused on the presidency and the pathway of the traditional academic pipeline. But as community colleges have struggled to do more with less, it has become even more imperative that the leadership of the organization approach turbulent times with greater innovation and entrepreneurial spirit, filling upcoming and increasing leadership vacancies with new talent. This study looked at the leadership characteristics of workforce development administrators. The purpose of this study was to analyze the talent found in the workforce development departments of selected community colleges by examining the management and leadership characteristics of workforce development personnel. The results of the statistical analysis showed some statistically different leadership characteristics and competencies between workforce administrators and other community college administrators. The workforce administrators were found to have characteristics of significantly higher leadership attributes for drive, which includes attributes of being dynamic, striving, and enterprising. The workforce administrators were also found to have significantly higher competency potentials for achieving success, which includes such factors as taking action, pursuing goals, and tackling business challenges. This data can serve to inform current presidents and aspiring leaders and educators about the specific areas of strength of workforce administrators, as well as areas to be targeted to better prepare tomorrow?s leaders.
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 Anna M Lebesch.
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:
UFE0043113:00001


This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

1 LEADERSHIP CHARACTERISTICS OF WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATORS IN COMMUNITY COLLEGES By ANNA MARIE LEBESCH A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQ UIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2011

PAGE 2

2 2011 Anna Marie Lebesch

PAGE 3

3 To my husband Mike, and our children Erin and Justin

PAGE 4

4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to thank my husband, Mike Lebesch, and our children, Erin and Justin, for their eternal support and love while I went on a seemingly endless journey in pursuit of my doctorate degree at the University of Florida. I will forever be indebted to them for their sacrifices while I pursued this degree. Words cannot b egin to express what their support and love have meant to me. I also would like to thank my parents, for their guidance and support throughout my educational journey. I want to specifically thank my committee chair, Dr. Dale Campbell. I appreciate his vi sion to make this cohort a reality and the support to see us all through to the end. I would like to thank the rest of my committee, Drs. David Honeyma n, Craig R. Wood, and Lynn Leverty. Special thanks also go to Angela Rowe who ensured that this cohort s tayed on track. I must also acknowledge the friends made in the cohort who have been my Finally, I must acknowledge all those who have worked with me throughout my career; their assistance got me to th is point. I have been blessed with many mentors but to Dr. Cosby, I owe a debt of gratitude for his kind and inspiring tutelage. My deepest appreciation goes to all my workforce colleagues who work tirelessly. They are so dedicated and they inspire me e very day. Lastly, thanks to Gail Gallagher, my assistant personally and professionally through so many years.

PAGE 5

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................ ................................ ................................ 4 LIST OF TABLES ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 8 LIST OF FIGURES ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 9 LIST OF DEFINED TERMS ................................ ................................ ......................... 10 ABSTRACT ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 11 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 13 Community College History ................................ ................................ ................... 13 Workforce Development History ................................ ................................ ............ 14 Community College Leaders ................................ ................................ ................. 18 Purpose of Study ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 19 Research Question ................................ ................................ ................................ 20 Research Hypotheses ................................ ................................ ........................... 20 Significance of the Study ................................ ................................ ....................... 20 Limitations ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 21 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ................................ ................................ ......................... 22 Community College Leadershi p ................................ ................................ ............. 22 Leadership Gap ................................ ................................ ............................... 22 Leadership Opportunity ................................ ................................ ................... 26 Leadership Fram ework ................................ ................................ .......................... 28 Characteristics and Competencies of the Community College Leader ................... 30 Workforce Development in Community Colleges ................................ ................... 32 Historical Point of View ................................ ................................ .................... 33 Pathway to the Future ................................ ................................ ..................... 34 Characteristics and Competencies in Workforce Development Leaders ................ 36 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ................................ ................................ .............. 41 Purpose of the Study ................................ ................................ ............................. 41 Research Problem ................................ ................................ ................................ 41 Research Question ................................ ................................ ................................ 42 Research Instrument ................................ ................................ ............................. 42 The Expert Report ................................ ................................ .................... 43 Psychometric Profile ................................ ................................ ................. 44 Competency Potential ................................ ................................ ............... 45

PAGE 6

6 Predicted Culture/Environment Fit ................................ ............................ 45 Instrument Validity and Reliability ................................ ............................. 46 Data Co llection ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 46 Data Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 47 4 RESULTS ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 51 Descriptive Statistics ................................ ................................ ............................. 51 Research Problem Hypothesis 1 ................................ ................................ ........... 52 Research Problem Hypothesis 2 ................................ ................................ ........... 53 5 DISCUSSION ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 65 Research Hypothesis 1 ................................ ................................ .......................... 65 Research Hypothesis 2 ................................ ................................ .......................... 70 Implications for Higher Education ................................ ................................ .......... 73 Suggestions for Future Research ................................ ................................ .......... 75 Conclusion ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 76 AP PENDIX A B UREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS ................................ ................................ ....... 78 B AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF COMMUNITY COLLEGES (AACC) ..................... 79 O rganizational Strategy ................................ ................................ ......................... 79 Resource Management ................................ ................................ ......................... 79 Communication ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 80 Collaboration ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 80 Community College Advocacy ................................ ................................ ............... 80 Professionalism ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 81 C THE WAVE SCALE DESCRIPTIONS ................................ ................................ .... 82 ................................ ................................ ........................... 82 ................................ ................................ .......................... 82 ................................ ................................ ...................... 82 ................................ ................................ ............................ 82 D THE COMPETENCY SCALE DESCRIPTIONS ................................ ..................... 87 ................................ ................................ ............. 87 ................................ ................................ ........... 87 Th ................................ ................................ ....... 87 ................................ ................................ ............ 87

PAGE 7

7 LIST OF REFERENCES ................................ ................................ .............................. 92 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................ ................................ ......................... 100

PAGE 8

8 LIST OF TABLES Table page 4 1 Response summary; m ean, s td. d eviation and m edian for o verall, w orkforce and o ther a dministrators ................................ ................................ .................... 55 4 2 Leadership c haracteristics ( e xecutive s ummary); m ean, s td. d eviation, m edian for o verall, w orkforce and o ther a dministrators ................................ ..... 56 4 3 Spearman c orrelation c oefficients l eadership c haracteristics ( e xecutive s ummary) w orkforce a dministrators n = 86 ................................ ........................ 57 4 4 Spearman c orrelation c oe fficients l eadership c haracteristics ( e xecutive s ummary) o ther a dministrators n = 80 ................................ ............................... 58 4 5 Leadership c haracteristics ( e xecutive s ummary) c orrelated d irection and s trength ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 59 4 6 Leadership competencies m ean and s td. d eviation for o verall, w orkforce and o ther a dministrators ................................ ................................ ........................... 60 4 7 Leadership competencies workforce a dm inistrators ................................ .......... 61 4 8 Leadership competencies other a dministrators ................................ ................. 62 4 9 Leadership c ompete ncies correlated direction and s trengt h .............................. 63

PAGE 9

9 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 3 1 Theoretical structure of the WAVE ................................ ................................ .. 49 3 2 Comp etency p otential p rofile s ten s core r ating. ................................ ................. 50 A 1 Labor force participation rates by age, 1988, 1998, 2008 and projected 2018. .. 78 A 2 Economic dependency ratio, by age 1975 2008 and projected 2018. ................ 78 C 1 The thought cluster, sections and dimensions. ................................ .................. 83 C 2 The influence cluster, sections and dimensions. ................................ ................ 84 C 3 The adaptability cluster, sections and dimensions. ................................ ............ 85 C 4 The delivery cluster, sections and dimensions. ................................ .................. 86 D 1 The solving problems cluster. ................................ ................................ ............ 88 D 2 The influencing people cluster. ................................ ................................ .......... 89 D 3 The adapting approaches cluster. ................................ ................................ ..... 90 D 4 The delivering results cluster. ................................ ................................ ............ 91

PAGE 10

10 LIST OF DEFINED TERMS C OMMU NITY In the context of this study, a community college is a public, not for C OLLEGE profit institution in which the most common degree awarded to students is an associate degree. O THER A community college administrator in this study is defined as any C OM MUNITY person who has had direct oversight of any division or department C OLLEGE within the community college other than workforce development. A DMINISTRATOR Examples of position titles included but were not limited to: Vice President of Academic Affair s, Executive Dean of Academic Affairs, Vice President of Instruction, Dean of Arts and Sciences, Chief Financial Officer, Vice President for Institutional Advancement, Director of Human Resources and Vice President for Operations. P RESIDENT For the purpos e of this study the community college president was defined as any person who has assumed the role and has the responsibilities of Chief Executive Officer (CEO) for the institution. W ORKFORCE A community college administrator in this study is defined as an y D EVELOPMENT person who has had direct oversight of any division or department A DMINISTRATOR within the community college related to workforce development. Examples of position titles would include but are not limited to: Vice President for Workforce D evelopment Career and Technical Education Dean or Director, Director of Corporate Training, Dean of C ontinuing Education.

PAGE 11

11 Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Education LEADERSHIP CHARACTERISTICS OF WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATORS IN COMMUNITY COLLEGES By Anna Marie Lebesch August 2011 Chair: Dale Campbell Major: Higher Education Administration The communit y college environment is a complex and ever changing system that requires effective leadership. The leadership characteristics in community colleges have been investigated substantially with studies primarily focused on the presidency and the pathway of t he traditional academic pipeline. But as community colleges have struggled to do more with less, it has become even more imperative that the leadership of the organization approach turbulent times with greater innovation and entrepreneurial spirit, fillin g upcoming and increasing leadership vacancies with new talent. This study looked at the leadership characteristics of workforce development administrators. The purpose of this study was to analyze the talent found in the workforce development departments of selected community colleges by examining the management and leadership characteristics of workforce development personnel. The results of the statistical analysis showed some statistically different leadership characteristics and competencies betwee n workforce administrators and other community college administrators. The workforce administrators were found to have characteristics of significantly higher leadership attributes for drive, which includes attributes of being dynamic, striving, and enter prising. The workforce administrators

PAGE 12

12 were also found to have significantly higher competency potentials for achieving success, which includes such factors as taking action, pursuing goals, and tackling business challenges. This data can serve to inform current presidents and aspiring leaders and educators about the specific areas of strength of workforce administrators,

PAGE 13

13 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Community colleges have had a rich a nd vital history of serving the communities of this nation. During the past century, they have responded to the needs of an ever changing and ever demanding constituency. Edmund Gleazer (1980) stated that the community college mission can be defined in th vision, and values continue to be supported by researchers who herald the community college as an innovator in leading change. As stated in 2008 by George R. Boggs, segments of American higher education, community colleges have been the most flexible, the most responsive to the educational needs of comm unities, and the most resourceful, taking calculated risks and leveraging scarce resources to accomplish their garnered even greater notoriety, as seen in the 2010 U.S. pres idential administration conducting a first ever community college summit at the White House. The summit members called upon these institutions to be a major contributor to the initiative to build American skills by producing an additional 5 million communi ty college graduates (The White House, 2010). Community College History The majority of colleges were originally established in the early 1900s as junior colleges providing the first two years of collegial work (Cohen & Brawer, 2008). This type of two yea r education quickly changed and expanded as the needs of the nation developed. Greater emphasis was placed on the development of a skilled workforce

PAGE 14

14 with training beyond high school as a result of national policy initiatives such as the GI Bill of Rights ( U.S. Department of Education, n.d.). Though community colleges had more than a century of history, the true growth and development of the community college system began in the 1960s. The 1960s was an era of significant growth as 457 new community colleges opened across the nation, which was more than the total that had been in existence before that time. (American Association of Community Colleges, 2010a). In 2009, the number of community colleges in the nation reached almost 1,200 enrolling more than 11. 8 million students, or 43% of all undergraduates in the United States (American Association of Community Colleges, 2010b). (p. 242). Without community colleges, millions of people young or old, rich or poor, average or brilliant would not have been able to access the education they needed to be prepared for the future. Community colleges often have been the only access poin t for education in a community, and also the real catalyst for personal and economic development (American Association of Community Colleges, 2010c). Workforce Development History As community colleges continued to grow, so has the depth and complexity of their mission. The former junior colleges are now full service comprehensive institutions which have strongly emphasized meeting the workforce needs of the communities they to fill workforce needs, brought together within one institution the former missions of junior

PAGE 15

15 Responding to the workforce needs of our nation was a long standing emphasis of highe r education. Federal policy and funding of workforce education, also known as its roots as far back as 1862 with the passage of the Morrill Act, which shifted the foc us from classical studies to more applied studies that would educate people in agriculture, home economics, mechanical arts, and other professions practical at the time (U.S. National Archives & Records Administration, 1995). This shift would only be the beginning of a change in direction of the educational system. Perhaps one of the best known and most influential federal legislative acts was the passage of the National Vocational Education (Smith Hughes) Act of 1917. This act, an early form of categoric al funding, set the stage for vocational education as a public funded entity, separate from the mainstream. The original focus of the act was that of a defense strategy which allowed students in the secondary system and even adults already in the workforc e to receive training (Smith, 1999). But this focus shifted over Measured in terms of dollars and enrollment, this early form of categorical assistance was deemed successful. In 1917, just before implementation of Smith Hughes, there were 200,000 vocational students in the United States and something less than $3 million was sp ent annually on their training. Forty years later, enrollment had increased to 3.4 million students and expenditures stood at $176 million. (para. 7) According to the Association of Career and Technical Education (2002a), in the 1940s, most of the voca tional training was supported by the need to train defense production workers to support the war effort. Following the war, it was legislation such

PAGE 16

16 as the GI Bill of Rights which continued to fuel the efforts to sustain vocational education. This action, as well as the National Defense Act of 1958, which was the training in scientific and technical fields (U.S. Department of Education, n.d.). The 1960s saw the passage of seve ral rounds of legislation meant to reinforce job training and vocational education. The acts included: the Manpower Development and Training Act of 1961, which provided the unemployed worker with assistance in attaining training; the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964, which created the Job Corps; and the Work Incentive Program in 1967, which provided training to welfare recipients (Almanac of Policy Issues, 2001). In addition to these acts, the Vocational Education Act of 1963 was passed, which came to b e known as the Perkins Act. Initial funding for this program was $60 million, and it became a permanent federal program to support vocational education at the secondary and postsecondary level (Association of Career and Technical Education, 2002b). Thoug h it has gone through many amendments, revisions, and reauthorizations, a new form of this legislation was enacted in 2006 (U.S. Department of Education, 2007). The purpose of this act included the following goals, as outlined by the Association of Career and Technical Education (2006): (1) building on the efforts of States and localities to develop challenging academic and technical standards and to assist students in meeting such standards, including preparation for high skill, high wage, or high demand occupations in current or emerging professions; (2) promoting the development of services and activities that integrate rigorous and challenging academic and career and technical instruction, and that link secondary education and postsecondary education fo r participating career and technical education students;

PAGE 17

17 (3) increasing State and local flexibility in providing services and activities designed to develop, implement, and improve career and technical education, including tech prep education; (4) conducti ng and disseminating national research and disseminating information on best practices that improve career and technical education programs, services, and activities; (5) providing technical assistance that promotes leadership, initial preparation, and pro fessional development at the State and local levels; and that improves the quality of career and technical education teachers, faculty, administrators, and counselors; (6) supporting partnerships among secondary schools, postsecondary institutions, baccala ureate degree granting institutions, area career and technical education schools, local workforce investment boards, business and industry, and intermediaries; (7) providing individuals with opportunities throughout their lifetimes to develop, in conjunct ion with other education and training programs, the knowledge and skills needed to keep the United States competitive. (Association for Career and Technical Education, 2006) On August 12, 2006, President George W. Bush signed the Carl D. Perkins Vocat ional and Technical Improvement Education Act of 2006, authorizing this legislation through 2012 (U.S. Department of Education, 2007). This legislation funneled an estimated allocation of $1,141,988,150 in the 2010 fiscal year to workforce education (Dann Messier, 2010). A look beyond the funding and policy to the individuals and communities served has provided another perspective on the impact of workforce development training. No matter the vantage point, the effect on the communities served has been v isible. The statistics have documented this impact: 50% of new nurses and a majority of other allied health workers are educated at community colleges. Almost 80% of front line, public service officers, such as firefighters, law enforcement officers, and emergency medical technicians, attained their job related knowledge at a community college.

PAGE 18

18 Finally, 95% of businesses and organizations, which employed graduates of community colleges, recommended their training programs (National Commission on Community Colleges, 2008). This long history, as well as the impact of community colleges and workforce training on our communities, has provided evidence of the strength and viability of these n commit to at and continual need and support for workforce development training in th e community college system. Community College Leaders The history, popularity, and demand for community college training has resulted in a unique organizational environment, one which has presented challenges to manage and lead. These institutions have de manded a unique set of leadership characteristics at the presidential and administrative levels to guide the organization. This problem has been further compounded by the fact that many of the leaders of community colleges entered the profession during the boon of the 1960s and made plans to end their careers. This pending wave of retirements threatened to wipe out the institutional knowledge and leadership in scores of institutions. Lengthy discussions, research, and publications have occurred about this concern from the perspective of higher education researchers (Boggs, 2003; Berry, Hammons, & Denny, 2001; Campbell & Associates, 2002; Fields, 2004). As community colleges have continued to be called upon to be the leaders and innovators in higher educati on, purposeful planning had to target training and increase

PAGE 19

19 the leadership pipeline (Amey, 2006; Amey, Van Der Linden, & Brown, 2002; Boggs, 2003; Fields, 2004; Romero, 2004). According to a 2007 survey, 47% of college presidents are coming from the trad itional pipeline of academic administration and only 4% from economic and workforce development positions (Duree, 2007). A leadership gap is forming, as shown by the 2009 American Council on Education Survey of Chief Academic Officers, which indicated tha t the most common career move for Chief (2006) findings that indentified a pending wave of retirements among the administrative ranks of middle management in community colleg es. These concerns are further substantiated by the data published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which projected a slowdown in the growth of the labor force that is expected to continue through the next decade, due substantially to the aging of the w orkforce (Toossi, 2009). As of January 1, 2011, MetLife (2009) approximated that every day more than 10,000 baby boomers will reach the age of 65, and this trend will continue for the next 18 years as the baby boomer generation born between 1946 and 1964 reach the stages of retirement. Many of these boomers are the same individuals who now fill the leadership positions that the higher education community is most concerned will drain the leadership resources in the community college system (Amey, 2006; Ame y, Van Der Linden, & Brown, 2002; Boggs, 2003; Campbell, 2006; Fields, 2004; Romero, 2004). Purpose of Study The purpose of this study was to analyze the talent found in the Workforce Development departments of selected community colleges by examining the

PAGE 20

20 management and leadership characteristics of Workforce Development personnel. It examined the unique character sets found in these positions. Research Question The research question guiding this study examined current community college personnel: How do workforce administrators differ from other administrators in terms of leadership characteristics and competency potential? Research Hypotheses Hypothesis #1: There are identifiable and significant characteristic differences between workforce administrator s and other administrators in community colleges. Hypothesis #2: There are identifiable and significant competency differences between workforce administrators and other administrators in community colleges. Significance of the Study As community colleges have faced some of the most tumultuous times in history and have been struck with the potential for substantial loss of personnel among the administrative and leadership ranks, more information is required about the current and future leaders for these or ganizations. This study builds upon the previous research of (2011) in identifying leadership attributes of community college leaders and in determining the strength of leadersh ip development. This study has expanded the focus of research beyond the traditional academic departments to include the workforce development departments of community colleges. This study has provided new knowledge to the literature about the competenci es of community college administrators. The findings will be used to inform current presidents and aspiring leaders and educators about the specific areas to be targeted to better prepare

PAGE 21

21 ansion of the pipeline to upper level administrators and the presidency beyond the traditional academic administration to the ranks of the Workforce Development departments. Limitations This study was conducted among public community colleges in the United States, therefore the results may not be generalizable to private, for profit, or community colleges outside of the United States. The participants of this study included only community college administrators. The results may be generalizable to all comm unity college administrators but not to college, university, or K 12 administrators. The participant responses were assumed to be honest and representative of their viewpoints. Since the participants are volunteers, it is likely that some bias occurs from self selection. The test was administered to respondents in an unsupervised fashion using computer based testing. No mechanism is in place for ensuring that the respondents stayed on task, other than making inferences from the data after collection.

PAGE 22

22 CHA PTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW The purpose of this chapter was to present a review of the growing scholarly literature on community college leadership in relation to the guiding research questions. An overview of research findings related to this study has been provided in this chapter. This chapter has been organized to first provide the overall identified leadership gap and the resultant leadership opportunity. A leadership framework is presented to guide the examination of literature as it relates to the char acteristics and competencies of community college leaders. The second section of this chapter is focused on the literature related to community college workforce development from both a historical perspective and future outlook, as well as an examination of the characteristics and competencies of workforce development leaders. Community College Leadership Leadership Gap The community college, a unique form of American higher education, in its 100 plus years of existence, has changed the landscape of postse condary education. The rapid growth experienced in the past four decades in which public institutions have increased 250% and enrollments by 700% has exemplified the learning opportunities that community colleges have provided (Cohen & Brawer, 2008). Comm unity colleges with their history of flexibility, adaptation, and innovation have demonstrated that, as organizations, they can lead during changing times. Yet the transformation of the community college has still not been completed. Mellow and Heelan (2 008) argued that to truly realize the potential of the institutions and the transformational power that exists

PAGE 23

23 within, community colleges must become full partners in American higher education policies and practice. To facilitate this transformation in the se times of complexities and uncertainty, formidable leadership must be present at the helm. But a growing concern has occurred society are taking a significant toll on the le adership workforce available in community colleges. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, dynamic changes expected are between 2008 and 2018 with 5.6 million people leaving the labor force as a result of aging and retirement (Toossi, 2009). Accord ing to Jackson (2010), these changes have resulted in unprecedented numbers of individuals with skills, knowledge, and experience lost to these institutions and organizations. As early as the 1980s Vaughn (1986) and 1990s, Vaughn and Weisman (1998), as wel l as Campbell and Leverty (1997) identified growing concerns about leadership within community colleges. Schults (2001) fashioned these concerns as a pending leadership crisis. The 1996 study, as cited by Weisman and Vaughan (2002), indicated that 68% of community college presidents planned to retire in 10 years (Vaugh and Weisman, 1998). In 2001, the percentage had risen to 79% (Weisman & Vaughn, 2002), and the projection was that more than half of the presidents leading the nearly 1,200 community colle ges would retire by 2012 (Weisman & Vaughan, 2007). This pending leadership predicament may have been subdued by the economic downturn and recession. The American Association of Retired Persons has reported that almost half of the employed population e nvision working into their 70s and beyond, mostly due to the recent recession and the depletion of retirement savings, as well as

PAGE 24

24 the increased ability to live a healthier life and an ongoing desire to continue contributing to society (Jackson, 2010). Th e Bureau of Labor Statistics found that the labor force participation by age group 55 and older is projected to increase by 2018. In addition, the economic dependency ratio for various age groups is expected to increase by 2018, particularly for those 65 years of age and older ( Appendix A), which indicates a need for older workers to remain in the workforce. Jackson also contended, however, that competitive employers need to embrace ideas of a more flexible workplace to attract the interest of this older workforce interested in phased retirement, flexible scheduling, tele working, and part time hours. Another concern is the wealth of knowledge and history that is at risk as these individuals retire or transition from the workforce (Jackson, 2010; Toossi, 2009). Even as the leadership predicament may have been subdued, some of the trends, which have now been identified, are being seen among the older workers in community college education, not only at the presidential level but further into the administrat ive ranks. The American Council on Education (ACE) released the results of its first ever report on Chief Academic Officers (CAOs) in 2009, which indicated that the most common career move for them was to retire (21%) versus to seek a presidency (20%). Cl osely behind those choosing retirement was to return to faculty (18%), which has provided more flexible employment options. This new report indicates a real concern for the depth of leadership knowledge, which is lost institutionally when CAOs retire. Als o, a leadership implication and a challenge that CAOs identified as one of their top three frustrations was cultivating leadership in others.

PAGE 25

25 increasing wave of retirements among th e administrative ranks of middle management at community colleges. These administrative ranks included the following positions: Academic Affairs, such as Director of Learning Resources and Director of Institutional Research; Student Affairs, such as Regi strar and Director of Financial Aid; and Business Affairs, such as Director of Accounting and Human Resources. The research indicated that within five years the participating presidents anticipated losing 11% to 25% of their administrative workforce in th ese areas. The gaps were specifically identified as 38% in Academic Affairs, 31% in Student Affairs, and 28% in Business Affairs. Even larger gaps were identified as well, with an anticipated loss of 26% to 50% of the administrative workforce for some ins titutions, which was broken down as 13% in Academic Affairs, 9% in Student Affairs, and 10% in Business Affairs. Another area somewhat distinctive but worthy of consideration was that rural community colleges comprise 60% of all community colleges. A comm unity college within a short commute of 90% of the U.S. population provides access and learning opportunities in hundreds of small rural communities (American Association of wer pay and lack of cultural events all make it difficult to attract and retain rural college Boggs (2003) argued these leadership issues are both a challenge and opportunity to develop and prepare the next generation of community colleg e leadership. Vaughn (2004) also contended as well that this leadership challenge has not been a crisis but an opportunity to develop stronger leaders a new generation of

PAGE 26

26 leaders. Sullivan (2001) likened the millennials as the fourth generation of communi ty college leaders. These individuals are technologically savvy, skilled collaborators who have shown promise by bringing education, business and government together to address the workforce needs of the future. This leadership crisis has become the perf ect opportunity to forge new pathways. Vaughan (2001) argued for changing the standard pipeline for securing presidential candidates, ensuring institutions do not become stagnated but instead accept fresh ideas and new perspectives needed to meet changing community colleges must adapt, forecast changes, and be creative with their solutions appropriate l eadership to accomplish this task. Leadership Opportunity Historically, the pathway to the community college presidency has followed the same trend in which candidates rose through the academic pipeline (Amey & Van Der Linden, 2002; King & Gomez, 2008; W eisman & Vaughn, 2002, 2007). Kubala and Bailey (2001), who examined a community college president appointed in the late 1990s, found 56.4% followed a primarily academic pathway to the presidency. As recent as 2006, Weisman and Vaughn (2007) attained sim ilar results in a survey which indicated that 55% of respondents were in an academic position prior to their first community college presidency, and 48% previously held a full time faculty position at a community college. The results acquired by Duree (200 7) in a 2006 survey indicated 47% of community college presidents were coming from the traditional pipeline of academic administration.

PAGE 27

27 The pipeline narrowed even further upon examination of additional data, indicating that many held multiple presidential appointments. Amey and Van Der Linden (2002) discovered that 25% were presidents of other institutions prior to attaining their most of the presidents held two or more p residencies. These results are indicative of search including other presidencies. This reliance on previous academic experience implied that leadership skills needed for the position may need to be gained from a variety of experiences (Amey et al., 2002). Though tradition has held fast for the majority of community college presidential and administrative appointees, the pathway has begun to widen, and, as a group, the appo majorities have been white male but consistent changes have occurred over time. Diversity of community college presidents and administrators, as defined by race and ethnicity, has been an area that has continued to change but slowly. The majority of presidents have continued to be white and have comprised approximately 82% of the presidential population. Representation among other groups has been approximately 8% African Americ an, 6% Hispanic/Latino, and 2% each Native American and Asian/Pacific Islander (Weisman & Vaughan, 2007). These percentages were an increase over previous studies in which rates were 6% African American, 5% Hispanic/Latino, and 1% each Native American and Asian/Pacific Islander (Amey & Van Der Linden, 2002). These percentages are also consistent with the demographics of the Chief Academic Officers, which have been identified to be 85% white, 6% African

PAGE 28

28 American, 4% Hispanic, 2% Asian American, and approxi mately 1% American Indian (American Council on Education, 2009) Studies have also revealed more diverse professional preparation among community col lege leaders. There has been a significant increase in the number of presidents coming from other types of administrative positions, such as senior student affairs officers and vice presidents for institutional planning or advancement (Amey et al., 2002). that the most common nonacademic po sitions held prior to the first presidency were chief student services officer, campus CEO, and chief business officer. In light of an anticipated large number of retirements in community colleges, aders (Amey et al., 2002, p. 574) The data suggested that the growth in previous administrative experience in positions other than chief academic officer is important. As Vaughn (2001) noted, tive position that comes administration has multiple and conflicting responsibilities for which management, administration, and leadership skills are gained through mul tiple and extended experiences. Leadership Framework Research has been conducted on the skill sets needed to perform competently as a community college president and administrator. Some consistent themes show a starter tool kit with which aspiring leaders can hone their skills and expand their experiences as the job and environment require.

PAGE 29

29 As part of the 2005 Leading Forward initiatives sponsored, by the W. K. Kellogg Foundation, the American Association of Community Colleges (AACC) contacted community co llege leaders from around the nation to brainstorm a set of recommended competencies to be used as a framework for developing future leaders. These results Community College Leaders ( Appendix B), and they were recommended for future community college leaders in the new millennium. These competencies have been validated by the research of Vincent (2004) and Hassan, Dellow, and Jackson (2010). of the data from across four summits which synthesized the opinions of 154 experts in community college leadership. This resulted in the AACC Competencies for Community College Leaders. In addition, a validation survey was conducted with a 76% response rate in which 100% S imilar results were found in a research study in which presidents and board chairs rated the importance of each competency (Hassan et al., 2010) Again, all six comparing agreement between presidents and trustees at the same institution, a high level of agree ment occurred on all six levels. The AACC Competencies for Community College Leaders provided a standard and consist perspective from which to view the leadership characteristics and competencies of community colleges administrators. Using these competenc ies, which consist of organizational strategy, resource management, communication, collaboration,

PAGE 30

30 community college advocacy, and professionalism as a framework, the data can be examined further to illustrate the underlining themes and characteristics need ed by those aspiring to leadership positions. Characteristics and Competencies of the Community College Leader Organizational strategies which advance the institution were found to be an essential element among many of the researchers (Amey, 2006; Boggs, 2003; Brown, Martinez, & Daniel, 2002; Hockaday & Puyear, 2000; McFarlin, Crittenden, & Ebbers, 1999; Pope & Miller, 2005; Shults, 2001). The ability to improve educational quality, make data driven decisions, respond to the needs of the community, creat e an environment for innovation and teamwork, as well as alignment of mission and outcomes, are all identified elements (American Association of Community Colleges, 2005). Goff (2002) indicated that organizational restructuring was a skill needed to meet the leadership and management requirements of being a community college leader. The American Association of Community Colleges (2005) also identified resource management as recommended competency for future community college leaders. Essential to this are financial strategies, and ensure accountability. Boggs (2003) also advocated this finding, stating that financial planning is an important skill for future leaders. The role that the community c ollege administrator must play as an advocate for the institution should not be overlooked (Amey, 2006; Goff, 2003; Pope & Miller, 2005). The competencies required for advocacy have included a demonstrated commitment to the mission, promotion, advancement and representation, as well as support of this unique learning environment (American Association of Community Colleges, 2005).

PAGE 31

31 Some would argue that this value of the community college education has not been a competency which cannot be taught in a class room but must be experienced (Pope & Miller, 2005). Another area which has proven difficult to quantify, but a necessary competency nonetheless would be professionalism. Fulton Calkins and Milling (2005) suggested one of the traits necessary is value cent ered leadership. Hockaday and Puyear (2000), who identified traits of effective community college leaders, included qualities such as Competencies for Community College Leader s (2005), these character elements are all related to professionalism. Goff (2002) acknowledged that many traits are needed by the community college president or leader to be successful, and as such individuals must conduct regular self assessment of thei r leadership traits and skills, and then capitalize on them to improve their institution. Communication has also been identified by the researchers as a consistently important competency (Boggs, 2003; Brown et al., 2002; Goff, 2002, 2003; Pope & Miller, 20 05). A 2002 study by Brown et al. revealed that instructional leaders at community colleges perceive communication skills to be the most important category of competencies necessary to perform their job effectively. These skills included multiple areas of communication, such as effective listening and feedback skills, effective writing skills, conveying a vision, conflict resolution, mediation and negotiation, understanding of interpersonal communication, and effective public speaking skills. Finally, the overwhelming majority of research reviewed identified collaboration abilities as a core function of community college leaders (Amey, 2006; Boggs, 2003;

PAGE 32

32 Hockaday & Puyear, 2000; McFarlin et al., 1999; Shults, 2001). In particular, the establishment of net works and partnerships, as well as the ability to work effectively with legislators, board members, accreditation organizations, and especially business and industry leaders, was of greatest importance. Indeed, community college leadership involves a wide range of complex competencies for which no one person has total and complete preparation. Boggs and equally unique responses by community college leaders who build all iances, vii). Workforce Development in Community Colleges One essential function of community colleges, which has consistently proven to carry its own challenges and o pportunities, has been Workforce Development. It is no in current terms, continues to be at the center of academia, blending academic and technical skills to educate a f uture workforce. While the diversity of workforce programs has changed considerably throughout the generations, the necessity of these programs has continued to thrive. Many community colleges are involved to some degree in credit or non credit workforce education, and many have even ventured into the realm of offering baccalaureate degrees in workforce specific areas. These baccalaureate programs have generally been in high demand workforce fields, such as business, health, and public service (Floyd & W alker, 2009).

PAGE 33

33 Historical Point of View With a history as rich and deep as the community colleges themselves workforce education has continued to be a driving force within institutions. Leaders have embraced workforce education as a core mission of the est ablishment, and endeavored to meet the training needs of all their respective constituencies. Workforce education, e passage of the Morrill Act, which shifted the focus from classical studies to more applied studies that would educate people in agriculture, home economics, mechanical arts, and other professions practical in the late 1800s. Workforce or career and tec hnical education has been viewed as a career pathway blurs the boundaries between secondary and postsecondary education. The tenets of workforce education are engrained in secondary and postsecondary institutions. Through the federal Perkins legislation these tenets were translated into the following goals of preparing students for high skills, high wage, high demand occupations: integration of rigorous academic and career and technical education; research on career and technical education; professional development that promotes leadership in career and technical education; partnerships at all levels; and lifelong learning opportunities (Association for Career and Technical Education, 2006). Much of the rapid growth, which has been already identified his torically at community colleges, is also a result of the strength and demand for the workforce development programs. A phenomenal growth in this area occurred in the 1960s and 1970s that stabilized in the 1980s at which time vocational programs were ident ified to make up 40% to 50% of the enrollments at community colleges (Cohen & Brawer,

PAGE 34

34 2008). According to the U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2007 2008 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study, 6,383,000 students we re seeking career education at the sub baccalaureate level, which accounted for 64% of the credential seeking undergraduate population. The workforce development programs at the community colleges of today are an integral part of the growth of the institut ions and serve to meet the needs of the majority of students. The Pathways to Prosperity Project, which is based at the Harvard Graduate School, in a 2011 report, identified high quality career education and community colleges as viable and important rout es to high paying jobs. The role that Workforce Educators will play is significant as the report also indicated that of the 47 million jobs created in the next 10 year period, approximately 30% of them will require ary education occupational credential. Pathway to the Future The new millennium community colleges are anticipated to face the responsibility of educating and re that the greatest challenge faci ng community college leaders was providing effective means of teaching 85% of our population who need the knowledge and skills for employment in the high wage/high skill jobs in an information and global economy. The dramatically changing landscape had created a paradigm shift in the skills necessary to be successful in the labor market. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (2010), more than one third of the fastest growing occupations requires an associate degree or short to moderate postseconda ry training. Thus Workforce Education has responded to these changes by joining the forces of policymakers,

PAGE 35

35 secondary and postsecondary educators, and employers, and endeavored to provide students with the necessary skill sets to be successful in this glob al economy. Workforce students have achieved high levels of academic success under the leadership of Workforce administrators. According to a 2003 report by the National Research Center for Career and Technical Education, these students participated in mo re rigorous coursework and took more higher levels of math and science than general studies students (Stone, 2003). Schools with highly integrated academic, workforce oriented career and technical education programs have significantly higher achieving stu dents in reading, mathematics, and science (Bottoms & Young, 2009). In addition to the academic success attained by Workforce students, research also indicated high levels of postsecondary and employment success. The National Center for Educational Statis tics (NCES) released a report on Career and Technical Education in the United States in 2008, which found that students who followed a vocational route were more likely than their general studies peers to obtain a degree or certificate within two years. T hese students were also more likely to be employed while in school. Overall, students who graduate from workforce programs are also more likely to be in the labor force (Levesque, K., Laird, J., Hensley, E., Choy S., Cataldi, E. & Hudson, L., 2008). The 2004 National Association of Vocational Education (NAVE) Final Report found that postsecondary vocational education, even without attaining a credential, provided 5% to 8% more earnings (U.S. Department of Education, 2004). Given the steeped history of wor kforce development and the continued success in paving a pathway to the future, career and technical education has remained a core mission of community colleges. To meet this ever changing responsibility, community

PAGE 36

36 colleges and the leadership of those ins titutions have evolved and quickly adapted to the demands of the times. Characteristics and Competencies in Workforce Development Leaders The responsibility of rapidly adapting to a changing workforce has required community colleges and workforce developme nt departments within those institutions to develop and hire formidable leaders. According to Zirkle, Parker, and McCaslin (2005), indentify the needs of individuals and future employers, understand policy development New Designs for Career and Technical Education a 2002 report by the National Research Center for Career and Technical Education, also identified the characteristics and competencies needed in workforce development (Copa & Wolff, 2002). The overarching operational features include the following characteristics: learner centered connectivity with networks; accountable in meeting internal and external standards; sustain able by being flexible; and innovative and vibrant by remaining responsive to changing needs. These core characteristics are translated into the following capabilities: a demand for competencies in subject matter knowledge and learning expectations; makin g learning authentic and contextualized; guiding learning; working in teams with the ability to collaborate, foster interpersonal interactions and partnerships; creativity and entrepreneurialism; willingness to engage in ongoing learning and personal devel opment; leadership in a variety of positions and situations; and the ability to train others to lead. Also at the forefront of leadership and advocacy for career and technical education is the National Association of State Directors of Career Technical Edu cation Consortium

PAGE 37

37 (NASDCTEc). In 2010, the consortium produced a new vision which called for leaders in workforce education to provide bold leadership and action. The characteristics and competencies for which the consortium called upon included: leaders hip in economic development and global competitiveness; ability to develop partnerships with business and industry; competency in designing high quality, performance based initiatives; creating environments which supported ongoing faculty development; and the ability to use and make data driven decisions and fund efforts effectively. Institutions which function within their own ivory towers are no longer the norm in higher education. The AACC Competencies for Community College Leaders (2005) has set a sta ndard and consistent perspective from which to view the leadership characteristics and competencies of the workforce, This framework can be examined further to illustrate the underlining themes and characteristics found desirable by those in leadership pos itions as workforce administrators. Consistent with the organizational strategy competency, community colleges and their workforce development departments must create new leadership characteristics to be market responsive. Harmon and MacAllum (2003) iden tified characteristics of the market responsive college which included: leadership committed to allocating resources to develop training programs and reaching out to local businesses and other organizations as part of the new market responsive mission of t he college; internal response mechanisms designed to quickly develop and deliver curricula to meet the changing demands of the workforce; partnerships with local business and industry that allow for the rapid development of training and academic curriculum ; and close relationships with all community stakeholders to better understand and respond to local

PAGE 38

38 community college workforce divisions also discussed the importance of ma rket focus in strategic planning and leadership, particularly in regard to entrepreneurialism. Resource Management among workforce development administrators has been heralded by researchers as an important leadership characteristic and competency. In th eir research of the leadership issues facing Pennsylvania career and technical education administrators, Clark, Farmer, and Welch (2010) found data driven decision making to be core to the resource management function. VanderMolen and Zinzer (2006) also i dentified functions of resource management as being essential leadership skills for career preparation administrators. Their findings indicated that managing were ranke d as the two most important job tasks of these administrators. Of the 12 major leadership issues that Watba and Farmer (2006) identified that community college workforce administrators have continued to face, the majority are resource management issues. These resource demands have included needed competencies to meet the financial, physical and human resource challenges of the future. The essential function of communication is often identified by the researchers as an important competency for leadership i n the community college environment (Boggs, 2003; Brown et al., 2002; Goff, 2002, 2003; Pope & Miller, 2005), and this element is equally important for workforce administrators. Copa, Plihal, Birky, and Upton (1999) communications is one of the essential functions that leaders need. In the research conducted by Hopkins, Lambrecht, Moss, and Finch (1998), the leadership

PAGE 39

39 characteristic of communication, which included l istening, oral and written aspects showed greater sensitivity to development and improvement over other leadership qualities. Various studies and articles have postulated the knowledge and skills needed and the importance of being a competent collaborator. Zirkle et al. (2006) identified this skill as responding to community interest and needs, as well as mobilizing community resources. R esearch also revealed the importance of the ability to collaborate within the organization and with the board (Clark e t al., 2010) For workforce development administrators, King (2011) specifically discussed the importance of the ability to collaborate across all sectors of the community, business, and industry, as well as 2006) research found that the building of school community relations was one of the top three ranked leadership skills of career and technical education administrators. Many researchers have found results that support the importance of institutional and co mmunity college advocacy. Clark et al. (2010) identified the support and advocacy of the mission as one of the top three leadership issues for leaders. The ability to advocate, nurture, and sustain the mission was also found to be an essential element am ong other researchers (Copa et al., 1999; Fulton Calkins & Milling, 2005; Zirkle et al., 2006). In the case of workforce administrators, researchers also indicated the importance of promoting not only the community college mission but also the importance of advocating the career and technical education mission (McCaslin & Parker, 2003; Zirkle et al., 2005).

PAGE 40

40 Boggs (2008) advocated the importance of professionalism as an attribute of a community college leader. He indicted this competency required an indi vidual to set high standards for self and others and to demonstrate accountability to and for the institution. Zirkle et al. (2006) shared similar principles for workforce professionals with the indication that integrity and fairness were imperative aspec ts of their leadership standards. A cross reference of the characteristics and competencies important for workforce Community College Leaders in the new millennium, which consi st of organizational strategy, resource management, communication, collaboration, community college advocacy, and professionalism, have identified commonalities in the underlying themes. This literature review lends to the consideration that those who are among the ranks of community college workforce personnel could indeed be viable candidates for future administrative and presidential candidacies. In summary, a review of the current literature indicates a critical shortage of new leaders to backfill pos itions left vacant as current community college leaders plan to retire. Because the administrators are viewed as the key to handling the ever changing environment of the community college, the shortfall of qualified candidates has created a potential crisi expand the pipeline to the upper level administration and presidency beyond the traditional academic pathway. Workforce development professionals could well fill this void in the future.

PAGE 41

4 1 CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY This chapter explains the research methodology used in this study. In this chapter, the research purpose, problem, design, instrument, population, data collection, and data analysis methods are described and explained. Purpo se of the Study The purpose of this study was to analyze the characteristics and competencies in the Workforce Development departments of selected community colleges by examining the management and leadership characteristics of Workforce Development person nel. This study examined the character sets found in these positions. This study sought to add to the literature about the competencies of community college personnel with a specific focus on workforce administrators. Findings should prove useful to current presidents and aspiring leaders and educators about the specific also enhance preparation to expand the pipeline to higher level administration and the presidency beyond the traditional academic administration pathway. Research Problem The community college administrator has multiple and conflicting responsibilities for which management, administration, and leadership skills are gained through multiple and extended experiences. Researchers (Amey & Van Der Linden, 2002; Duree, 2007; Weisman & Vaughn, 2007) had established that the most frequent pathway to the presidency is through academic administration. Yet other researchers (Boggs, 2003; & Vaughn, 2004) posited t hat this pipeline needs to be increased to continue the efforts to remain innovative and fill the anticipated vacancies. In light of anticipated large number

PAGE 42

42 of retirements, particularly at the presidency level in community colleges, atypical hires may be needed to ensure a new crop of leaders (Vaughn, 2004). Experience in Workforce Development may serve as an alternative avenue from which future leaders can reach upper administration and the presidency. Research Question The research question guiding this study examined current community college personnel: How do workforce administrators differ from other administrators in terms of leadership characteristics and competency potential? To answer this question, the following research hypotheses were created: H 0 1 : There is not a significant difference between workforce administrators and other administrators in terms of leadership characteristics for community college personnel. H A 1 : There is a significant difference between workforce administrators and other administrators in terms of leadership characteristics for community college personnel. H 0 2 : There is not a significant difference between workforce administrators and other administrators in terms of leadership competency potential. H A 2 : There is a signif icant difference between workforce administrators and other administrators in terms of leadership competency potential. Research Instrument The WAVE personality assessment was the instrument used for this research. The instrument developed by Peter Savill e of Saville Consulting, Ltd. is proprietary and protected under copyright laws both within the United States and internationally. The assessment cannot be presented in its entirety in this paper. The theoretical constructs and reporting mechanisms, howeve r, can be presented. The WAVE is a modern and

PAGE 43

43 WAVE as an integrated and dynamic questionnaire, offers users accurate identification and management of talent (Saville Co nsulting, 2010a). The structure of the WAVE uses a 9 point Likert type normative scale items. The 216 normative items were standardized to measure 108 facets in the areas of personality, motivation, competency, and culture. The WAVE is based upon 4 clu sters, 12 s ections, and 36 dimensions ( Figure 3 1). On average, the assessment takes about 35 minutes to complete. Throughout the f the respondent gives the same rating to two of the six statements, these statements are presented again, and the individual must then rate presented two or three times throu ghout the assessment to allow for the identification of self reporting bias and acquiescence bias. The Expert Report The expert report provides an in depth and comprehensive assessment of an information on an summary of psychometric profile, competency potential profile, predicted culture/environment fit, as well as a full psychometric profile of the thought, influence, adaptability, and delivery clusters. The results are based upon a comparison with more than 1,000 professionals, and they are presented on a 1 to 10 sten scale (Saville Consulting, 2010c). First, to further distinguish the assessment results, the response summary included details on ratings acquiescence, which examines how critical respondents

PAGE 44

44 were in their self ratings. Second, the consistency of rank ordering the characteristics is measured. The degree of alignment between normative and ips ative scores is also identified. If a difference occurs of more than three stens between rating (Normative) and ranking (Ipsative), this difference is indicated on the dimension. Third, a motive talent split is identified as the degree of alignment betwe en these scores. If differences of more than three stens exist, this difference is also indicated on the dimension. Psychometric Profile As displayed by Saville Consulting (2010c), the full psychometric profile provides a breadth of information and focuse s on the 36 Professional Styles dimensions. These dimensions are presented within the four main clusters, which break down into three sections, each consisting of three dimensions. The 108 facets in total are what ultimately comprise the 36 dimensions. T he four main clusters are next described and in more detail in Appendix C. The thought cluster included the sections of evaluative, investigative, and imaginative. The thought cluster further is broken down into the dimensions of analytical, factual, rati onal, learning oriented, practically minded, insightful, inventive, abstract, and strategic. The influence cluster included the sections of sociable, impactful, and assertive. The influence cluster is further broken down into the dimensions of interactive engaging, self promoting, convincing, articulate, challenging, purposeful, directing, and empowering. The adaptability cluster included the sections of resilient, flexible, and supportive. The adaptability cluster if further broken down into the dime nsions of self assured,

PAGE 45

45 composed, resolving, positive, change oriented, receptive, attentive, involving, and accepting. The delivery cluster included the sections of conscientious, structured, and driven. The delivery cluster is further broken down into the dimensions of reliable, meticulous, conforming, organized, principled, activity oriented, dynamic, enterprising, and striving. Competency Potential and limitations in t he areas of evaluating problems, investigating issues, creating innovation, building relationships, communicating information, providing leadership, showing resilience, adjusting to change, giving support, processing details, structuring tasks, and driving success ( Appendix D). This data is provided as a developmental tool for management of talent. In addition to presenting the competency results with the 1 to 10 sten scale, a rating is provided identifying the competency potential rela tive to a compariso n group ( Figure 3 2). Predicted Culture/Environment Fit The predicted culture/environment fit is an additional talent management tool. This tool indicates the aspects of the work culture, job, and environment that are likely to enhance or inhibit an indi This study focused on the 36 dimensions of the psychometric profile as a measure of leadership characteristics. The competency potential scales were used to measure leadership potential. In addition, descriptive statistics were calcula ted on ratings acquiescence, consistency of rankings, motive talent agreement, and normative ipsative agreement.

PAGE 46

46 Instrument Validity and Reliability The WAVE Professional Styles questionnaire demonstrates a high level of validity and reliability (Saville Consulting, 2010d). The validation centric development method was selected to establish validity. The average validity of one Professional Styles scale in relationship to its work performance criterion is 0.39, and the composite validity of more than one Professional Styles scale across the criteria is 0.46. This clearly indicates that the Professional Styles scales provide strong validity, ranging across a wide array of externally assessed work variables (Saville Consulting, 2010e). The invited access s ingle dimension validity ranges from .19 to .68. The invited access composite validity ranges from .22 to .78 (Saville Consulting, 2010f). Reliabilities for test retest and alternate form were the focus of determining instrument reliability. Internal Co nsistency estimates are designed to be around the 0.60 to 0.80 level to avoid the problem of repetitive item content, The internal consistency reliabilities at standardization have a mean of 0.76 for the 36 dimensions, a maximum of 0.87, and a minimum of 0.58, which indicates variation in breadth of the scales, as predicted (N=1,153). The 36 dimensions of Saville Consulting Wave Professional Styles have alternate form reliabilities with a mean of 0.86 for the combined score (ipsative and normative). The m inimum alternate form is 0.78 and the maximum is 0.93 (N=1153). In addition, the test retest study for the normative (Invited Access) form had a retest period of one month (N=112). The mean reliability is 0.79, the minimum 0.71, and the maximum 0.91 (Savi lle Consulting, 2010f). Data Collection This study utilized pre collected data by Saville Consulting, Ltd. Respondents self selected to answer the invited access online WAVE personality assessment between

PAGE 47

47 August and December 2006, and they were provided t he results electronically in the WAVE Personal Report. In the interest of social science research, the purpose of the collection was to create a norming database for senior executives and managers. The final population (N=166) includes data from five com munity colleges in Arizona, Indiana, Iowa, Ohio, and North Carolina, including Ivy Technical and Central Arizona. Also included in the final population are data from five AACC affiliate councils, including the American Association for Women in Community C olleges (AAWCC), National Council on Black American Affairs (NCBAA), National Community College Hispanic Council (NCCHC), Community College Business Officers (CCBO), National Council for Continuing Education and Training (NCCET), and the American Associate of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers (AACROA). In terms of administrative positions of participants, the final population includes workforce administrators (N=86) and other community college administrators (N=80). Data Analysis Analysis of the data began by examining for any anomalies, skewness, or outliers. Once these items were accounted, descriptive statistics and frequencies, including means, standard deviations, and skew were examined for the (N=166) population; the sample of (N=86) workfo rce administrators, and the sample of (N=80) other community college administrators. The first hypothesis examined if differences between workforce and other community college administrators exist with respect to their leadership characteristics. The hypot hesis was analyzed by grouping those individuals in the samples as community college workforce personnel and comparing them to community college personnel in other areas, that is, student services, academic services, and

PAGE 48

48 administrative affairs. This hypo thesis was analyzed by using an independent sample t test to analyze leadership characteristics. The second hypothesis examined if differences between workforce administrators exist with respect to their leadership competency potential. This hypothesis w as analyzed following the same design as the first hypothesis but focused on the competency potential profile. Bivariant Pearson correlation coefficients were also calculated. The ordinal data of leadership characteristics or competency potential served as the dependent variable. The nominal data of type of administrator served as an ind ependent variable. The

PAGE 49

49 Figure 3 1. Theoretical structure of the WAVE 4 Clusters 12 Sections 36 Dimensions 108 Facets

PAGE 50

50 Sten Score Rating 10 Extremely High: higher potential than about 99% of professionals 9 Very High: higher potential than about 95% of p rofessionals 8 High : higher than about 90% of professionals 7 Fairly high: higher potential than about 75 % of professionals 6 Average: higher potential than about 60% of professionals 5 Average: h igher potential than about 40% of professionals 4 F airly Low: higher potential than about 25% of professionals 3 Low: higher potential than about 10% of professionals 2 Very Low: higher than about 5% of professionals 1 Extremely Low: higher potential than about 1% of professionals Figure 3 2 Com petency p otential p rofile s ten s core r ating

PAGE 51

51 CHAPTER 4 RESULTS This chapter provides an overview of the findings from the statistical examination of the study, showing the results of the data gathered and the analysis process, as outlined in Chapter 3. The results for each hypothesis are shown in order. Descriptive Statistics The aggregate data (N=166) of workforce and community college personnel appear to be distributed normall y with no large deviations ( Table 4 1). The psychometric profile data, which suggested the overall population on the rating acquiescence, are slightly more positive in self ratings than many (M=6.7, SD=1.8). This is also the finding for the workforce administrators (M=6.6, SD=1.8), as well as other administrators (M=6.8, SD=1.9). The overall population is consistent in rank ordering of characteristics (M=5.4, SD=1.9). This is also the consistent result for the workforce (M=5.5, SD=1.9) and other administrators (M=5.3, SD=1.9). The degree of alignment between motive and talent sco res for the overall population is typical of most respondents (M=5.1, SD= 2.0). Similar results were found for workforce administrators (M=5.0, SD=2.1), as well as other administrators (M=5.2, SD=1.8) The degree of alignment between normative rating and i psative ranking scores of the overall population (M=5.1, SD=2.0) is typical of most respondents. This result was consistent for the workforce administrators (M=5.3, SD=1.9) and also other administrators (M=4.9, SD=2.0). If the ipsative scores are higher than the normative scores, the respondents may have been overly self critical in their self descriptions,

PAGE 52

52 whereas if the normative scores were higher than the ipsative scores the respondent may have been less self critical and exaggerated his descriptions. For the population and the workforce, as well as other community college personnel groups, means, standard deviations and medians are presented ( Table 4 1). Research Problem Hypothesis 1 The research problem guiding this hypothesis examined community coll ege personnel and was intended to determine how workforce administrators differ from other administrators in terms of leadership characteristics. To address this problem, the following research hypothesis was made: H 0 1: There is not a significant differenc e between workforce administrators and other administrators in terms of leadership characteristics for community college personnel. H A 1: There is a significant difference between workforce administrators and other administrators in terms of leadership cha racteristics for community college personnel. The data were divided into two samples. The data for the workforce community college administrators sample (N=86) and the data for the other community college administrators sample (N=80) both appeared to be d istributed normall y with no large deviations ( Table 4 2). The t test results ( Table 4 2) indicated that significant differences were found among the 12 summary or section characteristics between workforce administrators and other community college admini strators. The workforce administrators were higher on drive (M=7.0, SD=1.9, p>0.0004). The other community college administrators were significantly higher than workforce administrators on evaluation (M=6.8, SD=1.7, p>0.05) and resilience (M=6.1, SD=1.7, p>0.02).

PAGE 53

53 Correlation coefficients were calculated for the summary of leadership characteristics for both workforce administrators and for other commun ity college administrators ( Tables 4 3 and 4 4). Both positive and negative correlations were identified which are depicted in a summary that identified the direction and st rength of the correlations ( Table 4 5). Research Problem Hypothesis 2 The research problem guiding this hypothesis examined community college personnel; How do workforce administrators d iffer from other administrators in terms of leadership competencies? To address this problem, the following research hypotheses were created: H 0 2: There is not a significant difference between workforce administrators and other administrators in terms of l eadership competency potential. (null hypothesis) H A 2: There is a significant difference between workforce administrators and other administrators in terms of leadership competency potential. The competency data were divided into two samples. The data for the workforce community college administrators sample (N=86) and the data for the other community college administrators sample (N=80) both appeared to be distributed normall y with no large deviations ( Table 4 6). The t test results ( Table 4 6) indicate d that workforce administrators on the leadership competencies were significantly higher than other community college administrators on achieving success (M=7.0, SD=1.9, p>0.02). The other community college administrators were significantly higher than wo rkforce administrators on the leadership competencies of evaluating problems (M=7.4, SD=1.9, p>0.03) and projecting confidence (M=6.5, SD= .8, p>0.05).

PAGE 54

54 Correlation coefficients were calculated for the leadership competencies for both workforce administrato rs and for other community colleg e administrators ( Tables 4 7 and 4 8). Both positive and negative correlations were identified, which are depicted in a summary that indicated the strength of the direction and st rength of the correlations ( Table 4 9).

PAGE 55

55 T able 4 1. Response s ummary ; m ean, s td. d eviation and m edian for o verall, w orkforce and o ther a dministrators Overall Workforce Admin Other Admin M SD Median M SD Median M SD Median p Ratings Acquiescence 6.7 1.8 7.0 6.6 1.8 7.0 6.8 1.9 7.0 0.42 Consi stency of Rankings 5.4 1.9 5.0 5.5 1.9 5.0 5.3 1.9 5.5 0.52 Motive Talent Agreement 5.1 2.0 5.0 5.0 2.1 5.0 5.2 1.8 5.0 0.55 Normative ipsative Agreement 5.1 2.0 5.0 5.3 1.9 5.0 4.9 2.0 5.5 0.21

PAGE 56

56 Table 4 2. Leadership c haracteristics ( e xecutive s umma ry) ; m ean, s td. d eviation, m edian for o verall, w orkforce and o ther a dministrators Overall Workforce Admin Other Admin M SD Median M SD Median M SD Median p Vision (Vis) 6.80 1.90 7.00 6.70 2.00 7.00 6.80 1.70 7.00 0.94 Judgment (Jud) 6.50 1.70 7.00 6 .50 1.60 7.00 6.50 1.70 7.00 0.99 Evaluation (Eval) 6.50 1.90 7.00 6.20 2.00 6.00 6.80 1.70 7.00 0.05 Leadership (Lead) 6.60 1.70 7.00 6.50 1.90 7.00 6.60 1.50 7.00 0.92 Impact 5.50 1.80 6.00 5.30 2.00 5.00 5.70 1.70 6.00 0.32 Communication (Comm) 4.8 0 1.80 5.00 5.10 1.70 5.00 4.50 1.80 5.00 0.06 Support (Supp) 5.50 2.10 6.00 5.50 1.90 6.00 5.60 2.20 6.00 0.93 Resilience (Resil) 5.80 1.80 6.00 5.50 1.80 6.00 6.10 1.70 6.00 0.02 Flexibility (Flex) 5.90 1.80 6.00 5.70 2.00 6.00 6.10 1.70 6.00 0.22 S tructure (Struct) 6.70 1.80 7.00 6.50 1.70 7.00 6.80 1.80 7.00 0.44 Drive 6.60 1.90 7.00 7.00 1.90 7.00 6.00 1.80 6.00 0.0004* Implementation (Imp) 5.70 1.90 6.00 5.40 2.00 5.00 5.90 1.80 6.00 0.13 Results are significant at.05

PAGE 57

57 Table 4 3 Spearman c orrelation c oefficients l eadership c haracteristics ( e xecutive s ummary) w orkforce a dministrators n = 86 Vis Jud Eval Lead Impact Comm Supp Resil Flex Struct Drive Impl Vis 1.00 Jud 0.293 1.00 0.006 Eval 0.296 0.461 ** 1.00 0.006 <.0001 Lead 0.342 0.233 0.095 1.00 0.001 0.031 0.383 Impact 0.112 0.157 0.235 0.304 1.00 0 .304 0.148 0.029 0.005 Comm 0.148 0.193 0.310 0.306 0.467 ** 1.00 0.172 0.074 0.004 0.004 <.0001 Supp 0.007 0.108 0.239 0.053 0.182 0.040 1.00 0.949 0.322 0.027 0.631 0.094 0.713 Resil 0.062 0.057 0.067 0.168 0.193 0.091 0.042 1.00 0.573 0.605 0.538 0.122 0.075 0.403 0.699 Flex 0.296 0.028 0.126 0.225 0.140 0.005 0.100 0.362 1.00 0.006 0.797 0.249 0.038 0.200 0.965 0.361 0.001 Struct 0.102 0.007 0.020 0.062 0.033 0.015 0.028 0.073 0.016 1.00 0.351 0.950 0.857 0.573 0.765 0.888 0.797 0.505 0.881 Drive 0.327 0.257 0.040 0.550 ** 0.429 ** 0.313 0.294 0.104 0.195 0.230 1.00 0.002 0.017 0.712 <.0001 <.0001 0.003 0.006 0.34 2 0.072 0.033 Impl 0.583 ** 0.102 0.086 0.300 0.044 0.024 0.062 0.125 0.436 ** 0.429 ** 0.170 1.00 <.0001 0.348 0.431 0.005 0.687 0.827 0.572 0.253 <.0001 <.0001 0.118 **. Correlation is significant at the <.0001 level (2 tailed) Correlati on is significant at the .05 leve l (2 tailed). Vision (Vis); Judgment (Jud); Evaluation (Eval) ; Leadership (Lead); Impa ct ; Communication (Comm); Support (Supp); Resilience (Resil); Structure (Struct); Drive; Implementation (Impl).

PAGE 58

58 Table 4 4 Spearman c or relation c oefficients l eadership c haracteristics ( e xecutive s ummary) o ther a dministrators n = 80 Vis Jud Eval Lead Impact Comm Supp Resil Flex Struct Drive Impl Vis 1.00 Jud 0.165 1.00 0.143 Eval 0.178 0.372 1.00 0.114 0.001 Lead 0.347 0.100 0.102 1.00 0.002 0.376 0.367 Impact 0.187 0.023 0.034 0.388 1.00 0.096 0.843 0. 763 0.000 Comm 0.252 0.138 0.359 0.332 0.427 ** 1.00 0.024 0.223 0.001 0.003 <.0001 Supp 0.042 0.165 0.234 0.050 0.248 0.101 1.00 0.714 0.143 0.037 0.659 0.026 0.371 Resil 0.096 0 .026 0.154 0.416 0.280 0.211 0.047 1.00 0.397 0.820 0.172 0.000 0.012 0.060 0.678 Flex 0.188 0.078 0.312 0.279 0.028 0.358 0.221 0.422 ** 1.00 0.094 0.491 0.005 0.012 0.803 0.001 0.049 <.0001 Struct 0.140 0.311 0 .307 0.309 0.116 0.141 0.187 0.157 0.007 1.00 0.216 0.005 0.006 0.005 0.307 0.212 0.096 0.166 0.948 Drive 0.332 0.148 0.016 0.582 ** 0.476 ** 0.442 ** 0.283 0.139 0.241 0.264 1.00 0.003 0.191 0.889 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 0.011 0.220 0 .031 0.018 Impl 0.233 0.183 0.263 0.117 0.222 0.373 0.132 0.100 0.340 0.548 ** 0.173 1.00 0.037 0.105 0.019 0.302 0.048 0.001 0.243 0.379 0.002 <.0001 0.124 **. Correlation is significant at the <.0001 level (2 tailed). Correlation is significant at the .05 level (2 tailed). Vision (Vis); Judgment (Jud); Evaluation (Eval); Leadership (Lead); Impact; Communication (Comm); Support (Supp); Resilience (Resil); Structure (Struct); D rive; Implementation (Impl)

PAGE 59

59 Table 4 5 Leadership c hara cteristics ( e xecutive s ummary) c orrelated d irection and s trength ; r esults at the <.0001 level Correlated Characteristics Workforce Administrators Other Administrators Vision and Implementation /moderate Judgment and Evaluation +/moderate Leadership and Drive +/moderate +/moderate Impact and Communication +/moderate +/weak Impact and Drive +/moderate +/moderate Communication and Drive +/weak Resilience and Flexible +/weak Flexibility and Implementation /moderate Structure and Implementation +/weak +/moderate Very Strong 0.80 1.00; Strong 0. 60 0.79; Moderate 0.40 0.59; Weak 0.20 0.39; Very Weak 0.00 0.19 (Huck 2008)

PAGE 60

60 Table 4 6 Leadership c ompetencies m ean and s td. d eviation for o verall, w orkforce and o ther a dministrators Overall Workfor ce Admin Other Admin M SD Median M SD Median M SD Median p Achieve Success 6.8 1.8 7.0 7.0 1.9 7.0 6.5 1.7 7.0 0.02 Adjust to Change 6.5 1.8 7.0 6.4 1.9 6.0 6.6 1.7 7.0 0.43 Communicate 5.3 1.8 5.0 5.5 1.8 6.0 5.1 1.8 5.0 0.23 Creating Innovation 6 .9 1.8 7.0 6.9 2.0 7.0 6.9 1.6 7.0 0.64 Evaluate Problems 7.1 1.8 7.0 6.8 1.9 7.0 7.4 1.5 7.0 0.03 Executing Assignments 5.7 1.9 6.0 5.5 2.0 5.0 5.9 1.8 6.0 0.20 Make Judgments 6.9 1.7 7.0 6.8 1.8 7.0 6.8 1.8 7.0 0.65 Presenting Information 6.2 1.7 7. 0 6.1 1.9 6.0 6.3 1.5 7.0 0.63 Projecting Confidence 6.2 1.8 7.0 5.9 1.8 6.0 6.5 1.8 7.0 0.05 Providing Leadership 6.7 1.7 7.0 6.6 1.8 7.0 6.8 1.6 7.0 0.73 Providing Support 5.7 2.0 6.0 5.6 1.9 6.0 5.7 2.1 6.0 0.85 Structuring Tasks 6.9 1.8 7.0 6.8 1. 8 7.0 6.9 1.9 7.0 0.72 Results are significant at.05

PAGE 61

61 Table 4 7. Leadership c ompetencies w orkforce a dministrators n = 86 CI MJ EP PL AC ST1 AS PI PC EA CP PS CI 1.00 MJ 0.535 ** 1.00 <.0001 EP 0.543 ** 0.578 ** 1.00 <.000 <.0001 PL 0.391 0.482 ** 0.063 1.00 0.000 <.0001 0.565 AC 0.419 ** 0.246 0.005 0.619 ** 1.00 <.0001 0 .022 0.966 <.0001 ST1 0.050 0.035 0.018 0.250 0.125 1.00 0.648 0.751 0.871 0.020 0.252 AS 0.461 ** 0.576 ** 0.197 0.704 ** 0.436 ** 0.141 1.00 <.0001 <.0001 0.069 <.0001 <.0001 0.195 PI 0.2 84 0.416 ** 0.261 0.590 ** 0.283 0.066 0.598 ** 1.00 0.008 <.0001 0.015 <.0001 0.008 0.544 <.0001 PC 0.241 0.303 0.205 0.421 0.558 ** 0.133 0.387 0.430 ** 1.00 0.026 0.005 0.060 <.0001 <.0001 0.224 0.000 <.0001 EA 0.49 0 ** 0.219 0.004 0.274 0.432 ** 0.535 ** 0.256 0.199 0.179 1.00 <.0001 0.043 0.972 0.011 <.0001 <.0001 0.017 0.067 0.102 CP 0.015 0.078 0.196 0.480 ** 0.299 0.238 0.445 ** 0.605 ** 0.225 0.073 1.00 0.891 0.473 0.070 <.0001 0.005 0 .027 <.0001 <.0001 0.038 0.507 PS 0.070 0.201 0.257 0.164 0.257 0.173 0.174 0.062 0.122 0.046 0.211 1.00 0.523 0.064 0.017 0.131 0.017 0.111 0.109 0.571 0.267 0.675 0.051 **. Correlation is significant at the <.0001 level (2 tailed). Corre lation is significant at the .05 level (2 tailed).

PAGE 62

62 Table 4 8 Leadership c ompetencies o ther a dministrators n = 80 CI MJ EP PL AC ST1 AS PI PC EA CP PS CI 1.000 MJ 0.453 ** 1.000 < .0001 EP 0.409 0.498 ** 1.000 0.000 <.0001 PL 0.441 ** 0.457 ** 0.106 1.000 <.0001 <.0001 0.348 AC 0.373 0.322 0.080 0.630 ** 1.000 0.001 0.00 4 0.481 <.0001 ST1 0.197 0.365 0.326 0.379 0.283 1.000 0.079 0.001 0.003 0.001 0.011 AS 0.471 ** 0.517 ** 0.267 0.794 ** 0.573 ** 0.328 1.000 <.0001 <.0001 0.017 <.0001 <.0001 0.003 PI 0 .438 ** 0.340 0.151 0.599 ** 0.481 ** 0.030 0.651 ** 1.000 <.0001 0.002 0.181 <.0001 <.0001 0.791 <.0001 PC 0.192 0.222 0.020 0.635 ** 0.681 ** 0.288 0.477 ** 0.475 ** 1.000 0.088 0.048 0.860 <.0001 <.0001 0.010 <.0001 <.0001 EA 0.183 0.099 0.218 0.107 0.328 0.610 ** 0.117 0.311 0.174 1.000 0.104 0.384 0.053 0.347 0.003 <.0001 0.303 0.005 0.122 CP 0.289 0.205 0.170 0.515 ** 0.617 ** 0.064 0.486 ** 0.526 ** 0.442 ** 0.386 1.000 0.009 0.069 0.132 <.0001 <. 0001 0.574 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 0.000 PS 0.003 0.103 0.265 0.033 0.363 0.199 0.145 0.033 0.258 0.171 0.301 1.000 0.977 0.364 0.018 0.769 0.001 0.077 0.200 0.774 0.021 0.130 0.007 **. Correlation is significant at the <.0001 level (2 tailed) Correlation is significant at the .05 level (2 tailed).

PAGE 63

63 Table 4 9 Leadership c ompetencies c orrelated d irection and s trength ; r esults at the <.0001 level Correlated Characteristics Workforce Administrators Other Administrators Creating Innovation a nd Making Judgments +/ moderate +/weak Creating Innovation and Evaluating Problems +/moderate Creating Innovation and Providing Leadership +/weak Creating Innovation and Adjusting to Change +/weak Creating Innovation and Achieving Success +/weak +/w eak Creating Innovation and Presenting Information +/weak Creating Innovation and Executing Assignments /weak Making Judgments and Evaluating Problems +/moderate +/weak Making Judgments and Providing Leadership +/weak +/weak Making Judgments and Ac hieving Success +/moderate +/moderate Making Judgments and Presenting Information +/weak Providing Leadership and Adjusting to Change +/moderate +/moderate Providing Leadership and Achieving Success +/moderate +/moderate Providing Leadership and Prese nting Information +/moderate +/moderate Providing Leadership and Projecting Confidence +/weak +/moderate Providing Leadership and Communicating +/weak +/moderate Adjusting to Change and Achieving Success +/weak +/moderate Adjusting to Change and Presen ting Information +/weak Adjusting to Change and Projecting Confidence +/moderate +/moderate Adjusting to Change and Executing Assignments /weak Adjusting to Change +/moderate

PAGE 64

64 Table 4 9. Continued Correlated Characteristics Workforce Administrato rs Other Administrators Structuring Task and Executing Assignments +/moderate +/moderate Achieving Success and Presenting Information +/moderate +/moderate Achieving Success and Projecting Confidence +/weak Achieving Success and Communicating +/weak + /weak Presenting Information and Projecting Confidence +/weak +/weak Presenting Information and Communicating +/moderate +/moderate Projecting Confidence and Communicating +/weak Very Strong 0.80 1.00; Strong 0. 60 0.79; Moderate 0.40 0.59; Weak 0.20 0 .39; Very Weak 0.00 0.19 (Huck, 2008)

PAGE 65

65 CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION In this study, leadership characteristics and competencies of community college administrators, particularly workforce administrators, have been explored both in literature and empirically. T his chapter contains a discussion of the results, suggestions for future research, and implications for higher education. Research Hypothesis 1 This study identified specific leadership characteristic differences between workforce administrators and other community college administrators. The results indicated that significant differences were found among the 12 summary leadership characteristics between workforce administrators and other community college administrators. The correlation data also identi fied patterns of strengths and weaknesses. The workforce development administrators were found to have significant strengths in the drive dimension. This dimension entails the following three characteristics: 1) dynamic, that is, being energetic, initia ting, and action oriented; 2) striving, that is, being ambitious, results driven, and persevering; and 3) enterprising, that is, being competitive, entrepreneurial, and selling. These factors focused on the aspects of leadership, which encompass a deliver y focus necessary to move an institution forward. The workforce administrators also have other dimensions, and when combined, they serve to positively influence each other. These dimensions include judgment and evaluation, leadership and drive, impact and communication, impact and drive, and structure and implementation. These two factor combinations were found to influence

PAGE 66

66 each other negatively: 1) vision and implementation, and 2) flexibility and implementation. The implementation factor requires an in dividual to possess characteristics of meticulous and compliance, which may be counterintuitive to the leader who, as a visionary, is required to be inventive, abstract, strategic, and flexible. The other community college administrators were found to have significant strengths in the leadership characteristics of evaluation and resilience. The evaluation characteristic is found in a thought cluster and centers on analytical, factual, and rational characteristics. The resilience factor identifies the indi vidual as someone who is resolving, self assured, and composed. The other community college administrators also have other dimensions, and when combined, serve to positively influence each other. These dimensions include leadership and drive, impact and c ommunication, impact and drive, communication and drive, resilience and flexibility, and structure and implementation. These findings are further examined against the backdrop of existing literature, and the results have indicated that workforce administra tors, as well as other community college administrators, have some of the leadership characteristics to face the challenges of the 21 st century community college. The findings also suggest that gaps in these leadership characteristics exist. In addition, the American Association for can be used to help inform the findings and postulate directions for future research and development. Workforce administrators and other community college administrators were found to possess essential aspects of Organizational Strategy. This research included the

PAGE 67

67 strengths of drive and evaluation. In particular, for workforce administrators, the enterprising and entrepreneurial aspect of drive is of particular importance. Harmon and MacAllum (2003) and Schiefen (2010) emphasized in their research the importance of an organizational strategy for institutions to be market responsive and entrepreneurial. Of particular importance to note was that in Du prepared before assuming their first presidencies in the competencies necessary to strategically engage processes to identify the needs of constituents. Cu rrent leaders who responded to the study had rated meeting community workforce and economic development needs aspects of this characteristic are leadership assets that workforce administrators bring to community colleges. The correlations for workforce administrators and community college administrators produced some results which would align with organizational strategy. The results were leadership and drive, as well a s impact and drive for both groups. This indicated for those individuals who have leadership and drive that they possess the drive functions of dynamic, striving and enterprising and the leadership functions of purposeful, directing, and empowering. Thes e same drive functions are also coupled with the impact functions of convincing, challenging and articulate. The American Association of Community Colleges (2005) also identified resource management as recommended competency for future community college leaders. strategies, and ensure accountability. Boggs (2003) also advocated this finding, which

PAGE 68

68 indicated that financial planning is an important skill for future leaders. The workforce ability to be an effective resource manager. The American Association of Community Colleges (2005) identified an entrepreneurial stance as an important means for a leader of evaluation is also an important factor in resource management. This factor is tied to problem solving and fact finding all importa nt aspects of data driven decision making as Clark et al. (2010) indicated is core to the resource management function. Communication has also been identified by the researchers as a consistently important competency. Brown et al. (2002) revealed that ins tructional leaders at community colleges perceive communication skills to be the most important category of competencies necessary to perform their job effectively. This included multiple areas of communication, such as effective listening and feedback ski lls, effective writing skills, conveying a vision, conflict resolution, mediation as well as negotiation, understanding of interpersonal communication, and effective public speaking skills. These findings showed that none of the administrative groups were found to have statistically significant levels of leadership characteristics in the communications factors. This finding is a skill gap that needs further consideration. But it is important to note that in Hopkins et al. (1998) the leadership characteri stic of communication, which included listening and oral and written aspects, showed greater sensitivity to development and improvement over other leadership qualities. This study revealed correlated results related to communication for workforce administr ators, as well as other community college administrators who exhibit

PAGE 69

69 correlations in the area of impact and communication. In this situation, individuals, who possess the impact factor of convincing, challenging, and articulating, also are positively asso ciated with communication factors of self promoting, interacting, and engaging. The other community college administrators were also found to have a correlation between drive and communication. Another area in which the overwhelming majority of research r eviewed identified collaboration abilities as a core leadership skill (Amey, 2006; Boggs, 2003; Clark et al., 2010; Hockaday & Puyear, 2000; King, 2011; McFarlin et al., 1999; Shults, 2001; VanderMolin & Zinzer, 2006; Zirlke et al., 2006). In particular, the establishment of networks and partnerships is essential. The enterprising workforce administrators have established this ability. Their activity oriented and inventive strengths, which were identified in this study as aspects of the drive factor, se rve to support this competency. Since collaboration was also not found to be an identified strength for other administrators, this should be considered another skill gap for further development. Many researchers have established collaboration skills a n essential function in our 21 st century community colleges. Zirlke et al. (2006) described collaboration as a needed skill set important in mobilizing community resources, Clark et al. (2010) postulated the importance of board collaboration, and King (20 11) discussed the importance of business and industry, as well as governmental relationships. All these collaborative efforts are essential functions in community colleges today. The role the community college president and administrators must play as adv ocates for the institution must not be overlooked (Amey, 2006; Goff, 2003; and Pope & Miller, 2005). McCaslin and Parker (2003) and Zirkle et al. (2005) also discussed the

PAGE 70

70 importance of advocating for the workforce related career and technical education aspects of the community college organization. The workforce administrators and other community college administrators, who possess the correlated characteristics of leadership and impact and drive, have attributes which will assist them in this advocacy role. This indicates for those individuals that they possess the drive functions of being dynamic, striving, and enterprising, and they are also coupled with the impact functions of convincing, challenging, and articulating they can serve the advocacy rol e well. The final area which has proven difficult to quantify, but a necessary competency nonetheless, would be professionalism. Fulton Calkins and Milling (2005) suggested one of the traits necessary is value centered leadership. Hockaday and Puyear (20 00), who identified traits of effective community college leaders, included qualities such as integrity, confidence, courage, and good judgment. As they correspond to the American ements are all related to professionalism. The findings indicate that the other community college administrators identified strength of resiliency as an important factor in maintaining professionalism. Research Hypothesis 2 This study identified specif ic leadership competency potential differences between workforce administrators and other community college administrators. The correlation data also identified patterns of strengths and weaknesses. The workforce administrators were significantly highe r than the other community college administrators on achieving success. This competency includes the factors of taking action, pursuing goals, and tackling business challenges. Their average rating

PAGE 71

71 was at a fairly high level, showing that workforce admin istrators have greater potential than about 75% of professionals on this particular competency (Saville, 2010c). The other community college administrators were significantly higher than workforce administrators on the leadership competencies of evaluating problems and projecting confidence. The competency of evaluating problems includes the factors of analyzing situations, documenting facts, and interpreting data. The competency of projecting confidence includes factors of resolving conflict, conveying s elf confidence, and coping with pressure. Their average rating was at a fairly high level for evaluating problems, showing that the other community college administrators have greater potential than about 75% of professionals on this particular competency (Saville, 2010c). For the competency of projecting confidence, the rating was at an above average level, which is higher than about 60% of other professionals on this competency (Saville, 2010c). If the correlations are noted, a number of correlated stre ngths for the workforce and other administrators can be identified. The correlated strengths are clustered most positively with creating innovation, making judgments, providing leadership, adjusting to change, achieving success, presenting information, an d projecting confidence. As these findings are further examined against the backdrop of existing literature, the workforce administrators, as well as the other community college administrators, possess leadership competency potential, which is important in the leadership of community colleges. These findings also suggest competency areas, which require further enhancement to fulfill the goal of AACC and developing leaders, recognizing that

PAGE 72

72 the development of a leader is a lifelong process (American Assoc iation of Community Colleges, 2005). The workforce development administrators, who have the leadership competency to achieve success, have already demonstrated potential for strategically improving an organization. This factor involves taking action, seiz ing opportunities, and pursing goals. Providing leadership and creating innovation would also be important competencies to support the AACC compet ency of organizational strategy. But neither workforce administrators nor other community college administra tors scored significantly high on these areas. The fairly high averages on these competencies for both groups, as well as the positive correlations for these factors, indicate these are areas in which participants possessed competencies for future develop ment. The other community college administrators, who have the leadership competency of evaluating problems, have already demonstrated potential for resource management. This factor involves analyzing situations, documenting facts, and interpreting data, which, again, as Clark et al. (2010) indicated, are important characteristics for making data driven decisions. Executing assignments and structuring tasks are two other competency areas studied that related to resource management skills. The results ind icated that the participants, though achieving high averages on these competencies, none were significant. This too, could be addressed in skill development activities. Many have posited the importance of communication as an essential characteristic for c ommunity college leaders (Boggs, 2003; Brown et al., 2002; Goff, 2002, 2003; Pope & Miller, 2005), yet communication continues to be a factor in which the results indicate a lack of competence. The factor of communicating with people has the lowest

PAGE 73

73 mean o f all the competency factors. This mean rating was an average level which is higher than about 40% of other professionals on this competency (Saville, 2010c). Another competency of presenting information, which rated a slightly above average level that i s higher than about 60% of other professionals on this competency (Saville, 2010c), is relevant communication factors. These findings, along with the leadership characteristic findings, have signified a gap of skills on the communication factors. Three ot her competencies in the study were providing support, adjusting to change, and making judgments, all of which would be important competencies in the leader who is working to build collaborations. These factors were all rated at average to slightly above a verage for both the workforce and the other community college administrators, which suggests a potential for development between both administrative groups. The other community college administrators, who have the competency potential for projecting confid ence, have already demonstrated an important aspect of professionalism and community college advocacy. The projecting confidence competency includes resolving conflict, conveying self confidence, and coping with pressure. This confidence is important for administrators to promote the community college mission, resist the pressures, and maintain the courage that comes with the challenges of working in this highly dynamic environment. Implications for Higher Education As community colleges continue to be called upon to be the leaders and innovators in higher education, purposeful planning to target training and increasing the leadership pipeline have increased in importance. The findings of this study will support the critical selection and development ef forts of these future leaders. This study has

PAGE 74

74 provided information for institutions, associations, leadership development programs, and doctoral programs to consider when designing curricula for leadership development programs. This study can serve to i nform association leadership, higher education administrators, and professors and advisors in community college leadership programs who influence program and curricula design to place greater emphasis on identified gaps and areas of need in the development of leadership skills, characteristics, and competencies. In his doctoral program research on succession planning and developing community college leaders, Luna (2010) emphasized the importance of data to support the voices, indicating strengths and gaps that exist among community college administrators. Presidents, administrators, and human resource personnel, who are involved with developing their own individuals at community colleges in formal and informal programs, can use this information to advance their existing plans or to assist in the development programs. Weisman and Vaughan presidents sponsored GYOL programs, a significant gap still occurs in leadership development or succession planning programs. This study also provided new knowledge about the competencies of community college administrators, particularly workforce development administrators. Findings may be used to inform current presidents and aspiring leaders and educators about ways to expand the pipeline to upper level administration and the presidency beyond

PAGE 75

75 tradi tional academic administration to the ranks of the workforce development departments. This study has provided viable information about the characteristics and competencies which exist within these workforce development departments. Suggestions for Future Research This study focused only on the differences between workforce development and other community college administrators. A more expansive research study of additional administrative groups, such as Student Affairs, Business Services, and Administrat ive Services, would provide a more extensive analysis of leadership characteristics among expanded to include age, gender, ethnicity, years of service, educational attain ment, as well providing additional information for consideration in career development. A pre existing dataset was used that provided information on the leadership characteristics and competencies of workforce and other administrators in the community coll ege system. To further the research on the ever expanding field of workforce development and its impact on the community college system, additional research designed to collect career pathway and career trajectory information of workforce administrators, p articularly in those who have reached upper administration including the presidency, would serve to better inform. This additional research, in particular, could serve to provide a body of knowledge that would assist in preparing future leaders to develo p appropriate skill sets, identify mentoring opportunities, and assist in effective pathway preparation. In addition, to truly gain the presidential perspective, future research could focus on those presidents who have come from the workforce development ranks. This research would not only address the pathways and preparations of these presidents,

PAGE 76

76 but would also focus on the perceived success of these presidents, as well as the importance of their experience in their workforce development positions to tha t perceived success. Finally, the majority of the research literature on workforce development leadership is focused on the K 12 concerns and issues. Workforce development, as dded to a smaller but growing body of knowledge, which concentrates specifically on researching the unique issues associated with workforce development in the community college setting. Further research on workforce development, which is beyond simply the leadership needs to fulfill those vital community college functions, is warranted. This may include such topics as design and function of workforce development departments, impact of workforce development programs on colleges and communities, and the val ue or return on investment of workforce development programs. Conclusion Studies have revealed a need for more diverse professional preparation among community college leaders. Amey et al. (2002) reported an increase in the number of presidents coming fro m other types of administrative positions, such as workforce administrators. In light of an anticipated large number of retirements in community 2002, p. 574) The dat a suggested the importance of the growth in previous administrative experience in positions other than chief academic officer. Also significant is the realization that the role of the community college president has multiple and conflicting responsibiliti es for which management, administration, and leadership skills

PAGE 77

77 are gained through multiple and extended experiences, including those that are experienced in workforce development. In summary, a review of current literature indicates a critical shortage of new leaders to backfill positions left vacant as current community college presidents and other top administrators plan to retire. Because the president is viewed as the key to handling the ever changing environment of the community college, the shortfall of Thus an indicated need is apparent to expand the pipeline to the presidency beyond the traditional academic pathway. Workforce professionals, with their current l eadership characteristics and competencies, could well fill this void. The history, development, and future of workforce development in community colleges has been an interesting, exciting, and challenging relationship. Those who have chosen to pursue thi s particular sector of higher education have found many opportunities for growth and development. The savvy workforce professional will be well served to attain a strong foundation in his educational training and ongoing professional development. Given t he history and growth of community colleges, opportunities abound for the workforce professional who chooses to serve the students at these institutions, including reaching the highest levels of leadership at the community college.

PAGE 78

78 APPENDIX A BUREAU OF LA BOR STATISTICS Figure A 1. Labor force participation rates by age, 1988, 1998, 2008, and projected 2018. Figure A 2. Economic dependency ratio, by age 1975 2008, and projected 2018. APPENDIX B

PAGE 79

79 AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF COMMUNITY COLLEGES (AACC) C ompetencies f or Community College Leaders (2005) Organizational Strategy Assess, develop, implement, and evaluate strategies regularly to monitor and improve the quality of education and the long term health of the organization. Use data driven evidence a nd proven practices from internal and external stakeholders to solve problems, make decisions, and plan strategically. Use a systems perspective to assess and respond to the culture of the organization, to changing the demographics, and to the economical, political, and public health needs of students and the community. Develop a positive environment that supports innovation, teamwork, and successful outcomes. Maintain and grow college personnel and fiscal resources and assets. Align organizational mission, structures, and resources with the college master plan. Resource Management Ensure accountability in reporting. Support operational decisions by managing information resources and ensuring the integrity and integration of reporting systems and databases. Develop and manage resource assessment, planning, budgeting, acquisitions, and allocation processes consistent with the the college master plan and local, state, and national policies. Take an entrepreneurial stance in seeking ethical alternative funding sources. Implement financial strategies to support programs, services staff, and facilities. Implement a human resources system that includes recruitment, hiring, and reward and performance management systems, and that fosters the professional development and advancement of all staff. Employ organizational, time management, planning, and delegation skills. Manage conflict and change in ways that contribute to the long term viability of the organization.

PAGE 80

80 Communication Articulate and champion shared mission, vision, and values to internal and external audiences, appropriately matching message to audience. Disseminate and support policies and strategies. Create and maintain open communications regarding resources, priorities, and expectations. Convey ideas and information succinctly, frequently, and inclusively through media and verbal and nonverbal means to the board and other constituencies and stakeholders. Listen actively to understand, comprehend, analyze, engage, and act. Project confidence and respond re sponsibly and tactfully. Collaboration Embrace and employ the diversity of individuals, cultures, values, ideas, and communication styles. Demonstrate cultural competence relative to a global society. Catalyze involvement and commitment of students, facult y, staff, and community members to work for the common good. Build and leverage networks and partnerships to advance the mission, vision, and goals of the community college. Work effectively and diplomatically with unique constituent groups, such as legisl ators, board members, business leaders, accreditation organizations, and other such relevant groups. Manage conflict and change by building and maintaining productive relationships. Develop, enhance, and sustain teamwork and cooperation. Facilitate shared problem solving and decision making. Community College Advocacy Value and promote diversity, inclusion, equity, and academic excellence. Demonstrate a passion for commitment to the mission of community colleges and student success through the scholarship o f teaching and learning.

PAGE 81

81 Promote equity, open access, teaching, learning, and innovation as primary goals for the college, seeking to understand how these change over time and facilitating discussion with all stakeholders. Advocate the community college mi ssion to all constituents and empower them to do the same. Advance lifelong learning and support a learner centered and learning oriented environment. Represent the community college in the local community, in the broader educational community, at various levels of government, and as a model of higher education that can be replicated in international settings. Professionalism Demonstrate transformational leadership through authenticity, creativity, and vision. Understand and endorse the history, philosophy, and culture of the community college. Self assess performance regularly using feedback, reflection, goal setting, and evaluation. Support lifelong learning for self and others. Manage stress through self care, balance, adaptability, flexibility, and humo r. Demonstrate the courage to take risks, make difficult decisions, and accept responsibility. Understand the impact of perceptions, world views, and emotions on self and others. Promote and maintain high standards for personal and organizational integrity honesty, and respect for people. Use influence and power wisely in facilitating the teaching learning process and the exchange of knowledge. Weigh short term and long term goals in decision making. Contribute to the profession through the professional de velopment programs, professional organizational leadership, and research/publications.

PAGE 82

82 APPENDIX C THE WAVE SCALE DESCRIPTIONS Recall from Figure 3 1 that the WAVE is composed of four clusters: thought, influence, adaptability, and delivery. Each of thes e clusters is divided into three sections, three dimensions per section, and three facets per dimension, yielding a total of 12 sections, 36 dimensions, and 108 facets. The thought cluster ( Figure B 1) is composed of vision, judgment and evaluation sections and inventive, abstract, strategic, insightful, practically minded, learning oriented, analytical, factual, and rational dimensions. The influence cluster ( Figure B 2) is composed of leadership, impact, and communication sections, and purposeful, directing, empowering, convincing, challenging, articulate, self promoting, interactive, and engaging dimensions. The adaptability cluster ( Figure B 3) is composed of support, resilience, and flexibility sections, and involving, attentive, accepting, resolving, self assured, composed, receptive, positive and change oriented dimensions. The delivery cluster ( Figure B 4) is composed of structure and drive implementation s sections, and organized, principled, activity oriented, dynamic, striving, enterprising, meticulous, reliable, and compliant dimensions.

PAGE 83

83 Figure C 1. The thought cluster, sections, and dimensions. Thought Vision Inventive Creative, Original, Radical Abstract Conceptual, Theoretical, Learning by Thinking Strategic Developing Strategy, Visionary, Forward Thinking Judgment Insightful Discerning, Seeking Improvement, Intuitive Practically Minded Practical, Learning by Doing, Common Sense Focused Learning Oriented Open to Learning, Learning by Reading, Quick Learning Evaluation Analytical Problem Solving, Analyzing Information, Probing Factual Written Communication, Logical, Fact Finding Rational Number Fluency, Technology Aware, Objective

PAGE 84

84 Figure C 2. The influence cluster, sections, a nd dimensions. Influence Leadership Purposeful Decisive, Making Decisions, Definitive Directing Leadership Oriented, Control Seeking, Coordinating People Empowering Motivating Others, Inspiring, Encouraging Impact Convincing Persuasive, Negotiate, Asserting Views Challenging Challenging Ideas, Prepared to Disagree, Argumentative Articulate Giving Presentations, Eloquent, Socially Confident Communication Self Promoting Immodest, Attention Seeking, Praise Seeking Interactive Networking, Talkative, Lively Engaging Establishing Rapport, Friendship Seeking, Initial Impression

PAGE 85

85 Figure C 3. The adaptability cluster, sections, and dimensions. Adaptability Support Involving Team Oriented, Democratic, Decision Sharing Attentive Empathic, Listening, Psychologically Minded Accepting Trusting, Tolerant, Considerate Resilience Resolving Conflict Resolution, Handling Angry and Upset People Self Assured Self Confident, Self Valuing, Self Directing Composed Calm, Poised, Copes with Pressure Flexibility Receptive Receptive to Feedback, Open to Criticism, Feedback Seeking Positive Optimistic, Cheerful, Buoyant Change Oriented Accepting Challenges, Accepting Change, Tolerant of Uncertainty

PAGE 86

86 Figure C 4. The delivery cluster, sections, and dimensions. Delivery Structure Organized Self Organized, Planning, Prioritizing Principled Propre Discreet, Honoring Commitments Activity Oriented Quick Working, Busy, Multi Tasking Drive Dynamic Energetic, Initiating, Action Oriented Striving Ambitious, Results Driven, Perservering Enterprising Competitive, Enterpreurial Selling Implementation Meticulous Quality Oriented, Thorough, Detailed Reliable Meeting Deadlines, Finishing Tasks, Punctual Compliant Rule Bound, Following Procedures, Risk Averse

PAGE 87

87 APPENDIX D THE COMPETENCY SCALE DESCRIPTIONS Recall from Figure 3 1 that the WAVE is composed of four cluster s. Each of these clusters is divided into three sections, three dimensions per section, and three facets per dimension, yielding a total of 12 sections, 36 dimensions, and 108 facets. The competencies are based on links established between the 108 facets and links to work performance of more than 1,000 professionals in 12 key performance areas, clustered in four headings. Th e solving problems cluster ( Figure C 1) is composed of analyzing situations, making judgments, and cre ating innovations. The influencing people cluster ( Figure C 2) is composed of communicating with people, presenting information, and providing leadership. The adapting approaches cluster ( F igure C 3) is composed of projecting confidence, adjusting to change, and giving support. The delivering results cluster ( Figure C 4) is composed of executing assignments, structuring tasks, and achieving success.

PAGE 88

88 Figur e D 1. The solving problems cluster Solving Problems Evaluating Problems Analyzing Situations Documenting Facts Interpreting Data Making Judgments Providing Insights Adopting Practical Approaches Developing Expertise Creating Innovation Generating Ideas Exploring Possibilities Developing Strategies

PAGE 89

89 Figure D 2. The influencing people cluster Influencing People Communicating with People Impressing People Developing Relationships Establishing Rapport Presenting Information Convincing People Challenging Ideas Articulating Information Providing Leadership Making Decisions Leading People Empowering Individuals

PAGE 90

90 Figure D 3. The adapting approaches cluster Adapting Approaches Projecting Confidence Resolving Conflict Conveying Self Confidence Coping with Pressure Adjusting to Change Inviting Feedback Thinking Positively Embracing Change Providing Support Team Working Understanding People Valuing Individuals

PAGE 91

91 Figure D 4. The delivering results cluster Delivering Results Executing Assignments Checking Details Meeting Timescales Following Procedures Structuring Tasks Organizing Resources Upholding Standards Completing Tasks Achieving Success Taking Action Pursuing Goals Tackling Business Challenges

PAGE 92

92 LIS T OF REFERENCES Almanac of Policy Issues. (2001, June 1). Job training a nd vocational education. Retrieved from Almanac of Policy Issues: http://www.policyalmanac.org/economic/job_training.shtml American Association of Community Colleges (AACC). (2005). L eading forward: Competencies for community college leaders. [Brochure]. Washington, DC: Author American Association of Community Colleges (AACC). (2010a). Community colleges past and present. Retrieved from http://www.aacc.nche.edu/AboutCC/history/Pages/pasttopresent.aspx American Association of Community Colleges (AACC). (2010b). Community college trends and statistics. Retrieved from http://www.aacc.nche.edu/AboutCC/Trends/Pages/default.aspx American Association of Community Colleges (AACC). (2010c). 2010 Community college facts at a glance. Retrieved from http://www.aacc.nche.edu/AboutCC/Documents/factsheet2010.pdf The evolution of the community college in America. Retrieved from http://www.aacc.nche.edu/AboutCC/whsummit/Documents/boggs_whsummitbrief. pdf American Council on Education (ACE). (2009). The CAO census: A national profile of chief academic office rs. Washington, DC: Author Amey, M. J. (2006, November/December). Leadership in higher education. Change, volume number, 55 58. Amey, M. J., & Van Der Linden, K. E. (2002). Career paths for community college leaders. (Research Brief Leadership Series, No. 2, AACC RB 02 2). Washington, DC: American Association of Community Colleges. Amey, M. J., Van Der Linden, K. E., & Brown, D. F. (2002). Perspectives on community college leadership: Twenty years in the making. Community College Journal of Research and Pra ctice, 26, 573 589. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier Database. Association for Career and Technical Education (ACTE). (2006, August 4). Summary and analysis of major provisions and changes: "Career and Technical Education Improvement Act of 2006." Re trieved from Association for Career and Technical Education: http://www.acteonline.org

PAGE 93

93 Association for Career and Technical Education (ACTE). (2002a, February). Answering the call to duty. Retrieved from ACT E Onlin e: Techniques; Connecting Education and Careers 77: http://www.acteonline.org/tech_archive.aspx Association for Career and Technical Education (ACTE). (2002b, September). Federal funding for car eer and technical education. Retrieved from ACT E Online: Techniques; Connecting Education and Careers 77 : http://www.acteonline.org/tech_archive.aspx Basham, M. (2007). A cognitive application of personality testing: Measuring University of Florida, 2007). UF Online Dissertations. Berry, L. H., Hammons, J. O., & Denny, G. S. (2001). Faculty retirement turnover in community colleges: A real or imagined problem? Community College Journal of Research and Practice 25, 123 136. Boggs, G. R. (2003). Leadership Context for the Twenty First Century. New Directions for Community Colleges 123, 15 25. Retrieved from Academic Search P remier Database. Boggs, G. R. (2008). Forward. In Roueche, J. E., Richardson, M. M., Neal P. W., & Roueche, S. D. (Eds.), The creative community college: Leading change through innovation (pp. vii ix) Washington, DC: Community College Press. Bottoms, F., Young, M. (2009). Ready for tomorrow: Six proven ideas to graduate and prepare more students for college and 21st century careers. Retrieved from Southern Regional Education Board (SREB). Retrieved from http://publications.sreb.org/2009/09V20_Ready_for_Tomorrow.pdf Brown, L., Martinez, M., & Daniel, D. (2002). Community college leadership preparation: Needs, perceptions, and recommendations Community College Review, 30 (1), 45 7 4. Campbell, D. F. (2006). The new leadership gap: Shortages in administrative positions. Community College Journal, February/March 11 14. Campbell, D. F., & Associates (2002). The leadership gap: Model strategies for leadership development Washington, D C: Community College Press. Campbell, D. F., & Leverty, L. H. (1997). Developing and selecting leaders for the 21st Century. Community College Journal 67, 34 36. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier Database. Clark, R. W., Farmer, E. I., & Welch, S. M. (2010). An examination of leadership issues facing Pennsylvania career and technical administrators Career and Technical Education Research, 35, 47 62.

PAGE 94

94 Cohen, A. M., & Brawer, F. B. (2008). The American community college (5 th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey B ass. Comprehensive Employment and Training Act of 1973 (Pub. L. No. 93 203). Copa, G.H., Plihal, J., Birky, G., & Upton, K. (1999). New designs for staffing and staff development for secondary and postsecondary education National Center for Research in V ocational Education. University of California, Berkeley. Copa, G. H., & Wolff, S. J. (2002). New designs for career and technical education at the secondary and postsecondary levels: Design guide for policy and practice National Research Center for Career and Technical Education, University of Minnesota, St. Paul. Retrieved from http://136.165.122.102/UserFiles/File/pubs/Guide_for_Policy Copa.pdf Dann Messier, B. (2010, Ma rch 11). Estimated FY2010 state allocations under the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006 Retrieved from Program Memorandum, United States Department of Education: http: //cte.ed.gov/perkinsimplementation/nrg.cfm Duree, C. A. (2007). The challenges of the community college presidency in the new millennium: Pathways, preparation, competencies and leadership programs needed to survive (Doctoral dissertation, Iowa State Uni versity, Ames). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database (UMI No. 3289420). Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 (Pub. L. No. 88 452). Eddy, P. L. (2009). Wanted: Community college leaders to serve in the hinterlands. The Chronicle of Higher Education 55 (29), B24. Floyd, D. L., & Walker, K. P. (2009). The community college baccalaureate: Putting the pieces together. Community College Journal of Research and Practice 33, 90 124. Fulton Calkins, P., & Milling, C. (2005). Community college lea dership: An art to be practiced: 2010 and beyond. Community College Journal of Research and Practice 29, 233 250. Gleazer, J. E. (1980). The community college: Values, vision & vitality Washington, DC: American Association of Community and Junior College s. Goff, D. G. (2002). Community college presidency: What are the challenges to be encountered and traits to be successful? (Report No. JC 030 289). Tampa, FL: Hillsborough Community College. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED476681).

PAGE 95

95 Goff, D. G. ( 2003). What do we know about good community college leaders: A study in leadership trait theory and behavioral leadership theory (Report No. JC 030 281). Tampa, FL: Hillsborough Community College. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED476456). Harmon, R., & MacAllum, K. (2003). Documented characteristics of labor market responsive community colleges and a review of supporting literature. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Office of Vocational Adult Education. Hassan, A., Dellow, D., & Jackso n, R. (2010). The AACC leadership competencies: Parallel views from the top. Community College Journal of Research and Practice 34, 180 198. Hockaday, J., & Puyear, D. E. (2000). Community college leadership in the new millennium Washington, DC: Communit y College Press. Hopkins, C. R., Labrecht, J. J., Moss, J., & Finch, C. R. (1998). On the job experiences of vocational administrators that develop leadership capabilities. Journal of Vocational Education Research 23, 35 54. Huck, S. W. (2008). Reading St atistics and Research Boston: Pearson Education, Inc. HR Magazine 55 (10) pp. ii iv. Job Training and Partnership Act of 1982 (Pub. L. 97 300). King, S. B. (2011). Insight gained from a review of the master of science degree in workforce education leadership curriculum. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 35, 43 49. King, J. E., & Gomez, G. G. (2008). On the pathway to the presidency: Characteristics of high Washington, DC: American Council on Education. Kubala, T. S., & Bailey, G. M. (2001). A new perspective on community college presidents: Results of a national study. Community College Journal of Research and Practice 25, 793 804. Levesque, K., Laird, J., Hensley, E., Choy S., Catataldi, E. & Hudson, L (2008). Career and technical e ducation in the United States: 1990 200 5 Retrieved from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2008/2008035.pdf Luna, G. (2010). Succession planning; A doctoral program partnership for emerging community college leaders. Community College Journal of Research and Practice 34, 12, 977 990.

PAGE 96

96 Manpower Develo pment and Training Act (Pub. L. No. 87 415). McCaslin, N. L., & Parker, R. (2003). National leadership institute final report National Dissemination Center for Career and Technical Education. The Ohio State University. McFarlin, C. H., Crittenden, B. J., & Ebbers, L. H. (1999). Background factors common among outstanding community college presidents. Community College Review 27 (3), 19 33. Mellow, G. O., & Heelan, C. (2008). Minding the dream: The process and practice of the American community college Lan ham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. MetLife. (2009, February). Boomer bookends: Insights into the oldest and youngest boomers. Mature M arket Institute. Retrieved from http://www.metlife.com/assets/cao/mmi/publications/studies/mmi studies boomer bookends.pdf Morrill Act of 1862 (Pub. L. No. 37 108) National Association of State Directors of Career Technical Education Consortium (NASDCTEc). ( 2010). Reflect, transform, lead: A new vision for career technical education National Commission on Community Colleges. (2008, January). Winning the skills race colleges. New York: The College Board. Retrieved from http://professionals.collegeboard.com/profdownload/winning_the_skills_race.pdf National Defense Education Act of 1958 (Pub. L. No. 85 864). Gender in community college administration (Doctoral dissertation, University of Florida). UF Online Dissertations. Pathways to Prosperity Project. (2011). Pathways to prosperity: Meeting the challenge of preparing youn g Americans for the 21 st century Harvard Graduate School of Education. Pope, M. L., & Miller, M. T. (2005). Leading from the inside out: Learned respect for academic culture through shared governance. Community College Journal of Research and Practice 29 (9/10), 745 757. Prentice Hall Documents Library. (1998). Smith Hughes Act of 1917 Retrieved from Prentice Hall Documents Library: http://cwx.prenhall.com/bookbind/pu bbooks/dye4/medialib/docs/smith917.htm

PAGE 97

97 Presswood, K. (2011). Leadership attributes of enrollment managers in higher education institutions in the United States (Doctoral dissertation, University of Florida). UF Online Dissertations. Romero, M. (2004). Who will lead our community colleges? Change, 36 (6), 30 34. Roueche, J. E., Richardson, M. M., Neal P. W., & Roueche, S. D. (2008). The creative community college: Leading change through innovation Washington, DC: Community College Press. Saville Consulting (2010a). Saville Consulting Wave Professional Styles Retrieved from http://www.savilleconsulting.com/products/wave_professional.aspx Saville Consulting (2010b). Professional Styles Preparation Guide Retrieved from http://www.savilleconsulting.com/docs/PROF ST PG MTS1 UKE.pdf Saville Consulting (2010c). Professional Styles Example Expert Report Jack Taylor Retrieved from http://www.savilleconsulting.com/products/wave_professional.aspx Saville Consulting (2010d). The development of the professional styles questionnaires Retrieved from http://www.savilleconsulting.com/products/wave_technical.aspx Saville Consulting (2010e). Validity Retrieved from http://www.savilleconsulting.com/products/wave_technicalvalidity.aspx Saville Consulting (2010f). Summary of professional styles reliability Retrieved from http://www.savilleconsulting.com/products/wave_technicalreltables.aspx Saville Consulting (2010g). Professional styles single dimension and composite validities Retrieved from http://www.savilleconsulting.com/products/wave_technicalvaltables.aspx Schiefen, Kate (October 17 19, 2010). Entrepreneurial orientation of community college workforce divisions and the impact of organizational structure: A grounded theory study National Conference sponsored by National Council for Workforce Education. Retrieved from http://www.ncwe.org/?page=2010_workshops Shults, C. (2001). The critical impact of impending retirements of community college leadership (Research Brief Leadership Series, No. 1, AACC RB 01 5). Washington, DC: American Association of Community Colleges. Smith, N. B. (1999). A tribute to the visionaries, prime movers and pioneers of voca tional education 1892 to 1917. Journal of Vocational and Technical Education 16 (1). Stone, J. (2003). Research to practice The National Research Center for Career and Technical Education, (as cited in National Association of State Directors of Career and

PAGE 98

98 Sullivan, L. G. (2001). Four generations of community college leadership. Community College Journal of Research and Planning 25, 559 571. Toossi, M. (2009, November). Employment o utlook: 2008 18 Labor force projection to 2018: Older workers staying more active Monthly Labor Review. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. U.S. Department of Education. (n.d.). The federal role in education Retrieved from U.S. Department of Education: http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/fed/role.html?src=ln U.S. Department of Education. (2004). Earning, learning, and choice: Career and technical education works for students and employers National Association of Vocati onal Education (NAVE) Independent Advisory Panel. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/sectech/nave/naveiap.pdf U.S. Department of Education. (2007, March 16). Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Educ ation Act of 2006 Retrieved from U.S. Department of Education: http://www.ed.gov/policy/sectech/leg/perkins/index.html U.S. Department of Education. (2008). National Center for Education Statistics, 2007 2008 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study. U.S. Department of Labor. (1977). Overview of the Nixon Ford Administration at the Department of Labor, 1969 1977 Retrieved f rom U.S. Department of Labor: http://www.dol.gov/oasam/programs/history/webid nixonford.htm U.S. Department of Labor. (2010) Occupational Outlook Handbook: 2010 2011 Edition: Ove rview of the 2008 18 projections Retrieved from: Bureau of Labor Statistics. http://stats.bls.gov/oco/oco2003.htm U.S. National Archives & Records Administration. (1995). Morill Act (1862 ). Milestone Do cuments. Washington, DC. VanderMolen, J., & Zinzer, R. (2006). Job tasks performed by career preparation system administrators in one Midwestern state: Implications for leadership development. Journal of Industrial Education 104 135. Vaughn, G.B. (1986). The community college presidency New York; American Council on Education/Macmillian. Vaughn, G. B. (2001). Developing community college leaders for the future: Crisis or opportunity Raleigh, NC: North Carolina State University. (ERIC Document Reproduct ion Service No. ED457873). Vaughan, G. B. (2004). Diversify the presidency. Chronicle of Higher Education 51 (10), B14 B16.

PAGE 99

99 Vaughan, G. B., Mellander, G. O., & Blois, B. (1994). The community college presidency: Current status and future outlook Washingto n, DC: Community College Press. Vaughan, G. B., & Weisman, I. M. (1998). The community college presidency at the millennium Washington, DC: Community College Press. Vincent, E. T. (2004). A qualitative analysis of community college leadership from the lea ding forward summits Final Report prepared for the American Association of Community Colleges. ACT, Inc. Vocational Education Act of 1917 (Pub. L. No. 65 347). Watba, U., & Farmer E.I. (2006). Challenges confronting community college deans. Community Col lege Journal of Research and Practice 30, 243 251. Weisman, I. M., & Vaughan, G. B. (2002). The community college presidency, 2001. (Leadership Series Brief No. 3, Report No. AACC RB 02 1), Washington, DC: American Association of Community Colleges. Weis man, I. M., & Vaughan, G. B. (2007). The community college presidency: 2006. (Leadership Series Brief, Report No. AACC RB 07 1) Washington, DC: American Associati on of Community Colleges. The White House (2010). Building American skills by strengthening co mmunity olleges: White House summit on community colleges Retrieved from http://www.whitehouse.gov/communitycollege The White House. (2009, 24 February). Remarks of President Barack Obama -Address to Joint Session of Congress Retrieved from The Briefing Room: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks of Preside nt Barack Obama Address to Joint Session of Congress/ Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (Pub. L. No. 105 220). Zirkle, C., Parker, R., & McCaslin, N. L. (2005). The changing state of career and technical education leadership development in the United State s. In J. Gregson & J. Allen (Eds .), Leadership in career and technical education: Beginning the 21 st century (pp. 63 94). Columbus, OH: University Council for Workforce and Human Resource Education. Zirkle, C., Parker, R., & McCaslin, N. L. (2006). Career and technical education leadership development. 2006 CTE Research and Professional Development Conference. Atlanta.

PAGE 100

100 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Anna M. Lebesch received her baccalaureate degree from the University of Missouri in Columbia in 1992. She received her Master of Education in Educational and Counseling Psychology degree also from the University of Missouri in 1994. She attained her Ed.D. from the University of Florida in summer of 2011. During her tenure at the University of Missouri, Ms. Lebesch be gan her career in a paraprofessional, and she remained at a professional level position as a Work Study Director and Career Advisor. Ms. Lebesch then continued in the college system as a Program Specialist at Pensacola Junior College for the Carl D. Perkins Grants program for single parents and displaced homemakers. After this period, she continued her work at the Unive rsity of California San Diego as the Coordinator for Admissions and Student Affairs Representative for the Graduate School for International Relations and Pacific Studies. During the past 10 years, Ms. Lebesch has held various administrative positions at S t. Johns River State College, currently holding the appointment of Vice President of career and technical education, which includes competencies in budgeting, finance, progra m development, grant management, community affairs, economic development, faculty development, as well as professional training and institutional effectiveness.