Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Senior-level student affairs' administrators' self-reported leadership practices, behaviors, and strategies
(USC Thesis Other)
Senior-level student affairs' administrators' self-reported leadership practices, behaviors, and strategies
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Running Head: STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 1
SENIOR-LEVEL STUDENT AFFAIRS’ ADMINISTRATORS’ SELF-REPORTED
LEADERSHIP PRACTICES, BEHAVIORS, AND STRATEGIES
by
Marsh Allen Smith
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
May 2013
Copyright 2013 Marsh Allen Smith
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 2
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 3
Abstract
Universities are expanding and growing at rapid rates to meet the demand for higher education in
America. The profession of student affairs serves as the beacon to help guide students outside of
their classroom experience. In response to the changing campus climate, Student Affairs’
divisions will be tapped to help shape university policy while meeting the academic and
developmental needs of all students (Love, 2003). Student Affairs’ departments require strong
leadership in order to meet the needs of students financially, socially, and academically. Leading
a Student Affairs’ department is a senior-level administrator who is there to set vision, budgets,
and help guide the Student Affairs’ practitioners to engage students, develop an organizational
culture, and meet the university’s mission. This study examined how senior-level Student
Affairs’ administrators lead their Student Affairs’ departments to build effective leaders and
support new practitioners in developing their own leadership practices. Three research questions
were used in this mixed-method study. The quantitative portion of this study was conducted
through the Leadership Practices Inventory© (LPI) instrument which was sent to 40 senior-level
Student Affairs administrators at two universities in California. The Leadership Practices
Inventory© (LPI) survey has five fundamental leadership practices which are: Model the Way,
Inspire a Shared Vision, Challenge the Process, Enable Others to Act, and Encourage the Heart.
These five fundamental leadership practices help leaders to create and accomplish extraordinary
things (Kouzes and Posner, 1987). In the end, 23 senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators
completed the LPI survey. The qualitative portion of this research study used the technique of
purposeful sampling in which four senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators were selected to
participate in a 30-minute standardized open-ended interview and answer questions about their
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 4
beliefs and practices. The research study resulted in several key findings from data analysis.
First, senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders utilized Kouzes and Posner’s (2003) leadership
practice of Enabling Others to Act at high levels in their leadership styles. Second, the
leadership practice of Inspiring a Shared Vision was the lowest utilized leadership practice by
senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders in this study. Third, senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders
utilized the themes of Relationship Building, Group Collaboration, Working towards a Common
Goal, and Confronting Negative Behaviors in conjunction with LPI leadership practices to a high
standard and perceived themselves to create a positive work environment. Fourth, senior-level
Student Affairs’ leaders perceive themselves as strong mentors, leaders, and trainers that pass on
their leadership knowledge to the next generation of Student Affairs’ practitioners through the
themes of Role Modeling, Mentorships, and Support of Professional Developments in
conjunction with LPI leadership practices.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 5
Dedication
There have been so many people that have helped me achieve this milestone in my life. I
want to say a huge THANK YOU to my family, friends, and staff. I dedicate this dissertation to
them and I appreciate how they helped me, supported me, and loved me while I was typing and
crying to achieve this dream. In the immortal words of Herm Albright, “A positive attitude may
not solve all of your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.”
For Marcia & Zane: My Momma and Dad. You have been there for me since the
beginning. I love you and hope to make you proud of all I do.
For my Aunt Mary: You are the one who inspired me to get a Doctorate degree when you
fixed my ankle all those years ago. I can’t thank you enough for the love and support.
For Hilary & James: The best Assistant Resident Directors a guy can ask for. You
supported me and gave me the reassurance to know I could be both a graduate student and your
crazy boss man. Thank you for the talks, the tears, and the love. I appreciate you more than
you’ll ever know. I promise to be there for you and to support you on your continued journey
into Student Affairs.
For Kristo: Hi friend, meeting you has changed my life and I will always cherish your
friendship and guidance. Thanks for being the Vault.
For Megan, Nikki & Zan: My Mean Girls! You all were my rock in the stormy weather.
Thank you for the support and advice. Know that I am indebted to you and will be there to
return the favor as you go through your journey in a Doctoral program. And I want my pink shirt
back!
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 6
For Teresa & Mike Neel & Jacqueline: My roommates and houseguests. We are a
family! You taught me how to get to campus, never let me be late for class, and helped me to
enjoy the simple moments of life. Thank you for your support and helping me to navigate life
during this journey.
For Paola: P-A-O-L-A. Thank you for believing in me and sharing your family with me.
I love the Familia Lepe. I’m so thankful to have you in my life.
For Camila, “Crispy,” and Eric: You all are my knights in shining armor. I would never
have been able to accomplish so many things without your help and patience. Thank you from
the bottom of my heart.
To my Hedrick Hearts & Hitch Squirrels Staffs at UCLA: You got me coffee, made me
laugh, and hugged me through the tears. Thank you for helping me to reach my dreams. I am
proud to have worked with each of you and I am excited to see where you all will go in life.
Finally to Phong “Samantha” Tang: You allowed me to become a mentor and friend to
you. You challenged me to be a better person and loved me when I fell short. I'm so proud of
you and being a part of your life has been a blessing. I miss you every day and I am sad you
aren’t here. You were sunshine, joy, and positivity. Heaven is lucky to have an amazing person
like you. I know we will meet again, Samm Tang!! I love you.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 7
Acknowledgments
I would like to acknowledge Dr. Pedro Garcia, my dissertation chair. Dr. Garcia, you
challenged and supported me through this entire process. Thank you for showing me tough love
and for not making me sit in your office to type for a weekend. I can honestly say I had several
nightmares about having to sit and write in your office, or while you taught class, and I used that
image as a motivational technique to this dissertation moving along. You have shown me what it
means to be a mentor and leader and I want to thank you for everything. I knew I wanted to
write a dissertation on a leadership topic after the first interaction we had in class during year
one. I am honored that you allowed me to be in your thematic group and I have learned so much
from you. Thank you, Dr. Garcia, for everything.
The second committee member on my dissertation was Dr. Rudy Castruita. I would like
to say Thank you to Dr. Castruita for challenging me to think critically in this process. His
feedback and support has been unwavering and I appreciate him.
To Dr. Bridget Collier: You have been an inspiration of mine since I met you at UCLA.
Your insight and passion for students excites me and I feel blessed to have been able to work
with you. Thank for the support and guidance in this process.
Dr. Suzanne Seplow and Rob Kadota from UCLA’s Office of Residential Life (ORL):
Thank you for encouraging me to develop myself professionally and serving as mentors to me. I
appreciate your time, feedback, and always being there and open with me. Your support truly
has changed my life.
Ms. Megan Fox: You’re next lady! You challenged me to be a better professional and
encouraged me to take risks. You have supported me and loved me throughout this process.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 8
Thank you for always being willing to read over any of my papers and talking out any issue I
was having. I can’t wait to share in your moment! I’m proud to be your friend!
To Nikki Williams: My neighbor, my travel partner, and my friend. Thank you for proof
reading paper after paper. Thank you for pushing, arguing, and challenging me about passive
verbs and making smart choices. You constantly amaze me and I am so grateful for your
friendship and support.
To Taryn Wallon: You have always been my partner in crime. You have always been
there to help me wrap my mind around the issue or give me a new perspective about students and
how to work with them. I am blessed to have you in my life and thank you for helping me reach
this dream. From signing Grease 2 songs to arguing about for profit institutions, we make a
great team!
Chad, Becky, & Denise: Words cannot describe how much I adore you and how thankful
I am for you all. You helped me to find myself and supported me in our program. I love you
each so much and could not have done this without you. You all are truly gifted educators and I
am thankful to have you in my life and in the educational system!
To my USC Cohort: We have come so far and your support throughout this whole
process has truly impacted me; I was lucky enough to find Thursday Cohort 1and we all truly
became a family. I am proud of what we have accomplished! I am proud to be a Trojan!
Fight On!
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 9
Table of Contents
Abstract ................................................................................................................................3
Dedication ............................................................................................................................5
Acknowledgments................................................................................................................7
List of Tables .....................................................................................................................14
List of Figures ....................................................................................................................15
Chapter One: Introduction to the Study ...........................................................................16
Statement of the Problem .......................................................................................18
Purpose of the Study ..............................................................................................20
Research Questions ................................................................................................21
Significance of the Study .......................................................................................21
Assumptions ...........................................................................................................22
Definition of Terms................................................................................................23
Organization of the Study ......................................................................................24
Chapter Two: Review of Literature ...............................................................................26
Leadership Theory Categories ...............................................................................27
Trait Theories ..........................................................................................27
Behavioral Theories ................................................................................28
Ohio State University Study ..........................................................29
University of Michigan Study ........................................................29
Blake and Mouton’s Managerial (Leadership) Grid ...............................30
Power and Influence Theories ................................................................31
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 10
French and Raven’s Five Forms of Power .....................................31
Transformational Leadership .........................................................32
Servant Leadership.........................................................................33
Contingency Theories .............................................................................34
Fiedler’s Contingency Model ........................................................34
Path-Goal Theory ...........................................................................36
Cognitive Theories ..................................................................................37
Leaders’ Cognitive Framework ..............................................................37
Cultural/Symbolic Theories ....................................................................39
Culture and Leadership ...........................................................................39
Kouzes and Posner’s Leadership Framework ........................................................40
Model the Way ........................................................................................41
Inspire a Shared Vision ...........................................................................42
Challenge the Process .............................................................................42
Enable Others to Act ...............................................................................42
Encourage the Heart ................................................................................43
Leadership Practice Inventory (LPI) in Higher Education Research .....................43
Leadership in Student Affairs ................................................................................44
Summary ................................................................................................................45
Chapter Three: Methodology ...........................................................................................46
Introduction ............................................................................................................46
Purpose of the Study ..............................................................................................46
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 11
Research Design.....................................................................................................47
Population and Sampling .......................................................................................49
Demographic Data .................................................................................................50
Procedures ..............................................................................................................50
Instrumentation ......................................................................................................51
Data Collection ......................................................................................................53
Data Analysis .........................................................................................................54
Reliability and Validity ..........................................................................................54
Ethical Consideration .............................................................................................55
Summary ................................................................................................................55
Chapter Four: Analysis of Data ......................................................................................57
Introduction ............................................................................................................57
Data Collection ......................................................................................................58
Survey Respondents and Instrument .......................................................58
Interview Questions ................................................................................59
Interview Respondents ............................................................................60
Demographic Data .................................................................................................61
Analysis of Research Question One ......................................................................66
Enabling Others to Act............................................................................75
Encouraging the Heart ............................................................................76
Modeling the Way...................................................................................78
Challenging the Process ..........................................................................79
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 12
Inspiring a Shared Vision........................................................................81
Analysis of Research Question Two ......................................................................83
Theme 1: Relationship Building .............................................................84
Theme 2: Group Collaboration ...............................................................85
Theme 3: Working Towards a Common Goal ........................................85
Theme 4: Confronts Negative Behavior .................................................86
Analysis of Research Question Three ....................................................................87
Theme 1: Modeling Behavior .................................................................89
Theme 2: Mentorship ..............................................................................90
Theme 3: Support Professional Development ........................................91
Summary ................................................................................................................93
Chapter Five Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations .....................................95
Introduction ............................................................................................................95
Summary of Findings .............................................................................................97
Research Question One ..........................................................................................97
Enabling Others to Act............................................................................98
Encourage the Heart ................................................................................98
Modeling the Way...................................................................................99
Challenging the Process ........................................................................100
Inspiring a Shared Vision......................................................................100
Research Question Two .......................................................................................101
Theme 1: Relationship Building ...........................................................101
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 13
Theme 2: Group Collaboration .............................................................102
Theme 3: Working Towards a Common Goal ......................................102
Theme 4: Confronts Negative Behavior ...............................................102
Research Question Three .....................................................................................103
Theme 1: Modeling Behavior ...............................................................104
Theme 2: Mentorship ............................................................................104
Theme 3: Support Professional Development ......................................104
Key Findings ........................................................................................................105
Research Question One .........................................................................105
Research Question Two ........................................................................106
Research Question Three ......................................................................107
Recommendations for Senior-Level Student Affairs’ Leaders ............................108
Recommendations for Further Research ..............................................................110
Conclusion ...........................................................................................................111
References ........................................................................................................................113
Appendices
Appendix A: Request to Participate .....................................................................119
Appendix B: LPI-Self Form.................................................................................121
Appendix C: Senior-Level Student Affairs’ Administrators’
Interview Questions .......................................................................126
Appendix D: Request to Use LPI.........................................................................128
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 14
List of Tables
Table 1: Interview Question Matrix .........................................................................52
Table 2: Rank Ordered Leadership Practices by Means and
Corresponding Standard Deviation of Samples Senior-
Level Student Affairs’ Leaders (N=23) .....................................................70
Table 3: Individual Statement Ranked Highest to Lowest Rank
Ordered Leadership by Mean and Corresponding Standard
Deviation by Senior-Level Student Affairs’ Leaders (N=23)....................71
Table 4: Senior-Level Student Affairs’ Leaders Mean Leadership
Practices Inventory© Rating for Statements Related to
Enabling Others to Act...............................................................................75
Table 5: Senior-Level Student Affairs’ Leaders Mean Leadership
Practices Inventory© Rating for Statements Related to
Encouraging the Heart ...............................................................................77
Table 6: Senior-Level Student Affairs’ Leaders Mean Leadership
Practices Inventory Rating© for Statements Related to
Modeling the Way......................................................................................78
Table 7: Senior-Level Student Affairs’ Leaders Mean Leadership
Practices Inventory© Rating for Statements Related to
Challenging the Process .............................................................................80
Table 8: Senior-Level Student Affairs’ Leaders Mean Leadership
Practices Inventory© Rating for Statements Related to
Inspiring a Shared Vision...........................................................................82
Table 9: Senior-Level Student Affairs’ Leaders Interview Themes
and Related LPI Statements .......................................................................83
Table 10: Senior-Level Student Affairs’ Leaders Research Question 3
Interview Themes and Related LPI Statements .........................................89
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 15
List of Figures
Figure 1: Gender of Senior-Level Student Affairs’ Leaders .....................................62
Figure 2: Ethnicity of Senior-Level Student Affairs’ Leaders ..................................63
Figure 3: Age of Senior-Level Student Affairs’ Leaders ..........................................64
Figure 4 Educational Attainment of Senior-Level Student
Affairs’ Leaders .........................................................................................65
Figure 5: Amount of Time in Current Position for Senior-Level
Student Affairs’ Leaders ............................................................................66
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 16
Chapter One
Introduction to the Study
Campus climate images of students protesting fee increases, students being pepper
sprayed, and acts of violence happening on campuses are being broadcasted and making
headlines in the media. In these troubling times, universities rely on the Student Affairs’
divisions to meet the needs and demands of the student population. College administrators face a
perplexing challenge that past administrators never have experienced (Smith, 2005). The
hallowed halls of a university provide more than guidance and leadership for students who
engage in the collegiate environment. Universities are expanding and growing at rapid rates to
meet the demand for higher education in America.
Universities are meeting the demands for educational services in order to prepare students
for the global market place. The University of California system has seen a 12% increase of
students applying for admission to their universities over the past two years (University of
California Office of the President, 2011). The university is a complex organization with many
leaders trying to help fulfill the dreams of students trying to get an education. Students are
looking for leaders to help them navigate and negotiate the challenges of higher education. At
these institutions, there are many leaders that are changing the landscape for learning.
The profession of student affairs serves as the beacon to help guide students outside of
their classroom experience. Student Affairs’ practitioners have many different functions at the
university such as advising, counseling, program development, teaching and training (Love,
2003). The Student Affairs’ profession has evolved over time to meet the needs of the student
population and the demands of a changing society (Love, 2003). In response to the changing
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 17
campus climate, Student Affairs’ divisions will be tapped to help shape university policy while
meeting the academic and developmental needs of all students (Love, 2003). Those departments
require strong leadership in order to meet the needs of students financially, socially, and
academically. Leading a Student Affairs’ department is a senior-level administrator who is there
to set vision, budgets, and help guide the Student Affairs’ practitioners to engage students,
develop an organizational culture, and meet the university’s mission. The senior-level
administrator of the student affairs’ department often reports to the Chief Student Affairs’
Officer (CSAO) who provides the leadership and direction for the Student Affairs’ division. The
senior-level administrator of the department must be able to understand the organization of the
university, help practitioners work within the structure, and inspire staff to create new
opportunities to meet the needs of the students who attend the university (Love & Estanke,
2004).
Organizations such as the National Association of Student Personnel Administration
(NASPA) and the American College Personnel Association (ACPA) that serve in the
development of student affairs’ departments often highlight senior-level administrators that use
effective leadership styles at their annual conferences that change the purpose of leadership and
inspire organizational change (Harrison, 2011). In order to develop quality relationships with
their teams, senior-level administrators must acknowledge the power dynamics that are in play in
the organizational structure (Harrison, 2011). Senior-level administrators need to develop and
use leadership strategies, skills, and styles that allow each person on their team to be a leader in
the organization regardless of position on the organizational chart (Harrison, 2011). Leadership
is about the relationship between leaders and followers and the Student Affairs’ profession
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 18
encompasses this idea tenfold. Having strong leadership is a crucial component to building a
solid team. The changing landscape for learning on college campuses has affected the Student
Affairs’ division and in these times of transition and growth the Student Affairs’ profession is
looking for a leader that can direct, lead, and inspire all the Student Affairs’ practitioners at the
university to meet the holistic needs of the students outside of the classroom.
Statement of the Problem
The Student Affairs’ profession remains true to core foundations even as the global
needs, demands, and interests change the student populations that participate in the collegiate
experience (Roberts, 2012). The profession of Student Affairs started in 1890 at Harvard
University when a faculty member was given the additional responsibility to care for students
outside of his teaching responsibilities (Caples, 1996). The task of caring for students and
monitoring their behaviors were generally given to faculty members that were well respected by
their peers and had a strong interest in students (Young, 1996). This is how many of the first
Deans of Students were appointed at the beginning of the Student Affairs’ movement. The
profession of Student Affairs began to develop and in 1937 the American Council of Education
released the Student Personnel Point of View (SPPV), which articulated the first guiding
philosophy for the field of Student Affairs. This philosophy gave the newly formed Student
Affairs’ profession guiding principles as to how to meet the needs of the student population at
the university. The SPPV document encouraged Student Affairs’ practitioners to develop the
student as a whole that incorporates academic and personal training (American Council on
Education, 1937). In today’s collegiate environments, Student Affairs’ practitioners still seek to
holistically develop students and to create supportive environments that bring together academic
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 19
and social learning (Evan & Reason, 2001). As the profession of Student Affairs continues to
grow and meet the needs of students, the senior-level administrator must help practitioners to
engage with students and prepare them to enter this global conscious work force (Roberts, 2012).
Leading the Student Affairs’ division is the Chief Student Affairs’ Officer (CSAO) and
they are given the task of inspiring Student Affairs’ practitioners to meet the larger goals of the
university. The senior-level administrator of the Student Affairs’ division must create and build
a team of dynamic Student Affairs’ professionals to assist in the student development processes
as the university grows and changes to meet the demands of students and society. The university
has a difficult job to balance the needs of students and to support society to educate leaders and
the workforce of tomorrow. Peter McPherson, President of the National Association of State
Universities and Land-Grant Colleges (NASULGC), believed that,
Public research universities have risen to meet national needs in the past. With the
passage of the Morrill Act in 1862, they transformed themselves to meet the
agricultural/industrial needs of the country. In the immediate post-World War II era, they
dramatically expanded to serve the returning GIs. In the 1960s, they responded to the
challenge of Sputnik. (NASULGC, 2010, p. 80)
Universities will continue to meet the need of students in today’s market place. Leaders
are responsible for the policies and decisions of their organization but the decision-making
process needs to involve more than just the leaders (Astin & Astin, 2000).
Senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators use different strategies, skills, and leadership
styles to build effective Student Affairs’ divisions. Leading a Student Affairs’ division requires
a leader to understand how power and the organization operates and functions (Harrison, 2011).
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 20
The profession of Student Affairs’ is not only based on relationships with students but
relationships with peers and supervisors (Silverman, 1971). The senior-level administrator has
the responsibility to create organizational change for the betterment of serving students at the
university (Astin & Astin, 2000).
The global market is watching the trends in higher education and is interested to see how
Student Affairs’ practitioners engage students and help them negotiate challenges and develop
relationships both inside and outside the classroom (Clark, 2005). As the profession of Student
Affairs changes, so does the leadership of the Student Affairs’ divisions. The next generations of
Student Affairs’ leaders are being educated and are learning that the field of Student Affairs
might not be what they learned in graduate school (Cuyjet, Longwell-Grice, & Molina, 2009).
The next generation of Student Affairs’ practitioners will need to build connections with students
and to develop policies and practices that help them feel connected to the institution as well as
each other (Love, 2003). Senior-level administrators can prepare the next generation of Student
Affairs’ leaders to lead the organization by allowing them to learn how to lead and follow. The
field of Student Affairs will continue to adapt to a changing society and to shape the outside-of-
the-classroom learning experiences which seek to develop and to meet the needs of all millennial
students (Love, 2003).
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to examine research and contribute to the understanding of
how senior-level Student Affairs’ professionals use leadership practices in developing a Student
Affairs’ department. This study sought to examine how senior-level Student Affairs’
administrators lead their Student Affairs’ departments to build effective leaders and support new
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 21
practitioners in developing their own leadership practices. Leadership theories can provide a
context for how a leader leads others and why followers buy into their ideologies (Kezar,
Carducci, & Contreras-McGavin, 2006). The data was collected to determine factors that have
shaped Student Affairs’ administrators’ leadership styles that help to meet the needs of students,
the university, and society.
Research Questions
This research study sought to identify elements of effective leadership practices that can
prepare Student Affairs’ practitioners for the organizational culture of the university setting.
This study also examined senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators’ leadership styles to
determine how they engage and develop Student Affairs’ practitioners. The study focused on the
following research questions:
1. What strategies and skills do senior-level Student Affairs’ Administrators implement to
develop leadership styles within a Student Affairs’ department?
2. What strategies do senior-level Student Affairs’ Administrators utilize to inspire and
encourage a positive team dynamic?
3. How do senior-level Student Affairs’ Administrators pass on their knowledge of
leadership to the next generation of Student Affairs’ leaders?
Significance of the Study
The importance of this study is to aide in the development of literature about the evolving
and growing field of Student Affairs’ practices and research of effective leadership. This study
provides information for current and future Student Affairs’ practitioners about the roles of the
senior-level Student Affairs’ leader. This information can help provide strategies, skills, and
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 22
leadership styles that senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders can utilize to assist the university and
to engage students in the outside-of-the-classroom experience.
This study provides best practices and qualities of leaders that are currently being used to
serve the field of Student Affairs in senior-level roles. This information can serve as a model for
Student Affairs’ practitioners who want to provide leadership support to their Student Affairs’
divisions, and act as a model for practitioners who want to become more effective leaders at their
university.
Senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders will be able to use this research to help inspire new
generations of Student Affairs’ practitioners. Student Affairs’ departments will be able to show
the university they are accountable to holistically develop students in quantifiable ways.
Assumptions
There are several key assumptions that framed this research study. First there was the
belief that Student Affairs’ departments aid in the development of students. Second there was
the belief that senior-level Student Affairs’ leadership styles can affect how the Student Affairs’
department meets the goals of the university. Third, a Student Affairs’ senior-level leader uses
several different strategies, skills, and styles to develop their Student Affairs’ department.
Fourth, it was assumed that senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders exhibit qualities of leadership
that helps them to lead others. Lastly, it was assumed that a senior-level Student Affairs’ leader
will help to inspire and encourage new Student Affairs’ practitioners to develop their own
leadership skills to lead the field of Student Affairs.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 23
Definition of Terms
Key terms that are relevant to the study are defined and operationalized in this section.
Leadership: This study used the Bolman and Deal (2003) definition of leadership which
is, “Leadership is a subtle process of mutual influence fusing thought, feeling, and action
to produce cooperative effort in the service of purposes embraced by both leader and the
led.” (p. 345)
Student Affairs: The profession of Student Affairs consists of departments and units that
serve to assist in the growth and development of college students outside of the academic
classroom experience. Since the Student Affairs’ profession is constantly evolving to
meet the needs of students, departments are often added or deleted depending on the
needs of the institution. Love (2003), identified the following departments that are
typically classified as Student Affairs:
. . . residence life, commuter services, graduate student services, admissions, new
student orientation, financial aid, counseling centers, advising centers, leadership
development, Greek affairs, student activities, student unions, leadership
development, community service, service learning, career planning and
placement, discipline and judicial affairs, alumni relations and development,
services for students with disabilities, developmental learning services, and
advocacy and support programs. (p. 1)
Student Affairs’ practitioner: For the purposes of this study, a Student Affairs’
practitioner refers to someone with a graduate degree in higher education administration,
educational leadership, and counseling that works professionally at an institution of
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 24
higher education in any management, counseling, advising, or administrative function
(Love, 2003).
Senior-level Student Affairs’ Leader: In this study, a senior-level Student Affairs’ leader
refers to a director of a unit or department. All senior-level administrators would report
to the Chief Student Affairs’ Officer such as the Vice President of Student Affairs’
(VPSA), the Dean of Students (DOS), or the Chief Student Affairs Officers (CSAO).
The senior-level administrators set goals, mission, and provide direction for their
department within the Student Affairs’ division.
Chief Student Affairs’ Officer: In this study, the CSAO is described as someone that
oversees the division of Student Affairs’ at the institution and builds connections with
students that will enhance their experiences. The CSAO sets goals, mission, and provides
direction for the division of Student Affairs at the institution.
Organization of the Study
This study is organized into five chapters: Chapter One includes an Introduction to the
Study, which included a Statement of the Problem, Purpose of the Study, Research Questions,
explained the Significance of the Study, Assumptions, Definition of Terms, and Organization of
the Study.
Chapter Two presents a literature review that explains different types and styles of
leadership approaches that senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators use in the evolving and
growing field of Student Affairs, leadership research that has been done within the Student
Affairs’ field, and how leaders within Student Affairs pass on knowledge and inspire new leaders
to lead in the field of Student Affairs.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 25
Chapter Three contains the methodology, instruments used to conduct the research,
identification of the participants of the research portion, and how data was collected. Chapter
Four reports the findings of the study’s data as it relates to the research questions that guide the
study. Chapter Five contains the final summary along with the conclusions, future implications,
and recommendations for current and future Student Affairs’ research and leadership practices.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 26
Chapter Two
Review of Literature
The purpose of this study was to explore how senior-level Student Affairs’ professionals
used leadership strategies, styles, and skills to lead their department, how they help their
department build a positive environment to work in, and how they share knowledge with new
professionals in the field of Student Affairs. This literature review will present a broad overview
of leadership theories that have shaped leadership styles, practices, and perspectives in the
Student Affairs’ profession. The intent of the researcher was not to summarize all of the vast
leadership theories but to provide context of leadership research that can be applied in a
collegiate setting and utilized by a senior-level Student Affairs’ leader to lead their department.
The topic of leadership and the question of what makes a leader effective is a complex
issue in academia, business, and life. Northouse (2010) explained that, “Leadership is a complex
process that has multiple dimensions” (p. 1). There have been thousands of books, articles, and
journals written on the topic of leadership (Bass, 1990). At the collegiate level, leadership
research has shifted beyond the role of the president and now includes deans, directors, and
department chairs. Leadership has been studied throughout the institution of higher education
and the literature has changed over the past 15 years to reflect this phenomenon of a multiple-
leadership perspective (Kezar et al., 2006). Research shows a clear message that campus leaders
such as the president, academic affairs, and student affairs’ officers need to direct and guide
efforts on their campus to help resolve problems and create changes on their campus (Bensimon,
Neumann, & Birnbaum, 1989). This study used the Bolman and Deal (2003) definition of
leadership which was, “Leadership is a subtle process of mutual influence fusing thought,
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 27
feeling, and action to produce cooperative effort in the service of purposes embraced by both
leader and the led” (p. 345).
Leadership Theory Categories
There are six types of leadership theory categories that can be used to lead and guide
people. These categories are Trait, Behavioral, Power and Influence, Contingency, Cognitive,
and Cultural/Symbolic theories.
Trait theories. Early researchers thought that personality traits were essential for
effective leadership and could be identified through research (Spencer, n. d.). Trait theory seeks
to identify specific personal characteristics that contribute to a person's ability to be a successful
leader in an organization (Bensimon et al., 1989). This theory centers on leaders and looks at the
specific traits that distinguish them from followers (Kezar et al., 2006). Traits that were studied
included physical characteristics, social background, personality, and ability (Bensimon et al.,
1989).
Trait theory is also known as the “great man" theory because it focuses on identifying the
innate qualities and characteristics of great leaders (Northouse, 2010). A major assumption of
this theory was that great leaders are born with these abilities and that only great people can
possess leadership abilities (Northouse, 2010). Goal attainment is directly linked to the
leadership in this theory. Empirical research documents the important key leadership traits from
trait theory that include: intelligence, self-confidence, determination, integrity, and sociability
(Kezar et al., 2006).
Trait theory focused exclusively on leaders and not on followers or situations (Spencer, n.
d.). Researchers sought to identify the link between personal traits and a successful leader but
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 28
they were only able to find weak relationships (Yuki, 1981). Bass (1981) studied traits of a good
leader and found that leaders might possess trait characteristics that would make them a
successful leader but having traits did not guarantee the leader would be successful in their
organization. Trait theories were very popular in the early 20th century (Kezar et al., 2006) but
they are no longer a major focus of organizational research (Bensimon et al., 1989). Although
trait theory is no longer a popular theory to research, researchers have begun to take a new look
at the trait approach to develop theory around the inter-acting variables which has led to the
creation of the leadership skills model (Spencer, n. d.). Trait theory allowed researchers to
develop universal definitions of traits (Kezar et al., 2006) and it has served in the initial
leadership research effort to understand various leadership styles.
Behavioral theories. Behavioral theories’ approach examined how leaders interact with
their followers on task and relationship levels. During the mid-20th century, behavioral theories
became popular for researchers to study in order to gain an understanding of how a leader
behaved while leading followers (Kezar et al., 2006). Behavioral studies do not look at leaders’
characteristics or power but rather what leaders actually do (Bensimon et al., 1989). This
leadership approach allowed researchers to study the behaviors of what makes a good leader, and
since behaviors can be learned, there was the assumption that leadership can be taught to all
followers.
There are two prominent studies on behavioral theories that researchers conducted at the
Ohio State University and the University of Michigan. The studies allowed researchers to gain an
understanding of how leaders’ behaviors can affect followers.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 29
Ohio State University study. The Ohio State University researchers investigated how
leaders act while they are leading a group or organization. Subordinates of leaders were given
the Leader Behavior Description Questionnaires (LBDQ; Hemphill & Coons, 1957) that dealt
with how their leaders engaged in behaviors while leading a group. Results from this study led
researchers to determine that there are two categories of behaviors that are called initiating
structure and consideration (Stogdill, 1974). Initiating structure behavior is when leaders
organize and schedule activities of task behaviors for followers (Northouse, 2010).
Consideration behavior is relationship building between leaders and followers (Northouse,
2010). These two styles of behaviors are central behaviors of what leaders do when they are
leading people to build and nurture relationships (Northouse, 2010).
University of Michigan study. The University of Michigan’s study investigated how
leaders’ behaviors impacted the group being lead. The study identified two types of leadership
behavior called employee orientation and production orientation (Northouse, 2010). Employee
orientation is when a leader takes an approach that shows interest in human relations and pays
special attention to personal needs and individuality of their employees (Bowers & Seashore,
1966). The production-orientation approach is the technical aspects of how the workers are
viewed in which they get the job completed (Bowers & Seashore, 1966). In this study,
researchers saw these two leadership styles in opposition to each other. This meant that leaders
who were strong toward employee orientation were weak towards product orientation and those
leaders who were strong in product orientation were weak in employee orientation.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 30
Blake and Mouton’s managerial (leadership) grid. Blake and Mouton’s (1964)
managerial grid used a two-dimensional axis that was based on the two studies from Ohio State
University and the University of Michigan. The managerial grid was renamed the leadership
grid to be used in organizations that help leaders find purpose (Northouse, 2010). The leadership
grid had two-axis that focused on concern for people and concern for production. The two
dimensions of the grid work interdependently and affect each other. A leaders’ style can be
identified by the degree of concern they have for production and people. The leadership grid
used a 9-point scale of each side of the axis. The leaders’ style can be identified and explained
by where they fall on the grid. There are five styles on the grid, which are team management,
country-club management, authority-compliance management, middle-of-the-road management,
and impoverished management. The highest score on either axis is a “9.” The team-
management style is a score of 9.9 and is the most desired type of management style on the
leadership grid. This meant the leader had a high concern for people and a high concern for
production. The leadership grid is an example of a practical model of leadership that is based on
two major leadership behaviors: task and relationship.
In 1981, the leadership grid was redesigned for higher education purposes and called the
“Academic Administrator’s Grid” (Blake, Mouton, & William, 1981). The Academic
Administrator’s Grid provided a framework for collegiate leadership. The grid scoring worked
the same but the five styles on the grid were changed to the following: caretaker, authority-
obedience, comfortable-pleasant, constituency-centered, and team (Blake et al., 1981). The team
style of leadership was considered to be the best approach of leadership because the leader has a
high concern for people and a high concern for the institution.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 31
There are two major themes that have emerged from each of these research studies on
behavioral theories. The first theme is how leaders interact with people such as concern for
people, employee orientation, and consideration. The second theme is how leaders interact with
tasks such as concern for production, production orientation, and imitating structure. Behavioral
theories allow leaders to use a combination of task and relational behaviors when interacting
with subordinates (Kezar et al., 2006). These theories reflect on how the leaders balance both
the task and relationship behaviors. Behavioral leadership is focused on what leaders do and
how they do it verses personal characteristics of leaders. These theories do imply that effective
leaders use a style that is high-task and high-relationship.
Power and influence theories. Power and influence theories examined leadership in
terms of how leaders use and exercise power to influence their followers. Leadership is a
reciprocal process that meaningfully engages leaders and followers and emphasizes the needs
and values of both parties (Kezar et al., 2006). This leadership approach allows researchers to
study a leader’s ability to use persuasion to achieve organizational benchmarks (Kezar et al.,
2006)
French and Raven’s five forms of power. Researchers John French and Bertram Raven
(1959) developed the Five Forms of Power model to explore how leadership and power are
related. Leaders use social power and social influence to influence followers and meet the
demands of the organization. Leaders use multiple sources of power to meet the needs and
demands to influence followers (Kezar et al., 2006).
French and Raven’s (1959) study found five categories of power which leaders used to
influence their followers. The five categories are legitimate, reward, expert, referent, and
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 32
coercive. A legitimate leader influenced followers through their position in the organization.
The legitimate leader had a belief that the leader had the right to make demands, expect
compliance, and obedience from their followers (French & Raven, 1959). A reward leader used
rewards such as promotions and financial raises to compensate followers for compliance. A
coercive leader threatened punishment to their followers for noncompliance. An expert leader
used their skills and knowledge to influence their followers. While a referent leader used their
perceived attributes from others to influence followers.
This model was a social power theory that emphasized a one-way influence from leader
to follower (Bensimon et al., 1989). This theory allowed leaders to use positional and personal
power sources to influence and guide their followers.
Transformational leadership. Transformational leadership is a social exchange theory
that emphasized the two-way mutual influence and reciprocal relationships between leaders and
followers (Bensimon et al., 1989). The theory of transformational leadership was first
introduced by James Burns (1978) in an attempt to understand how leaders and followers helped
each other advance to a higher level of moral and motivation achievements (Burns, 1978). This
theory was redefined when Bernard Bass (1985) sought to expand the idea of transformational
leadership to understand how the theory impacted followers. Transformational leadership
focused on how leaders impacted their followers and developed them into their full potential.
According to Bass (1985), there are four components of transformational leadership.
These components are idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and
individualized consideration. Idealized influence is also called charisma (Bass, 1985) and was
when a leader acted as a strong role model for their followers. Having a strong leader to role
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 33
model behavior after helped to create a sense of trust and respect for followers and they
internalized the leaders’ behaviors to achieve the desired outcomes. Inspirational motivation was
when a leader had a clear and strong message that challenged their followers to buy into the
vision of the organization and to help achieve that vision. In this component, leaders used
symbols and emotional appeal to help followers find and experience passion to achieve goals
(Northouse, 2010). Intellectual stimulation was when a leader stimulated followers to be
creative and use innovation that challenged the values and beliefs of the follower, the leader, and
the organization (Northouse, 2010). This type of leadership style supported followers to take
challenges and encouraged them to take risks and explore new ways of doing things.
Individualized consideration was when a leader created a supportive climate that allowed all
followers to be listened to and expressed their needs (Northouse, 2010). This type of leader
created open lines of communication so that followers were freely able to express ideas and the
leader could offer recognition for participation.
Transformational leaders empowered and sought to create positive changes that helped
every member of their group achieve organizational goals. Transformational leadership was a
process that changed and transformed people who participated in the process (Northouse, 2010).
Servant leadership. The theory of servant leadership was developed by Robert Greenleaf
(1977) and was based on the idea of the servant as a leader. Greenleaf defined servant leadership
saying, “It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve, to serve . . . Then conscious
choice brings one to aspire to lead” (p. 27). The servant leader focused on the needs of their
followers and helped them to become more autonomous, knowledgeable, free, and more like
servants themselves (Northouse, 2010). Servant leadership brought together task
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 34
accomplishment and social implications. The servant leader had responsibility to focus on the
have and have-nots and recognized everyone as equals in the organization (Northouse, 2010).
The relationship between the servant and leader is equal and reciprocal in this model. Greenleaf
did not list any specific qualities of what makes a good servant leader or follower but focused on
long-term global goals that affect human leadership behaviors. This model stressed the
importance of ethical standards and showed followers how to lead so in turn they could become a
servant leader themselves.
Contingency theories. Contingency theories brought together traits, behaviors, and
characteristics to creative, effective situations for leaders to lead. These theories emphasized
situational factors such as group involvement and external environments that could affect
leadership (Bensimon et al., 1989). Higher education used contingency theory to examine
subsystems such as political, bureaucratic, symbolic, and collegial (Kezar et al., 2006). The
framework of contingency theory focused on leadership styles described as task-motivated or
relationship motivated (Northouse, 2010).
Fiedler’s contingency model. The pioneer of contingency models was Fred Fiedler
(1967) who developed one of the earliest and well-known models. Fiedler’s model looked at
leadership in three key elements: leader-member relations, task structure, and position power.
These three factors came together in various ways to produce situations where leaders had a
range of high control to low control (Bensimon et al., 1989).
The factor of leader-member relations referred to the atmosphere of the group and the
levels of confidence, loyalty, and attraction followers had for their leader (Northouse, 2010).
When the group atmosphere was good, there was a high trust between subordinates and their
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 35
leader. If there was friction and an unfriendly atmosphere between leader-members, this was
considered poor.
Task structure was the second variable in Fiedel’s (1967) model, which referred to the
degree that the requirements of the task were clear for accomplishment (Northouse, 2010).
Tasks that were high structured gave more control to the leader. While tasks that that were
vague and unclear, took away a leader’s influence and control.
The third variable of the model was position power. Position power referred to the
amount of authority a leader had over their subordinates (Northouse, 2010). High position power
was considered favorable in this model that allowed the leader to hire, fire, or give raises. A
leader with low position power did not have the same abilities as someone with high position
power and was the least favorable.
Situations that were most favorable for a leader in Fiedler’s (1967) model included
having good member-leader relations, used defined tasks, and had a high position power.
Fiedler’s research wanted to understand how leaders that were task-oriented and leaders that
were people-oriented performed in various leadership situations. Task-oriented leaders generally
performed well in most situations regardless of whether they were favorable or unfavorable to
the followers (Fiedler, 1967). The people-oriented leader generally does better in situations that
allow them to use their skills in human relations or intermediate favorable situations (Fielder,
1967). In order to use Fiedler’s model effectively, leaders need to understand if they are task-
oriented or people-oriented. Then the leader needs to determine the situation and how leader-
member relations, task structure, and position power can affect the situation.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 36
Path-goal theory. Path-goal theory was another contingency theory that was inspired by
the work of researcher Martin Evans (1970). This model tied into the contingency models
because it utilized the three variables of leader behavior, subordinates and situations, and
rewards. This theory emphasized that a leader was responsible for their subordinates’ motivation
and attainment of personal and organizational goals (Northouse, 2010). The leader provided a
path for the subordinates to follow in order to reach a reward. The leader had the challenge to
make the paths clear and easy to follow in order for the subordinates to be able to reach
attainment (House, 1971).
There were four classifications of leader’s behaviors in the path-goal theory model which
included directive, supportive, participative, and achievement-oriented (House & Mitchell,
1974). A directive leader explained what needs to be done, how to complete the task, and when
the task needed to be completed. The directive leader had clear performance goals and rules for
all subordinates to follow. The supportive leader was approachable and showed care and
concern for all subordinates. This leader was open and treated all subordinates like equals. The
participant leader invited all subordinates to be a part of the decision-making process. This
leader was open for suggestions and encouraged all subordinates to voice their opinions in the
work place. The achievement-orientated leader set high challenges and encouraged subordinates
to perform at their highest level. This type of leader stressed high quality and constant
improvement for their subordinates and showed high levels of confidence that their subordinates
would reach their goals. Path-goal theory was not a trait approach so a leader could adapt their
leadership style to fit the needs of their followers (Northouse, 2010).
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 37
This theory brought together the motivation principles and expectancy theories into a
leadership theory that sought to provide a practical leadership model that highlighted how
leaders could help subordinates. Path-goal theory had a few commonalities with Hersey and
Blanchard’s (1988) situational theory and Fielder’s (1967) contingency model. Both path-goal
theory and situational theory looked at the readiness levels of subordinates to make decisions and
participate in processes. Path-goal theory and contingency models both helped leaders to view
the larger contexts of the organization. The theoretical framework of the path-goal theory could
help leaders motivate their subordinates to produce quality work and find satisfaction in the work
environment (Northouse, 2010).
Cognitive theories. Cognitive theories of leadership focused on the thought process of
individuals involved in leadership positions, sought to understand how attributes and outcomes
affected leaders, and the importance of perception and cognition in leadership (Kezar et al.,
2006). Research in the area of cognitive theories informed the development practices and
understanding of how followers made leadership-attribution assumptions (Kezar et al., 2006).
These theories sought to influence the cognitive processes that helped leaders develop an
understanding of leadership (Kezar et al., 2006).
Leaders’ cognitive framework. Robert Birnbaum (1992) conducted a five-year study of
how cognitive frames affected leadership in higher education institutions. The study examined
how college presidents conceptualized their roles at the university. The presidents who
participated in the study were asked to think about their leadership style, assumptions, and
beliefs and asked them to fit them into the four framework categories of bureaucratic, collegial,
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 38
political, and symbolic (Kezar et al., 2006). This research study mirrored the four-frame model
by Bolman and Deal (2003) entitled Reframing Organizations.
The four frameworks each focused on a different aspect of leadership. The bureaucratic
frame focused on the institutional structure and organization. Leaders in the frame paid attention
to goals, priorities, the organizational chart, authority, and control (Kezar et al., 2006). The
collegial frame focused on the achievement of the group to meet the institutional goals. Leaders
in this frame encouraged team building, loyalty, and commitment (Kezar et al., 2006). The
political frame required leaders to examine the external and internal environments. Leaders in
this frame looked at the universities’ resources, mobility, and emerging conflicts (Kezar et al.,
2006). The symbolic frame allowed a leader to use history of the institution to help employees
focus on organizational values and beliefs. Leaders in this frame used stories, rituals, myths, and
symbols to help employees learn culture (Kezar et al., 2006). This study found that leaders who
used all four frameworks were considered to be a more effective leader because they showed a
cognitive complexity to analyze a situation (Birnbaum, 1992).
Cognitive theory was a growing area that only had a few generalized trends in current
research (Kezar et al., 2006). Leadership attribution of judgment for both leaders and followers
was influenced by cognition (Kezar et al., 2006). Cognitive complexity could be increased by
using a broad approach, consulting multiple sources of data, open to evidence, and new
information that could help others function in the organization (Kezar et al., 2006).
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 39
Cultural/symbolic theories. A study of leadership through the cultural lens used rituals
and traditions to move people toward change (Kezar et al., 2006). These theories sought to
understand the importance of context for interaction, leadership, and symbolic functions of
leadership (Kezar et al., 2006). Research in this area looked at the importance of the leader
shaping the organizational culture, providing meaning, connecting community, and reinforcing
values at the institutional level (Kezar et al., 2006).
Culture and leadership. Researchers Birnbaum (1992) and Bergquist (1992) were the
two major contributors to the understanding of the relationship of culture and leadership in
higher education. Both researchers examined how culture and symbolic theories changed the
face of leadership at the collegiate level.
Birnbaum’s (1992) study called How Academic Leadership Works encouraged
administrators to view the collegiate setting through the cultural-perspective lens to develop an
understanding of leadership. It was important for leaders to develop an aliment of institutional
values and beliefs with campus culture (Birnbaum, 1992). If leaders wanted to change culture, it
was important that they were familiar with it and could understand it (Birnbaum, 1992).
Bergquist’s (1992) study of culture and leadership produced the Four Cultures of the
Academy model. This theoretical framework explained how the four cultures of collegial,
managerial, developmental, and negotiating existed in every institution of higher education
(Bergquist, 1992). Organizations had one operational culture at a time and had several
subcultures for employees to navigate through (Kezar et al., 2006). Bergquist suggested that
leaders should use all four cultures to make them a more effective leader.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 40
Cultural and symbolic theories suggested that organizational participants over time
through the interactions developed shared meaning that influenced their activities and actions
(Bensimon et al., 1989). These theories could be seen as a social context that could be changed
depending on the cultural context (Kezar et al., 2006). Cultural and symbolic theories did not
have a lot of empirical research that support them in connecting them to leadership practices of
organizations (Kezar et al., 2006).
Kouzes and Posner’s Leadership Framework
The Leadership Practices Inventory© is a copyrighted publication and the authors of the
instrument were contacted through a form on the publisher’s website to obtain permission for its
use in this study. The authors agreed to the use and reproduction of the Leadership Practices
Inventory© instrument in written form, as outlined at no charge or use of their electronic
distribution of the LPI for a nominal fee payment. Permission to use either the written or
electronic versions required the following agreement with the understanding that the LPI is used
only for research purposes and is not sold or used in conjunction with any compensated
management development activities; that copyright of the LPI, or any derivation of the
instrument, is retained by Kouzes Posner International, and that the following copyright
statement is included on all copies of the instrument
1
. Additional information is found in
Appendix D.
The Leadership Challenge was chosen for this study because it is broad and lends itself
to help understand effective leadership styles of practitioners. Northouse (2010) explained that
this model was about practice and not about personality which helps practitioners become more
1
“Copyright © 2003 James M. Kouzes and Barry Z. Posner. All rights reserved. Used with permission”
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 41
effective leaders. The Leadership Challenge can serve as a guide book for practitioners by
sharing anecdotes, strategies, and behavioral skills for leaders to utilize (Davis, Kouzes, Posner,
& Kotter, 1988). This theory was not aimed at academics but at practitioners, managers, and
non-managers who want to enhance their leadership skills (Middlehurst, Kouzes, & Posner,
1989). The conceptual framework was developed through triangulation of qualitative and
quantitative research methods and studies (Kouzes & Posner, 2002) that allowed researchers to
study leaders’ personal-best leadership experience, in-depth interviews with leaders, and case
studies to create the framework. The Leadership Challenge has five fundamental leadership
practices which help leaders to create and accomplish extraordinary things: Model the Way,
Inspire a Shared Vision, Challenge the Process, Enable Others to Act, and Encourage the Heart.
Each of these actions can be transformed into a leadership behavior statement (Kouzes & Posner,
2002).
Model the way. In order to model the way, a leader needs to be clear about his/her own
philosophies and values (Northouse, 2010). A leader should be able to use their own voice to
clarifying their values and express them to followers. Leaders create behavioral standards and
set appropriate examples for others to follow (Kouzes & Posner, 2002). When the bureaucracy
of the organization halts productivity, the leader provides support, direction, and victory
opportunities for followers. The leaders must follow through on all of their promises and affirm
the common goals and values they share with their followers (Northouse, 2010). Followers will
not always believe in the message unless they believe in the messenger (Kouzes & Posner,
2003).
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 42
Inspire a shared vision. Creating compelling visions that can guide follower’s behavior
is a trait of an effective leader (Northouse, 2010). Passionate leaders envision the future and
enlist followers to create a shared aspiration that is appealing to all followers (Kouzes & Posner,
2002). Leaders not only believe that they can make a difference but they listen to their followers
to help them realize their own dreams (Northouse, 2010). Through inspiring a shared vision, a
leader can communicate to followers and get people excited about the possibilities for the future
(Northouse, 2010). Creating a shared vision can also inspire followers to reach their own dreams
(Kouzes & Posner, 2003).
Challenge the process. Leaders that challenge the process are not afraid to step into the
unknown and challenge the status quo of the organization (Northouse, 2010). Challenging the
process requires leaders to experiment and to take risks (Kouzes & Posner, 2002). When a
leader takes a risk they might reach a goal or face failure; either way, all leaders understand that
with each risk taken they will have a learning opportunity. Leaders search for new and
innovative ways to change, grow, and improve existing processes in the organization (Kouzes &
Posner, 2002).
Enable others to act. Leaders collaborate and built dynamic relationships with their
team members that encourage them to be actively involved within the organization (Northouse,
2010). Enabling Others to Act created an environment where followers could contribute to the
organization (Northouse, 2010). Leaders built and developed mutual respect for followers by
allowing them the opportunity to make choices and set cooperative goals for the team (Kouzes &
Posner, 2002). A leader can share power and discretion with followers that can strengthen and
build trust for the organization (Kouzes & Posner, 2002).
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 43
Encourage the heart. Leaders recognize followers’ accomplishments and encourage
heart by rewarding and showing appreciation (Northouse, 2010). Leaders create a spirit of
community by celebrating the values and accomplishments of the organization (Kouzes &
Posner, 2002). Encouraging the heart in the organization required a leader to foster emotional
involvement, celebrate victories, and to recognize contributions (Kouzes & Posner, 2002). The
outcome of encouraging and recognizing heart builds a more supportive collective identity and
community spirit for the organization (Northouse, 2010).
Leadership Practice Inventory (LPI) in Higher Education Research
The Leadership Practice Inventory (LPI) has been used in several research studies to
examine leadership in higher education. College presidents’ leadership practices (Plowman,
1991; Bauer, 1993; Dikeman, 2007), the Chief Student Affairs’ officer (Oliver, 2001;
Rozeboom, 2008), executive women (Gorenflo, 1994; Brightharp, 1999) and athletic coaches
(Armstrong, 1992) have all been studied. In the mid-1990s, researchers Posner and Brodsky
(1992) created a student version of the LPI to inspire college students and youth to develop
strong leadership skills. The student version of the LPI has been used to study Greek student
leaders (Adams & Keim, 2000), student athletes (Boettinger, 2007), and resident assistants in
residential living communities (Levy, 1995).
Leadership is a relationship and a leader creates creditability for their followers when
they are true to their own leadership beliefs and behaviors (Kouzes & Posner, 2002). The LPI
can provide a leader with tools to become more effective in meeting job-related demands,
creating higher-performing teams, and increasing motivational levels in followers (Kouzes &
Posner, 2002). The LPI allowed leaders to learn from best leadership practices and to develop an
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 44
understanding that leadership is a set of skills and abilities that can be learned and improved
upon (Kouzes & Posner, 2002).
Leadership in Student Affairs
Studying leadership within the Student Affairs’ organizational context is a relatively new
area of investigation for researchers (Smith & Hughey, 2006). College presidents are recruiting
Student Affairs’ practitioners that understand conflict resolution (Randall & Globetti, 1992), can
support the academic mission of the university (Johnson & O’Grady, 2006), and who can fulfill
the dualistic role of being an educator and leader to students (Sandeen, 1991). According to
Smith and Hughey (2006), Student Affairs’ departments are gaining value, support, and
influence on college campuses across the nation.
The Student Affairs’ department role is evolving and becoming central to the university
being able to reach its goals and develop students at the university (Garland & Grace, 1993).
The Chief Student Affairs’ Officer (CSAO) needs to be able to network within the organization
of the university to support the Student Affairs’ division staff and programs (Sandeen, 1991).
The Student Affairs’ staff not only implements campus programs (Rogers, 1996), they educate
students and provide guidance for the university departments (Smith, Lana, & Hughey, 2009).
The Chief Student Affairs’ Officer’s leadership style could be the difference between a
division becoming a successful, thriving department or a failing department (Buller, 2006). The
role of the CSAO is to ensure that the Student Affairs’ division is participating in decision-
making processes and have professional development opportunities that help to develop
themselves and students (Sandeen, 1991). Student Affairs’ divisions are growing and evolving
to meet the needs and demands of the collegiate environment. As the collegiate environment
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 45
changes, the Student Affairs’ division needs to develop practices and leadership to meet the
needs and demands of a changing organization (Rozeboom, 2008).
Summary
After reviewing the literature, it is apparent that there are many types of leadership styles
that a Student Affairs’ professional can use to lead a student affairs’ division. A leader can
impact the organization, their followers, and the institution. Trait theories looked at leadership
through traits and the “great man” theory which allow a leader to be successful. Behavioral
theories examined the behavioral approaches to leadership or what a leader did and not who they
are. Power and influence theories explored how leaders used and exercised power to influence
their followers. Contingency theories’ approach brought together traits, behaviors, and
characteristics to creative effective situations for leaders to lead and to clarify the role of the
leader. Culture and symbolic theories of leadership viewed leadership through a lens that
examined the usage of rituals and traditions. Cognitive theories of leadership focused on the
thought processes of leaders and helped them to understand perception and cognition of
followers. Kouzes and Posner (2002) provided a framework of leadership that could allow a
Student Affairs’ leader to be effective when they are challenging the process, inspiring a shared
vision, enabling others to act, modeling the way, and encouraging heart to all their followers.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 46
Chapter Three
Methodology
Introduction
A description of the purpose and design of the study, identification of the participants of
the research portion, how data was collected and analyzed, and an explanation of the instruments
used to conduct the research are included in Chapter Three.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of the study was to answer the following research questions:
1. What strategies and skills do senior-level Student Affairs’ Administrators implement to
develop leadership styles within a Student Affairs’ department?
2. What strategies do senior-level Student Affairs’ Administrators utilize to inspire and
encourage a positive team dynamic?
3. How do senior-level Student Affairs’ Administrators pass on their knowledge of
leadership to the next generation of Student Affairs’ leaders?
This mixed-method study was conducted to identify the leadership skills, strategies, and
styles that senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators implement in their Student Affairs’
departments. How can senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators support students and entry-
level practitioners in their quest to be a leader in the growing field of Student Affairs?
This research sought to measure, and gain, an understanding of leadership traits; identify
the characteristics of exemplary leadership practices within student affairs; and help individuals
discover the five practices of effective leadership styles. Leadership theories can provide a
context for how a leader leads others and why followers buy into their ideologies (Kezar et al.,
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 47
2006). This study also sought to examine how senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators led
their Student Affairs’ departments to build effective leaders and support new practitioners in
developing their own leadership practices. The literature has left senior-level Student Affairs’
administrators in higher education with different leadership theories, knowledge, and information
on how to identify their leadership strengths and find opportunities for improvement. The data
was collected to determine factors that have shaped senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators’
leadership styles that helped to meet the needs of students, practitioners, and the university.
Research Design
This study was designed as a mixed-methods study conducted with senior-level Student
Affairs’ administrators who are a director of a Student Affairs’ department at Big California
State University (BCSU) and California Private University (CPU) [pseudonyms are being used].
The study involved the collection of qualitative data from open-ended interview
questions with senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators, as well as more quantitative data
obtained through the Leadership Practices Inventory© (LPI) surveys used to gather data on the
leadership practices of senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders.
The quantitative portion of this study was conducted through Kouzes and Posner (1987)
the Leadership Practices Inventory© (LPI) survey. The Leadership Practices Inventory© has
five fundamental leadership practices which are: Model the Way, Inspire a Shared Vision,
Challenge the Process, Enable Others to Act, and Encourage the Heart. These five fundamental
leadership practices help leaders to create and accomplish extraordinary things. Kouzes and
Posner developed the five practices of exemplary leaders’ framework with an intensive research
project to determine the leadership competencies. They collected thousands of “Personal Best”
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 48
leadership experiences which showed how anyone can develop the key leadership skills needed
“to get extraordinary things done” (Kouzes & Posner, 2002, p. xxiv, Preface). This research
outlined the principles and practices that are solidly based from more than two decades of
quantitative and qualitative research by collecting thousands of "Personal Best" stories—the
experiences people recalled when asked to think of a peak leadership experience. The
Leadership Challenge serves as a guide book for practitioners by sharing anecdotes, strategies,
and behavioral skills for leaders to utilize (Davis et al., 1988). This theory is not aimed at
academics but at practitioners, managers, and non-managers who want to enhance their
leadership skills (Middlehurst et al., 1989).
The qualitative portion of this research was completed through face-to-face interviews
(see Appendix C), each of approximately 30 minutes in length. These face-to-face interviews
were conducted with senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders, allowing them the opportunity to
share what they felt were effective leadership practices among Student Affairs’ leaders, and how
their leadership styles were able to provide the necessary support to enable the success of future
leaders in the field of Student Affairs. The open-ended questions allowed the leaders to share
their leadership styles, strategies, and skill sets without having to be limited by provided-answer
choices on a survey. The interviews contained broad questions about their personal styles of
leadership, leadership traits, and questions related to the LPI leadership practices. The data from
the qualitative sources were analyzed to find correlations within their answers and LPI leadership
practice statements that focused upon what are considered to be leadership traits among senior-
level Student Affairs’ leaders.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 49
The University of Southern California’s (USC) Internal Review Board (IRB) approved
the study on April 17, 2012. After receiving permission from Ellen Peterson, Permission
Manager of Wiley Publishing, the LPI instrument was electronically mailed to the senior-level
Student Affairs’ leaders at the targeted institutions in California. Descriptive statistics were used
to conduct data analysis and to explore relationships between survey and interview variables and
theme.
Population and Sampling
The survey population for this study consisted of 40 senior-level Student Affairs’
administrators at higher education institutions located in California. The quantitative research
section utilized purposeful sampling to invite senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders to participate
in the survey. Patton (2002) confirmed that “random probability samples cannot accomplish
what in-depth, purposeful samples accomplish, and vice versa” (p. 236). The senior-level
Student Affairs’ leaders who were invited to participate in the LPI survey were all listed as a
Director of a Student Affairs department on their university’s organizational chart. The
Leadership Practices Inventory© (LPI) online survey was sent to 40 senior-level Student Affairs’
professionals at Big California State University (BCSU) and California Private University
(CPU).
Big California State University (BCSU) is a large public institution that has an
enrollment of about 37,000 undergraduate and graduate students. The Student Affairs’ division
at BCSU has 20 different departments under its Student Affairs’ umbrella. California Private
University (CPU) is an elite private institution with an enrollment of 38,000 graduate and
undergraduate students. CPU has 20 departments in their student affairs’ division.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 50
The participants in the qualitative portion of the research study were four senior-level
Student Affairs’ administrators who also agreed to participate in a 30-minute interview and
answer open-ended questions about their beliefs and practices. There were two senior-level
Student Affairs administrators from each institution that were purposeful sampled for the
interview process which utilized the standardized open-ended structure. This method of
interviews allowed for the respondents to express their viewpoints and experiences to the open-
endedness of each questions (Turner, 2010).
Demographic Data
Demographic data, including gender, ethnicity, age, educational attainment, and years of
employment at their current position were collected. Demographic information was self-reported
by the senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders on the LPI survey and a senior-level Student Affairs’
leader could opt out of answering any demographic related question.
Procedures
The investigator sent the electronic survey along with the Request to Participate letter to
40 senior-level Student Affairs’ professionals prior to June 2012 (see Appendix A). Twenty
senior-level Student Affairs’ professionals at Big California State University (BCSU) and 20
senior-level Student Affairs’ professionals at California Private University (CPU) were asked to
participate in the study. The one-on-one interviews were conducted with four senior-level
Student Affairs’ professionals who answered standardized open-ended questions about their
beliefs and practices as a senior-level leader of a Student Affairs’ department. Creswell (2007)
explained the importance of choosing appropriate leaders to interview for a research study. An
appointment was made with each senior-level Student Affairs’ professional and they were
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 51
emailed the questions in advance of the interview. All interviews were conducted with leaders at
their place of work. Conducting interviews in a comfortable and familiar environment can help
participants to be more open and honest when sharing the story (Creswell, 2007). All responses
were audio taped with permission of the leader, and were transcribed and used in the qualitative
portion of the study.
Instrumentation
The study presented in this paper utilized the Leadership Practices Inventory© (LPI).
The Leadership Practices Inventory© (LPI) is a 30-item questionnaire containing five subscales
for each of the five practices of exemplary leadership: Challenging the Process, Inspiring a
Shared Vision, Enabling Others to Act, Modeling the Way, and Encouraging the Heart. Each
subscale contains six questions, with a 10-point Likert response scale and takes approximately
10-20 minutes to complete. The Likert scale is as follows: (1) almost never, (2) rarely, (3)
seldom, (4) once in a while, (5) occasionally, (6) sometimes, (7) fairly often, (8) usually, (9) very
frequently, and (10) almost always. A senior-level leader who uses a particular leadership
behavior frequently would rate the behavior high. James Kouzes and Barry Posner (1987)
designed The Leadership Practices Inventory© to measure leadership qualities. There are two
forms of the LPI instrument which include the LPI-Self and the LPI-Observer. The forms of the
LPI differ by who is responding to the statements. The LPI-Observer can help to validate a
leaders described behaviors. This study only used the LPI-self instrument. Kouzes and Posner
(1987) analyzed the personal best leadership experiences of leaders in business. The authors
examined these responses and “through a triangulation of qualitative and quantitative research
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 52
methods” (Kouzes & Posner, 1995, p. 341) developed the Leadership Practices Inventory©. A
copy of the LPI-Self survey instrument is included in Appendix B.
Four senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators agreed to participate in a follow-up
interview. These interviews used the standardized open-ended questions technique to gather
information to understand leadership approaches utilized by senior-level Student Affairs’
administrators. Interviewing allowed the researcher to gain personal insight from the senior-
level administrators who shared their perspective on things that cannot be directly observed
(Patton, 2002). Using a standardized open-ended approach in interviews can allow respondents
to contribute detailed information and allows the researcher to ask follow-up or probing
questions if needed (Turner, 2010). The standardized open-ended question style of interview
allows the respondents to contribute as much information and details as they desired and ensured
that all respondents were asked the identical questions in the same order (Patton, 2002; Gall,
Gall, & Borg, 2003). Table 1 shows how the interview questions related to the research
questions.
Table 1
Interview Question Matrix
Interview
Question
Research
Question 1
Research
Question 2
Research
Question 3
IQ 1 X X X
IQ 2 X X X
IQ 3 X X X
IQ 4 X X X
IQ 5 X X X
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 53
Table 1 (Cont’d.)
Interview
Question
Research
Question 1
Research
Question 2
Research
Question 3
IQ 6 X X X
IQ 7 X X
IQ 8 X
Data Collection
The investigator sent the Leadership Practices Inventory© (LPI) survey along with the
Request to Participate letter to 40 senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators at Big California
State University (BCSU) and California Private University (CPU) during July, 2012. The survey
was an electronic version of the LPI which consisted of a 30-item questionnaire containing five
subscales for each of The Five Practices of Exemplary Leadership: Challenging the Process,
Inspiring a Shared Vision, Enabling Others to Act, Modeling the Way, and Encouraging the
Heart. The one-on-one interviews were conducted with senior-level Student Affairs’
administrators. All of the four interviewees were directors of a Student Affairs’ department at
BCSU and CPU. An appointment was made with each senior-level Student Affairs’
administrator and they were emailed the questions in advance of the interview. All interviews
were conducted with administrators at their place of work. All responses were audio taped with
permission of the administrator, and were transcribed and used in the qualitative portion of the
study.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 54
Data Analysis
Descriptive statistics were used to find variance within the quantitative data collected.
The data was collected using Microsoft Excel and was coded, scored, and analyzed using this
system.
The qualitative data was collected during one-on-one interviews where senior-level
Student Affairs’ administrators answered standardized open-ended questions. The results
provided valuable data with regard to factors that have shaped senior-level Student Affairs’
administrators’ leadership styles that helped to meet the needs of students, practitioners, and the
university.
The analysis included:
1. Detailed descriptions of the Leadership Practices Inventory© (LPI) questionnaire
containing five subscales for each of the five practices of exemplary leadership:
Challenging the Process, Inspiring a Shared Vision, Enabling Others to Act, Modeling
the Way, and Encouraging the Heart.
2. Looking for significance variance within the mean areas of leadership defined by LPI
researchers.
3. The interview questionnaires were analyzed for trends in common responses.
Reliability and Validity
Reliability refers to the extent to which a research instrument contains measurement
errors that cause scores to differ for reasons unrelated to the individual respondent (Aiken, 1997).
The fewer errors contained, the more reliable the instrument. Research experts consider an
instrument good if the reliabilities are above .60 (Aiken, 1997). Kouzes and Posner (2002)
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 55
summarized that researchers have been conducting studies that have corroborated the reliability
and validity of the Leadership Practices Inventory©. Studies have indicated internal reliabilities
on the LPI-Self scales, ranging from .80 to .87 (Leadership Challenge, 2000). The tested
reliability of the LPI and its frequent use by researchers and longitudinal data collected by
Kouzes and Posner (2002) made it an easy choice for this research study because of its
reliability. As a result of the LPI's previously tested validity and reliability in numerous studies,
a pilot study was not determined to be necessary.
Ethical Consideration
The researcher submitted the necessary request forms for the research involving human
participation to the University of Southern California’s (USC) Institutional Review Board (IRB).
All USC’s IRB guidelines and procedures were astutely followed. All participants consented to
participate in the study and all were informed of the purpose and nature of the research.
Confidentiality and anonymity of all participants in the study was strictly adhered. The approval
from the Institution Review Board was received April 17, 2012.
Summary
This chapter presented details of the quantitative and qualitative methodologies and
procedures for this research study. The chapter was organized into the following ten sections:
(1) purpose of study, (2) research design, (3) population and sampling, (4) demographic data, (5)
procedures, (6) instrumentation, (7) data collection, (8) data analysis, (9) reliability and validity,
and (10) ethical consideration.
The purpose of the study was to measure and gain an understanding of leadership traits;
identify the characteristics of an inspiring leader within student affairs; and help individuals
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 56
discover the five practices of effective leadership styles. Information was collected via
qualitative interviews and quantitative surveys with senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 57
Chapter Four
Analysis of Data
Introduction
A presentation and discussion of the data collected from a mix-methods study, which
examined leadership style and strategies that current senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders utilized
to lead, develop, and engage their Student Affairs’ department is found in this chapter. The
quantitative data was collected through electronic surveying of senior-level Student Affairs’
leaders with the Leadership Practices Inventory© (LPI) that consisted of leadership trait
statements ranked on a Likert scale. Qualitative data was collected through follow-up interviews
of four senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders. This chapter presents the response rates of the
online LPI surveys, the demographic information of the respondents, the research findings from
the analyzed and compiled data, and the researcher’s discussion with regard to the meaning of
the research findings.
This study sought to answer the following three research questions:
1. What strategies and skills do senior-level Student Affairs’ Leaders implement to develop
leadership styles within a Student Affairs’ department?
2. What strategies do senior-level Student Affairs’ Leaders utilize to inspire and encourage
a positive team dynamic?
3. How do senior-level Student Affairs’ Leaders pass on their knowledge of leadership to
the next generation of Student Affairs’ leaders?
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 58
Data Collection
Survey respondents and instrument. The participants for this study were selected from
Student Affairs’ professionals at two higher education institutions in California. Big California
State University (BCSU) is a large public institution and California Private University (CPU) is
an elite private institution. These institutions were chosen due to their relative institutional size,
comparable student populations, and similar Student Affairs’ departmental structure.
Twenty senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders at both institutions were asked to complete
an electronic version of the Leadership Practices Inventory© (LPI) self-report. The LPI-Self
asked senior-level leaders to answer 30 statements about leadership styles. Each statement was
on a 10-point Likert scale. The Likert scale is as follows: (1) almost never, (2) rarely, (3)
seldom, (4) once in a while, (5) occasionally, (6) sometimes, (7) fairly often, (8) usually, (9) very
frequently, and (10) almost always. A senior-level leader who uses a particular leadership
behavior frequently would rate the behavior high. Results from all senior-level Student Affairs’
leaders that participated in the study were tabulated in a Microsoft Excel program to determine a
total rating for each of the five LPI leadership principles. A senior-level leader could score
between 6 and 60 on each section of the LPI-Self report. The LPI-Self survey was divided into
five sections about leadership practices; these sections are (1) Challenging the Process,
(2) Inspiring a Shared Vision, (3) Enabling Others to Act, (4) Modeling the Way, and
(5) Encouraging the Heart.
Of the 40 surveys that were sent to current Student Affairs’ professionals at both
institutions, 23 were returned resulting in a 57.5% rate of return. The researcher used Microsoft
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 59
Excel to code, score, and analyze the data from the 23 senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders that
participated in the study
Interview questions. Four senior-level leaders were asked to participate in a follow-up,
one-on-one interview with the researcher about their personal leadership styles and how they
utilize LPI strategies in their Student Affairs’ environments. Each interview took place in that
leader’s place of employment and took about 30 minutes. The interview questions provided
valuable data with regard to factors that have shaped senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders’
leadership styles that they used to meet the needs of students, practitioners, and the university.
Interviewing allowed the investigator to gather information in order to understand the leadership
approaches utilized by senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders.
Leaders were asked to answer the following questions:
1. What is your philosophy of leadership?
2. What is your leadership style and/or approach to leading your Student Affairs’
department and has it changed over time?
3. What strategies do you use to develop a positive working environment in your Student
Affairs’ department?
4. Among these leadership traits (Challenging the Process, Inspiring a Shared Vision,
Enabling Others to Act, Modeling the Way, Encouraging the Heart), which one do you
resonate the most with and why?
5. Which LPI qualities do you think are most important in developing your Student Affairs’
department?
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 60
6. Which LPI qualities do you think you utilize the most while training your Student
Affairs’ department?
7. What area(s) of the LPI do you find to be the most challenging or difficult to integrate
into your Student Affairs’ department? Why?
8. How do you pass on your leadership skills, styles, and strategies to new professionals in
the field of Student Affairs?
Interview respondents. The researcher conducted four interviews with two senior-level
Student Affairs’ leaders from each institution utilizing a purposeful sampling technique. Below
are the profiles of each of the respondents [pseudonyms are being used] to the qualitative
interviews that answered standardized open-ended questions.
The first interview was with Mr. James Principe, Director of Student Housing at Big
California State University (BCSU). Mr. Principe has served in this role since 2010 and has
worked at the institution for over 30 years. Mr. Principe’s philosophy of leadership is that
“leadership is focused on providing direction within the context of any kind of organization or
group of other persons” (personal communication, October, 2012).
The second interview was with Dr. Megan Williams who has served for ten years as the
Executive Director of First Year Programs and Residential Life at Big California State
University (BSCU). Dr. Williams not only runs a Student Affairs’ department but she also
teaches classes and engages students through involvement activities in residential communities.
Dr. Williams’ leadership philosophy is to “create social change and to create change in a way
that moves us forward in positive directions that make an impact on our constituents whoever
that is” (personal communication, October, 2012).
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 61
Ms. Hilary Irwin serves as a Director of a Cultural Center at California Private University
(CPU) and was the third interview in this study. Ms. Irwin believed that “you can always tell a
good leader by the people who follow” (personal communication, October, 2012). Her style is to
lead by example and to” keep it real” (personal communication, October, 2012) for students and
professionals. Ms. Irwin has been working at CPU for over 16 years.
The final interview was with Ms. Teresa Gobin from California Private University
(CPU). She is currently transitioning into her role as the newly appointed Director of Student
Governance. Her idea of leadership is that she “believes very strongly that leadership is a – it’s
almost like – it comes with attachments like earned respect as opposed to just being granted
respect” (personal communication, October, 2012). Ms. Gobin has been a Director in the
Student Affairs’ department since 2004 and has led and inspired numerous graduate and
undergraduate students to successfully complete their education at the University.
Demographic Data
Demographic data were disaggregated by gender, ethnicity, age, educational attainment,
and years of experience at their current position. The researcher used the demographic
information provided and collected by the LPI survey publisher and did not deviate from those
categories. When relevant, both total numbers and percentages of demographic data were
analyzed in tables or charts, as well as in narrative form.
Out of the 23 senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders who repsonded, 16 identifiied
themselves as a female and 7 identified as male. One respondent felt pressure to label their
gender and emailed the researcher about having to pick from a binary category. The researcher
passed the feedback onto the publisher of the LPI survey.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 62
Figure 1: Gender of Senior-Level Student Affairs’ Leaders
The data in Figure 1 was not analyzed with regard to gender significance for effective
leadership style, skills, or strategies. The researcher did find it interesting to note that most of
the leaders were predominantly female, and further research regarding the correlation between
gender and leadership style might elicit significant findings.
Of the 23 senior-level Student Affairs’ Leaders that responded to the survey, 13 identified
themselves as White/Caucasian. Two identified themselves as Asian/Pacific Islander, two
identified themselves as Black/African American, two identified themselves as Hispanic/Latino,
two identified themselves as Mixed or more than one category, and two identified themselves as
Other. Figure 2 shows the breakdown of responses by ethnicity.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 63
Figure 2: Ethnicity of Senior-Level Student Affairs’ Leaders
The data in Figure 2 demonstrates that a majority of the senior-level Student Affairs’
Leaders who responded were White/Caucasian. No analysis was made by the researcher to
determine if ethnicity had any significance on effective leadership style, skills, or strategies
utilized by senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders,
The reported ages of the senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders are as follows: eight
respondents were in the 50-59 age category, while seven respondents were in the 40-49 category;
there were five respondents in the 33-40 age category; also, there were two respondents in the
24-32 category; and there was one respondent in the 60 and older category. Figure 3 shows the
breakdown of responses by ages.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 64
Figure 3: Age of Senior-Level Student Affairs’ Leaders
This study did not analyze the significance of age that contributed to leadership style,
strategies, or skills for senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders. Most of the senior-level Student
Affairs’ leaders identified themselves in the 41-60 age range.
Sandeen (1991) suggested that the future of leaders in Student Affairs’ departments will
need to be educated with a terminal degree and have experience working in Student Life within a
university. Of the 23 respondents, 21 responded with their highest educational attainment: 9 held
a Master’s Degree and 12 had a Doctoral Degree. This researcher did not analyze the
significance of educational attainment that contributed to leadership style, strategies, or skills for
senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders. Figure 4 visually exemplifies the highest educational
attainment of senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders who responded to the survey.
0 2 4 6 8 10
24-32
41-49
60+
Respondents
Age Range
Age of senior-level Student Affairs
Administrators
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 65
Figure 4: Educational Attainment of Senior-Level Student Affairs’ Leaders
The final piece of demographic data the research collected pertained to how long the
senior-level Student Affairs’ administrator had been in their position. The research was open to
inviting any senior-level Student Affairs’ administrator to participate in this study as long they
were listed on the BSCU or PCU student Affairs’ organization chart as a Director of a Student
Affairs department. Of the 23 respondents, 21 responded with their years in their current
position at their university. Eleven responded with having been in their current position 10 or
more years, four responded having been in their current position 5-10 years, three responded
having been in their current position 3-5 years, two responded having been in their position 1-3
years, and one person responded having been in their position less than a year. Figure 5 visually
represents the respondents’ amount of Time in Current Position for Senior-Level Student
Affairs’ Leaders.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 66
Figure 5: Amount of Time in Current Position for Senior-Level Student Affairs’
Leaders
Analysis of Research Question One
In the first research question the researcher asked, “What strategies and skills do senior-
level Student Affairs’ Leaders implement to develop leadership styles within a Student Affairs’
department?” The LPI-Self survey is divided into five sections about leadership practices; these
sections are (1) Challenging the Process, (2) Inspiring a Shared Vision, (3) Enabling Others to
Act, (4) Modeling the Way, and (5) Encouraging the Heart. The five principles of the
Leadership Practices Inventory© (LPI) scores were collected for each of the 23 study
participants. The LPI consists of 30 statements on the survey and each of the five practices has
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 67
six statements associated with it. Each statement was on a 10-point Likert scale and a senior-
level leader could score a total between 6 and 60 on each section of the LPI-Self report.
The following six statements were associated with Model the Way (MTW) on the LPI
survey that the senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders completed. These statements were:
Statement 1- I set a personal example of what I expect of others.
Statement 6- I spend time and energy making certain that the people I work with adhere
to the principles and standards that we have agreed on.
Statement 11- I follow through on the promises and commitments that I make.
Statement 16- I ask for feedback on how my actions affect other people's performance.
Statement 21- I build consensus around a common set of values for running our
organization.
Statement 26- I am clear about my philosophy of leadership.
The next six statements are related to the LPI practice of Inspire a Shared Vision (ISV).
These statements were:
Statement 2- I talk about future trends that will influence how our work gets done.
Statement 7- I describe a compelling image of what our future could be like.
Statement 12- I appeal to others to share an exciting dream of the future.
Statement 17- I show others how their long-term interests can be realized by enlisting in a
common vision.
Statement 22- I paint the "big picture" of what we aspire to accomplish.
Statement 27- I speak with genuine conviction about the higher meaning and purpose of
our work.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 68
The third leadership practice is Challenge the Process (CTP). The following six
statements are related to it:
Statement 3- I seek out challenging opportunities that test my own skills and abilities.
Statement 8- I challenge people to try out new and innovative ways to do their work.
Statement 13- I search outside the formal boundaries of my organization for innovative
ways to improve what we do.
Statement 18- I ask "What can we learn?" when things do not go as expected.
Statement 23- I make certain that we set achievable goals, make concrete plans, and
establish measurable milestones for the projects and programs that we work on.
Statement 28- I experiment and take risks, even when there is a chance of failure.
The fourth leadership practice is entitled, Enabling Others to Act (EOA) and has the
following six statements associated with it:
Statement 4- I develop cooperative relationships among the people I work with.
Statement 9- I actively listen to diverse points of view.
Statement 14- I treat others with dignity and respect.
Statement 19- I support the decisions that people make on their own.
Statement 24- I give people a great deal of freedom and choice in deciding how to do
their work.
Statement 29- I ensure that people grow in their jobs by learning new skills and
developing themselves.
The six statements in this last section were related to Encouraging the Heart (ETH).
These statements are:
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 69
Statement 5- I praise people for a job well done.
Statement 10- I make it a point to let people know about my confidence in their abilities.
Statement 15- I make sure that people are creatively rewarded for their contributions to
the success of our projects.
Statement 20- I publicly recognize people who exemplify commitment to shared values.
Statement 25- I find ways to celebrate accomplishments.
Statement 30- I give the members of the team lots of appreciation and support for their
contributions.
Senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders at Big California State University (BCSU) and
California Private University (CPU) were invited to participate in this study and to respond to the
30 statements on the Leadership Practice Inventory (LPI) (see Appendix A). A senior-level
Student Affairs’ Administrator who uses a particular leadership behavior frequently would rate
that behavior high for the related statement. The maximum possible score on each of the five
leadership practices sections was 60 (six statements each worth a maximum of 10 points). The
minimum possible score on each of the five leadership practices sections was 6 (six statements
each worth a minimum of 1 point each). Each of the five practices of leadership scores were
grouped and calculated for the means. Means and Standard deviations for each of leadership-
practices scores of the sampled senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders are presented in Table 2 in
rank order.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 70
Table 2
Rank ordered Leadership Practices by Means and Corresponding Standard Deviation of
Samples Senior-Level Student Affairs’ Leaders (N=23)
Leadership Practices Mean* Standard Deviation
Enabling Others to Act 53.21 4.17
Encouraging the Heart 50.00 8.10
Modeling the Way 49.86 5.56
Challenging the Process 48.69 5.52
Inspiring a Shared Vision 48.21 7.36
*Maximum = 60
Based on the mean scores, Enabling Others to Act was perceived by the respondents as
the leadership practice that senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders most frequently engage and with
the lowest variation in occurrence. The leadership practices of Encouraging the Heart, Modeling
the Way, and Challenging the Process followed the Enabling Others to Act in terms of highest
means. The leadership practice with the lowest mean was Inspiring a Shared Vision which
suggests that senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders infrequently engage with this leadership
practice. Encouraging the Heart has the highest variation in occurrence almost twice the size of
the highest scoring leadership practice of Enabling Others to Act. This suggests that leaders
agree that it is important to use the leadership practice of Encouraging the Heart, but conduct this
practice in varied ways.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 71
All 30 statements related to Kouzes and Posner’s (2003) leadership practices have been
arranged from highest mean to lowest mean score and include the standard deviation presented
below in Table 3.
Table 3
Individual Statement Ranked Highest to Lowest Rank Ordered Leadership by Mean and
Corresponding Standard Deviation by Senior-Level Student Affairs’ Leaders (N=23)
LPI Statement Mean Standard
Deviation
LPI Practice
14. Treats people with dignity and
respect
9.73 0.61 EOA
11. Follows through on promises
and commitments
9.26 1.09 MTW
4. Develops cooperative
relationships
9.17 0.93 EOA
1. Sets a personal example of
what is expected
9.04 0.97 MTW
22. Paints "big picture" of group
aspirations
8.86 1.14 ISV
24. Gives people choice about
how to do their work
8.86 1.35 EOA
3. Seeks challenging
opportunities to test skills
8.78 0.99 CTP
27. Speaks with conviction about
meaning of work
8.60 1.33 ISV
9. Actively listens to diverse
points of view
8.60 1.49 EOA
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 72
Table 3 (Cont’d.)
LPI Statement Mean Standard
Deviation
LPI Practice
5. Praises people for a job well
done
8.60 1.58 ETH
26. Is clear about his/her
philosophy of leadership
8.52 1.37 MTW
29. Ensures that people grow up in
their jobs
8.47 1.16 EOA
30. Gives team members
appreciation and support
8.43 1.56 ETH
15. Creatively rewards people for
their contributions
8.39 1.46 ETH
20. Recognizes people for
commitment to shared values
8.39 1.72 ETH
21. Builds consensus around
organizations values
8.34 1.30 MTW
19. Supports decisions other
people make
8.34 0.98 EOA
23. Makes certain that goals,
plans, and milestones are set
8.30 1.39 CTP
10. Expresses confidence in
people's abilities
8.26 1.42 ETH
8. Challenges people to try new
approaches
8.21 1.41 CTP
2. Talks about future trends
influencing our work
8.13 1.45 ISV
18. Asks "What can we learn?"
8.00 1.67 CTP
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 73
Table 3 (Cont’d.)
LPI Statement Mean Standard
Deviation
LPI Practice
6. Makes certain that people
adhere to agreed-on standards
7.95 1.58 MTW
13. Searches outside organization
for innovative ways to
improve
7.95 2.18 CTP
25. Finds ways to celebrate
accomplishments
7.91 1.75 ETH
7. Describes a compelling image
of the future
7.86 1.48 ISV
12. Appeals to others to share
dream of the future
7.69 1.84 ISV
28. Experiments and takes risks
7.43 1.61 CTP
17. Shows others how their
interests can be realized
7.04 2.26 ISV
16. Asks for feedback on how
his/her actions affect people's
performance
6.73 2.04 MTW
All 30 statements were compiled in a rank-order list in Table 3 showing the highest mean
score to the lowest mean score. Statement number 14 which stated “Treats people with dignity
and respect” was rated the highest mean score of 9.73 and had the lowest standard deviation of
0.61. Statement 14 (Treats people with dignity and respect) is related to the Enabling Others to
Act leadership practice. Four of the top ten statements are related to the leadership practice of
Enabling Others to Act. These statements are: 14 (Treats people with dignity and respect), 4
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 74
(Develops cooperative relationships), 24 (Gives people choice about how to do their work), and
9 (Actively listens to diverse points of view). The Student Affairs’ profession is one that guides
people with developmental principles (American Council on Education, 1937); therefore, it is not
surprising that most of the statements from the leadership practice of Enabling Others to Act
category were ranked the highest in this study. “I would say that enabling our students to be
successful is probably the most important thing we would do as Student Affairs’ professionals, in
general. We need to be developmental in our approaches” said Ms. Teresa Gobin of California
Private University (personal communication, October, 2012).
The second highest mean score of 9.26 was from statement 11 which stated “Follows
through on promises and commitments.” This leadership practice is related to the behavior of
Modeling the Way. The data shows that the leadership practice of Modeling the Way was also
related to the lowest mean score of all 30 statements. Statement 16 stated “Asks for feedback on
how his/her actions affect people's performance” and has a mean score of 6.73. The data
suggests that senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders use the leadership practice of Modeling the
Way in their leadership style but might not always engage in seeking feedback on how their
actions affect their supervisee’s performance.
Within student affairs, and given the fact that we are basically general educators that
support students, supporting them in their formal educational activities and interests but
also supporting them just in their narrative general growth of development, I think that it
is important for us {as Student Affairs practitioners}to be very aware of the modeling
that we provide. (Mr. James Principe, Big State California University, personal
communication, October, 2012).
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 75
In the following sections, the researcher will present each of the leadership practices from
Kouzes and Posner’s Leadership Practices Inventory© (LPI, 2003) rankings by the senior-level
Student Affairs’ leaders. Each leadership practice statement has been grouped together and
ranked from highest to lowest mean score and coordinated with a standard deviation based on the
senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators’ responses to the LPI-Self survey.
Enabling others to act. The statements below relate to Kouzes and Posner’s (2003)
leadership practice of Enabling Others to Act (EOA) which were grouped together and the
sample mean score and standard deviations are presented in Table 4.
Table 4
Senior-Level Student Affairs’ Leaders Mean Leadership Practices Inventory© Rating for
Statements Related to Enabling Others to Act
LPI Statement Number Mean* Standard
Deviation
14. Treats people with dignity and respect
9.73 0.61
4. Develops cooperative relationships
9.17 0.93
24. Gives people choice about how to do their work
8.86 1.35
9. Actively listens to diverse points of view
8.60 1.49
29. Ensures that people grow up in their jobs
8.47 1.16
19. Supports decisions other people make
8.34 0.98
*Maximum = 10
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 76
The statement with the highest mean score and the lowest standard deviation is statement
14 (Treats people with dignity and respect). The Enabling Others to Act statement that has the
lowest mean is statement 19 (Supports decisions other people make) but statement 19’s standard
deviation is the third lowest one of the six statements in this leadership practice. Statement 9
(Actively listens to diverse points of view) has the highest standard deviation for this leadership
practice. In Enabling Others to Act, the variance of the mean averages were within close range
of each other which suggests that senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders have a high frequency of
engaging in this leadership practice. The leadership practice of Enabling Others to Act resonates
with Dr. Megan Williams (personal communication, October, 2012) stating, “A quality of being
a good leader is understanding the principle of enabling others to act which is trying to get
people, the right people in the right places and trying to make everyone successful in their
niche.”
Encouraging the heart. The statements below relate to Kouzes and Posner’s (2003)
leadership practice of Encouraging the Heart (ETH) which were grouped together and the sample
mean score and standard deviations are presented in Table 5.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 77
Table 5
Senior-Level Student Affairs’ Leaders Mean Leadership Practices Inventory© Rating for
Statements Related to Encouraging the Heart
LPI Statement Number Mean* Standard
Deviation
5. Praises people for a job well done
8.60 1.58
30. Gives team members appreciation and support
8.43 1.56
15. Creatively rewards people for their contributions
8.39 1.46
20. Recognizes people for commitment to shared values
8.39 1.72
10. Expresses confidence in people's abilities
8.26 1.42
25. Finds ways to celebrate accomplishments
7.91 1.75
*Maximum = 10
Encouraging the Heart was the second highest ranked of the leadership practices used by
the senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders in this study. Statement 5 which stated “Praises people
for a job well done” had the highest mean score but did not have the lowest standard deviation
for the leadership practice of Encouraging the Heart. The lowest mean score for this leadership
practice was the statement “finds ways to celebrate accomplishments” (statement 25). The
lowest standard deviation for this leadership practice was statement 10 (Expresses confidence in
people’s abilities), which was the fifth-ranked statement in this leadership practice.
The data suggests that senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders use this leadership practice
often in their leadership styles but in their own unique ways to meet the needs of their
departments. Mr. James Principe of Big State California University said the following about
Encouraging the Heart,
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 78
encouraging the heart, to be able to recognize, as this suggests here, contributions that
individuals make, and I would imply that to not just the workers but those we who are
trying to educate, our students, and to support them and to encourage them and to
recognize them for what it is that they are achieving as well. (personal communication,
October, 2012)
Modeling the way. The statements below relate to Kouzes and Posner’s (2003)
leadership practice of Modeling the Way (MTW) which were grouped together and the sample
mean score and standard deviations are presented in Table 6.
Table 6
Senior-Level Student Affairs’ Leaders Mean Leadership Practices Inventory© Rating for
Statements Related to Modeling the Way
LPI Statement Number Mean* Standard
Deviation
11. Follows through on promises and commitments
9.26 1.09
1. Sets a personal example of what is expected
9.04 0.97
26. Is clear about his/her philosophy of leadership
8.52 1.37
21. Builds consensus around organizations values
8.34 1.30
6. Makes certain that people adhere to agreed-on standards
7.95 1.58
16. Asks for feedback on how his/her actions affect people's
performance
6.73 2.04
*Maximum = 10
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 79
Statement number 11 which stated “Follows through on promises and commitments”
held the highest mean score for Modeling the Way. This statement suggests that follow through
is an important leadership practice of senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders. Ms. Hilary Irwin
from California Private University (personal communication, October, 2012) said the following
about the leadership practice of Modeling the Way, “I model what I like to see, I have to
remember that people are watching me so I can’t just do any-all kind of thing.” “Sets a personal
example of what is expected” (Statement 1) has the lowest variation in occurrence of all the
statements under Modeling the Way leadership practice.
Statement 16 (Asks for feedback on how his/her actions affect people's performance) has
the lowest mean score and the greatest standard deviation for the leadership practice of Modeling
the Way. Senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders work to prepare the next generation of Student
Affairs’ leaders to lead the organization by allowing them to learn how to model the way.
“Modeling the way . . . I am going to practice what I preach” was stated by Ms. Hilary Irwin of
California Private University (personal communication, October, 2012).
Challenging the process. The statements below relate to Kouzes and Posner’s (2003)
leadership practice Challenging the Process (CTP) which were grouped together and the sample
mean score and standard deviations are presented in Table 7.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 80
Table 7
Senior-Level Student Affairs’ Leaders Mean Leadership Practices Inventory© Rating for
Statements Related to Challenging the Process
LPI Statement Number Mean* Standard
Deviation
3. Seeks challenging opportunities to test skills
8.78 0.99
23. Makes certain that goals, plans, and milestones are set
8.30 1.39
8. Challenges people to try new approaches
8.21 1.41
18. Asks "What can we learn?"
8.00 1.67
13. Searches outside organization for innovative ways to
improve
7.95 2.18
28. Experiments and takes risks
7.43 1.61
*Maximum = 10
Statement 3 (Seeks challenging opportunities to test skills) of the Challenging the Process
leadership practice had the highest mean score and the lowest standard deviation. This suggests
that senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders like to find opportunities to challenge their skill sets
within their roles at the university.
Statement 28 (Experiments and takes risks) has the lowest mean score for this leadership
practice. Ms. Teresa Gobin from California Private University stated that,
Challenging the way can help you to try to develop and create the perfect [Student
Affairs] team, try to bring people in with a variety of strengths and ways that can
collaborate and integrate, really integrate everyone’s strengths together, so that the
department is a strong team. (personal communication, October, 2012)
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 81
The statement with the lowest standard deviation for this leadership practice is Searches
outside organization for innovative ways to improve (Statement 13). Dr. Megan Williams from
Big State California University stated that,
Challenging the process . . . has a notion of changing the status quo and it could be very
specific to my area within student affairs. But you tend to get — we tend to get a lot of
staff that want to do exactly that, want to change the status quo. And as a leader, you
want to balance the history and the time that’s been invested in terms of where we have
gotten to with the ability to kind of move forward and have change and do things
differently. (Personal communication, October, 2012)
The divisions of Student Affairs at both sampled intuitions are comprised of 20 different
departments. This can help to explain why statements 13 (Searches outside organization for
innovative ways to improve) and 28 (Experiments and takes risks) have low means and high
standard deviation.
However it should be noted that Student Affairs’ departments often support one another
to help meet the university mission and goal of serving students. Senior-level Student Affairs’
leaders might be stretched out in their roles and they themselves don’t spend time getting
involved outside their department but have lower-level professionals who represent their
departments on campus-initiated committees and boards.
Inspiring a shared vision. The statements below relate to Kouzes and Posner’s (2003)
leadership practice of Inspiring a Shared Vision (ISV) which were grouped together and the
sample mean score and standard deviations are presented in Table 8.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 82
Table 8
Senior-Level Student Affairs’ Leaders Mean Leadership Practices Inventory© Rating for
Statements Related to Inspiring a Shared Vision
LPI Statement Number Mean* Standard
Deviation
22. Paints "big picture" of group aspirations
8.86 1.14
27. Speaks with conviction about meaning of work
8.60 1.33
2. Talks about future trends influencing our work
8.13 1.45
7. Describes a compelling image of the future
7.86 1.48
12. Appeals to others to share dream of the future
7.69 1.84
17. Shows others how their interests can be realized
7.04 2.26
*Maximum = 10
Inspiring a Shared Vision leadership practice was ranked fifth by senior-level Student
Affairs’ leaders in this survey. Statement 22 (Paints "big picture" of group aspirations) had the
highest mean score and lowest standard deviation for the Inspiring a Shared Vision leadership
practice. This suggests that senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders use this leadership practice but
at infrequently rates in their leadership practices. Mr. James Principe of Big State California
University (personal communication, October, 2012) shared his opinion about inspiring a shared
vision when he said he is “excited about thinking into the future as it regards what we [Student
Affairs] can do that will add or benefit or improve usually the experience of others.”
“Shows others how their interests can be realized” (Statement 17) had the lowest mean
score and highest standard deviation for the leadership practice of Inspiring a Shared Vision.
The data from Statement 17 (Shows others how their interests can be realized) suggests that
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 83
senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders do not perceive that they show others how their interest can
be realized in their work place. Statement 17 (Shows others how their interests can be realized)
has a 7.04 mean score which suggests that this leadership practice is utilized by senior-level
Student Affairs’ leaders to some degree in their leadership practices.
Analysis of Research Question Two
In the second research question, the researcher asked, “What strategies do senior-level
Student Affairs’ Leaders utilize to inspire and encourage a positive team dynamic?” In
addition to the Leadership Practice Inventory (LPI) self-survey, four senior-level Student
Affairs’ leaders were interviewed for a half hour, and asked open-ended questions about
leadership styles, skills, and strategies that they use in leading a Student Affairs’ department. In
this section the research will present the themes that emerged from the interviews. Each
interview theme will be related to the leadership practices of the LPI and discussion will follow.
Table 9 displays the themes that emerged from the interviews and the related LPI Statement.
Table 9
Senior-Level Student Affairs’ Leaders Interview Themes and Related LPI Statements
Interview Theme LPI Statement Mean Leadership
Practice
Relationship Building Statement 14-Treats people with
dignity and respect
9.73 Enabling
Others to
Act
Group Collaboration Statement 3-Develops cooperative
relationships
9.17 Enabling
Others to
Act
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 84
Table 9 (Cont’d.)
Interview Theme LPI Statement Mean Leadership
Practice
Working Towards a
Common Goal
Statement 22- Paints "big picture" of
group aspirations
8.86 Inspiring a
Shared
Vision
Confronts Negative
Behavior
Statement 8- Challenges people to try
new approaches
8.21 Challenging
the Process
Theme 1: Relationship building. All of the senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders that
were interviewed agreed that building relationships is the most important part of creating a
positive work environment. The theme of relationship building was related to the LPI leadership
practice of “Treats people with respect and dignity” (Statement 14). Statement 14 (Treats people
with respect and dignity) had the highest mean score of all the leadership practices utilized by the
senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders in this study. Dr. Megan Williams from Big California
State University (personal communication, October, 2012) believed that building strong
relationships is a key area for Student Affairs’ departments. She stated, “When you build a
relationship with others it makes it an easier place to work and then when there are challenges
that come up having that relationship allows for greater possibility that it will get addressed.”
Statement 14 (Treats people with respect and dignity) is related to the LPI leadership
practice of Enabling Others to Act. According to Kouzes and Posner (2002) leaders who use this
practice, build and develop mutual respect for followers by allowing them the opportunity to
make choices and set cooperative goals for the team. “Speak to everyone and be genuine” was
stated by Ms. Hilary Irwin from California Private University (personal communication,
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 85
October, 2012) with regard to building strong relationships with your Student Affairs’
department and division.
Theme 2: Group collaboration. The next theme to emerge from the interviews with the
senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders was the idea to create and encourage group and
departmental collaboration. The theme of group collaboration was related to the LPI leadership
practice of “Develops cooperative relationships” (Statement 3). Statement 3 (Develops
cooperative relationships) had the third highest mean score of the leadership practices and is
related to the LPI category of Enabling Others to Act. Mr. James Principe of Big State
California University (personal communication, October, 2012) shared how he uses the practice
of Enabling Others to Act in his role, “The strategy is to facilitate collaboration and cooperation
amongst participants and to work towards and encourage positive group interactions.” The
leadership practice of Enabling Others to Act allows leaders to collaborate and build dynamic
relationships with their team members (Northouse, 2010). As a leader, you should “demonstrate
concern for the well-being of the people who are working in the environment and to support
them in their personal and professional interest goals” as stated by Mr. James Principe (personal
communication, October, 2012). These relationships encourage team members to be actively
involved in their Student Affairs’ organization (Northouse, 2010).
Theme 3: Working towards a common goal. The third theme to emerge from the
interviews with the senior-level leaders was to work towards a common goal. The theme of
working towards a common goal is related to the LPI statement of “Paints ‘Big Picture’ of group
aspirations” (Statement 22). Statement 22 (Paints “Big Picture” of group aspirations) was ranked
the fifth most frequently used leadership practice and had a mean score of 8.86. Dr. Megan
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 86
Williams (personal communications, October, 2012) stated, “Working toward a common goal
leads to a kind of a positive work environment because people know that you are going to be
transparent, respectful, and you are going to be working towards the goals to benefit everyone.”
Statement 22 (Paints “big picture” of group aspirations) is related to the leadership
practice of Inspiring a Shared Vision. According to Kouzes and Posner (2002), leaders who use
this practice are passionate leaders that envision the future and enlist followers to create a shared
aspiration that is appealing to all followers. When Inspiring a Shared Vision, Mr. James Principe
of Big California State University suggested that all Student Affairs’ leaders should,
set clear outcomes that enable people to work towards them with a sense of clarity,
lacking ambiguity, so that they know what it is and how they are doing, and to have a
reasonably achievable outcome, so that people can feel good about achieving them, and
then to provide information about how we are doing both as a group and individually.
(personal communication, October, 2012)
Through inspiring a shared vision, a leader can communicate to followers and get people excited
about the possibilities for the future of the Student Affairs’ organization (Northouse, 2010).
Theme 4: Confronts negative behavior. The final theme that emerged from the
interviews with the senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders about creating a positive work
environment was to confront negative behavior. The theme of confronting negative behavior is
associated to the LPI leadership statement of “Challenges people to try new approaches”
(Statement 8). Statement 8 had a mean score of 8.21 and was ranked in the top twenty of
leadership practices used by senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders. Dr. Megan Williams spoke
about confronting negative behavior by saying,
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 87
I think calling things out openly, even in groups at times, can be an effective strategy.
And I wish I had the ability to do that more often because I think that it allows for the
things that creep up that aren't helpful in a working environment to be addressed right on
the spot to see the leader addressing it. (personal communication, October, 2012)
Statement 8 (Challenges people to try new approaches) is related to the LPI leadership
practice of Challenging the Process. Challenging the Process requires leaders to experiment and
to take risks (Kouzes & Posner, 2002). When Student Affairs’ leaders confront negative
behavior they need to be able to “challenge the group to move in a direction and provides
support through resources and other means for the group to move in that direction,” was stated
by Mr. James Principe of Big California State University (personal communication, October,
2012). Leaders take risks as they support their teams in reaching goals and changing behaviors.
All leaders understand that with each risk taken they will have a learning opportunity. Leaders
working to challenge the process and change employee behaviors need to “continue to reinforce
that they want to collaborate and want to support other people’s success” as stated by Ms. Teresa
Gobin (personal communication, October, 2012). According to Kouzes and Posner (2002),
leaders search for new and innovative ways to change, grow, and improve existing processes in
the organization to help to create a positive environment in which to work in.
Analysis of Research Question Three
In the third research question, the researcher asked, “How do senior-level Student
Affairs’ Leaders pass on their knowledge of leadership to the next generation of Student
Affairs’ leaders?” In addition to the Leadership Practice Inventory (LPI) self-survey, four
senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders were interviewed for a half hour, and asked open-ended
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 88
questions about how they pass on their leadership knowledge, skills, and strategies that they use
in leading a Student Affairs’ department to the next generation of Student Affairs’ leaders. Two
of the four senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders that were interviewed did not resonate with
research question three. Mr. James Principe stated,
I don’t know that my particular leadership skills, styles and strategies are what others
particularly want. I mean it sounds a little bit egoistical that I would want to pass on
mine. It's not like I own them. My concern is more that people have an opportunity to
develop their own context. (personal communication, October, 2012)
While Dr. Megan Williams said, “I certainly recognize my style is not the end-all-be-all
and that I have lots of room for improvement but [my style] has some of the learning lessons that
I have gained over time and what could be helpful” to the next generation of Student Affairs’
leaders (personal communication, October, 2012).
In this section the research will present the themes that emerged from the interviews.
Each interview theme will be related to the leadership practices of the LPI and discussion will
follow. Table 10 displays the theme that emerged from the interviews and the related LPI
statement.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 89
Table 10
Senior-Level Student Affairs’ Leaders Research Question 3 Interview Themes and Related LPI
Statements
Interview Theme LPI Statement Mean Leadership
Practice
Role Modeling Statement 1. Sets a personal example of
what is expected
9.04 Model the
Way
Mentorships Statement 26. Is clear about his/her
philosophy of leadership
8.52 Model the
Way
Support
Professional
Development
Statement 29. Ensures that people grow
up in their jobs
8.47 Enabling
Others to
Act
Theme 1: Modeling behavior. The theme of modeling behaviors for new professionals
and staff was discussed in each interview with the senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders. The
theme of modeling behaviors was related to the LPI leadership statement of “Sets a personal
example of what is expected” (Statement 1). Statement 1 (Sets a personal example of what is
expected) had a mean score of 9.04 and was the third highest ranked leadership practice that
senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders use in their leadership styles reported in this study.
Interviewing the senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders gave the researcher a sense that modeling
behaviors allowed the leaders to give back to their field on a personal basis and to really make
connections with the next generation of Student Affairs’ leaders. Ms. Hilary Irwin from
California Private University spoke about modeling behaviors, “I want to show them that you
can do it, and it's not easy, but these are the steps that I did; I lead by example just by saying; I
am encouraging; I am inclusive” (personal communication, October, 2012).
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 90
Statement 1 (Sets a personal example of what is expected) is connected to the LPI
leadership practice of Modeling the Way. According to Kouzes and Posner (2002), leaders will
create behavioral standards and set appropriate examples for employees and staff to follow.
Northhouse (2010) suggested that a leader who is modeling the way for their organization needs
to be clear about his/her own philosophies and values. Dr. Megan Williams from Big California
State University models the way for the next generation of Student Affairs’ leaders by teaching
in BCSU’s Student Affairs’ Master’s program. As Dr. Megan Williams stated, through the class,
she is able to meet and stay connected with students; “I think I try to share helpful things for
them to think about [while trying] moving forward” (personal communication, October, 2012) in
wanting to work in field of Student Affairs. Leaders believe that they can make a difference and
act to create environments where professionals, both seasoned and new, can contribute and
develop the organization (Northouse, 2010).
Theme 2: Mentorship. The second theme to emerge from the interviews with the
senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders was the idea of mentorship which can help them to pass on
leadership knowledge to the next generation of Student Affairs’ professionals. The theme of
mentorship was related to the LPI leadership practice statement of “Is clear about his/her
philosophy of leadership” (Statement 26). Statement 26 (Is clear about his/her philosophy of
leadership) had a mean score of 8.52 and was ranked the 11th leadership practice that senior-
level Student Affairs’ leaders used in their leadership styles reported in this study. Several
senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders were mentors during their time in college. Ms. Hilary Irwin
shared her experience and why she believes in mentorship saying, “It goes back to leading by
example, modeling the way, saying, I am here to help anyone because someone helped me.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 91
Someone took the time to pull me aside as a first year college student” (personal communication,
October, 2012) and now she serves as a mentor in professional organizations and to students on
the CPU campus.
Statement 26 (Is clear about his/her philosophy of leadership) is related to the LPI
leadership practice of Modeling the Way. Mentorship allows a leader to use their own voice and
actions to clarify values and express traits of an effective leader in the field of Student Affairs
(Northouse, 2010). Mr. James Principe from Big California State University stressed the
importance of mentorship for new professionals but encourages them to get involved in
professional organizations and find professional development opportunities at their university
(personal communication, October, 2012). Having a mentor can help a new professional
understand the vision of the university and a strong mentor can communicate to mentees and get
them excited about the possibilities for their future careers in Student Affairs (Northouse, 2010).
Theme 3: Support professional development. The final theme that emerged from the
interviews with the senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders was the idea of supporting professional
development. The theme of supporting professional development was related to the LPI
leadership practice of “Ensures that people grow up in their jobs” (statement 29). Statement 29
(Ensures that people grow up in their jobs) had a mean score of 8.47 and was ranked as the 12th
most frequently utilized leadership practice by senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders in this study.
Mr. James Principe of Big State California University stated the following regarding professional
development, “I like to think of myself as a good role model, as a professional within the
profession. I provide structures within the organization that support the development of new
professionals and everyone within the organization” (personal communication, October, 2012);
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 92
which is a skill that leaders within the field of Student Affairs’ need to be able to put into
practice in their role as leaders in the field.
Statement 29 (Ensures that people grow up in their jobs) is related to the LPI leadership
practice of Enabling Others to Act. According to Kouzes and Posner (2002), leaders that utilize
the leadership practice of Enabling Others to Act can build and develop followers by allowing
them the opportunity to make choices and set cooperative goals for the team such as providing
them opportunities for professional development. Ms. Teresa Gobin from California Private
University spoke about how professional development is used in her department, “As a
supervisor, I could help people work on the things they needed to work on, and I saw people
really grow, mature, be much more effective, because of using professional development
approaches to being a leader” (personal communication, October, 2012).
The leadership practice of Enabling Others to Act allows leaders to create an
environment where followers can contribute to the organization (Northouse, 2010) from what
they have learned through professional development opportunities. Dr. Megan Williams shared
the following about professional development opportunities, “the goal is that you have to be [or
do] intentional things” (personal communication, October, 2012). About guiding people to get
involved in organizations that can help them grow and change the face of the work we do in
student affairs. Ms. Teresa Gobin from California Private University stated,
One of my strengths as a supervisor was that I could help people work on the things they
needed to work on, and that I saw people really grow, mature, be much more effective, be
much more flexible and much more effective using multiple professional development
approaches to being a leader. (Personal communication, October, 2012)
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 93
Summary
This chapter presented the response rates from the online LPI surveys, the demographic
information of the respondents, the research questions findings, and the researcher’s discussion
with regard to the meaning of the research findings. Senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders’
responses to the LPI statements on a Likert-scale and interview findings were presented in this
chapter for each research question. These findings were presented in both narrative and table
form.
The first research question examined leadership strategies and skills that senior-level
Student Affairs’ leaders frequently utilize to develop leaders within their departments. The data
suggests that senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders from Big California State University and
California Private University utilize all 5 (Challenging the Process, Inspiring a Shared Vision,
Enabling Others to Act, Modeling the Way, and Encouraging the Heart) leadership practices of
the LPI. The leadership practice of Enabling Others to Act was perceived by the respondents as
the most frequently engaged leadership behavior. Data indicated that the leadership practices of
Encouraging the Heart, Modeling the Way, and Challenging the Process followed the Enabling
Others to Act in terms of rank order. The leadership practice with the lowest engagement from
the respondents was Inspiring a Shared Vision which suggests that senior-level Student Affairs’
leaders infrequently engage with this leadership practice.
The second research question examined the strategies that senior-level Student Affairs’
leaders utilize to create a positive work environment. Themes that emerged from interviews with
four senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders were related to LPI leadership practice statements and
presented in narrative and table form. The themes of relationship building, group collaboration,
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 94
working towards a common goal, and confronting negative behavior emerged from the
interviews. The data indicated that the senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders use and support
these themes in various ways in their department.
The third research question examined how senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders pass on
knowledge to the next generation of Student Affairs’ leaders. Themes that emerged from
interviews with four senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders were related to LPI leadership practice
statements and presented in narrative and table form. The themes of role modeling, mentorships,
and supporting professional development emerged from the interviews. The data indicated that
the senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders use and develop these themes in their own unique ways
in their department.
Further analysis of data is found in the following chapter.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 95
Chapter Five
Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations
Introduction
The purpose of this study was to explore how senior-level Student Affairs’ professionals
used leadership strategies, styles, and skills to lead their Student Affairs’ department. This study
examined leadership behaviors of senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators to understand how
they build a positive environment for their employees to work in and how they inspired new
professionals in Student Affairs to advance in the field. The profession of Student Affairs seeks
to holistically develop students and prepare them for entry into the global-conscious work force
(Evan & Reason, 2001; Roberts, 2012). The senior-level Student Affairs’ administrator must
build and create a dynamic team of professionals to assist students in developmental processes as
the university grows and changes to meet the demands of students and society. Senior-level
Student Affairs’ administrators must use several strategies, skills, and leadership styles to lead a
Student Affairs’ department. Leading a Student Affairs’ division requires a leader to understand
how power and the organization operate and function (Harrison, 2011) at the collegiate level.
The next generations of Student Affairs’ leaders are being educated by senior-level
administrators that can provide practices and policies to help them grow and develop as a leader
in the growing field of Student Affairs. The profession of Student Affairs continues to adapt to a
changing society and to shape the outside-of-the-classroom learning experiences which seek to
develop and to meet the needs of all millennial students (Love, 2003).
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 96
This study sought to answer the following three research questions:
1. What strategies and skills do senior-level Student Affairs’ Administrators implement to
develop leadership styles within a Student Affairs’ department?
2. What strategies do senior-level Student Affairs’ Administrators utilize to inspire and
encourage a positive team dynamic?
3. How do senior-level Student Affairs’ Administrators pass on their knowledge of
leadership to the next generation of Student Affairs’ leaders?
Data was obtained from senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators through a mixed-
method study. Student Affairs’ administrators who are a director of a Student Affair’s
department at Big California State University (BCSU) and California Private University (CPU)
[pseudonyms are being used] were invited to participate in the study. Of the 40 surveys that
were sent to current Student Affairs’ professionals at both institutions, 23 were returned,
resulting in a 57.5% rate of return.
The quantitative portion of this study was conducted through Kouzes and Posner’s (1987)
Leadership Practices Inventory© (LPI) survey. The Leadership Practices Inventory© has five
fundamental leadership practices which are: Model the Way, Inspire a Shared Vision, Challenge
the Process, Enable Others to Act, and Encourage the Heart. These five fundamental leadership
practices can help Student Affairs’ leaders to create and accomplish their missions and standard
of service within their departments.
The qualitative portion of this research was completed through face-to-face interviews.
Four senior-level leaders were asked to participate in a follow-up, one-on-one interview with the
researcher about their personal leadership styles and how they utilized LPI strategies in their
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 97
Student Affairs’ environment. The interviews were conducted with senior-level Student Affairs’
leaders, allowing them the opportunity to share what they felt were effective leadership practices
among Student Affairs’ leaders, and how their leadership styles were able to provide the
necessary support to enable the success of future leaders in the field of Student Affairs.
Summary of Findings
The summaries of findings were based on the analysis of the data in Chapter Four.
Senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators from both sampled universities agreed that they
engaged in all leadership behaviors described by the Leadership Practices Inventory©. Data
indicated that senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators utilized the LPI leadership practices to
a high standard and perceive themselves to be strong leaders for their departments.
Research Question One
The first research question the researcher asked was, “What strategies and skills do
senior-level Student Affairs’ Administrators implement to develop leadership styles within
a Student Affairs’ department?” The leadership practice that was most frequently engaged in
by senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators was Enabling Others to Act. Four of the top ten
ranked LPI statements are related to the leadership practice of Enabling Others to Act. These
statements are 14 (Treats people with dignity and respect), 4 (Develops cooperative
relationships), 24 (Gives people choice about how to do their work), and 9 (Actively listens to
diverse points of view). Statement 14 stated “Treats people with dignity and respect” was the
highest rated LPI leadership statement and had a mean score 9.73 and the lowest standard
deviation of 0.61. Data indicated that senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators develop
leadership behaviors in their departments by treating people with dignity and respect (Statement
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 98
14), following through on promises and commitments (Statement 11), developing cooperative
relationships (Statement 4), setting a personal example of what is expected (Statement 1), and
painting "big picture” of group aspirations (Statement 22). According to the data, senior-level
Student Affairs’ administrators were least likely to show others how their interests can be
realized (Statement 17) or ask for feedback on how his/her actions affect people's performance
(Statement 16). The leadership practices of Encouraging the Heart, Modeling the Way, and
Challenging the Process followed the Enabling Others to Act in terms of highest means. The
leadership practice with the lowest mean was Inspiring a Shared Vision which suggested that
senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators infrequently engage with this leadership practice.
Enabling others to act. The profession of Student Affairs is one that guides people with
developmental principles; the leadership practice of Enabling Others to Act allows senior-level
Student Affairs’ administrators to build dynamic relationships with their team members that
encouraged them to be actively involved (Northouse, 2010). The variance of the mean averages
for Enabling Others to Act were within a close range of each other which suggests that senior-
level Student Affairs’ administrators have a high frequency of engaging in this leadership
practice. Senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators can share the power and discretion with
their employees that can strengthen and build trust, goals, and opportunities for the organization
(Kouzes & Posner, 2002).
Encourage the heart. The leadership practice of Encouraging the Heart was perceived
by senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators to be the second most utilized leadership practice.
Data showed that senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators utilized Encouraging the Heart
practice to develop leadership behaviors by “praising people for a job well done” (Statement 5).
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 99
Senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators can create a spirit of community by celebrating the
values and accomplishments of the organization (Kouzes & Posner, 2002). Encouraging the
Heart was the second highest ranked of the leadership practices used by the senior-level Student
Affairs’ administrators in this study and variance of the mean averages for Encouraging the
Heart were within a close range of each other. Student Affairs is a profession where encouraging
and recognizing the heart builds a more supportive collective identity and community spirit for
organizations (Northouse, 2010). Encouraging and recognizing the heart builds a more
supportive collective identity and community spirit for the Student Affairs’ organization
(Northouse, 2010).
Modeling the way. Modeling the Way leadership practice was the third most utilized
leadership practice in this study of senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators. Modeling the
way allows senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators to create behavioral standards and set
appropriate examples for their department to follow (Kouzes & Posner, 2002). Data showed that
senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators developed leadership behaviors by following
through on promises and commitments (Statement 11) and setting a personal example of what is
expected (Statement 1). These leadership practices allow the senior-level Student Affairs’
administrator to be clear about their own philosophies and values (Northouse, 2010).
Out of all the 30 statements on the LPI, Statement 16 “Asks for feedback on how his/her
actions affect people's performance” is related to the leadership practice of Modeling the Way
which had the lowest mean score. The data signaled that senior-level Student Affairs’
administrators use the leadership practice of Modeling the Way in their leadership style but
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 100
might not always be perceived in seeking feedback on how their actions affect their employees’
performance in the work environment.
Challenging the process. The leadership practice of Challenging the Process was
perceived by senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators to be the fourth most utilized leadership
practice. Statement 3 “Seeks challenging opportunities to test skills” had the highest mean score
for this leadership practice and suggested that senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators like to
find opportunities to challenge their skill sets. Senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders understand
that taking risks will come with some learning opportunities for their department.
Inspiring a shared vision. Inspiring a Shared Vision leadership practice was ranked the
lowest by senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators in this survey. Three out of the five lowest
scoring leadership practices belong to Inspiring a Shared Vision. These are Statement 7
“Describes a compelling image of the future,” Statement 12 “Appeals to others to share dream of
the future,” and Statement 17 “Shows others how their interests can be realized.” Although this
leadership practice had many statements that scored a low means, these statements still
performed well when translated to the Likert scale. These leadership practices scored in the
fairly often (7) to usually (8). When translated into the Likert scale, this suggests that this
leadership practice is utilized by senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators to some degree in
their leadership practices. Through inspiring a shared vision, senior-level Student Affairs’
administrators can communicate to their department and get people excited about the
possibilities for the future (Northouse, 2010).
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 101
Research Question Two
The second research question the researcher asked was, “What strategies do senior-
level Student Affairs’ Administrators utilize to inspire and encourage a positive team
dynamic?” Four senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators were interviewed for a half hour
and asked open-ended questions about leadership styles, skills, and strategies that they use in
leading a Student Affairs’ department in addition to the Leadership Practice Inventory (LPI) self-
survey.
Senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators from both sampled universities agreed that
they engaged in all of the following leadership behaviors in their effort to create, inspire, and
encourage a positive work environment. Data indicated that senior-level Student Affairs’
administrators utilized the theme behavior in conjunction with LPI leadership practices to a high
standard and perceived themselves to create a positive work environment for their departments.
Themes that emerged from the interviews were related to the leadership practices of the
LPI. There were four themes that emerged from the interviews with the senior-level Student
Affairs’ administrators which were: Relationship Building, Group Collaboration, Working
towards a Common Goal, and Confronting Negative Behavior.
Theme 1: Relationship building. The theme of relationship building was utilized by all
senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators and was an important part of creating a positive
work environment. The theme of Relationship Building was connected to the LPI statement of
“Treating people with dignity and respect” (Statement 14). Statement 14 had the highest mean
score out of all 30 leadership statements on the LPI survey and is related to the leadership
practice of Enabling Others to Act. Senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders who use the leadership
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 102
practice of Enabling Others to Act will develop mutual respect for followers by allowing them
the opportunity to make choices and set cooperative goals for the team (Kouzes & Posner, 2002).
Theme 2: Group collaboration. The theme of Group Collaboration was the second
theme to emerge from the interviews with the senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders and was
related to the LPI statement of “Develops cooperative relationships” (Statement 3). Statement 3
is in the LPI practice of Enabling Others to Act which allows a senior-level Student Affairs’
leader to build relationships with their team members (Northouse, 2010).
Theme 3: Working towards a common goal. The third theme to emerge from the
interviews with the senior-level leaders was the idea of working towards a common goal. This
theme is related to the LPI statement of “Paints ‘Big Picture’ of group aspirations” (Statement
22). Statement 22 (Paints “Big Picture” of group aspirations) is in the LPI practice of Inspiring a
Shared Vision. Senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders who use this practice are passionate leaders
that envision the future and enlist followers to create a shared aspiration that is appealing to all
followers (Kouzes & Posner, 2002).
Theme 4: Confronts negative behavior. The last theme that emerged from the
interviews with the senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators about creating positive work
environments was Confronts Negative Behavior. The theme is associated to the LPI leadership
statement of “Challenges people to try new approaches” (Statement 8). Senior-level Student
Affairs’ leaders search for new and innovative ways to change, grow, and improve existing
processes in the organization (Kouzes & Posner, 2002) to help create a positive environment for
their staff to work in.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 103
Research Question Three
The third research question which was asked by the researcher was, “How do senior-
level Student Affairs’ Administrators pass on their knowledge of leadership to the next
generation of Student Affairs’ leaders?” Four senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators
were interviewed for a half hour, and asked open-ended questions about leadership styles, skills,
and strategies that they use in leading a Student Affairs’ department in addition to the Leadership
Practice Inventory (LPI) self-survey.
Senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders from both sampled universities all agreed that they
do pass on their knowledge of leadership to the next generation of Student Affairs’ leaders in
different ways that impact and shape the next generation of Student Affairs leaders. Data
indicated that senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators utilized the theme behaviors in
conjunction with LPI leadership practices to a high standard and perceived themselves to be
mentors, role models, and leaders to the next generation of Student Affairs’ leaders. Research
question three received mixed reactions from the senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders. They all
believed it is important to develop the next generation of Student Affairs’ leaders, but some of
them expressed that their style of leadership was not the best example and new professionals
should learn leadership styles, skills, and strategies from multiple leaders in the division of
Student Affairs.
There were three themes that emerged from the interviews with the senior-level Student
Affairs’ administrators which were Modeling Behaviors, Mentorships, and Support of
Professional Development. Each of the themes from the interviews was related to the leadership
practices of the LPI. Data indicated that senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators utilized the
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 104
theme behavior in conjunction with LPI leadership practices to a high standard in their respective
work environments and perceived themselves to be able to pass on leadership knowledge, skills,
styles, and strategies to the next generation of Student Affairs’ leaders.
Theme 1: Modeling behavior. The theme of modeling behavior was the first theme to
emerge from the interviews with senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders when discussing how they
pass their leadership knowledge to the next generation of Student Affairs’ professionals. The
modeling behavior theme was related to the LPI statement of “Sets a personal example of what is
expected” (Statement 1) and is connected to the leadership practice of Modeling the Way.
Student Affairs’ leaders all agreed that modeling behavior for their staff is important to their
leadership practices. Kouzes and Posner (2002) suggested that leaders will create behavioral
standards and set appropriate examples for employees and staff to follow.
Theme 2: Mentorship. The theme Mentorship was the second theme that came from the
senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders. The Mentorship theme was related to the LPI leadership
practice statement of “Is clear about his/her philosophy of leadership” (Statement 26) and is
connected to the leadership practice of Modeling the Way. Research by Northouse (2010)
suggested that Mentorship allows a leader to use their own voice and actions to clarify values
and express traits of an effective leader in the field.
Theme 3: Support professional development. The final theme that emerged from the
interviews with the senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders was the idea of supporting professional
development of the next generation of Student Affairs’ leaders and professionals. The theme of
Supporting Professional Development was related to the LPI leadership statement of “Ensures
that people grow up in their jobs” (statement 29) and is connected to the leadership practice of
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 105
Enabling Others to Act. Professional development opportunities can help new and emerging
leaders in the field of Student Affairs contribute to the organization (Northouse, 2010) from what
they have learned through participating in professional development opportunities.
Key Findings
This study used the Bolman and Deal (2003) definition of leadership which is,
“Leadership is a subtle process of mutual influence fusing thought, feeling, and action to produce
cooperative effort in the service of purposes embraced by both leader and the led” (p. 345). The
LPI leadership practices allow senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders to learn from best leadership
practices and to develop an understanding that leadership is a set of skills and abilities that can
be learned and improved upon (Kouzes & Posner, 2002).
Conclusions that correspond with each research question have been drawn.
Research question one. “Treats people with dignity and respect” (Statement 14) was the
highest mean of all 30 LPI statements and lowest standard deviation. This implies that senior-
level Student Affairs’ leaders go out of their way to build safe and inclusive environments for
their staff. The profession of Student Affairs has not deviated away from its founding core
principles of seeking to holistically develop students and to create environments that bring
together academic and social learning (American Council on Education, 1937; Evan & Reason,
2001) to meet the needs of students and professionals.
The findings show that senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders in this study highly utilized
each one of Kouses and Posner (2003) leadership practices. Enabling Others to Act was
perceived by the respondents to be the most utilized of the LPI leadership practices. Senior-level
administrators develop and use leadership strategies, skills, and styles that allow each person on
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 106
their team to be a leader in the organization (Harrison, 2011) which allows the next generation of
Student Affairs leaders to receive professional development opportunities and contribute to the
organization. The leadership practices of Encouraging the Heart, Modeling the Way, and
Challenging the Process followed the Enabling Others to Act in terms of highest means. Each of
the leadership practices gives the senior-level different tools to utilize to develop their
organization and meet the demands of the University and student population.
There was less of an agreement by senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders about the
leadership practice of Inspiring a Shared Vision which had the lowest mean of all the leadership
practices in this study. Senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders have the potential to develop the
Inspiring a Shared Vision practice in their leadership styles. One reason the Inspiring a Shared
Vision might not have been highly ranked in this survey is the senior-level Student Affairs’
leaders often report to the Chief Student Affairs’ Officer (CSAO) who is given the task of
inspiring Student Affairs’ division at the university to meet the larger goals of the University.
Senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders did utilize the Inspiring a Shared Vision leadership practice,
just not as often as the other four in this study.
Research question two. Research question two’s data combined face-to-face interview
responses with the Leadership Practice Inventory (LPI) self-survey data. The findings highlight
how senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders are able to develop behaviors in an effort to create,
inspire, and encourage a positive work environment. The senior-level administrator of a Student
Affairs’ division must create and build a team of dynamic Student Affairs’ professionals that can
assist students through developmental process and the university in meeting the demands of a
global society. Senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators utilized the themes of Relationship
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 107
Building, Group Collaboration, Working towards a Common Goal, and Confronting Negative
Behaviors in conjunction with LPI leadership practices to a high standard and perceived
themselves to create a positive work environment.
Each of the themes was connected to an LPI statement. Two of the four themes from this
research question which were connected to the leadership practice of Enabling Others to Acts.
Those statements and themes were, Statement 14 (Treats people with dignity and respect)
connected to the interview themes of Relationship Building and Statement 3 (Develops
cooperative relationships) connected to the theme of Group Collaboration. Senior-level Student
Affairs’ leaders utilized the leadership practice of Enabling Others to Act which often developed
mutual respect for employees and gave them opportunities to lead the organizations (Kouzes &
Posner, 2002). The other two themes were connected to the LPI practices of Inspiring a Shared
Vision and Challenge the Process. Senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders can impact the Student
Affairs’ department, their followers, and the institution as an effective leader who use the LPI
leadership practices in their roles.
Research question three. Research question three combined data from face-to-face
interview responses with the Leadership Practices Inventory © (LPI) self-survey data. Research
findings showed how senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders passed on their leadership knowledge
to the next generation of Student Affairs’ practitioners and related those behaviors to the
leadership practices of the LPI. Senior-level administrators help prepare the next generation of
Student Affairs’ leaders to lead the organization by allowing opportunities to learn how to lead
and follow. The senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders utilized the themes of Role Modeling,
Mentorships, and Support of Professional Developments in conjunction with LPI leadership
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 108
practices to a high standard and perceived themselves as strong mentors, leaders, and trainers
that pass on knowledge to the next generation of Student Affairs’ leaders. Student Affairs will
continue to adapt to a changing society and to shape the outside-of-the-classroom learning
experiences which seek to develop and to meet the needs for students and staff (Love, 2003).
Each of the themes that were found in the interviews was connected to an LPI statement.
Two of the three statements were connected to the LPI leadership practice of Modeling the Way.
The third statement was connected to the LPI leadership practice of Enabling Others to Act.
Research by Kouses and Posner (2002) showed that the LPI can provide a leader with tools to
become more effective in meeting job-related demands, creating higher-performing teams, and
increasing motivational levels.
Research question three allowed senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders to reflect on their
leadership style and how they pass on leadership knowledge. Two of the leaders did not resonate
with the research question and encouraged new professionals to learn from multiple leaders and
not just one person’s style. However, data indicated that the senior-level Student Affairs’
administrators use the themes of role modeling, mentorships, and supporting professional
development in various ways in their department to pass on knowledge to the next generation of
Student Affairs’ leaders.
Recommendations for Senior-Level Student Affairs’ Leaders
Based upon the finding from the study, the following recommendations are made:
1. This study found that senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders utilized Kouzes and Posner
(2003) leadership practice of Enabling Others to Act at high levels in their leadership
styles. This behavior should be continued and emphasized in the work place so that staff
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 109
and students can continue to feel they are being treated with dignity and respect.
Silverman (1971) explained that the profession of Student Affairs is not only based on
relationships with students but relationships with peers and supervisors.
2. Inspiring a Shared Vision was the lowest utilized leadership practice by senior-level
Student Affairs’ leaders in this study. Through the leadership practice of Inspiring a
Shared Vision, a senior-level leader can communicate to followers and get them excited
about the possibilities for the future of the organization (Northouse, 2010). Setting vision
can be a crucial component for a leader and encouraging senior-level leaders to develop
this practice can help them develop their own leadership practices (Buckingham, 2005).
3. Findings from the data showed that senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders often do not
engage in asking for feedback about their performance or how it affects others. Senior-
level leaders should create a system that allows for feedback to be given to them in a safe
and supportive manner for the leader and staff. One solution could be to use the LPI-
observer survey that could give the senior-level leaders feedback in the five leadership
categories. Senior-level leaders would be able to modify their behaviors based of the
feedback from the LPI-observer and develop their own professional development plans.
4. Senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders should continue to develop positive work
environments by relationship building, developing group collaboration opportunities,
working toward common goals, and confronting negative behaviors. When senior-level
Student Affairs’ leaders allow collaboration, it can help to build dynamic relationships
with their team members and the department (Northouse, 2010). Senior-level leaders can
support their departments in taking risks by setting clear outcomes that enable the team to
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 110
work towards them with a sense of clarity and support them by confronting negative
behaviors as the team develops throughout the year.
5. Senior-level Student Affairs’ should continue to provide professional development
opportunities, mentorships, and role modeling to their Student Affairs’ department.
Professional development can assist new professionals with understanding trends that are
facing higher education. They can also help the Student Affairs’ department develop
themselves and new ways to meet the demands of the student population they serve.
Role modeling and mentorship helps senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders to pass on
leadership knowledge to the next generation of Student Affairs’ professionals.
Recommendations for Further Research
This study was well designed and had valuable and practical findings; there is still a need
for a large-scale study of senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders in the state of California to further
understand how the leadership practices of the LPI can help aide in the development of Student
Affairs’ departments statewide. With that in mind, the following suggestions are for future
research:
1. Further research that expands the participation in the survey to include the entire state of
California and senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders. The additional information can
continue to validate the findings of the research, the usefulness of the LPI leadership
practices in Student Affairs’ departments, and make the results more generalizable to the
leadership population of the Student Affairs profession.
2. Further research about the relationships between the senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders
and the Chief Student Affairs’ Officer at the University. This research can help to
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 111
determine how the LPI leadership practices are utilized in the holistic development of
leaders within the Student Affairs’ division.
3. A study that examines how demographic information such as ethnicity, gender, years in
position, and education attainment can affect how Kouzes and Posner’s (2003) leadership
practices of the LPI utilized in a Student Affairs’ department and see if any one of those
factors’ influences cause a discrepancy in results.
4. This study collected data from senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders at a Private and
Public University. Compare how the Student Affairs’ leaders at a specific type of
university could change the results. Leaders at Public Universities might utilize the LPI
leadership practices in different ways than their colleagues at Private universities.
5. The researcher invited Student Affairs’ leaders to participate in this research study during
the summer months of the year. A similar study could be reproduced and administered
throughout the academic year which might yield higher participation results and provide
greater mean and return rates.
Conclusion
This study adds to the existing body of literature pertaining to the leadership practices of
senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders who utilize Kouzes and Posner’s (2003) LPI principles,
create positive work environments, and support new practitioners in developing their own
leadership practices. The research findings in this study are consistent with previous research in
leadership studies. There are many types of leadership styles that a Student Affairs’ professional
can use to lead a Student Affairs’ division and leadership theories can provide a context for how
a leader leads others and why followers buy into their ideologies (Kezar et al., 2006). This
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 112
research study aims to guide Student Affairs’ leaders, seasoned and new, in leadership practices
that they can embody, create, and build on their journey to becoming outstanding and successful
leaders in the profession of Student Affairs.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 113
References
Adams, T. C. & Keim, M. C. (2000). Leadership practices and effectiveness among Greek
student leaders. College Student 34: 259-270
Aiken, L. R. (1997). Psychological testing and assessment. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Astin, A. & Astin, H. (2000). Leadership reconsidered: Engaging higher education in social
change. Battle Creek, MI. W. K. Kellogg Foundation.
American Council on Education. (1937). The student personnel point of view. American Council
on Educational Studies, 1(3). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
Armstrong, S. (1992). A study of transformational leadership of athletic directors and head
coaches in selected NCAA Division III colleges and universities in the Midwest. Kent
State University, Kent, OH. Retrieved from
http://www.leadershipchallenge.com/WileyCDA/Section/id-131104.html
Bass, B. M. (1981). Stogdill's handbook of leadership. New York: Free Press
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance. New York: Free Press.
Bass, B. M. (1990). Bass and Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and
research. Rev. ed. of Stogdill’s handbook of leadership. (1981). New York: Free Press.
Bauer, M. (1993). Are the leadership practices of college presidents in the northeast distinct
from those of leaders of business and industry? The University of New Haven, West
Haven, CT. Retrieved from http://www.leadershipchallenge.com/WileyCDA/Section/id-
131104.html
Bensimon, E. M., Neumann, A., & Birnbaum, R. (1989). Making sense of administrative
leadership: The “L” word in higher education. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report.
Washington, DC: School of Education, George Washington University.
Bergquist, W. H. (1992). The four cultures of the academy: Insights and strategies for improving
in collegiate organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Birnbaum, R. (1992). How academic leadership works: Understanding success and failure in the
college presidency. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Blake, R. R., & Mouton, J. S. (1964). The managerial grid: Key orientation for achieving
production through people. Houston, TX: Gulf.
Blake, R. R, Mouton, J. S., & Williams, M. S. (1981). The academic administrator grid. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 114
Boettinger, A. (2007). Student-Athlete leadership practices. University of Tennessee, Knoxville,
Knoxville, TN. Retrieved from
http://www.leadershipchallenge.com/WileyCDA/Section/id-131104.html
Bolman, L. & Deal, T. (2003). Reframing organizations: Artistry choice and leadership. (3rd ed.)
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bowes, D. G., & Seashore, S. E. (1966). Predicting organizational effectiveness with a four-
factory of theory leadership. Administrative Science Quarterly 11, 238-263
Brightharp, C. Y. (1999). Real and ideal leadership practices of women in mid-level
administrative positions in student affairs. Bowling Green State University, Bowling
Green, OH. Retrieved from http://www.leadershipchallenge.com/WileyCDA/Section/id-
131104.html
Buckingham, M. (2005). The one thing you need to know: About great managing, great leading,
and sustained individual success. New York: Free Press.
Burkhart, M. B. (1999). A comparison of leadership styles and organizational cultures of women
in two and four year colleges and universities. University of Sarasota, Sarasota, FL.
Retrieved from http://www.leadershipchallenge.com/WileyCDA/Section/id-131104.html
Buller, J. L. (2006). The essential department chair: A practical guide to college administration.
Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing.
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper and Row.
Caples, R. C. (1996). The learning debate: A historical perspective. Journal of College Student
Development, 37(5), 387
Clark, M. (2005). Negotiating the freshman year: Challenges and strategies among first-year
college students. Journal of College Student Development, 46(3), 296-316.
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five
approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Cuyjet, M., Longwell-Grice, R., & Molina, E. (2009). Perceptions of new student affairs’
professionals and their supervisors regarding the application of competencies learned in
preparation programs. Journal of College Student Development, 50(1), 104-119
Davis, T. R. V., Kouzes, J. M., Posner, B. Z., & Kotter, J. P. (1988). Review of the leadership
challenge. The Academy of Management Executive (1987-1989), 2(2), 165-166.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 115
Dikeman, R. (2007). Leadership practices and leadership ethics of North Carolina community
college presidents. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, East Carolina University,
Greenville, NC. Retrieved from
http://www.leadershipchallenge.com/WileyCDA/Section/id-131104.html
Evan, N., & Reason, R. (2001). Guiding principles: A review and analysis of student affairs’
philosophical statements. Journal of College Student Development, 42(4), 359-377.
Evans, M. G. (1970). The effects of supervisory behavior on the path-goal relationship.
Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 5, 227-298.
Fiedler, F. E. (1967). A theory of leadership effectiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill.
French, J. R. P., & Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright and A. Zander.
Group dynamics. New York: Harper & Row.
Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. (2003). Educational research: An introduction (7th ed.).
Boston, MA: A & B Publications.
Garland, P. H., & Grace, T. W. (1993). New perspectives for student affairs professionals:
Evolving realities, responsibilities and roles. Washington, DC: Association for the Study
of Higher Education.
Gorenflo, B. G. (1994). Shared characteristics of effective women administrators at Eastern
Michigan University and Wayne State University. Thesis, Eastern Michigan University,
Detroit, MI. Retrieved from http://www.leadershipchallenge.com/WileyCDA/Section/id-
131104.html
Greenleaf, R. K. (1977). Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate power and
greatness. New York: Paulist.
Harrison, L. (2011). Transformational leadership, integrity, and power. New Directions for
Student Services, 135(1), 45-52
Hemphill, J. K., & Coons, A. E. (1957). Development of the leader behavior description
questionnaire. In R. M. Stogdill’s & A. E. Coons (Eds.) Leader behavior: Its description
and measurement (Research monograph No. 88). Columbus, Ohio State University,
Bureau of Business Research.
Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1988). Management of organizational behavior: Utilizing
human resources (5th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
House, R. J. (1971). A path-goal theory of leadership effectiveness. Administration Science
Quarterly, 16, 321-338.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 116
House, R. J., & Mitchell, R. R. (1974). Path-goal theory of leadership. Journal of Contemporary
Business, 3, 81-97.
Johnson, B. T. & O'Grady, C. R. (2006). The spirit of service: Exploring faith, service, and
social justice in higher education. Williston, VT: Anker Publishing.
Kezar, A. J., Carducci, R., & Contreras-McGavin, M. (2006) Rethinking the “L” word in higher
education: The revolution in research on leadership. ASHE Higher Education Report,
31(6).
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1987). The leadership challenge: How to get extraordinary
things done in organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Kouzes, J. & Posner, B. (1995). The leadership challenge: How to keep getting extraordinary
things done in organizations (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2002). The leadership challenge: How to keep getting
extraordinary things done in organizations (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2003). Leadership practice inventory: Leadership development
planner (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Pfeiffer.
Leadership Challenge. (2000). Leadership practices inventory: Psychometric properties.
Retrieved from
http://www.leadershipchallenge.com/UserFiles/lc_jb_psychometric_properti.pdf
Levy, M. (1995). Followers' perceptions of leaders: Prototypes and perceptions of resident
assistants. Master’s Thesis, University of Maryland, College Park, MD. Retrieved from
http://www.leadershipchallenge.com/WileyCDA/Section/id-131104.html
Love, P. (2003). Considering a career in student affairs. American College Personnel
Association. Retrieved from http://www.acpa.nche.edu/c12/career.htm
Love, P. G., & Estanke, S. M. (2004). Rethinking student affairs’ practice. San Francisco:
Jossey- Bass
Middlehurst, R., Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1989). Leadership and higher education. Higher
Education, 18(3), 353-360.
National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges. (2010). University tuition,
consumer choice and college affordability: Strategies for addressing a higher education
affordability challenge. Retrieved from
https://www.aplu.org/NetCommunity/Document.Doc?id=1296
Northouse, P. (2010). Leadership: Theory and practice. (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage
Publications.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 117
Oliver, S. (2001). The leadership practices of chief student affairs officers in Texas: A
comparative analysis. Ph.D. dissertation, Texas A&M University. College Station, TX.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications.
Plowman, R. J. (1991). Perceptions of presidential leadership behavior and institutional
environment by presidents and vice presidents of selected four-year colleges and
universities in Florida. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Mississippi,
Waco, MS. Retrieved from http://www.leadershipchallenge.com/WileyCDA/Section/id-
131104.html
Posner, B. Z., & Brodsky, B. A. (1992). Leadership development instrument for college students.
Journal of College Student Development, 33(2), 231-237.
Randall, K., & Globetti, E. (1992). Desired competencies of the chief student affairs officer as
perceived by college president. College Student Affairs’ Journal, 11(3), 54-61.
Roberts, D. (2012). The student personnel point of view as a catalyst for dialogue: 75 years and
beyond. Journal of College Student Development, 53(1), 2-18
Rogers, J. L. (1996). Leadership. In S. R. Komives, & D. B. Woodard (Eds.), Student services: A
handbook for the profession (3rd ed.) (pp. 299-319). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Rozeboom, D. J. (2008). Self-report and direct observer’s perceived leadership practices of chief
student affairs’ officers in selected institutions of higher education in the United States.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX.
Retrieved from http://www.leadershipchallenge.com/WileyCDA/Section/id-131104.html
Sandeen, A. (1991). The chief student affairs officer: Leader, manager, mediator, educator. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Silverman, R. J. (1971). The student personnel work on the boundary. The Journal of College
Student Personnel, 12, 3-6.
Smith, B. L. (2005). Chief student affairs officers: Effectiveness, characteristics, and traits in
four-year, post-secondary institutions. Unpublished specialist project, Western Kentucky
University. Retrieved from http://www.leadershipchallenge.com/WileyCDA/Section/id-
131104.html
Smith, B. L., & Hughey, A. W. (2006). Leadership in higher education - its evolution and
potential: A unique role facing critical challenges. Industry and Higher Education, 20(3),
157-163.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 118
Smith, B., Lana, T. M., & Hughey, A. W. (2009). The chief student affairs’ officer: What
constitutes effective leadership? The Kentucky Counseling Journal, 28(1), 5-14.
Spencer, E. (n. d.). Leadership models and theories: A brief overview. Retrieved from:
http://www.webhostingpal.com/lectures/apel/leader.htm
Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (Version 15.0) [Computer Software]. Armonk, NY:
International Business Machines.
Stogdill, R. M. (1974). Handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research. New York:
Free Press.
Turner, D. W., III. (2010). Qualitative interview design: A practical guide for novice
investigators. The Qualitative Report, 15(3), 754-760. Retrieved from
http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR15-3/qid.pdf
University of California Office of the President. Student Affairs. Fall 2011 Application Tables.
University of California. University of California Office of the President, 01 June 2011.
Web. 13 Mar. 2012. http://www.ucop.edu/news/factsheets/2011/11app.html
Young, R. B. (1996). Guiding values and philosophy. In S. R. Komives & D. B. Woodard (Eds.)
Student Affairs: A handbook for the profession (3rd ed., pp. 83-105). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Yuki, G. (1981). Leadership in organization. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 119
Appendix A
Request to Participate
Electronic Email
Hello Student Affairs’ Leader,
I am a doctoral candidate, Marsh Allen Smith, in the Rossier School of Education at the
University of Southern California. For my dissertation, I am studying senior-level Student
Affairs’ Administrators’ leadership styles and attributes through their self- perception.
You are invited to participate in the study. All senior-level Student Affairs’ Administrators are
asked to participate by taking the Leadership Practice Inventory (LPI) survey. The LPI survey is
an online assessment instrument that asks leaders questions about leadership behaviors. The LPI
instrument only takes 10-20 minutes to complete.
Participation in this study is voluntary. Your identity as a participant will remain confidential at
all times during and after the study. All participants that fill out an LPI survey will be sent a
$5.00 dollar gift card to Starbucks for their time.
This research study has been reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board at the
University of Southern California in Los Angeles, CA.
All questions about this process should be addressed to Mr. Marsh Allen Smith,
smith8@usc.edu.
Thank you for your consideration of participation,
Marsh Allen Smith
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
Election communication sent from LPI website
Dear Leader,
Welcome to LPI Online. Marsh Allen Smith has created a new LPI Individual assessment for
you. This is a tool that will measure your leadership behaviors and contribute to your
development as a Leader.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 120
To begin, click the link below, and then register:
https://www.lpionline.com/lpi?p=313567:8941777:2340585
Please do not forward this link to any other participants.
Due Date: June 27, 2012
After registering, please click on "Start Assessment" under the LPI Individual heading to
complete your self-assessment.
Questions about taking the assessment?
Please contact your Administrator: Marsh Allen Smith.
Technical Issues?
Please contact tech support at http://lpi.custhelp.com.
Please do not reply to this email. It is an automated mailbox
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 121
Appendix B
LPI-Self Form
Demographic Characteristics
Please select the demographic information that best describes you from the choices provided for
each characteristic.
1. What is your age group?
o 17 years or under
o 18 – 23
o 24- 32
o 33 – 40
o 41 – 49
o 50 – 59
o 60 – older
2. Please indicate whether you are:
o Female
o Male
3. Which of the following categories best describes your race and/or ethnic background?
o Asian/Pacific Islander
o Black/African American
o Hispanic/Latino
o Native American
o White/Caucasian
o Mixed or more than one category
o Other
o Would rather not answer
4. What is your country or region of residence?
o Afghanistan
o Africa
o Aland Islands
o Albania
o Algeria
o American Samoa
o Andorra
o Angola
o Anguilla
o Antarctica
o Antigua and Barbuda
o Argentina
o Armenia
o Aruba
o Australia
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 122
o Austria
o Azerbaiian
o Bahamas
o Bahrain
o Bangladesh
o Bermuda
o Bhutan
o Bolivia, Plurinational State Of
o Bosnia and Herzegovina
o LOST the middle sections
o Turkmenistan
o Turks and Caicos Islands
o Tuvalu
o Uganda
o Ukraine
o United Arab Emirates
o United Kingdom
o United States
o United States Minor Outlying Islands
o Uruguay
o Uzbekistan
o Vanuatu
o Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic Of
o Vietnam
o Virgin Islands, British
o Virgin Islands, U.S.
o Wallis and Futuna
o Western Sahara
o Yemen
o Zambia
Copyright © 2003 James M. Kouzes and Barry Z. Posner. All rights reserved. Used with
permission.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 123
Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI)
Self
INSTRUCTIONS
Self Assessment
Please complete the LPI Self assessment as part of the LPI Individual; it should take
approximately 10-15 minutes. Answers to all 30 questions are required. When you've completed
all of the questions, be sure to click on Submit. Your responses will be compiled into a report
that will be available from your Administrator.
Here’s the rating scale that you’ll be using:
1 = Almost Never 6 = Sometimes
2 = Rarely 7 = Fairly Often
3 = Seldom 8 = Usually
4 = Once in a While 9 = Very Frequently
5 = Occasionally 10 = Almost Always
In selecting each response, please be realistic about the extent to which you actually engage in
the behavior. Do not answer in terms of how you would like to see yourself behave. Answer in
terms of how you typically behave—on most days, on most projects, and with most people.
To what extent do you typically engage in the following behaviors? Choose the number that best
applies to each statement and record it in the blank to the left of the statement.
________ 1 I set a personal example of what I expect of others
________ 2 I talk about future trends that will influence how our work gets done
________ 3 I seek out challenging opportunities that test my own skills and abilities
________ 4 I develop cooperative relationships among the people I work with
________ 5 I praise people for a job well done
________ 6 I spend time and energy making certain that the people I work with
adhere to the principles and standards that we have agreed on
________ 7 I describe a compelling image of what our future could be like
________ 8 I challenge people to try out new and innovative ways to do their work
________ 9 I actively listen to diverse points of view
________ 10 I make it a point to let people know about my confidence in their
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 124
abilities
________ 11 I follow through on the promises and commitments that I make
________ 12 I appeal to others to share an exciting dream of the future
________ 13 I search outside the formal boundaries of my organization for
innovative ways to improve what we do
________ 14 I treat others with dignity and respect
________ 15 I make sure that people are creatively rewarded for their contributions
to the success of our projects
________ 16 I ask for feedback on how my actions affect other people's performance
________ 17 I show others how their long-term interests can be realized by enlisting
in a common vision
________ 18 I ask "What can we learn?" when things do not go as expected
________ 19 I support the decisions that people make on their own
________ 20 I publicly recognize people who exemplify commitment to shared
values
________ 21 I build consensus around a common set of values for running our
organization
________ 22 I paint the "big picture" of what we aspire to accomplish
________ 23 I make certain that we set achievable goals, make concrete plans, and
establish measurable milestones for the projects and programs that we
work on
________ 24 I give people a great deal of freedom and choice in deciding how to do
their work
________ 25 I find ways to celebrate accomplishments
________ 26 I am clear about my philosophy of leadership
________ 27 I speak with genuine conviction about the higher meaning and purpose
of our work
________ 28 I experiment and take risks, even when there is a chance of failure
________ 29 I ensure that people grow in their jobs by learning new skills and
developing themselves
________ 30 I give the members of the team lots of appreciation and support for their
contributions
Copyright © 2002-2012 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Published by Pfeiffer, An Imprint of Wiley, San Francisco, CA.
Published by Jossey-Bass, An Imprint of Wiley, San Francisco, CA.
All rights reserved. Please read our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Demographic Survey (Optional)
By telling us a bit about yourself, you will be making a real contribution to our ongoing efforts to
improve the quality and usefulness of the LPI. This information is completely anonymous and
will be combined with demographic information from others who participate in the LPI. Thank
you!
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 125
Please answer the following questions
1. My work group has a strong sense
of team spirit
Choose an Answer
2. I am proud to tell others that I work
for this organization.
Choose an Answer
3. I am committed to this
organization's success.
Choose an Answer
4. I would work harder and for longer
hours if the job demanded it.
Choose an Answer
5. I am highly productive in my job. Choose an Answer
6. I am clear about what is expected of
me in this job.
Choose an Answer
7. I feel that my organization values
my work.
Choose an Answer
8. I am effective in meeting the
demands of my job.
Choose an Answer
9. Around my workplace, people seem
to trust the management.
Choose an Answer
10. I feel like I am making a difference
in my organization.
Choose an Answer
11. Overall, I am an effective leader. Choose an Answer
12. Which category best represents your
highest level of education?
Choose an Answer
13. How many years have you been an
employee of this organization?
Choose an Answer
14. Which of the following best
describes your position in this
organization?
Choose an Answer
15. Which of the following best
describes your functional area in this
organization?
Choose an Answer
16. Which of the following best
represents your industry?
Choose an Answer
17. What is the total number of
employees in your organization?
Choose an Answer
Copyright © 2002-2012 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Published by Pfeiffer, An Imprint of Wiley, San Francisco, CA.
Published by Jossey-Bass, An Imprint of Wiley, San Francisco, CA.
All rights reserved. Please read our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 126
Appendix C
Senior-Level Student Affairs’ Administrators’
Interview Questions
1. What is your philosophy of leadership?
2. What is your leadership style and/or approach to leading your Student Affairs
department and has it changed over time?
3. What strategies do you use to develop a positive working environment in your Student
Affairs’ department?
4. Among these leadership traits (Challenging the Process, Inspiring a Shared Vision,
Enabling Others to Act, Modeling the Way, Encouraging the Heart) which one do you
resonate the most and why?
5. Which LPI qualities do you think are most important in developing your Student
Affairs’ department?
6. Which LPI qualities do you think you utilize the most while training your Student
Affairs department?
7. What area(s) of the LPI do you find to be the most challenging or difficult to integrate
into your Student Affairs department? Why?
8. How do you pass on your leadership skills, styles, and strategies to new professionals
in the field of Student Affairs?
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 127
Kouzes & Posner’s, The Five Practices of Exemplary Leadership –
Uses LPI survey (Leadership Practices Inventory) –
1. Challenging the Process - Leaders search for opportunities to change the status quo.
They look for innovative ways to improve the organization. In doing so, they experiment and
take risks. And because leaders know that risk taking involves mistakes and failures, they
accept the inevitable disappointments as learning opportunities.
2. Inspiring a Shared Vision - Leaders passionately believe that they can make a
difference. They envision the future, creating an ideal and unique image of what the
organization can become. Through their magnetism and quiet persuasion, leaders enlist
others in their dreams. They breathe life into their visions and get people to see exciting
possibilities for the future.
3. Enabling Others to Act - Leaders foster collaboration and build spirited teams. They
actively involve others. Leaders understand that mutual respect is what sustains extraordinary
efforts; they strive to create an atmosphere of trust and human dignity. They strengthen
others, making each person feel capable and powerful.
4. Modeling the Way - Leaders establish principles concerning the way people
(constituents, colleagues, and customers alike) should be treated and the way goals should be
pursued. They create standards of excellence and then set an example for others to follow.
Because the prospect of complex change can overwhelm people and stifle action, they set
interim goals so that people can achieve small wins as they work toward larger objectives.
They unravel bureaucracy when it impedes action; they put up signposts when people are
unsure of where to go or how to get there; and they create opportunities for victory.
5. Encouraging the Heart - Accomplishing extraordinary things in organizations is hard
work. To keep hope and determination alive, leaders recognize contributions that individuals
make. In every winning team, the members need to share in the rewards of their efforts, so
leaders celebrate accomplishments. They make people feel like heroes.
STUDENT AFFAIRS’ LEADERSHIP PRACTICES 128
Appendix D
Request to Use LPI
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
Universities are expanding and growing at rapid rates to meet the demand for higher education in America. The profession of student affairs serves as the beacon to help guide students outside of their classroom experience. In response to the changing campus climate, Student Affairs’ divisions will be tapped to help shape university policy while meeting the academic and developmental needs of all students (Love, 2003). Student Affairs’ departments require strong leadership in order to meet the needs of students financially, socially, and academically. Leading a Student Affairs’ department is a senior-level administrator who is there to set vision, budgets, and help guide the Student Affairs’ practitioners to engage students, develop an organizational culture, and meet the university’s mission. This study examined how senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators lead their Student Affairs’ departments to build effective leaders and support new practitioners in developing their own leadership practices. Three research questions were used in this mixed-method study. The quantitative portion of this study was conducted through the Leadership Practices Inventory© (LPI) instrument which was sent to 40 senior-level Student Affairs administrators at two universities in California. The Leadership Practices Inventory© (LPI) survey has five fundamental leadership practices which are: Model the Way, Inspire a Shared Vision, Challenge the Process, Enable Others to Act, and Encourage the Heart. These five fundamental leadership practices help leaders to create and accomplish extraordinary things (Kouzes and Posner, 1987). In the end, 23 senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators completed the LPI survey. The qualitative portion of this research study used the technique of purposeful sampling in which four senior-level Student Affairs’ administrators were selected to participate in a 30-minute standardized open-ended interview and answer questions about their beliefs and practices. The research study resulted in several key findings from data analysis. First, senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders utilized Kouzes and Posner’s (2003) leadership practice of Enabling Others to Act at high levels in their leadership styles. Second, the leadership practice of Inspiring a Shared Vision was the lowest utilized leadership practice by senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders in this study. Third, senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders utilized the themes of Relationship Building, Group Collaboration, Working towards a Common Goal, and Confronting Negative Behaviors in conjunction with LPI leadership practices to a high standard and perceived themselves to create a positive work environment. Fourth, senior-level Student Affairs’ leaders perceive themselves as strong mentors, leaders, and trainers that pass on their leadership knowledge to the next generation of Student Affairs’ practitioners through the themes of Role Modeling, Mentorships, and Support of Professional Developments in conjunction with LPI leadership practices.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Leadership strategies, skills, and professional approaches utilized by effective senior-level student affairs administrators at urban universities
PDF
An examination of the leadership practices of Catholic elementary school principals
PDF
Capacity building for STEM faculty and leaders: supporting university students with ADHD in earning STEM degrees
PDF
Leadership strategies employed by K-12 urban superintendents to improve the academic achievement of English language learners
PDF
Indicators of successful administrative leadership practice within high-stakes performance-based preschool programs
PDF
Strategies used by superintendents in developing leadership teams
PDF
The critical aspects of oversight that suburban superintendents, as instructional leaders, must employ to improve instruction
PDF
Leadership strategies employed by K–12 urban superintendents to improve the academic achievement of English language learners
PDF
The role of superintendents as instructional leaders: facilitating student achievement among ESL/EL learners through school-site professional development
PDF
The work-life balance pursuit: challenges, supports, and strategies of successful women senior student affairs officers
PDF
A case study of promising leadership practices employed by principals of Knowledge Is Power Program Los Angeles (KIPP LA) charter school to improve student achievement
PDF
Effective leadership practices of catholic high school principals that support academic success
PDF
Let's hear it from the principals: a study of four Title One elementary school principals' leadership practices on student achievement
PDF
Effective strategies superintendents utilize in building political coalitions to increase student achievement
PDF
Promising practices of school site administrators within established ninth‐grade transition programs at large high schools
PDF
Superintendents' viewpoint of the role stakeholders can play in improving student achievement
PDF
A study of student affairs administration professional preparation in Chinese higher education
PDF
Leadership development in student affairs graduate preparatory programs
PDF
The influence of authentic leadership attributes on credibility: how administrative leaders in an academic medical center build, maintain or lose credibilty
PDF
Effective strategies that urban superintendents use that improve the academic achievement for African-American males
Asset Metadata
Creator
Smith, Marsh Allen
(author)
Core Title
Senior-level student affairs' administrators' self-reported leadership practices, behaviors, and strategies
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education (Leadership)
Publication Date
02/22/2013
Defense Date
12/11/2012
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
higher education administration,higher education leadership,leadership styles,OAI-PMH Harvest,student affairs leaders
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
García, Pedro Enrique (
committee chair
), Castruita, Rudy Max (
committee member
), Collier, Bridget (
committee member
)
Creator Email
marshallensmith@gmail.com,smith8@usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-221454
Unique identifier
UC11294885
Identifier
usctheses-c3-221454 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-SmithMarsh-1447.pdf
Dmrecord
221454
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Smith, Marsh Allen
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Tags
higher education administration
higher education leadership
leadership styles
student affairs leaders