Date of Graduation
College of Education and Human Services
Curriculum & Instruction/Literacy Studies
This study examined the leadership styles of presidents at Master's I institutions as defined by the Carnegie Foundation (2001), and called the "Middle Child of Public Higher Education". The entire population of 494 presidents was surveyed and a response rate of 51.4% was obtained. This study examined the relationships between leadership style and specific demographic variables.;Bolman and Deal devised a four-frame model that included the structural, human resource, political, and symbolic leadership frames. These frames, or windows, allow users to view the world and problems from various perspectives. The structural frame relates to hierarchy and formal rules. The human resource frame focuses on the people in the organization. The political frame views organizations as arenas where participants compete over resources, power, influence, and interests. The symbolic frame focuses on the ceremonies, culture, and myths within an organization. Leaders may predominantly use one style, but are better equipped to handle complex problems by using a multi-frame style.;The Leadership Orientations (Self) 1990 instrument was utilized to reveal that Masters I presidents employed in a statistically significant manner a multi-style approach (43.7%), followed by a paired-style (22.4%), then a single-style (20.9%), and finally, a no-style (13%) leadership orientation. Further, it was found that frame utilization was statistically significant. The frames employed in descending order were human resources (30.7%), structural (22.5%), political (22.5%), symbolic (18.8%) and no-frame (5.5%).;The respondents were predominantly Caucasian (86.6%) male (76.8), married (79.4%) in their first presidency (70.5%), had been in the position less than ten years (60.1%) and were over the age of sixty (47.2%) Their previous position was chief academic officer (47.2%) or president of another institution (26.2%) Nearly 90% had earned doctorates, Ph.D. (73.6%) or Ed.D. (16.1%) with education (31.6%) as the primary area of academic expertise.;The findings produced no statistically significant differences when comparing leadership style and institutional variables, demographic variables, first time presidents or length of time as president.;Leadership is a complex phenomenon that cannot be explained by this set of variables and may be situational in context. Further study can assist in identifying effective leadership variables.
Monahan, Michael L., "Leadership frames of presidents of Master I Higher Education Institutions" (2004). Graduate Theses, Dissertations, and Problem Reports. 2567.