University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Leave no leader behind (LNLB): leadership development for K-12 operations leaders

(USC Thesis Other)

Leave no leader behind (LNLB): leadership development for K-12 operations leaders

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Leave No Leader Behind (LNLB): Leadership Development for K –12 Operations Leaders

Pamela M. Kelly

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education

August 2023

© Copyright by Pamela M. Kelly 2023
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Pamela M. Kelly certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Don Trahan
Eric Canny
Marsha Boveja Riggio, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2023
iv
Abstract
This study used a gap analysis framework to evaluate knowledge, motivation, and organizational
(KMO) influences related to the leadership development of operations leaders in K–12 schools.
Following a literature review, assumed KMO influences were examined through a qualitative,
innovative case study. Assumed influences were validated or invalidated through analysis of
interview data. As an outcome of the study, the researcher offers specific recommendations in
Chapter Five intended to increase the operations leaders’ knowledge, skills, and motivation while
presenting strategies to meet organizational influences. A comprehensive implementation and
evaluation plan that follows the new world Kirkpatrick model is also presented and measures the
effectiveness of the recommendations. As a result of this innovative study, a program model is
presented that is designed to meet individual and organizational needs. The program model is
titled “Leave No Leader Behind (LNLB).” The LNLB program and its activities and training aim
to provide leadership development to operations leaders in K–12 schools.

v
Dedication
To my husband, Tony Salvino, for his unwavering support, patience, understanding, and love on
this 3-year journey that took up an incredible amount of time away from our family. Thank you
for always believing in me and encouraging me to undertake this challenge and persevere when
faced with difficulties. You always reminded me to “get it done” and “take it one step at a time.”
Thank you for your ongoing encouragement and love!
To my children, Michael and Klaudia Salvino, for visiting me in “my office in the basement,”
where I spent most of my nights and weekends for the last 3 years, and for continually delivering
me a coffee and a smile. Both of you inspire me!
To my wonderful parents, Anne Marie and Paul Kelly, who role-modeled and instilled in me a
strong work ethic and perseverance. They truly exemplified the motto “Never give up!” I am
eternally grateful for the love and sacrifices they made to raise my eight siblings and me. I only
wish they could be here now.
To my mother-in-law and father-in-law, Frances (Mom) and Michael (Dad) Salvino, for their
prayers, support, and wise words of wisdom throughout the process. “You never waste an
education,” and “Time goes by so fast. Before you know it, you will be done.” You were right!
To God for giving me dreams, faith, and the persistence to pursue them.

vi
Acknowledgments
Thank you to my dissertation committee. To my committee chair, Dr. Marsha Riggio, for
her expertise, advice, feedback, and positive encouragement throughout this journey. Thank you
to my committee members, Dr. Don Trahan and Dr. Eric Canny, for their feedback and
encouragement. I have the utmost respect for my committee’s knowledge, expertise, wisdom,
and guidance throughout the entire process.
Thank you to my extended family, whose ongoing encouragement, kind words, and belief
in me greatly impacted me.
Thank you to my dear friends, former and current leaders, mentors, and colleagues in the
Parkland School District who supported and encouraged me along this journey.
Thank you to Julia Jim, my success buddy, for her incredible support, encouragement,
insight, and general care and concern for my success. I am incredibly grateful for her support!
Also, special thanks to the weekend writing group that I was lucky enough to be part of for your
support and encouragement that helped keep me on task, focused, and motivated.
Finally, to the entire USC Organizational Change and Leadership Cohort 18, professors,
and classmates, for collectively helping me to grow and learn more than I ever thought possible.
Your experiences, perspectives, backgrounds, thoughts, and insights have profoundly affected
my life. I wish you all the best and many blessings on your continued life journey. Fight on!

vii
Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ........................................................................................................................................v
Acknowledgments.......................................................................................................................... vi
List of Tables ...................................................................................................................................x
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... xii
Chapter One: Introduction to the Study ...........................................................................................1
Background of the Problem .................................................................................................2
Statement of the Problem .....................................................................................................4
Purpose of the Study ............................................................................................................5
Research Questions ..............................................................................................................7
Significance of the Study .....................................................................................................7
Definition of Terms............................................................................................................10
Assumptions, Limitations, Delimitations and Positionality ..............................................12
Conclusion .........................................................................................................................15
Organization of the Study ..................................................................................................16
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature .........................................................................................17
Research Questions ............................................................................................................17
Search Description .............................................................................................................17
Conceptual Framework ......................................................................................................18
Review of Research ...........................................................................................................19
Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences ...................................................26
Summary ............................................................................................................................37
Chapter Three: Methodology .........................................................................................................38
Research Design.................................................................................................................38
viii
Research Questions ............................................................................................................40
Setting ................................................................................................................................41
Data Collection ..................................................................................................................42
Data Analysis .....................................................................................................................46
Reliability ...........................................................................................................................47
Validity ..............................................................................................................................48
Conclusion .........................................................................................................................50
Chapter Four: Research Findings...................................................................................................51
Findings..............................................................................................................................61
Summary of Validated Influences .....................................................................................81
Conclusion .........................................................................................................................83
Chapter Five: Conclusions, Discussion, and Suggestions for Future Research ............................84
Summary of Findings .........................................................................................................84
Conclusions for RQ 1.........................................................................................................86
Conclusions for Research Question 2 ................................................................................92
Implementation and Evaluation Plan .................................................................................98
Suggestions for Future Research .....................................................................................100
Conclusion .......................................................................................................................101
References ....................................................................................................................................105
Appendix A: Semi-Structured Interviews ....................................................................................120
Appendix B: Interview Protocol ..................................................................................................123
Appendix C: Listing of Documents for Data Analysis ................................................................125
Appendix D: Pre-Interview Recruiting Communications............................................................126
Appendix E: Informed Consent for Exempt Research ................................................................127
Appendix F: Assumed Influences and Interview Items ...............................................................129
ix
Appendix G: IRB Approval Letter ..............................................................................................131
Appendix H: Level 4 Results and Leading Indicators .................................................................133
Appendix I: Level 3 Critical Behaviors .......................................................................................135
Appendix J: Level 3 Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for OPS Leaders ........136
Appendix K: Required Drivers ....................................................................................................137
Appendix L: Level 2 Learning .....................................................................................................138
Appendix M: The Program ..........................................................................................................139
Organizational SMART Goal ..........................................................................................139
Stakeholder of Focus SMART Goal ................................................................................139
Appendix N: Level 2: Evaluation of the Components of Learning .............................................141
Appendix O: Level 1 ....................................................................................................................144
Appendix P: Immediate Evaluation Instrument (L1, L2) ............................................................145
Appendix Q: Delayed-Blended Evaluation Instrument (L1, L2, L3, L4) ....................................146

x
List of Tables
Table 1: KMO Chart 26
Table 2: Research Questions and Data Sources 43
Table 3: OPS Education Level and Related Certifications 56
Table 4: Participants’ Core Comments on Communication Skills 63
Table 5: Participants’ Self-Rating for Communication Skills 64
Table 6: Participants’ Core Points Regarding Goal Setting 66
Table 7: Participants’ Comments Regarding Growth Mindset 68
Table 8: Participants’ Leadership Style and Engagement in Reflective Practices 70
Table 9: Participants’ Core Comments on Their Confidence 72
Table 10: Participants’ Self-Rating 72
Table 11: Participant’s Core Comments on Valuing Growing as a Leader 74
Table 12: Participants’ Core Comments on Organizational Resources (Time and Access) 76
Table 13: Participants’ Core Comments on Potential Professional Development Training
Topics 77
Table 14: Participants’ Core Comments on Knowledge Sharing. 79
Table 15: Participants’ Comments on Coaching 81
Table 16: Knowledge Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data 82
Table 17: Motivation Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data 82
Table 18: Organization Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data 83
Table 19: Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations 87
Table 20: Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations 91
Table 21: Summary of Organizational Influences and Recommendations 95
Appendix G: Assumed Influences and Interview Items 129
Table E1: Level 4 Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes 133
xi
Appendix I: Level 3: Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for OPS Leaders 136
Table K1: Required Drivers to Support OPS Critical Behaviors 137
Table N1: Level 2 Components of Learning for the Program 142
Table P1: Level 1 Components to Measure Reactions to the Program 144
Appendix Q: Delayed-Blended Evaluation Instrument (L1, L2, L3, L4) 146

xii
List of Figures
Figure 1: Operations Departments 52
Figure 2: OPS Total Years Worked in Organization 53
Figure 3: OPS Total Years of Leadership Experience in Organization 54
Figure 4: Previous Backgrounds 55
Figure 5: Promoted Versus Outside Hire 57
Figure 6: Number of Staff Members OPS Supervise 58
Figure 7: Percentage of OPS Not Given Leadership Training by Employer at the Time of Hire 59
Figure 8: Percentage of OPS Currently Not Receiving Formal Leadership Training 60
Figure 9: LNLB Chart 100

1

Chapter One: Introduction to the Study
The U.S. Department of Education outlaid over 260.45 billion U.S. dollars in 2021,
making education the country’s second-largest spending item in terms of discretionary funding in
the United States (U.S. Department of Education, 2021). The benefits reaped from education not
only benefit the individual but also positively contribute to the welfare of the community
(Buerger & Harris, 2020). Education is big business. Therefore, we must pay attention to this
sector’s management and who leads these organizations. Leaders in education oversee
everything from academics and curriculum to food services and transportation. Leaders must
possess the critical skills of creating positive work environments, communicating effectively
with various constituent groups, leading change, and supervising personnel (Channing, 2020).
Furthermore, educational leaders’ top challenges are dealing with personnel matters, navigating
institutional, local, and state politics, and managing complex budgets (Channing, 2020).
In K–12 schools, there are academic leaders and operations leaders (OPS). Leaders in
academic areas include principals, assistant principals, curriculum and instruction leaders,
student services, assistant superintendents, and superintendents. School systems’ OPS leaders
work in human resources, business offices, food services, technology, performing arts,
maintenance, custodial, and transportation.
This dissertation addresses the knowledge, skills, motivation and organizational factors
related to leadership development (LD) for OPS at K–12 schools. This is a problem because
these leaders are typically not provided opportunities to develop their leadership capacity
through traditional/formalized training and lack many informal training opportunities. Often,
individuals are promoted from a staff or line position to a management position and never
receive formal leadership training or coaching. Also, OPS areas often have the most personnel
2

issues, retention, and hiring challenges. Leadership training and skill building are needed to cope
with and handle these challenges. Retirements and lack of skilled candidates will make hiring
and retaining these leaders increasingly critical and training more essential. Given the
importance of their roles, we must pay attention to how all leaders are prepared for their roles.
There is much literature on the importance of academic leaders, and the definition has
been expanded over the years beyond just principals to include central office staff, teacher
leaders, department chairs, and team leaders (Clayton, 2014). Most recently, the main focus for
leader development in K–12 schools has been on leaders directly connected to teaching and
learning and their impact on the classroom (Leithwood et al., 2020). While instructional
leadership is a critical task of school leaders for a school’s success (Vogel, 2018), it is equally
important that leadership training be fully implemented and developed on the operations side for
K–12 leaders to assist with overall success in K–12 schools. Currently, there is a gap in the
literature, and in practice, concerning OPS training and development. This dissertation aimed to
address those gaps through research and data analysis to ultimately create a training model to
assist OPS in building their leadership capacity.
Background of the Problem
When managers do not possess strong leadership skills, they cannot boost employees’
performances and direct their staff members to achieve organizational goals (Wen et al., 2019).
School systems are ineffective when there is a lack of strong leadership and understanding of
one’s leadership style (Smith & Squires, 2016). A lack of training and development of
employees is not beneficial for individuals or the organization (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009).
Regarding OPS in K–12 schools, there is a lack of formal and informal opportunities for their
ongoing LD. Historically, school leaders’ formal training and development primarily focuses on
3

academics. To address the gaps in training, this study examined the individual and organizational
levels as these relate to OPS development.
Individual Level
On the individual level, operations directors are often promoted from within the
organization, especially to entry-level management positions. It is very common to promote and
hire OPS serving in department-level positions, such as head cook, payroll clerk, human
resources assistant, and maintenance worker. While it is exciting to promote from within, times
of transition can prove difficult for both the new leader and the followers (Venkatesh, 2008).
Yet, leadership succession is one of the most important factors that affect school improvement
(Hargreaves, 2009). Whether promoted from within or hired into an organization, developing
oneself and becoming more aware of oneself as a leader, receiving training, increasing skills and
competencies and having time for reflection aid in an individual’s LD (Kjellström et al., 2020).
Currently, there are deficiencies in meeting the needs of OPS in these areas, and these
deficiencies need to be addressed.
Organizational Level
At the organizational level, OPS in K–12 settings transition into management without
participating in a fully developed and implemented leadership training program. By comparison,
talent management is a priority, especially for profit-generating organizations operating in the
private sector (Van Zyl et al., 2017). There is a growing talent shortage in the world economy,
and leadership capacity and skills are not being developed internally, which is resulting in
employees not being prepared to assume leadership roles for their organizations (Venkatesh,
2008). Without this type of internal LD in the field of education for K–12 OPS, they are not
4

equipped with the necessary skills. Education does not have an intentional focus or established
system for upskilling OPS leadership capacity and skills compared to private industry.
A gap exists between what happens in corporations with training and what happens in education,
especially with OPS leaders.
Statement of the Problem
Due to all the problems outlined above in the background of the problem, there is a
significant impact of not having K–12 LD training for OPS, and it can be felt at the individual
and organization levels.
Individual
There is an impact on the individual operations leader when core skills and competencies
have not been addressed through an LD program. To begin with, these leaders need to be
appropriately transitioned into their roles. In terms of the individual system, it is very common
for organizational leaders not to effectively transition into a new role, and the results can take a
toll on both the individual and the organization (Watkins, 2009). The individual may feel they
lack skills and knowledge but will be hesitant to tell the organization as they do not want to be
perceived as not knowing what they are doing or be viewed as ineffective or ill-prepared for the
role (Lunenburg, 2011a). In addition, an individual’s motivation and confidence to develop their
skills may be lacking and needs to be examined to ensure they can engage in more complex tasks
(Dwyer, 2019). Individuals may also be expected to supervise staff members and not have the
proper training and background to do so (Bridges & Mitchell, 2000). Therefore, a leadership
training program that is not geared toward individual and personal development results in an
organizational framework that does not support LD for OPS.

5

Organization
The impact on the organization is also significant. Poor leadership is a primary reason
organizations fail (Holt et al., 2018). Not identifying individual leaders’ needs and skills results
in a lack of cultivating the next generation of leaders, and employees desire additional training to
improve their leadership skills (Center for Creative Leadership, 2003).
Organizational aspects such as time for training, support for leader development, and
access to training and professional development are lacking when schools do not emphasize such
important considerations. Organizations are not developing a leader’s strengths and talents when
they follow a one-size-fits-all system; leadership cannot be developed by leadership theories
alone (Bridges & Mitchell, 2000). The impact is that talent management is not aligned with a
clear understanding of how LD and succession planning should be integrated and how managers
fit into that process (Groves, 2006). Research supports that managers are instrumental in
developing other leaders, but if they are not properly trained, there is a saturation of undeveloped
leaders (Groves, 2006). When leadership and leadership training are not valued as keys to an
organization’s success, engaging senior leadership is lacking (Longenecker & Insch, 2018).
Furthermore, the individual leader may feel unsupported by top leadership if they never interact
with them, whether formally or informally (Longenecker & Insch, 2018).
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to gather, examine, and learn more about LD for OPS at
Bright Horizons School District (BHSD, a pseudonym) and identify elements of successful
formal and informal leadership training programs to support their professional growth. The
participants’ previous leadership training, and existing support and opportunities, were examined
to gain perspective on their training experiences. Leadership development can be defined as an
6

expansion of a person’s capability to be effective in a leadership role and processes (Van Velsor
et al., 2010). The study also focused on the knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational
influences related to leadership training and capacity building. As mentioned, both the individual
and the organization, and their influences, were focal points.
Individual
In terms of the individual, the purpose was to collect data that reflects OPS background
and experiences related to their LD in K–12 schools. The study also sought to learn how
prepared leaders feel when they enter their leadership role and what knowledge, skills and
abilities they believe they need to be part of a leadership training program to grow their capacity.
The purpose of the study includes examining four specific skills associated with strong
leadership; communication skills, growth mindset, goal setting and reflection. In addition, it is
critical to examine the transition and onboarding stage and support offered to a leader, as well as
what is provided on an ongoing basis in terms of development (Clifton & Harter, 2019). Lastly,
by uncovering individuals’ LD experiences and challenges and their motivations, a goal of the
study was to create a model training program to build leadership capacity.
Organization
With regard to the organization, this study’s overall purpose was to examine perspectives
from OPS on the organizational support, resources, culture, and professional development
opportunities provided to them. It is important to know that the organizational focus of this study
is the viewpoint of the OPS and not that of the organization or its agents. Organizations will
continue to face challenges in meeting the demands of retirements among managers and leaders,
and it is critical that leaders, new and continuing, are properly prepared, trained, and continually
developed (Holt et al., 2018). Therefore, organizations should identify the skills and
7

competencies leaders need that will match the organization’s needs (Kjellström et al., 2020). The
gap between potential and needed skills can be narrowed by providing support through
intentional opportunities, coaching, and professional development (Fernández-Aráoz et al.,
2017); employees will feel more engaged. However, leaders’ development involves more than
increasing knowledge and skills; the organizational culture and resources must support LD
(Roupnel et al., 2019). This study assessed organizational resources, support, knowledge sharing,
and coaching to understand OPS experiences and needs.
Research Questions
1. What are the knowledge, skills, and motivation (KM) influences related to the current
leadership development system for operations leaders?
2. What are the organization (O) influences related to operations leaders’ current
leadership development system?
Significance of the Study
Leadership has a direct effect on organizations and their success. Leaders determine what
is valued and the overall culture and employee motivation (Al Khajeh, 2018). The significance of
this study is that the data provide insight into the leadership opportunities and training available
to K–12 OPS. Furthermore, the research adds value to the literature and provides a framework, a
model, and guidance on what is needed to develop leadership skills in OPS at K–12 schools.
The research focused on the knowledge and skills, motivation and organizational factors
influencing OPS development at the individual and organizational levels. It is known that LD
and continuous learning create more positive organizations, foster teamwork, reduce turnover,
and improve performance (Longenecker & Insch 2018). The literature, interviews and document
analysis data were useful in developing a framework for increasing leadership capacity and
8

opportunities. The significance of the study also directly relates to the fact that management
functions to support learning and teaching, which are the core of the educational enterprise
(Hoyle & Wallace, 2005).
Organizations’ success lies in strong leadership, and it is vital to continually develop
leaders’ skills, abilities, and capacity (Holt et al., 2018). Thus, LD providing LD training must be
intentional (Van Zyl et al., 2017), especially for leaders without formalized training. It is the
organization’s responsibility to develop and improve those who manage and lead others
(Margerison, 1991). Therefore, this problem of practice must be examined because OPS in K–12
organizations oversee areas central to these systems’ success. OPS require LD to ensure they
have opportunities to grow as leaders and contribute to the overall success of K–12 school
management.
It is also significant to note that OPS supervise large numbers of staff. In this study, 50%
of the organization’s total employee base. The OPS oversee critical areas in K–12 education yet
has the most limited leadership training. Most OPS leaders are promoted from within and receive
little to no leadership training. While academics are the top priority in educational institutions,
K–12 education can no longer afford to leave OPS out of leader growth and development plans.
It is common for OPS leaders to be staff members reporting to a supervisor, and the next day,
after promotion, they are a supervisor with little to no leadership training, coursework, or
certificate required. Academic leaders have formal systems, education, required certifications,
and ongoing training to ensure their LD. Formal training is needed. The time has come that we
must be intentional and inclusive about LD for OPS leaders. Viewing the significance from an
individual and organizational lens is equally important and presented in the following sections.

9

Individual
At the individual level, an examination of background, knowledge and skills, motivation,
confidence, and value for self-development will be examined. In terms of knowledge and skills,
specific skills associated with LD are examined. They include communication skills, a growth
mindset, goal setting and self-awareness/reflection. It is important to address what leadership
training, if any, the new leader received (Kjellström et al., 2020). It is also essential to learn more
about the individual leader’s confidence and motivation and the value they place on LD. A
person’s belief that they can perform a task influences their motivation and performance
(Bandura, 1997).
Organization
Organizations must develop a leader’s strengths and talents; there is no one-size-fits-all,
and leadership cannot be developed by leadership theories alone (Bridges & Mitchell, 2000).
Talent management must be aligned with a clear understanding of how LD and succession
planning integrate and how managers fit into that process (Groves, 2006). Research supports that
managers are instrumental in developing other leaders (Groves, 2006). Leadership and leadership
training are keys to organizations’ success, and engaging senior leadership in those efforts is
vital (Longenecker & Insch, 2018).
At the organizational level, the study examined whether OPS feel they have the resources
and opportunities provided by the organization to enhance their leadership capacity. This study
examined professional development opportunities and training, transition into leadership,
opportunities for knowledge sharing between operations departments and senior leadership, and
the availability of coaches. Leadership development can be complex and involves the interaction
between developing individuals and an organization’s genuine culture of LD (Roupney et al.,
10

2019). It is significant in this study to learn from the participants’ responses so that a training
model can be developed to meet their needs. Examining how the individual leader feels they fit
into the overall organizational culture informs whether leaders are adequately developed
(Daniëls et al., 2019), and this is also a focal point of the study from the organizational lens.
The importance for new leaders of a knowledge-sharing climate at an organization cannot
be underestimated, as it positively affects overall organizational learning (Park & Kim, 2018). It
is significant to this study that OPS have the opportunity to continually develop their skills.
Lastly, an organization that invests in coaching its leaders helps to cultivate leadership skills and
generates positive outcomes (Dziczkowski, 2013).
Definition of Terms
The following are key terms, concepts or factors discussed throughout this study.
Definitions are provided for each term.
Academic departments: Academic areas include principals, assistant principals,
curriculum and instruction leaders, student services, assistant superintendents, and
superintendents.
Coaching: Refers to a method of training, counseling or instructing an individual or a
group how to develop skills to enhance their productivity or overcome a performance problem.
Emotional intelligence: The capacity to be aware of, control, and express one’s emotions
and to handle interpersonal relationships judiciously and empathetically.
Growth mindset: a belief that success depends on time and effort.
Instructional leadership training: Trains academic administrators on how to
communicate clearly with teachers and coaches, handle challenges situations, engage in goal
setting, and provide support and guidance to their staff.
11

Knowledge: How to do something to understand why a given task is important.
Leadership development system: Leadership development is a set of activities that
prepare current and future leaders to perform effectively in their roles. Leadership development
enables employees to improve their skills in areas such as decision making. Project management.
Strategy. It is the process that helps expand the capacity of individuals to perform in leadership
roles in their organizations.
Leadership role: Position of designated responsibility that involves people management.
Involves facilitating the execution of an organization’s strategy through building alignment,
winning mindshare and growing the capabilities of others.
Leadership training: Specialized programs designed to teach new leadership techniques
and refine skills to run a team, including communication, motivation methods, and coaching.
Leadership transition: Any significant change in a leader’s role caused by promotion,
secondment, changing organizations, merger, acquisition, restructuring or returning from
maternity/paternity/career leave.
Learning walks: A brief classroom (department) visit utilizing a research-based tool that
provides opportunities to reflect upon learning strategies, engagement, and content.
Management development: A systematic process of training and growth by which
managerial personnel gains and applies skill, knowledge, altitude and insights to manage the
work in their organization effectively and efficiently.
Mentoring: A professional relationship in which an experienced person helps or guides
another person to support their personal development.
Motivation: General desire or willingness of someone to do something.
12

Operational leadership training: Trains OPS administrators on how to communicate
clearly with staff, handle challenges situations, manage, role model, engage in goal setting, and
provide support and guidance to their staff.
Operations leaders (OPS): Defined as managers and leaders working in the operations
departments of a K–12 school system: food services, business office, transportation, human
resources, information technology, and custodial/maintenance.
Organization: A group of people who work together for a particular purpose.
Personal learning cloud (PLC): The personal learning cloud (PLC) is a combination of
massive open online courses and learning platforms that enable people to consume interactive
content online during the times that work best for them.
Self-efficacy: An individual’s belief in their capacity to act in the ways necessary to reach
specific goals.
Skills: The ability, coming from one’s knowledge, practice, and aptitude, to do something
well.
Assumptions, Limitations, Delimitations and Positionality
Assumptions
Two primary assumptions guide this study and inform the limitations and delimitations:
OPS leaders need LD to maximize their potential as leaders, and the organization must be part of
the solution. These assumptions helped shape the interview protocol for the study. In the study, I
asked participants to answer questions and reflect on LD as it relates to both themselves and the
organization. The study’s assumptions and limitations were informed by who I am as a
researcher.

13

Limitations
As with the majority of studies, the design of the current study is subject to possible
limitations. In this study, there were several limitations. First, the sample is not entirely
representative of the desired population since it is a smaller sample. The results are accurate for
this particular group of leaders at this specific time. If the sample were more extensive, more
precise results might occur. In addition, the participants were self-reporting. Since this is a
qualitative study, the interviews elicited personal responses and reflection. While participants
were encouraged to be frank and ensure confidentiality, it is impossible to know if they were
open, forthright, and detailed in their answers. Therefore, there is no guarantee that they were
completely honest or transparent. Furthermore, I coded by listening to recordings, reviewing
transcripts and reviewing notes. These limitations could bias the results of the study. A limitation
could be that the study did not use a formal data analysis resource such as thematic content
analysis (TCA) or NVivo to search for keywords.
Another limitation is that I utilized convenience sampling. I chose OPS at one specific
school district. The responses might reflect an experience unique to one district. To combat
convenience sampling, I ensured the questions were valid and had a colleague, who holds a
doctorate in educational leadership, review the questions. In addition, some participants may
have hesitated to be completely honest due to my position in the organization. Although I do not
directly supervise or manage any study participants, they may have held back their true feelings.
Lastly, the knowledge, motivation, and organizational (KMO) influences framework is a
gap/deficit lens, so it is important to note the data were viewed through this theory and the
outcomes were limited to this scope. Also, since there is a lack of previous research on this
14

specific topic, I relied on related literature to fill the gap, which may have further limited the
study.
Delimitations
One of the delimitations in this study pertains to the boundaries I established for
participant selection. I chose OPS in K–12 schools. I did not include principals or other academic
leaders; they may also have unmet management and LD training. Another delimitation is that I
chose to conduct a qualitative study instead of a quantitative one, which may have limited the
number of responses and perspectives. I was also intentional in the school district I chose. The
demographics of this school are that it is a suburban, high-performing, predominantly middle-
class school district. Therefore, I may not get the perspective of leaders in districts with fewer
resources or more diverse demographics. Lastly, some school districts may outsource some of
their operations departments, limiting a district’s ability to implement this study across all of
their operations departments.
Positionality
I serve as a director of human resources (DHR) for a large public school and bring the
knowledge and perspective of over 25 years in the field. I also worked in the corporate human
resources sector for 10 years before working in education. Therefore, I bring the unique
perspective of serving as an OPS in both the public and private sectors. In addition, I received
formalized management and leadership training while serving in the private sector. In my
position as a DHR, I am aware of the leadership offerings and capacity-building activities
provided to OPS. However, I am unaware of the individual leader’s backgrounds and
experiences relative to LD and their perceptions of LD. My personal experience drives my
15

interest in the research topic. I possess a strong desire to analyze the LD gap for OPS in K–12
education to add value and improve in the future.
As the DHR, I held a dual role as a doctoral student and a district employee while
conducting this study. However, I did not directly supervise any of the participants. That being
said, my leadership position in the organization may have influenced individuals to agree to
participate in the study. To combat this potential ethical issue, I was clear with all participants
that this was a doctoral dissertation study, not a work assignment. In addition, I reminded them
that all responses would be coded and would not be directly attributed to them. They were also
reminded that their participation was voluntary, and they could withdraw from the study at any
time if they desired.
Conclusion
The organization is responsible for building and improving those who manage and lead
others (Margerison, 1991). This study was designed to uncover the LD practices in K–12 schools
for OPS and to offer a model for improvement based on those findings. The challenges K–12
leaders face today demand unique skills in a time of uncertainty (Luqman et al., 2012). Most
school leaders do not receive formal leadership training, and very few districts have traditional
leadership programs (Darling-Hammond et al., 2007). Ensuring OPS are included in LD
activities and training is essential. Therefore, this problem of practice requires examination
because OPS at K–12 organizations oversee areas critical to K–12 systems’ success. Without
adequately developed leaders, these systems fail employees and organizations (Longenecker et
al., 1999).

16

Organization of the Study
The study is organized into five chapters. Chapter One focuses on the introduction,
background of the problem, statement of the problem, purpose of the study, research questions,
significance of the study, definition of terms, assumptions, limitations, delimitations, conclusion,
and organization of the study. Chapter Two highlights the relevant literature as it relates to the
research questions. In particular, there are four sections in Chapter Two, covering the historical
context, great leadership, developing leadership capacity outside and within schools, and
examining the KMO influences on LD. Chapter Three describes the methodology, research
design, and data collection and analysis procedures. Chapter Four details the research findings.
Chapter Five provides the summary of findings, conclusions, discussion, suggestions for future
research/recommendations and a conclusion.

17

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
This chapter presents an introduction to the study, the search description, the conceptual
framework, and a detailed review of the literature. The literature review will explore the
following areas: historical context, defining great leadership, LD outside of schools and school
LD. The chapter ends with a section on research on the KMO influences (Clark & Estes, 2008)
on LD practices at K–12 schools. The chapter presents literature on strategies to improve OPS
capacity alongside a model focused on individual areas of communications, goal setting, a
growth mindset, and self-development. Motivation areas will include self-efficacy and value
expectancy. For organizational influences, resources such as time and access to professional
development, knowledge sharing, and coaching will be explored. The following research
questions guided the study:
Research Questions
1. What are the knowledge, skills, and motivation (KM) influences related to the current
leadership development system for operations leaders?
2. What are the organization (O) influences related to operations leaders’ current
leadership development system?
Search Description
I conducted research using Google Scholar, books, peer-reviewed articles, the University
of Southern California’s library, and databases such as ProQuest. I looked primarily at research
conducted within the last 10 to 15 years. I researched LD both outside and within schools. I also
researched the key stakeholders (OPS) and examined whether the literature provided information
about their LD in K–12 schools. I utilized the KMO framework (Clark & Estes, 2008) to
examine the influences on the stakeholder group. I reviewed research aimed at developing
18

leadership capacity. My study also explored the reasons that might underlie this problem and
introduced new approaches to solving and improving the situation for school leaders.
I used keywords, phrases, and themes to search on my topic. Some examples of literature
searches included: LD in schools, developing leadership capacity, leaders developing leaders,
coaching, management development, LD, systems thinking, school leadership, leadership
training in schools and the private sector, talent development, developing organizational
capacity, professional development for school leaders, the impact of leader development, the
learning organization, organization transformation, mentoring, skills needed for school leaders,
training needs assessment, developing middle managers, school management, school district
management, growth mindset, leadership and culture, and self-reflection for leaders.
Conceptual Framework
I conducted the research using the conceptual framework of Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap
analysis model. The gap analysis model evaluates performance by looking at three dimensions:
knowledge (K), motivation (M), and organization (O). It is known as the KMO theory. The gap
analysis guided me to create a model that meets the individual’s and the organization’s needs in
the K–12 school setting. This theory seeks to examine performance outcomes by identifying a
problem or goal for the organization and individuals, assessing the current state versus the
desired state (the gap), examining potential causes and solutions to the performance gap, and
evaluating results (Clark & Estes, 2008). It provides clear guidelines for diagnosing causes of
performance gaps and then selecting solutions for the KMO environment in which we work
(Clark & Estes, 2008). The results then tie back to the intended and desired original business
performance goal and are either achieved, fine-tuned, or revised and then the cycle starts over
again. In essence, by identifying the causes of performance gaps and implementing performance
19

solutions, we can diagnose the human causes behind the performance gaps (Clark & Estes,
2008). For this study, the organizational goal was to improve management/leadership training for
OPS in K–12 schools and the KMO theory supports this goal and aims to address the gap and
influences affecting the problem of practice.
Review of Research
The next section of the dissertation focuses on the review of research related to leadership
and the KMO framework. I present the historical context of the problem, along with the research
on how great leadership is defined. I then present research as it relates to developing leadership
capacity both within and outside of school systems. Lastly, I examine the research on the KMO
factors as they relate to my research problem of practice.
Historical Context
Schools across the U.S. are in crisis. There are structural deficits, politicization, changing
demographics, and, most recently, COVID, among the many challenges they face (Fernandez et
al., 2020). Schools are complicated organizations that some think should be run like big
businesses, but in reality, the complexity of an educational organization sets it apart, and schools
cannot be managed like businesses (Childress et al., 2006). Leadership and how leaders manage
schools are key components of a school’s overall success (Daniëls et al., 2019). Leaders and
managers in schools must be properly equipped to handle daily challenges. In recent years,
management and leadership training has been brought into the education field to better equip
leaders in their daily tasks. However, it has been adopted on the education side of the
organization (Daniëls et al., 2019). In essence, leaders such as principals have been researched,
and the literature has examined the complexity of their jobs in terms of both management and
leadership (Sebastian et al., 2019). As a result, LD and training programs are offered to grow
20

educational leaders' leadership capacity, and programs are available for these individuals at the
state and local levels (Darling-Hammond et al., 2007).
However, school systems have many leaders outside of just building principals and those
tied to the academic side (Rosser, 2004). There is another group of critically important leaders
that exists, the OPS. These individuals run systems in schools, such as facilities, human
resources, business offices, food services, technology, maintenance, custodial and transportation
departments. These individuals need leadership skills, management training and LD to cope with
the challenges they face. Gallup’s (2019) research reveals that about one in 10 people possess the
talent to manage. It is important to note that another two in 10 people exhibit some
characteristics of basic managerial talent and can function at a high level if their company invests
in coaching and developmental plans for them (Beck & Harter, 2014). Historically, there is little
research on this stakeholder group (OPS) as it relates to leadership training and development and
therefore a need to research this topic.
What is Great Leadership?
Leadership is the capability to influence a group of people to achieve a vision or set of
goals (Northouse, 2019). It is a widely studied subject in management. According to Kalsoom et
al. (2018), leadership is the most critical component in an organization and the most important
skill for the organization’s leaders. It brings direct and indirect impacts on the employee’s
performance. It has been said that the better the leadership, the better the organization can
collectively face challenges in difficult times (Kolzow, 2014). Leaders play a central role in
fostering a culture that encourages knowledge sharing, fosters employee retention and creates
loyalty to the organization (Wen et al., 2019). Maxwell (2002) stated that leadership is about the
21

importance of being a life-long learner and a commitment to individual growth to effectively
lead others to accomplish goals.
The literature supports that great leadership is essential to success. It also points to the
fact that to attract, grow and maintain highly effective leaders; organizations must be intentional
in developing the leadership capacity of all individuals (Day, 2000.) Organizations that prioritize
LD are more effective in meeting the expectations of their stakeholders and customers (Kolzow,
2014). Della-Latta and Burkett (2021) shared that Brené Brown defined great leadership as
taking responsibility for finding the potential in people and possessing the courage to actually
develop that potential. Great leaders are grounded in authenticity and trust and stay connected to
their values (Lopez, 2018). According to Gibson and Weber (2015), Winston Churchill, one of
the greatest leaders in history, believed in clear and simple communication, decisiveness,
willingness to take risks and a desire for self-improvement. According to Gallup (2017), the
leadership behavior of an organization directly impacts its ability to attract and retain top talent,
employee morale, performance and job satisfaction.
In this next section, the literature review focuses on how leadership capacity is
developed in leaders. Specifically, the research is focused on how leader development occurs
outside of schools in the private sector and what is happening within schools.
Developing Leadership Capacity
A closer look at how leadership capacity is developed is now presented. Common
elements of effective LD programs, both inside and outside of schools, are examined. To begin,
the literature on developing leadership outside of schools is explored.

22

Outside Schools
Leadership and LD are popular terms in organizations. Leader development has been
defined as “the expansion of a person’s capacity to be effective in leadership roles and
processes” (Van Velsor & McCauley, 2004, p. 2). It makes sense that organizations focus on
leader development since effective leadership is viewed as a source of competitive advantage
(Day, 2000). In the private sector, there are many practical applications for how organizations
develop their leaders. This section examines the literature on developing leaders outside of
schools.
Leadership can be taught, and the top leadership competencies include creating a positive
workforce, communicating effectively, goal setting, supervising personnel, and possessing
effective human relations skills (Channing, 2020). As Day (2011) noted, LD is more than just
developing an individual leader. Leadership development has a social context and involves
multiple individuals (Day, 2000). Leadership involves a continuous learning process and
interconnectedness (Petrie, 2014). Therefore, when planning LD activities, it is essential to
consider the process of adult development (Day, 2011). In essence, learning and development are
top on the priority list for organizations concerned about arming their workforces with the skills
needed for the future and harnessing great talent takes an investment of time by top executives
(Bhalla et al., 2018).
In organizations outside of education, developing leadership capacity has been
accomplished by using a variety of models. However, the literature presents some common
elements for supporting effective LD programs. A common first step is to begin with a needs
assessment (Leskiw, 2007) to establish alignment with overall business goals and strategy and to
identify gaps in the knowledge and skills of leaders in the organization compared to the ideal
23

(Leskiw, 2007). Another key component in developing leadership capacity is knowing the
audience or level of leaders the organization is seeking to develop (Schettler, 2003). A third
component is to ensure the organization’s culture supports LD (Kessler, 2002). The organization
needs to support both individual and collective development, and trust and respect must be part
of the culture to build LD (Day, 2000). Lastly, organizations that are effective at LD have
developed a learning system that works for their leaders and includes things like action learning,
mentoring, formal and informal learning opportunities, self-directed learning, knowledge sharing
from top executives, and the use of technology (Leskiw, 2007). Organizations’ goal is to upskill
all employees and ensure leaders possess the knowledge and skills to lead their teams (Day,
2011).
A list of best practices for LD was developed by The Hay Group (2005), whose
researchers investigated the most admired companies in the world and identified common themes
among their LD. The themes included: a link to the organization’s mission and values, active
learning through assignments or experiences, self-assessment opportunities and developmental
plans tailored to the individual, and coaching (Holt et al., 2018). Kouzes and Posner (2017)
highlighted effective leadership includes developing others, collaboration, coaching, clear
communication, goal setting, feedback and empowering subordinates to take risks.
The best companies are now offering a variety of ways to deliver LD, including online
courses, social and interactive platforms, PLCs, active learning, mentors and coaches
(Moldoveanu & Narayandas, 2019). Companies like Marriott International, Inc., offer PLCs,
which are on the rise due to their popularity that they can be done remotely, are low-cost, and
learning is personalized (Moldoveanu & Narayandas, 2019). Companies have found that
traditional LD, where it is one-size-fits-all, does not yield skills transfer and are moving away
24

from these isolated methods (Ardichvili et al., 2016). Rather, personalized, active learning that
can be applied directly to a job setting with follow-up is most effective (Holt et al., 2018). In
addition, successful leaders know how to tap into “network intelligence” and learn from other
leaders rather than just classes (Hoffman et al., 2013). It is the power of one-on-one learning that
can be executed by a mentor or coach (Petushek et al., 2018). The practice of seeking out others
and engaging in knowledge sharing brings incredible, long-lasting results (Ardichvili et al.,
2016). All successful LD programs are supported by the culture and meet the needs of both the
individual and the organization (Day, 2000). The various methods to upskill leaders will be
further explored when looking at a model to meet OPS leadership training needs. However, at
this time, we will explore the literature as it relates to developing leadership capacity within
schools.
Within Schools
Research on educational leadership has resulted in leadership theories, practices, and,
ultimately, LD and training aimed at educational leaders to improve schools’ effectiveness
(Daniëls et al., 2019). It is important to note that within a school system, the definition of an
educational leader includes building-based administrators, academic-related central office
personnel, curriculum leaders, and teacher leaders (Clayton, 2014). However, the definition of
educational leader does not include OPS serving in departments such as business office, human
resources, technology, facilities, custodial, maintenance, transportation and food services. K–12
schools focus on the leaders overseeing areas related to teaching and learning since teaching and
learning are the core processes of schools (Leithwood, 1992). In recent years, it has been
recognized that K–12 academic leaders need to engage in transformational leadership, which
includes motivating others to work toward individual and organizational goals while also
25

providing managerial skill training in a culture that supports both student and organizational
goals (Sun & Leithwood, 2012). Based on Daniëls et al. (2019), effective leadership consists of
academic school leaders who focus on curriculum and instruction, possess strong communication
skills, create a positive culture and climate through trust and collaboration, implement vision and
mission, give feedback and invest in hiring and developing personnel. To accomplish these
outcomes, most school districts and states have prioritized instructional leader development,
focusing solely on principals and leaders connected to the classroom (Clayton, 2014).
The literature supports that numerous programs exist for LD for academic leaders. The
modes of delivery are typically state-offered programs, local training, articles, podcasts, graduate
coursework, seminars, and conferences (Daniëls et al., 2019). A Google search will net hundreds
of books and articles on instructional/academic LD. In Pennsylvania, a program called PA
Inspired Leadership addresses core competencies and corollary standards needed for
instructional leaders to increase the knowledge, skills, and competencies for student success
(Pennsylvania Department of Education, 2008). It is only offered to leaders on the academic side
of education, with no counterpart program for OPS. The main focus of leader development
within schools looks primarily at school leadership that can improve student achievement, honor
diverse learners, and offers a climate of support (Clayton, 2014).
With regards to LD for operational school leaders, the research was lacking. The
literature review did not find specific research geared toward K–12 OPS. The research was
focused on academic leaders or teacher development. This gap in research reveals a need for LD
for OPS in K–12 educational systems, which is the motivation for this study.

26

Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences
In this section, the literature focuses on the KMO influences and how they relate to the
study. Table 1 presents the individual system with a column for each KMO factor. The columns
detail the KMO influences. Four specific skills related to the literature on leadership skills were
examined within the knowledge and skills influence: communication skills, growth mindset, goal
setting and self-awareness/reflection. Two areas of motivation were explored: self-efficacy and
expectancy value. Three cultural settings, resources, knowledge sharing and coaching, are
presented under the organization. The literature review in this section will focus on all these
influences.

Table 1
KMO Chart
Knowledge and skills Motivation Organization
Do they have procedural and
metacognitive knowledge in
the following areas?
Communication skills
Goal setting
Growth mindset
Self-knowledge, self-
development/reflection
How motivated is the
individual leader in
growing and learning?
Self-efficacy
Expectancy-value
What are the cultural setting
organizational influences
on leader development?
Resources
Knowledge sharing
Coaching

27

Knowledge and Skills: Procedural and Metacognitive Knowledge for Operations Leaders
It is important to determine leaders’ existing knowledge and skills to assess whether there
are gaps to address (Clark & Estes, 2008). According to Krathwohl (2002), there are four
knowledge dimensions: factual, conceptual, procedural and metacognitive. The first level of the
knowledge dimensions, factual, requires knowledge of basic facts, information and terminology
related to a topic. The next level, conceptual, is knowledge of the underlying categories,
principal, structures or theories of a field. The third level is procedural knowledge. This level
includes knowledge of the skills and procedures involved with a task, including techniques,
methods, and necessary steps. The final and highest level is the metacognitive level. This is the
level of knowledge where an individual is aware of their cognition, including knowledge that
relates to cognitive tasks as well as contextual and conditional knowledge and self-knowledge
(Krathwohl, 2002). An important part of this study was to examine the procedural and
metacognitive knowledge and skills of K–12 OPS as it related to their LD.
Based on the literature discussed earlier in this chapter, possessing procedural and
metacognitive knowledge and skills is essential for a strong leader. In terms of procedural
knowledge, OPS need to show they can implement or execute a task (Krathwohl, 2002).
According to Clark and Estes (2008), procedural knowledge is key to helping leaders know how
to train and communicate with others. Operations leaders supervise other personnel and need to
know how to effectively train and lead them to establish tasks and goals (McGurk, 2009).
In terms of metacognitive knowledge, operations directors need to be aware of
themselves as leaders and have the ability to reflect (Krathwohl, 2002). Leadership is a balancing
act requiring the skill to direct people to complete tasks, but leaders also need to possess the
ability to reflect upon their behaviors and relationships with others to lead (McGurk, 2009)
28

effectively. Metacognitive knowledge includes knowledge of one’s thinking processes, including
approaches to problems and how to carry out solutions (Pintrich, 2002). Leaders need to be able
to metacognitively reflect on their leadership and adjust accordingly to grow as leaders. To do
this, leaders need to learn and develop these reflective practices through professional
development and increase their emotional intelligence (Patti et al., 2015).
As mentioned earlier, being able to communicate effectively, practice a growth mindset,
engage in goal setting, and possess self-awareness and reflection are important skills for leaders.
A more detailed description of these key skills as they apply to OPS is found in these next few
sections.
Operations Leaders Need to Communicate Effectively to Lead Staff
In terms of communicating, leaders would need to know how to communicate effectively
to manage other individuals and accomplish organizational goals (Baldoni, 2004). Effective
communication enhances good relations and helps shape climate and culture (Daniëls et al.,
2019). There is a difference between the ability to speak and the ability to communicate, and
effective leadership communication is grounded in the organization’s values (Baldoni, 2004).
The OPS need to know the essential elements of effective communication to communicate the
right message at the right time. Leaders must be able to effectively communicate verbally and
non-verbally to guide, direct, motivate and inspire others, and they need emotional intelligence to
navigate their own and others’ emotions (Barrett, 2006). Individuals who are knowledgeable,
motivated, and possess the skills, behaviors and effectiveness to use gestures, voice, and
language to help others achieve goals can have a significant positive impact on an organization
(Wikaningrum et al., 2018). If OPS know how to communicate effectively, they are more likely
to be successful in their leadership role.
29

Operations Leaders Need to Know How to Set Goals
Leaders need to acquire procedural knowledge of how to set goals and help others set
goals to achieve the organization’s mission and vision (Latham & Locke, 2006). They will then
be able to help others set goals for themselves, which aids in increasing overall motivation
(Bandura, 2001). Leaders can motivate others to perform by setting clear goals and focusing on a
learning goal orientation, which involves developing new skills and competencies to handle
difficult and challenging situations (Lunenburg, 2011a). However, the basics of goal setting,
such as ensuring goals are SMART: specific (S), measurable (M), achievable (A), relevant (R),
and time-bound (T; Aghera et al., 2018) and effectively communicating is important for leaders
to know (Lunenburg, 2010). The benefits of goal setting are many, including it can motivate
behavior change, ignite purpose to a particular project or pursuit, and, when attained, increase
self-efficacy and provide an overall sense of fulfillment for both leaders and followers (Latham
& Locke, 2006).
Operations Leaders Need to Possess a Growth Mindset
Another key knowledge-related skill is that of the growth mindset. It is both a procedural
and metacognitive skill. The growth mindset, based on implicit person theory (IPT), embodies
the thought that there is always potential to develop intellect, increase talent, and adjust moral
understandings (Dweck, 2006). The IPT theory details two mind frames; growth and fixed
mindset. An incremental (growth) theorist believes that people can and do change and that
intelligence, talent and abilities can be developed and learned (Yeager & Dweck, 2020).
Organizations that promote and train on a growth mindset encourage their employees to develop
continually, and they see the potential in their employees (Grant et al. 2018). Leaders with
incremental (growth) mindsets develop themselves and engage more in coaching their
30

employees, which leads to more positive relationships between employees and managers,
resulting in increased individual and organizational performance (Yeager & Dweck, 2020). The
growth mindset focuses more on effort, practice and strategies over achieving a specific grade or
outcome (Dweck, 2021). It is about continual learning, and leaders with a growth mindset will
coach individuals and teams to new skills and opportunities (Gottfredson & Reina 2020).
On the other hand, in IPT, an entity (fixed) mindset believes that others’ characteristics,
behaviors, and skills are basically set and not likely to change. Managers with entity theories
(fixed mindsets) tend not to see improvement, even if the improvement is present. Furthermore,
when a manager holds an entity theory of his or her employee, the manager is less likely to coach
the employee toward performance improvement, and the relationship, as well as increased
performance, are negatively affected due to their belief that the person cannot change (Heslin &
VandeWalle, 2008).
Operations Leaders Need to Possess Self-Awareness, Self-Knowledge and Practice Reflection
One cannot lead others further than one has been oneself. When it comes to leadership,
self-awareness, self-development and reflection are essential (Maxwell, 2002). Overall, self-
knowledge and leadership require knowing one’s breadth and depth of experience, knowledge,
and skills (Pintrich, 2002). Knowing how to meet the needs of a particular assignment or team
objective is easier when one is aware of one’s strengths and overall leadership style (Rubin,
2013). An exceptional attribute of Winston Churchill was his desire and commitment to self-
improvement. He created an environment that encouraged reflection and allowed subordinates to
offer opposing viewpoints without consequence (Gibson & Weber, 2015).To know yourself is to
grow yourself, which translates to knowing one’s strengths, weaknesses, passions, and the gap
between where one currently is and where one wants to be (Maxwell, 2022).
31

This self-awareness and development skill is important for OPS because when
individuals have a clear picture of their leadership style, they are in a better position to select
training and development opportunities that best suit their natural abilities to grow as a leader
(Rubin, 2013) and serve others. Sinar et al. (2015) emphasized that leaders need to develop
different skills at different rates, and there is no one-size-fits-all in LD. The OPS in K–12 need to
be self-aware and practice reflection. Reflective practices help leaders by heightening their
awareness of behaviors and situations to improve performance (Castelli, 2016). The next section
examines motivation as part of the KMO model.
Motivation
This section reviews literature that focuses on motivation influences. Specifically, it will
discuss self-efficacy theory and expectancy-value theory as they relate to OPS. Three factors
define motivation: active choice; persistence; and mental effort (Clark & Estes, 2008). Active
choice is the pursuit of a goal, persistence is continuing to work toward important work goals
and not giving up, and mental effort involves working smarter and possibly developing novel
ideas to succeed (Clark & Estes, 2008). When these factors of motivation are combined with
knowledge and skills, there is increased performance (Clark & Estes, 2008). A higher level of
motivation has a positive effect on performance and is, therefore, a valuable trait for leaders and
employees (Osabiya, 2015).
Self-Efficacy Influence
Bandura (1997) described self-efficacy as one’s ability to be successful in certain
situations and one’s perceived capabilities for learning or performing actions at designated
levels. High self-efficacy or confidence can positively influence motivation, which can positively
impact performance (Osabiya, 2015). Individuals with high efficacy tend to choose more
32

complex tasks, expend greater effort, persist longer, use more complex learning strategies, and
are more effective leaders (Dwyer, 2019). An essential part of the overall theory is an awareness
of what influences self-efficacy. One’s own past experiences, vicarious experiences, persuasion,
verbal feedback, physiology, and the personal context of this situation are all influences on self-
efficacy (Lunenburg, 2011b). Collective efficacy refers to an individual’s perception of his or her
group’s collective capability to successfully perform job-related tasks (Bandura, 1997). The
theory also examines how perceptions of one’s immediate supervisor and group efficacy can
directly affect job satisfaction (Borgogni et al., 2011). In this study, the focus was on the
participants’ self-efficacy as it relates to leadership training and development.
The self-efficacy influence examined herein was that OPS need to feel confident that they
have the leadership skills and training to carry out their jobs. Self-efficacy affects not only what
skills individuals perceive they possess but also what they believe they can do with their skills
(Ali et al., 2018). A leader’s confidence can impact overall motivation and overall drive, effort,
perseverance, and goals they set and achieve; it can also positively impact their subordinates
(Chemers et al., 2000). Furthermore, individuals with high self-efficacy are more likely to set
higher goals, conquer obstacles, prevail in meeting challenges and are motivated and goal-
oriented (Versland, 2016). In contrast, individuals lacking in self-efficacy tend to give up easily,
set goals that are easy to achieve, and avoid challenges (Versland, 2016). Leaders with high self-
efficacy have a more positive relationship with achieving goals and are more motivated to
develop their leadership skills (Dwyer, 2019), and this is an important component of effective
leadership for OPS.

33

Value Influence
The other motivating influence is the expectancy-value theory. Expectancy-value theory
is based on the idea that motivation can be influenced by the individual or organization’s beliefs
or expectations for success (Pintrich, 2002). The expectancy-value theory is a theory of
motivation that states motivation is determined by two factors. The first is expectancy, meaning
whether one expects one can succeed at the task, asking oneself, “Can I do this task?” The
answer to this question often determines whether a person will undertake a task. Values are the
second factor, asking oneself, “Do I want to do this task? What benefit do I gain?” The answer to
these questions will often influence whether an individual chooses to engage (Wigfield & Eccles,
2000).
There are also four different components of values related to task value; attainment value,
intrinsic value, utility value, and cost. Attainment value equates to satisfaction from
achievement, and intrinsic value is the enjoyment one gains from doing the task. Utility value or
usefulness refers to how a task fits into an individual’s future plans, and cost refers to how the
decision to engage in one activity limits access to other activities (Kuhn et al., 2022). This study
looks at the utility value of LDT for OPS in K–12 schools.
The value-related influence examined in this study was that OPS need to value growing
their knowledge and skills (self-development). According to Guillén et al. (2015), knowing how
to be a good leader is not enough. One must be motivated to learn and lead to meet an
organization’s demands and challenges. There is an underlying psychological aspect to the
expectancy-value theory that can help or hinder one’s motivation (Kuhn et al., 2022).
Operational leaders need to see the value and be motivated to engage in professional
development and other related activities to enhance leadership skills and abilities. If the value of
34

learning and growing is present, then motivation, behavior change and self-development should
follow along with culture change (Schein & Schein, 2018).
Organization: Cultural Setting Influences
According to Clark and Estes (2008), successful change occurs when the organizational
culture supports change efforts. The organization’s top leaders have a responsibility and,
ultimately, the most significant impact on the creation and transformation of the organization’s
culture (Armenakis et al., 2011). According to Schein (2004), organizational culture is
manifested at three levels; cultural artifacts, espoused beliefs and values, and underlying
assumptions, thoughts and beliefs. Within an organization, there are both cultural models and
settings. Cultural models are an organization’s values, beliefs, and attitudes (Clark & Estes,
2008). In many cases, cultural models are viewed as barriers within organizations. Cultural
settings are the visible manifestations, outcomes, or results of the cultural models (Schein, 2004).
Whether examining cultural models or settings, LD needs to be aligned with organizational
development for it to bring about change in day-to-day operations (Kjellström et al., 2020). The
most elaborate and detailed LD programs will not be successful if they are not aligned with the
organization’s cultural norms and practices (DeLong & Trautman, 2011). In the next section,
cultural settings will be presented as they relate to increasing the leadership capacity of OPS.
Cultural settings addressed in conjunction with knowledge, skills, and motivation can
provide opportunities for growth (Clark & Estes, 2008). Organizational learning often begins
with an individual who recognizes a gap between what is and what could be and then, through
discovery and data gathering, develops an idea or new practice to produce a change (Huber,
1991). However, one cannot force a learning culture; it must consciously develop and evolve
over time. Thereby, it is shared by all members of the organization (Senge, 20o6). In addition,
35

according to Brown (2018), leaders improve culture by modeling and embedding gratitude as
part of the everyday fabric (Della-Latta & Burkett, 2021). Organizational-level development that
includes a focus on the organization as a whole and networks of people needs to be a focus area
of LD programs and not just the development of the individual leadership capacity (Baker, 2014;
Petrie, 2014; Ziskim, 2015).
In this study, the gap being analyzed relates to leadership training for OPS in K–12
settings. The environment, processes and leadership behaviors contribute to a strong learning
culture (Garvin et al., 2008). Operations leaders need to be part of an organization that reinforces
learning and provides opportunities for growth and development. In particular, influences related
to overall organizational resources and support, knowledge sharing, and opportunities for
coaching will be examined in the next few sections.
Organizational Resources and Support for Operations Leaders
It is important that the organization value OPS leaders’ development and allots time for
training and development as well as access to training and professional development. Leaders are
central to fostering the development of healthy work cultures. Leaders are critical to an
organization’s culture. They help create it and ultimately hold the power to manipulate the
culture (Shein, 2004). Lack of goals, role models, communication and resources impacts the
cultural setting of an organization (Clark & Estes, 2008). Organizational support, such as solid
orientation and proper leader transition to the role, must be a top priority whether hired internally
or externally (Manderscheid & Ardichvili, 2008). There needs to be an emphasis on their job
transition and the necessary support provided, as transitions in non-profits can be more nuanced
due to the focus on missions and values (Balser & Carmin, 2009). This is needed in the field of
education.
36

Executive-Level Knowledge Sharing for Operations Leaders
Davis and Leon (2011) stated that it takes a team to lead schools effectively. Knowledge
sharing within organizations can not only have a significant impact on actual learning but on the
overall culture of an organization (Longenecker & Insch, 2018). One factor that is essential to
the overall growth and development of leaders within an organization is the commitment and
involvement of senior leaders (Cacioppe, 1998). Executive-level knowledge sharing involves
leaders developing leaders and has proven to be a successful component of LD programs. While
courses and online platforms have their place, great leaders are often great teachers and provide
accelerated learning and wisdom to newer leaders in an organization through knowledge sharing.
Companies like PepsiCo, Marriott International, and Johnson & Johnson have designed LD
around senior leaders developing other leaders (Cacioppe, 1998). Knowledge sharing can come
in many different forms. Top executives can share leadership information at staff meetings,
retreats, and workshops. The advantages are numerous and include benefits to all leaders, such as
sharing real-life experiences and problem-solving on company challenges, common goals,
vision, and frameworks aimed at the current environment (Longenecker & Insch, 2018). The
OPS could benefit from knowledge sharing with top executives as part of an in-house LD
program that could offer tremendous value to developing leadership capacity at a minimum cost.
Coaching
Coaching is used as a custom-tailored developmental tool for leaders to enhance skills
and leadership competencies (Hastings & Kane, 2018). Successful coaching relationships can
assist leaders with an individualized plan that can be directly applied to the individual’s
leadership position in the organization (Korotov, 2016). Unlike mentoring, which is more
general in nature and aimed at the long-term development of the mentee, coaching is highly
37

individualized and specific to behavior development and modification tailored to achieve goals
(Hastings & Kane, 2018). Coaching can accelerate the learning process for leaders and cultivate
leadership skills through one-on-one focus aimed at increasing items ranging from self-esteem to
motivation, behaviors, knowledge and skills (Passmore, 2015). Operations leaders at BHSD
currently are not assigned a coach. Based on the literature, coaching could be a beneficial part of
an overall LD program for organizational leaders.
Summary
This chapter sought to identify literature on LD, particularly OPS leader development.
While finding literature specific to OPS was difficult, the research supported how important
leader development is to an organization. The literature review also included Clark and Estes’s
(2008) gap analysis and focused on KMO influences. The gap analysis identified procedural and
metacognitive influences for several knowledge areas related to LD: communication and growth
mindset, goal setting and self-awareness/reflection. In addition, the literature review focused on
motivational influences, specifically self-efficacy and expectancy-value related to leader
development. Lastly, the literature reviewed cultural settings and organizational influences
related to LD. The literature presented in this chapter provides context to the problem of practice
and research questions.

38

Chapter Three: Methodology
The study intended to examine the knowledge and skills, motivation and organizational
influences on LD of operational leaders within a K–12 school setting. Based on that data, the
study focused on solutions and equipping operational leaders with the necessary skills. To assess
the KMO influences, the study looked at two key systems, the individual and the organization,
from the OPS perspective. This chapter describes the research design, including the setting,
target population, sample, sampling method and recruitment. Data collection procedures were
examined in detail as well as data analysis to include reliability and validity. Confidentiality,
along with ethical considerations, were made to ensure the safety of all participants.
Research Design
This study’s design was qualitative. The research questions were the basis for selecting
this type of research design. Creswell (2014) indicated that qualitative research allows the
researcher to collect data in a natural setting. The study used an innovative case study approach
in a K–12 educational setting. The case study approach addressed the research questions through
an in-depth analysis. I chose qualitative methodology because it allowed me to have detailed
conversations through interviews to gain first-hand accounts and insights about experiences and
opportunities for leadership training for K–12 OPS.
Qualitative research is defined as studying phenomena in their natural settings,
attempting to make sense of or interpret it, and trying to understand the meaning people have
constructed and how they make sense of their world (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). It describes the
lived experiences of individuals (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). My case study involved eight sub-
cases consisting of individual participants. Semi-structured interviews (see Appendix A) were
conducted with eight OPS. Each leader was a subcase within the study, given that each
39

represented a different title, department, background, and experience. I used pseudonyms when
referring to participants in the study. I believe this qualitative methodology allowed me to obtain
first-hand information and insights about my participants’ experiences and feelings about
leadership experiences, training and their development as a leader.
The specific strategy of inquiry I used was semi-structured interviews. After completing
the interviews, I coded with a priori codes tied to the KMO influences surrounding LD.
Gathering good data by asking good open-ended questions that can be followed with probes for
details is a key goal of qualitative research (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This strategy of inquiry
aligns with my framing because it allows for an open exchange of information. It also permitted
me to ask follow-up questions as needed to best elicit relevant information. My goal was to
understand the knowledge, skills and motivation of the OPS as well as how the organization
influences what leadership training exists for OPS in K–12 school districts. The goal of the
interviews was to capture a picture of the participants’ experiences and perspectives (Merriam,
2009). The participants’ transition into operations leadership roles was examined as well. To
increase the accuracy of the data, interviews should be audio recorded (Creswell & Creswell,
2018), and that is the method I followed in this study.
The interviews via the interview protocol (see Appendix B ) provided information
relevant to the research questions. They allowed me to gain insight into these leaders’
knowledge, skills, and motivation relative to LD. I gathered the narrative data from the
conversation. Following the interviews, I reviewed the transcriptions, analyzed the data, and
coded according to the a priori codes connected to my KMO study.
I also conducted a document analysis by collecting and reviewing organizational
documents to determine how the organization supports LD and OPS training. I reviewed
40

documents, including the district budget, training offered to leaders, meeting agendas for
administrative workshops, and district agreements with administrators (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). Document analysis allowed for the validation of findings from the interview data.
Documents related to the study and KMO influences were collected. A listing of documents can
be found in Appendix C. Documents are listed in the appendix but not individually attached to
protect the organization’s confidentiality.
I established cut-off scores to determine whether an influence was an asset or a need. For
the semi-structured interviews, it was 75%. If there was 75% or greater agreement among
participants on an influence, I determined if the influence was a need or an asset. Since this study
had eight total participants, six participants were needed to determine if the influence fell into the
need or asset category based on the 75% cut-off score. In terms of document analysis, I looked
for evidence within a specific document(s) to reflect a given KMO influence. Given the limited
documents available, I had to rely almost exclusively on the semi-structured, in-person
interviews and the literature review for this innovative case study. Therefore, 90% weight (based
on the 75% threshold) was given to interviews and 10% weight to documents for any given
influence during data collection.
Research Questions
1. What are the knowledge, skills, and motivation (KM) influences related to the current
leadership development system for operations leaders?
2. What are the organization (O) influences related to operations leaders’ current
leadership development system?

41

Setting
The setting was a private, secure office located in an administrative office building which
is part of a K–12 educational school system. The setting was free from distracting noise and
allowed for uninterrupted conversation. All cell phones were put on silent mode, and a “do-not-
disturb” sign was placed on the office door. A digital recorder, along with Google Meet, was
used for recording. Participants have easy access to the building where the interviews took place,
and the office is located in a quiet, confidential area. The setting was appropriate to answer the
two research questions because the study focused on operations LD at one K–12 educational
institution.
Participants
Target and Accessible Population and Sample
The target population for this study was K–12 operational leaders in the United States.
The accessible population was K–12 operational leaders in the northeastern United States. The
sample consisted of eight K–12 operational leaders in one school district in the northeastern
United States.
Sampling Method
This study examined the experiences of eight K–12 OPS at a school district. I chose the
northeastern area of the United States based on convenience and accessibility. Therefore, the
method I used was convenience sampling. I chose BHSD to conduct the study and gather my
participants. Convenience sampling was the method used to choose the school district due to the
availability of study participants. The individual participants were chosen by purposeful
sampling; selection was based on the job title held in the school district. A requirement and the
42

criteria for participation was that the individual held a leadership position/title in one of the
school district’s operations departments.
Recruitment
Recruitment followed the University of Southern California (USC) Institutional Review
Board (IRB) approval process, and verbal approval was obtained from the superintendent of
schools of BHSD. Participants were contacted by telephone to ask if they would be willing to be
part of the study. Appendix D presents the information shared with participants during the
recruitment call. I provided each participant with the informed consent document for the study
(see Appendix E). The interview participant selection criterion is detailed below.
Criterion 1
Participants (OPS) must hold a leadership position/title in one of the school district’s
operations departments.
Criterion 2
The OPS leaders must be either hired or promoted into their leadership roles within the
past 10 years.
Criterion 3
The OPS leaders must be available for an interview during January 2023.
Data Collection
There were two points of data collection: interview data and document analysis. Table 2
presents the RQ and the data collection used. Using these two methods allowed me to capture
various perspectives and information.

43

Table 2
Research Questions and Data Sources
Research question Interviews Document analysis
What are the knowledge, skills, and motivation
(KM) influences related to the current
leadership development system for operations
leaders?
X X
What are the organization (O) influences related
to operations leaders and their current leadership
development system?
X X

Interview Protocol
Two research questions guided this study, each linked to semi-structured interview
questions (see Appendix A) centered around leadership training and development for OPS. This
interview consisted of nine background, descriptive questions asked during the semi-structured
interview to collect general data regarding the interviewees’ prior training and leadership
experience, followed by four primary questions related to knowledge influences, two primary
questions related to motivation influences and ended with three primary questions related to
organizational influences.
The types of questions in the interview ranged from background, knowledge, skills,
motivation, and behaviors to feelings, opinions and values (Patton, 2002). All interview
questions were related to the research questions, which were aligned with the KMO gap analysis
model. The purpose of the questions was to address the research questions by allowing
interviewees to offer their experiences and perspectives, knowledge, skills, motivation and
organizational influences impacting their LD. Appendix F presents the assumed influences and
44

the interview questions. The questions were open-ended and flexible yet structured enough to
gather the required data to answer the research questions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). I conducted
the interviews one-on-one, and the questions were open-ended yet flexible to allow for follow-up
and probes (Patton, 2002).
Procedures
The procedures for collecting data involved several steps and procedures. First, I read the
interview protocol (Appendix B) to each interviewee before the interview. Second, informed
consent (Appendix E) was secured from all participants. Third, participants read the
confidentiality statement. Fourth, I conducted 45-to 60-minute interviews in January 2023.
The interviews were conducted in a private office with the door closed, cell phones
turned off, and no interruptions permitted. The interviews were recorded via phone and Google
Meet. A transcript was produced for each interview. The interview ended with the participant
having the opportunity to offer any final information and ask questions.
After all interviews were completed, document analysis was conducted to validate or
invalidate the various KMO influences. This was done by reviewing official documents
(Appendix C) to triangulate findings from the personal interviews and the literature review.
Confidentiality Parameters
Confidentiality and informed consent were agreed upon with all participants prior to
participating in the study (Hinga, 2021). My study was voluntary. The leaders chosen for the
study did not receive any compensation. The incentive to participate was the opportunity to
discuss their individual experiences with LD and offer suggestions for improvement. I did not
use any power in terms of my position in the organization to convince individuals to participate.
All participant information was recorded in such a way that it was not linked to their name or
45

position. It was made clear that the study and goal of this research are to support higher levels of
success for individuals and the organization. I went through the university’s IRB process for
proper approval of the study (see Appendix G). This research will serve the interest of leaders
and the organization they serve. The research questions that were listed in the previous section
were answered in the study.
To protect the participants’ privacy, no personal or identifiable information was obtained
to facilitate the research or used as part of data collection. The steps taken to ensure access to the
minimum amount of information necessary to complete the study were careful analysis and
writing of the interview questions, ensuring document analysis did not identify any particular
name(s) or departments and ensuring no additional information was obtained about individuals
other than what was necessary as part of the study.
Data Management and Encryption
I remain current with cybersecurity practices by practicing safe computing practices,
staying current by reading technological articles, installing anti-virus software, installing a
firewall, and enabling automatic updates for Windows. In regard to system authentication and
security, I ensured that access to all confidential and sensitive data was managed appropriately
by using strong passwords, restricting user permissions to the files, and locking the workstation
when I was away. Data encryption was used to further protect confidential and sensitive research
data. The encryption stays with the data as it travels through any networks, web servers,
application servers, and database servers.
Dissemination of Findings
Dissemination refers to a planned process that involves consideration of target audiences
and the settings in which research findings are to be received and, where appropriate,
46

communicating and interacting with wider policy and … service audiences in ways that will
facilitate research uptake in decision-making processes and practice. (Wilson et al., 2010, p. 93)
I will disseminate the findings to the executive team in the school district through a
summary document listing the findings that resulted from the research. I received informed
consent from all the participants in this regard. I will share the findings with the participants as
well.
Data Analysis
The data analysis provided answers to the research questions (Merriam, 2009). I
conducted data analysis using two methods: descriptive and document analysis.
Descriptive Analysis
The first method was to review all of the interview data. The interviews were conducted
in person and recorded over Zoom. I took handwritten notes during the interviews as well. I first
read the transcripts without analysis to get a general sense of the overall information shared in
the interview (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). I then listened to each recording while reviewing the
transcripts and my hand-written notes. This allowed me to review the data multiple times to start
analyzing the data. The process helped me code according to the KMO framework searching for
keywords and aligning with the a priori coding method (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Descriptive
analysis of the data revealed the frequency of each a priori code.
Document Analysis
The second method for data analysis involved reviewing organizational documents. I
analyzed documents to seek findings according to the KMO framework. The first step in the
process was to gather documents related to the research question that was being asked of the
participant. I then reviewed the documents, looking for any evidence to support the research
47

question response from the participant. I looked for keywords and any patterns across documents
that supported the KMO a priori terms and themes. Finally, I determined if the document
supported the research question.
Both the interviews and document analysis provided meaning to the research questions
by quantifying the responses in such a way that it helped to determine if the influence was an
asset or need for the group.
Reliability
Reliability refers to the extent to which the findings of a study can be replicated (Salkind,
2017). The manner in which I set up my study makes it convenient for another researcher to
replicate it. The interview questions can be used in any school, distinct from collecting and
analyzing similar data.
Dependability
Dependability is important to trustworthiness because it establishes the study’s findings
as consistent and repeatable. Dependability means that if the work were to be repeated with the
same methods and participants, similar results would most likely be attained (Shenton, 2004).
Dependability could also be improved through triangulation to ensure that the weak points of one
approach to data collection are reimbursed by the use of alternate data-gathering methods. In my
study, I triangulated the data by conducting interviews with eight sub-cases, conducted a detailed
literature review and reviewed documents such as budgets and meeting agendas. According to
Maxwell (2004), triangulation is a method that can support the conclusions of the data. It allows
the researcher to utilize different data collection methods to support the research claims. I also
ensured dependability through an inquiry audit. To conduct the audit, I shared my research
information with someone outside the research team and participants. This individual is a
48

member of the organization’s leadership team who scrutinized the accuracy of the information
and relevant supporting documents.
Confirmability
Confirmability is the degree to which other researchers can confirm the study’s findings.
Confirmability entails establishing data and interpretations and pertains to instilling confidence
that the findings are based on the participant’s narratives and words rather than the researchers’
biases (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). I used several techniques to establish confirmability in this
study. I ran the data twice and carefully reviewed all transcripts prior to performing the a priori
coding. I also have an audit trail of the raw data, recordings, interview notes and documents
collected for the study to establish confirmability if audited. In addition, the triangulation of the
data and perspectives helped me to confirm the KMO a priori themes for this study.
Validity
Validity determines if the research measures that which it was intended to measure and if
the means of measurement are accurate (Golafshani, 2003). In this study, validity was important
to ensure the questions measured the knowledge and skills, motivation and organizational
influences that were intended to be measured (Salkind, 2017). Beyond my dissertation
committee, I had two other USC doctoral cohort members using the KMO framework review the
semi-structured interview questions to ensure they targeted the KMO objectives. I also had a
colleague who holds a doctorate in leadership review the content to validate the questions.
Credibility
I used three specific strategies to ensure credibility and trustworthiness. The first was
confidentiality and informed consent, which was agreed upon with all participants prior to the
interviews (Hinga, 2021). The second was triangulation. I triangulated the data by conducting
49

interviews with eight participants, each one representing a sub-case, conducting a detailed
literature review and reviewing organizational documents. The third strategy was reflexivity,
meaning reflecting on biases and their impact on the study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). One way I
engaged in reflexivity was by writing notes about participants’ comments and my thoughts
during the interview.
To add additional credibility to the study, all interviews were voluntary and
uncompensated. The incentive to participate was the opportunity to share experiences and ideas
for potential solutions. I did not use any power in terms of the position held in the organization to
convince individuals to participate. All participant information was recorded in such a way that it
was not linked to their name or position. It was made clear that the study and goal of the training
were to support higher levels of success for individuals and the organization. I went through the
university’s IRB process for proper approval of the study (see Appendix G). The chosen school
district did not require a separate IRB approval beyond the university’s IRB approval.
Transferability
Transferability is the degree to which the results of qualitative research can be transferred
to other contexts or settings with other respondents (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The researcher
facilitates the transferability judgment by a potential user through the thick description. The thick
description refers to rich, descriptive information about the study. With this detailed information
on participants and their experiences, readers can judge how the data and study apply to their
environments (Polit & Beck, 2010). The transfer of information often has generalizing features
where the researcher must recognize what has been learned from one situation to another (Kuper
et al., 2008). The goal of transferability is to allow others to recreate the process followed in a
study and apply it to their own organization and programs. This will help to meet the criteria for
50

external validity. Transferability is especially important in qualitative studies since there is often
a small number of individuals involved as participants, and it is impossible to demonstrate
findings to other situations and populations (Shenton, 2004).
In this study, the transferability is to other school districts with OPS at their K–12
schools. The data revealed information and findings that generated potential solutions and
information that will benefit other K–12 organizations. The interviews and documents allowed
me to perform detailed data analysis to report the findings related to my research questions in
Chapter Four, followed by my recommendations in Chapter Five.
Conclusion
This chapter provided an overview of the qualitative methodology and data analysis used
in this study. The chapter described the research design, including the setting, target population,
sample, sampling method and recruitment. Data collection procedures were examined in detail as
well as data analysis to include reliability and validity. Priority was given to the confidentiality
of all participants. All processes were followed to ensure the qualitative case study procedures
were implemented in the study. The following chapter presents the study’s findings in relation to
the research questions.

51

Chapter Four: Research Findings
The purpose of this study was to explore LD within K–12 schools for OPS. Public sector
leadership is key to advancing an organization toward accomplishing its goals and mission
(Ugaddan & Park, 2017). The assumed causes of KMO influences were explored using the two
research questions, and the resulting data is organized and presented in this chapter.
1. What are the knowledge, skills, and motivation (KM) influences related to the current
leadership development system for operations leaders?
2. What are the organization (O) influences related to operations leaders’ current
leadership development system?
Data collection for this study consisted of participant interviews and document collection
and analysis centered on the research questions using the KMO theoretical framework. These
multiple data sources were collected to validate the assumed causes. Specifically, interviews and
document analysis were collected to understand the knowledge, motivation and organization
challenges OPS in K–12 encounter relative to their LD. The interviews, documents, and
literature were used to triangulate the findings to enhance the validity and trustworthiness of the
research.
Participant Background Information
In terms of the actual interviews, I asked nine background questions related to the OPS
role and LD before commencing the semi-structured interview. The questions were asked to
collect this background information, and the following sections present a summary of the
participants’ responses.

52

What is your Current Department?
Operations leaders at the organization oversee transportation, maintenance, custodial,
food services, technology, business office, human resources, and performing arts. The
organization has eight operations departments within its overall structure. Figure 1 shows the
OPS departments in the district.

Figure 1
Operations Departments

53

Please Tell Me How Long You Have Worked in the Organization
The participants had experience working for the organization ranging from less than 1
year to 34 years. This reflected their total years working regardless of the position held. Figure 2
shows the range of total years worked for the organization regardless of position held.

Figure 2
OPS Total Years Worked in Organization

54

How Long Have You Worked in a Leadership Role for the Organization?
The participant’s experience ranges from 1 year to 20 years in their current leadership
role. However, six participants have been leaders for less than 4 years. Figure 3 shows the range
of years in the current leadership role.

Figure 3
OPS Total Years of Leadership Experience in Organization

55

Was Your Previous Job Role on the Academic or Operations Side of K–12?
Only one participant had served on both the academic and operations side of K–12 in
their career. The remaining seven were solely on the operations side. Figure 4 represents the
previous backgrounds of OPS.

Figure 4
Previous Backgrounds

56

What Is Your Highest Level of Education? Do You Need to Hold a Specific Certificate or
Degree for Your Current Role?
Six participants hold an associate degree, one holds a bachelor’s degree, and one holds a
master’s degree. Only one of the participants needed a bachelor’s degree to be hired into their
role. The remaining participants did not require a specific degree beyond high school to perform
their leadership role. Specific educational or industry-specific certifications were not needed for
their current leadership positions. However, three participants held certifications related to their
current field/position. Table 3 represents the education of participants and if they hold a related
certificate for their position.

Table 3
OPS Education Level and Related Certifications
OPS Associate degree Bachelor’s
degree
Master’s degree Related
certification
OPS 1 X X
OPS 2 X X
OPS 3 X X
OPS 4 X
OPS 5 X
OPS 6 X
OPS 7 X
OPS 8 X

57

Please Highlight Any Roles That Were Considered Administrative, Supervisory/Leadership
Roles Before Joining the Organization (or Were You Promoted From Within?)
Seventy-five percent, or six leaders, were promoted to a leadership role from within the
organization and did not hold any positions considered administrative or supervisory/leadership
roles before joining the organization. The remaining two were hired from outside the
organization and from another K–12 educational organization, having served in an operations
leadership role. Figure 5 represents the percentage of OPS hired from within versus outside the
organization.

Figure 5
Promoted Versus Outside Hire

58

How Many Employees Do You Currently Supervise?
The leaders interviewed supervised anywhere between three and 180 staff members.
Seventy-five percent, or six of the eight interviewed, supervised over 60 staff members. Figure 6
represents the percentage of OPS who supervise over 60 staff members.

Figure 6
Number of Staff Members OPS Supervise

59

Was Any Leadership Training Offered or Provided by the District Upon Hiring? (Was It
Effective or Not? If So, Who Provided Any Training?)
All participants agreed that there was no formal leadership training offered when hired.
All participants had no formal leadership training in the past. The two who did have training
received it outside the field of education in a previous job or organization. In those two cases, it
had been over ten years since the training was held. Figure 7 represents leadership training
offered by the employer at hire.

Figure 7
Percentage of OPS Not Given Leadership Training by Employer at the Time of Hire

60

Leaders Need to Feel Confident That They Possess the Leadership Skills and Training to
Carry Out Their Jobs
All participants agreed that they had not received formal leadership training in their
current roles. Therefore, there was a person or department that provided formal leadership
training. Figure 8 represents current formal leadership training for OPS.

Figure 8
Percentage of OPS Currently Not Receiving Formal Leadership Training

61

The background questions revealed that the eight participants chosen through
convenience sampling represent 87.5% of the organization’s operations departments; seven of
the eight operations departments were available for the study. Combined, these leaders oversee
slightly over 50 % of the organization’s total overall employee base. This diverse participant
base allowed for data representing a cross-section of departments and experiences. I feel data
saturation was reached with the eight interviews, and it was not necessary to interview additional
leaders. The next section moves beyond the background data and presents the findings of the
study based on the research questions.
Findings
This next section will present the findings for the research questions. The findings are
organized by the two research questions. Each finding is aligned with the appropriate KMO
influence.
Findings Research Question 1
The first research question asked, “What are the knowledge, skills, and motivation (KM)
influences related to the current LD system for operations leaders?” This question explored the
various influences an OPS may have experienced relative to their knowledge, skills and
motivation with regard to LD. Procedural and metacognitive knowledge influences were
examined via Interview Questions 1–4 (see Appendix A). Self-efficacy and expectancy-value
motivational influences were explored in Interview Questions 5 and 6 (see Appendix A). The
next section will explore the specific findings within the knowledge influences:
RQ 1 Results and Findings for Procedural and Metacognitive Knowledge Needs
Procedural and metacognitive knowledge in areas related to communication skills,
growth mindset, goal setting and self-knowledge/reflection were assessed. These were four key
62

leadership knowledge areas identified in the literature review. For procedural knowledge, the
study examined if OPS knew how and were trained in techniques, methods and necessary steps
to communicate effectively, practice a growth mindset, engage in goal setting and possess self-
awareness and reflection skills and strategies. For metacognitive knowledge, the study assessed
if leaders held an awareness of themselves as a leader and could analyze and reflect in all of
these areas as well. The next section will detail the findings for each specific knowledge
influence.
Interview findings for Knowledge Influence 1: Operation Leaders Need to Know
How to Communicate Effectively to Lead Staff. Effective communication skills involve the
process of exchanging ideas, thoughts, opinions, and knowledge. The interviewees demonstrated
a concrete understanding of effective communication skills and shared specific examples to
support their knowledge and experiences. The majority shared that communication was a
strength, and procedural knowledge was evidenced by successfully running meetings, handling
employee conflicts, emails, phone calls, presentations, team meetings, in-person training,
surveys, and conducting webinars. All eight leaders understood the importance of
communication and were able to articulate metacognitive knowledge by sharing why effective
communication is so important as a leader. According to OPS 2, “Leaders must be able to
communicate … share ideas and thoughts.” OPS 4 stated, “I think the lack of ability to
communicate results in conflict.” OPS 3 shared, “Effective communication is essential as a
leader. It ensures everyone is on the same page.” OPS 5 added, “Communication makes
everyone feel involved and helps to prevent misunderstandings and unnecessary conflicts.” Table
4 represents comments from participants regarding communication.

63

Table 4
Participants ’ Core Comments on Communication Skills
Participant Communication skills core comment
OPS 1 “Communication keeps folks on the same page and makes them
accountable.”
OPS 2 “Be able to articulate your thoughts without being authoritative.”
OPS 3 “Awareness and listening are key.”
OPS 4 “Makes everyone feel involved.”
OPS 5 “I feel there is always room for improvement.”
OPS 6 “Communication means teamwork. … No one is guessing or
wondering.”
OPS 7 “It is about taking time to listen and be patient.”
OPS 8 “Things need to be set up correctly and communicated, or there
will be issues down the line.”

They were asked to rate themselves and comment on any previous formal training on a
scale of 1–10 (10 being the highest). There was only one outlier with a score of 5. The majority
felt confident and capable in their communication skills, and scores ranged from 7 to 9. In
addition to sharing their experiences with communication, the interviews revealed strong
communication skills on the part of all the participants. Table 5 indicates the self-rating given by
each participant.

64

Table 5
Participants ’ Self-Rating for Communication Skills
Participant Self-rating communication skills
OPS 1 8
OPS 2 8/9
OPS 3 8/9
OPS 4 7
OPS 5 8
OPS 6 8
OPS 7 5
OPS 8 7/8

Additional probes in the interview indicated that only two participants had formal
communication training. Lastly, the interviewees mentioned where they feel they would like to
improve with regard to their communication skills. The majority indicated they need to improve
(a) handling conflict and (b) dealing with a crisis situation in the workplace.
Document Analysis. In terms of documents, I found many documents on both the
department and district websites
1
to demonstrate that effective communication is occurring. In
particular, social media posts, board meetings and community-related documents were easy to
locate, and validated communication is important in this organization. Communication from
executive leadership to other leaders happens frequently at monthly meetings and through
internal communications. Appendix C provides a listing of documents.

1
The source is the organization’s website. Actual URL is not provided because it would reveal the identity of the
organization.
65

Summary. Effective communication is currently an asset. The interviews and documents
combined met the threshold to demonstrate both procedural and metacognitive knowledge in
these leadership skill areas.
Interview Findings for Knowledge Influence 2: Operations Leaders Need to Know
How to Set Goals (Goal-Setting Process). All OPS are not systematically trained or involved
with the goal-setting process. The majority mentioned there was no formal communication about
goals at their level and no goal setting expected from the organization. That being said, 50% do
set goals for themselves, and 20% have them written down. Thirty percent mentioned they
engaged in informal goal setting with their supervisor. Two mentioned they had limited training
in previous employment (outside of education) in goal setting. While factual and conceptual
knowledge was present for OPS, procedural and metacognitive knowledge needs to be
strengthened. Overall, the participants demonstrated a concrete grasp of the benefits of goal
setting, as evidenced by comments. According to OPS 1, “Goals keep individuals focused and
create a process for goal attainment.” OPS 2 shared, “Goal setting is very satisfying in terms of
overall work performance.” OPS 3 stated, “Additional training in this area would be beneficial.”
OPS 4 added that goals help employees to conquer their daily jobs. Table 6 shows responses to
overall experiences with goal setting.

66

Table 6
Participants ’ Core Points Regarding Goal Setting
Participant Core point
OPS 1 “No goal settings expected. No communication on goals. I set
them for myself. I love goal setting.”
OPS 2 “Before I can set goals, I need to figure out where we are at. This
is a fact-finding year, but I like goal setting. I do not have to
turn them into anyone.”
OPS 3 “I have very little knowledge in this area, … but I do write a list
of everything I need to get done for the day.”
OPS 4 “Yes, I have training. I learned through YouTube and other
technology I like setting goals and setting small goals and larger
ones.”
OPS 5 “In a previous job, I was trained to set goals. … It is more
difficult in education due to unions and not being able to offer
rewards for performance.”
OPS 6 “I have never had training but know how to set goals. I have been
involved in setting department goals outside of education. I feel
it is very important.”
OPS 7 “I like goal setting. I do it sometimes, but nothing official.”
OPS 8 “I have goals. … More casual, nothing official, no annual goals
submitted.”

Document Analysis. District documents and board meeting agendas reveal strong goal
setting at the district level.
2
The cabinet-level head of each department is responsible for
submitting the goals. While department leaders may be involved in helping to shape and carry

2
The source is the organization’s website. Actual URL is not provided because it would reveal the identity of the
organization.

67

out these goals, there is no formal expectation across all departments that all OPS, regardless of
level, engage in goal setting, be trained in goal setting, and have ongoing discussions and
accountability to goal setting. Therefore, no documents exist for this participant group.
Summary. While the OPS have a solid understanding and the necessary factual and
conceptual knowledge in this area, both procedural and metacognitive training and discussion on
goal setting and aligning goals to district goals would benefit this research group. Therefore, goal
setting is a need for the organization. Less than a 75% threshold was met for this influence
during the interviews, and documents were lacking.
Interview Findings for Knowledge Influence 3: Operations Leaders Need to Possess
a Growth Mindset. The majority of the participants shared that the term “growth mindset” is not
used in the operations areas on a regular basis and that they had limited exposure to the overall
concept, training and/or how to apply strategies as a leader. Two leaders were very familiar with
the term and felt strongly that leaders must practice and model a growth mindset as opposed to a
fixed mindset. The majority need to gain both procedural and metacognitive knowledge in this
area. OPS 2 shared that “if you are working in education, it is very hard to have a fixed mindset
since we are in the relationship business and have to have a growth mindset.” OPS 1 shared,
“You are the leader of your department, and I need to show and teach folks, so they grow into
higher positions.” Table 7 shows comments from participants regarding the growth mindset.

68

Table 7
Participants ’ Comments Regarding Growth Mindset
Participant Core point
OPS 1 “Growth mindset is about bettering myself and my subordinates. I
can grow, and they can grow.”
OPS 2 “It allows you to try new things and build trust, and we need to
always promote a growth mindset.”
OPS 3 “This term is not something I am super familiar with, but I do
encourage staff to get professional development to grow.”
OPS 4 “Not familiar with the growth mindset. … It’s hard with adults as
many have fixed mindsets.”
OPS 5 “Many individuals are set in their ways. I have not heard of a
growth mindset.”
OPS 6 “Not aware of it, but it is always good to be open to change.”
OPS 7 “I possess both fixed and growth. Depends on the situation.
However, to adapt to change, you have to grow and learn.”
OPS 8 “I am not really familiar with a growth mindset. I do try to look
for more than one solution to a problem.”

Document Analysis. Documents that support a growth mindset are discussed and used in
educational organizations. However, most of the documents are items related to professional
development and training tied to the academic side of the organization. I did not find documents,
training, or professional development for OPS.
Summary. Based on the 75% overall threshold and the interview and document data,
growth mindset training is identified as a need.
Interview Findings for Knowledge Influence 4: Operations Leaders Need to Possess
Self-Awareness, Self-Knowledge and Self-Reflection Skills. Self-awareness, knowledge and
69

reflection were assessed by asking OPS to describe themselves as leaders and how they increase
their job skills. A focus on procedural knowledge was gained through exploring how they
increase self-knowledge, their techniques and strategies. In terms of metacognitive, a focus was
on discussing reflective practices and asking interviewees to cite specific examples. Questions
focusing on leadership style and overall skills allowed them to share their knowledge and
experiences. Fifty percent of the interviewees immediately stated they were “hands-on” leaders.
Given that most of their everyday responsibilities involve working side by side with staff to carry
out operations, a hands-on approach makes sense. All leaders shared they are very engaged in
their departments’ day-to-day activities and take great pride in managing their teams’
performance.
In terms of reflection and self-awareness, most participants did not elaborate on or
describe robust experiences, any reflection training, or specific activities surrounding their
leadership to indicate reflective practices or metacognitive knowledge. However, they all
expressed the desire to learn more. They have factual and conceptual knowledge in this area, but
their procedural and metacognitive knowledge and skills need to be strengthened. Three
participants practiced reflection and highlighted the important benefits of a leader. OPS 2 shared
how reflective practices can help with making tough decisions and helps one to grow. OPS 4
echoed those comments and added that it helps to reflect after making decisions. OPS 6 stated,
“It helps process things. I can go back and think of how I handled something.” Table 8 captures
participants’ descriptions of their leadership style as well as if they engage in reflective practices.

70

Table 8
Participants ’ Leadership Style and Engagement in Reflective Practices
Participant Leadership style Engage in reflective practices
OPS 1 “Open-door, listener, set the example.” Yes
OPS 2 “Organized, hard-worker, hands-on.” Not often
OPS 3 “Hands-on.” No
OPS 4 “Parent/coaching style, hands-on.” No
OPS 5 “Firm, fair, and friendly.” Heard of it
OPS 6 “Communicator, not a micromanager,
accessible.”
No
OPS 7 “Not demanding, more passive, but
very hands-on.”
No
OPS 8 “Efficient, patient, communicator.” Not often

Document analysis. In terms of documents, I did not find documents indicating
increasing self-knowledge, awareness, leadership styles, or reflection skills and training provided
to OPS.
Summary. While there was an understanding at the factual and conceptual level,
increased procedural and metacognitive knowledge in terms of self-awareness and knowledge
aligned with self-reflection strategies would benefit OPS leaders. Therefore, since the 75%
threshold was not met for this influence during the interviews and documents were lacking, this
knowledge influence was identified as a need.

71

RQ1 Results and Findings for Self-Efficacy and Expectancy-Value Motivation Needs
The study also examined two motivation influences: self-efficacy and expectancy value.
Self-efficacy is defined as one’s ability to succeed in certain situations and perceived capabilities
for learning or performing actions at designated levels (Bandura, 1997). According to Pintrich
(2003), expectancy-value theory is based on the idea that motivation can be influenced by the
individual or organization’s beliefs or expectations for success. The next section will detail the
findings for each specific motivation influence.
Interview Findings for Motivation Influence 1: Operations Leaders Need to Feel
Confident That They Possess the Leadership Skills and Training to Carry Out Their Jobs.
The interview findings indicated that all participants felt confident that they possessed the skills
and training to carry out their jobs. However, it was noted in almost every interview that they did
not always feel this way and that a stronger onboarding and transition into leadership is needed.
The more confident leaders made comments such as “I know my position. … I am effective at
leading teams. I am good at training. I am very confident because I had good mentors.”
Comments from the few leaders with less confidence included, “I would like more support from
my supervisor to help build my confidence. With additional training, I would be more
confident.” Table 9 highlights participants’ comments regarding confidence as a leader. Table 10
presents their self-rating scores with regard to confidence.

72

Table 9
Participants ’ Core Comments on Their Confidence
Participant Core point
OPS 1 “I feel confident in my knowledge and skills, and I have been doing this a
very long time.”
OPS 2 “I am sitting at the table. … My position is so unique.”
OPS 3 “Accomplishing things as a team builds my confidence.”
OPS 4 “Would give my confidence a 7 now in terms of having the right skills, but a
4 when hired.”
OPS 5 “So many things can go wrong as a leader. … Crisis. … Right now, I feel
fairly confident about my skills.”
OPS 6 “I tend to be a timider. … Additional training would be helpful.”
OPS 7 “I know I can do it. … I am just passive at times, still learning how to do
everything.”
OPS 8 “Have been through so much; I feel I know my job inside and out.”

Table 10
Participants ’ Self-Rating
Participant Self-rating confidence skills
OPS 1 8
OPS 2 8
OPS 3 9
OPS 4 7
OPS 5 7
OPS 6 “Not very” no #
OPS 7 6
73

Document Analysis. There were no documents available for this motivational area.
Summary. Given the threshold of 75 %, this area was identified as an asset. However, it
is important to note that although the leaders indicated confidence, additional comments stated
that they lacked confidence and felt they lacked the necessary skills and training when they were
new in their positions. This area will be further assessed under organizational influences.
Interview Findings for Motivation Influence 2: Operations Leaders Need to Value
Growing Their Leadership Knowledge and Skills. All interviewees felt very strongly that they
value growth and leadership. Unfortunately, given their limited opportunities for growth and
professional development, they did not have a lot of past experiences to draw upon and share in
the interviews. However, they value their leadership role and would welcome and value all
appropriate training to maximize effectiveness and grow as leaders. All eight leaders were open
and eager to receive formal and informal leadership training. According to OPS 8, “Growing as a
leader is very important. … Knowledge is power. … Growing helps build self-confidence, too.”
OPS 4 shared, “We need to always focus on the continued open mind and willingness to learn.”
OPS 6 shared. “I think it’s really important to grow as a leader. … Times are changing. They
never stay the same. … It is so important to grow as a leader.” Table 11 presents core comments
regarding valuing growing leadership skills.

74

Table 11
Participant ’s Core Comments on Valuing Growing as a Leader
Participant Core point
OPS 1 “Extremely important. … As my department grows, I need to grow.”
OPS 2 “Working in the education field requires continual growth.”
OPS 3 “I enjoy growing as a leader. … It is so important. … Others expect us to
keep getting better.”
OPS 4 “I like growing and learning from those around me, … keeping an open
mind.”
OPS 5 “There is always something to learn as a leader. … I value learning.”
OPS 6 “Times are changing. … [It is] important to grow as a leader. I value
interacting with other departments to learn.”
OPS 7 “Learning holds tremendous value for me. … It motivates me.”
OPS 8 “Times change, policies change, learning is essential to become as good as
you can.”

Document Analysis. No documents corresponded with this motivation area.
Summary. Even though there was a lack of documents to support this area, the study
group met a 100% threshold based on interview data, bypassing the required overall 75%
threshold for this area. Therefore, this motivation influence area was deemed an asset.
Findings Research Question 2: RQ 2 Results and Findings for Organizational Influences
and Needs
The second research question asked, “What are the organizational (O) influences related
to the current LD system for operations leaders?” This question explored the various influences
an OPS may have experienced relative to organizational influences concerning LD. These areas
were assessed via Interview Questions 7 through 9 (see Appendix A).
75

Organizational influences include cultural models and settings. This study explored three
areas in cultural settings. Data and findings pertained to resources such as time, professional
development, and overall access to training and development. In addition, under cultural settings,
data were gathered relative to knowledge sharing: the exchange of information between top
leadership and OPS. Lastly, data analysis and findings were gathered on participants’
experiences and benefits associated with coaching for LD.
Interview Findings for Cultural Setting Influence 1: Organizational Support & Resources
(Professional development, Time, Access, Transition) for LD for Operations Leaders
In terms of overall organizational support and opportunities to grow their leadership
capacity, leaders made the following comments. According to OPS 1, “There are limited
opportunities to grow. There is a state conference.” OPS 2 shared, “Transition was the most
difficult. Very jarring start. This would be an area to provide more support.” OPS 4 stated,
“There is a lack of training for OPS. We concentrate mostly on teachers. It’s more sink or swim.”
OPS 5 echoed these statements, adding, “On our end, it is difficult to offer anything. We are all
so unique.” OPS 7 said, “I don’t know that there’s anything for us. I know more training could
only help.” OPS 8 shared, “I would have liked more training when promoted. I had to learn from
others.”
The majority of the comments evidenced knowledge that in the field of education, the
focus is on students and academics. Therefore, for the majority of the participants, there was an
understanding and acceptance among them as to why there are limited opportunities for OPS.
However, all the participants expressed they would benefit from more time to train, more
onboarding/transition training, and more opportunities in the future. In terms of the type of
leadership training, the majority expressed openness to anything that would help them grow. The
76

areas we discussed earlier, communication skills, growth mindset, goal setting and increasing
self-knowledge/ reflection, were areas of interest for the majority of participants. Table 12
highlights participants’ comments regarding organizational resources such as time and access to
training. Table 13 presents core comments on potential professional development training topics.

Table 12
Participants ’ Core Comments on Organizational Resources (Time and Access)
Participant Core point
OPS 1 “Not enough time. There are opportunities, but they are very limited.”
OPS 2 “Not sure yet if enough time. I know there is a summer workshop
available each year.”
OPS 3 “Maybe there are opportunities, but I can’t leave. Too busy. It is offered
for the academic side, as it should be, but very little training is geared
towards operations.”
OPS 4 “Yes, once in the summer. We concentrate on the teachers. Not much
for us.”
OPS 5 “Yes, once a year. … On our end, it’s difficult to offer. It’s more on the
academic side, and I understand why.”
OPS 6 “No time. … I think there are conferences I can attend outside, but there
is no time.”
OPS 7 “Very, very little time. I don’t know that there is anything for us.”
OPS 8 “I am not exactly sure what is available for professional development
here. There are outside meetings I can go to and learn from others in
my same job. Minimal training. No time.”

77

Table 13
Participants ’ Core Comments on Potential Professional Development Training Topics
Participant Core point
OPS 1 “Dealing with difficult people, … supervising versus leading. Learning
more about leadership.”
OPS 2 “Transition and orientation to positions need the most attention.”
OPS 3 “Communication skills. Communication to help my staff.”
OPS 4 “Management of employees/conflict training. Communication.”
OPS 5 “Learning management styles. … Dealing with difficult employees.”
OPS 6 “Handling difficult people. … Learning from other leaders would be
helpful.”
OPS 7 “Open to training in all areas … to help run my department.”
OPS 8 “Dealing with social issues/irate people. … How to calm them. I would
love a training program.”

Document Analysis
Documents indicate annual professional leadership training for OPS, usually a day or two
in the summer. Documents indicate offerings for academic leaders on a more frequent basis.
Reimbursement for additional college is available to both groups. The meeting agenda for the
annual summer retreat and the administrative agreement for salary and benefits provided detailed
information.
3
These items are listed in Appendix C

3
The source is raw data from internal training and administrative benefit package. Actual document not referenced
as it would reveal the identity of the organization.
78

Summary
This area is identified as a need for the organization. Less than 75 %of the participants
and document analysis indicates sufficient professional development, time, access, and
opportunities for OPS LD.
Interview Findings for Cultural Setting Influence 2: The Organization Needs to Recognize
Executive-Level Knowledge Sharing Is Important for Operations Leaders
Although knowledge sharing and knowledge transfer were not common terms used in
OPS departments, once it was described, all interviewees indicated they engaged in knowledge
sharing with top executives. The majority felt there were opportunities to connect with executive
leadership on an informal basis throughout the year but would welcome more formal
opportunities to learn leadership skills and advice from this group. All participants stated they
would value such learning, and it would be beneficial to them. According to OPS 6, “I know they
care for us. I would absolutely want to learn more from them.” OPS 7 stated, “Yes, I would like
more opportunities to interact. … They have years of experience that can benefit us.” Table 14
presents comments from participants on knowledge sharing.

79

Table 14
Participants ’ Core Comments on Knowledge Sharing.
Participant Core point
OPS 1 “I welcome the sharing and learning. Helps with problem-solving.”
OPS 2 “Knowledge sharing is very beneficial to have. Would like more. It can
be very lonely in OPS. Sometimes, you feel like you are on an island.”
OPS 3 “It would help them understand our operations better, and we can learn
from them and ask for advice.”
OPS 4 “I think it would be very beneficial. I don’t have a lot right now.”
OPS 5 “The education side directly impacts us, so I would like more
interactions. … [I] would like to learn about leadership styles.”
OPS 6 “Learning from each other. … You are growing from within. … That’s
really important.”
OPS 7 “I know they have a lot on their plate, but it would be nice to
communicate and learn from them more often.”
OPS 8 “I find top leadership very accessible and very comfortable with them. …
[I] would like more opportunities to learn from them and gain more
knowledge.”

Document Analysis
Documents support that knowledge sharing has occurred in the organization.
4
Meeting
agendas for a recent leadership series indicated knowledge sharing is in place. However, not all
OPS had access to the training. It was based on individuals hired within the last 5 years. The
series was titled Master Leadership Series and is included in the listing of documents in
Appendix D.

4
The source is raw data and internal training. Document not referenced as it would reveal the identity of the
organization.
80

Summary
Although this item did not meet the 75% threshold, participants shared that executive
leaders in the organization are very accessible and believe they truly care about them as leaders.
Several mentioned that knowledge sharing within the organization has been increasing in the last
several years and trending in the right direction. Most interviewees had a strong desire to engage
in more formal knowledge sharing from top leaders to develop as leaders.
Interview Findings for Cultural Setting Influence 3: The Organization Needs to Recognize
Coaching as a Valuable Tool to Assist Operations Leaders in Developing Their Leadership
Capacity
Most interviewees recognized mentoring as a valuable tool for LD and were very familiar
with this term. However, in terms of coaching for LD, no participant had formally had a coach
while in a leadership position in education. However, 20% of interviewees felt they had informal
coaching on the job from a more senior member. All participants felt coaching would be a
valuable tool to increase their leadership skills if properly matched. According to OPS 1, “In all
my transitions and positions, I never had a coach or mentor.” OPS 3 stated, “I’ve had very little
coaching. … I have to lean on my own by investigating.” OPS 5 said, “Coaching is great. We
practice coaching with our staff all the time, but I have not had it as a leader.” Table 15 presents
comments from participants on coaching.

81

Table 15
Participants ’ Comments on Coaching
Participant Core point
OPS 1 “It would have been nice to have when transitioning into leadership.”
OPS 2 “No coach, but I have had a mentor, and it was great.”
OPS 3 “That would be hard. … Our department is so unique. Really hard to
understand our department.”
OPS 4 “I have not, but I am open to all of it. … Specialized training in certain
areas would be very helpful.”
OPS 5 “Coaching could be useful to help correct behaviors or increase
knowledge, but I have not had one.”
OPS 6 “Learning from each other. You are growing from within. That’s really
important.”
OPS 7 “Not too much coaching happening in our area.”
OPS 8 “My immediate supervisors were good coaches, but it was not formal.”

Document Analysis
There were no documents regarding coaching for OPS leaders.
Summary
This area did not reach the 75% threshold in terms of interviews and documents.
Therefore, this is an area of need in the organization.
Summary of Validated Influences
Tables 16, 17, and 17 show the KMO influences for this study and their determination as
assets or needs.

82

Table 16
Knowledge Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data
Assumed procedural & metacognitive knowledge influence Asset or need
Communication skills Asset
Goal setting Need
Growth mindset Need
Self-awareness/reflection Need

Table 17
Motivation Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data
Assumed motivation influence Asset or need
Self-efficacy Asset
Value influences Asset

83

Table 18
Organization Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data
Assumed organization influence Asset or need
The cultural setting, resources Need
The cultural setting, knowledge sharing/transfer Need
The cultural setting, coaching Need

Conclusion
This chapter discussed the study’s findings and was organized by the research questions.
As indicated in Tables 16, 17, and 18, there is a need at the individual and organizational levels.
At the individual level, there is a need for goal setting, a growth mindset and self-
awareness/reflection. At the organizational level, there is a need for support and resources,
knowledge sharing, and coaching.

84

Chapter Five: Conclusions, Discussion, and Suggestions for Future Research
Leadership is the key to success in any organization (Longenecker & Insch, 2018). To
maintain that success, LD and continuous learning are essential. The overall culture and
conversation surrounding LD in K–12 education needs to be further developed to include the
uniqueness of the operations leadership role.
This chapter combines the findings from Chapter Four with the knowledge from the
literature review presented in Chapter Two. I will present detailed recommendations for each
research question in this chapter by following the KMO conceptual framework. In this chapter, I
will propose a training model that provides a comprehensive leadership training approach to
developing OPS in K–12 education. The leadership training program is LNLB. The program will
offer opportunities to OPS to engage in training activities to develop specific leadership skills,
such as communication skills and self-awareness, coupled with providing organizational support
and resources such as time and coaching. The program model is the result of examining the
individual and organizational systems and their KMO influences.
Summary of Findings
The previous chapter presented the study’s results. The findings were presented by
answering each research question while incorporating the KMO framework. The results indicate
that while OPS leaders are highly motivated and value growing their leadership skills and
capabilities, there is a need for additional support and strategies to assist in their leader
development. In particular, there are needs requiring attention at both the individual and
organizational levels. At the individual level, items to be enhanced include leadership skills such
as goal setting, possessing a growth mindset and increasing self-knowledge and reflection. At the
organizational level, items to be addressed include resources such as time and access to
85

professional development, more robust onboarding and transition, knowledge sharing, and
coaching.
The findings connect to the literature review. According to Day (2000), successful LD
programs are supported by the culture and meet the needs of both the individual and the
organization. Effective leadership includes clear communication, collaboration, coaching,
feedback and empowering subordinates (Kouzes & Posner, 2017). Action learning, mentoring,
formal and informal learning opportunities, self-directed learning, and knowledge sharing from
top executives are all part of an effective LD program (Leskiw & Singh, 2007). Identifying gaps
in knowledge and skills and providing leaders with the tools to improve should be a goal of the
organization (Day, 2011). It is important to recognize the LD needs of OPS leaders, whether
hired from within or outside the organization, which was discussed in Chapter Two. In addition,
as discussed in Chapter Two, it is common for academic leaders to hold educational degrees and
certifications and be offered professional development and mentors to help them prepare for their
careers (Vogel, 2018). This is an important aspect of leader development in education. However,
the educational system as a whole needs to be more aware and inclusive across K–12 schools,
and OPS leaders need to be offered more formal and robust leader training opportunities to
develop as well.
Overall, the findings indicate the need for more structure and supporting strategies to
meet OPS LD gaps and needs. According to Holt et al. (2018), it is vital to develop the skills and
capacity of all leaders. This next section will present specific recommendations for practice
based on the study findings.

86

Conclusions for RQ 1
The following section presents conclusions to include recommendations for RQ1. Both
the knowledge and motivation areas from the KMO model will be addressed.
RQ 1: Knowledge Recommendations
There were gaps in procedural and metacognitive knowledge and skills for goal setting,
growth mindset, and self-awareness/reflection. Regarding procedural knowledge, OPS need
more training and strategies in these areas. Regarding metacognitive knowledge, they need to be
aware of themselves as a leader and be able to reflect (Krathwohl, 2002). Leadership is a
balancing act requiring the skill to direct people to complete tasks. Still, leaders also need to
possess the ability to reflect upon their behaviors and relationships with others to lead (McGurk,
2009) effectively.
The recommendation to close this procedural and metacognitive gap is based on
leadership theory and involves intentional leadership training in various skill areas. The
leadership training, LNLB, is geared toward individual knowledge and skill development. This
will allow both procedural and metacognitive skills to be built and developed. Examples of
strategies are scenario learning, in-person learning, online training opportunities, and leadership-
related podcasts. In addition, allowing OPS leaders the opportunity to seek feedback and practice
reflection is important. Table 19 details a summary of the specific knowledge and skills
examined in this study, the determination of the influence as either a need or asset, priority
status, principle and citation, and specific recommendations.
87

Table 19
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Assumed knowledge
influence
Asset or
need
Priority
Yes or no
Principle and
citation
Context-specific
recommendation
Operations leaders
need to communicate
effectively to lead
teams/staff. (K, P and
K, M)
Asset No Provide accurate
feedback that
identifies the skills
or knowledge the
individual lacks,
along with
communication, so
that skills and
knowledge can be
learned, followed
by the teaching of
these skills and
knowledge
(Anderman &
Anderman, 2009).
Effective leaders are
knowledgeable
about the use of
effective
communication
skills to facilitate
change and
enhance
organizational
capacity. Related
research: Conger,
1991; Denning,
2005; Lewis, 2011
Effective leaders are
aware of various
types of
communication,
nonverbal
communication,
storytelling, and
person-centered
communication,
and how these
communication
The study found OPS
leaders possess strong
communication skills.
However, OPS agreed it
is a skill that I would
like to develop
continually. They were
especially interested in
sharpening their
communication skills to
deal with difficult
people.
Define effective
communication and
expectations for leaders.
Continue to role model
and provide information
and education on
effective
communication skills at
monthly OLT meetings.
Provide a job aid that
outlines effective verbal
and nonverbal
communication,
storytelling, and public
speaking.
Host speakers to train on
effective
communication skills.
Topics: dealing with
difficult people, conflict
resolution.
Utilize top management
to teach communication
skills.
88

Assumed knowledge
influence
Asset or
need
Priority
Yes or no
Principle and
citation
Context-specific
recommendation
modalities
influence change
and the
environment
within the
organization.
Related research:
Conger, 1991;
Denning, 2005;
Lewis, 2011
Operations leaders
need to possess a
growth mindset. (K,
P and K, M)
Need Yes How individuals
organize
knowledge
influences how
they learn and
apply what they
know (Schraw &
McCrudden,
2006).
Provide education and
scenario learning so
OPS can discuss real-
life situations through a
growth mindset lens.
Provide training on
growth mindset from
the work of Carol
Dweck.
Utilize podcasts as a
means of training for a
growth mindset.
Train on growth mindset
as it relates to DEI.
Operations leaders
need to know how to
set goals, individually
and departmentally,
to achieve
organizational goals.
(K, P and K, M)
Need Yes Self-regulatory
strategies,
including goal
setting, enhance
learning and
performance
(APA, 2015;
Dembo & Eaton,
2000; Denver et
al., 2009).
Provide education by
conducting a goal-
setting workshop.
Provide a job aid to assist
in goal setting.
Provide opportunities for
OPS to discuss goal
setting.
Collect annual goals from
OPS and have the
department head review
them bi-annually for
feedback.
Share and review district
goals with all OPS
leaders at the annual
retreat. Give time at a
89

Assumed knowledge
influence
Asset or
need
Priority
Yes or no
Principle and
citation
Context-specific
recommendation
retreat for both
departmental goal
setting and individual
goal setting.
Operations Leaders
need to possess self-
awareness and
knowledge to lead
others as well as self-
reflect. (K, P and K,
M)

Need Yes Encourage learners
to self-explain or
answer deep
questions during
learning (Mayer,
2011).
Provide accurate
feedback that
identifies the skills
or knowledge the
individual lacks,
along with
communication, so
that skills and
knowledge can be
learned, followed
by the teaching of
these skills and
knowledge
(Anderman &
Anderman, 2009).
Provide opportunities for
learners to engage in
guided self-monitoring
and self-assessment
(Baker, 2006) during
the annual retreat and at
one workshop during
the year.
Train OPS leaders on the
skills and practices
involved in self-
reflection.
Provide a job aid for
practicing self-
reflection.
Provide training on the
various leadership
styles as well as training
on the psychology of
leadership.

Lastly, regarding knowledge recommendations, it is recommended that documents be
created for goal setting, growth mindset, and self-awareness/reflection. Having documents that
reflect the training and learning in these areas will support the goal of closing the knowledge-
related gaps. For example, having documents detailing what is expected in terms of goal setting
for each leader, holding training on goal setting, and job aides for goal setting would all support
the knowledge recommendations.

90

RQ1: Motivation Recommendations
According to the findings, the OPS leaders are confident in their ability to lead, highly
motivated and value leadership growth opportunities. Therefore, there are no specific motivation
recommendations. However, I believe OPS leaders will continue to increase their confidence and
performance once they become more involved in the process and activities associated with LD
training. Social cognitive theory supports the concept that acquiring new skills can improve self-
efficacy (Bandura, 1997).
The interviewees also reported they value and appreciate opportunities to develop.
According to the expectancy-value theory, learning and motivation are enhanced if the learner
values a task (Wigfield & Eccles, 2006). Therefore, I believe the value OPS place on LD will
only be enhanced once they start training. In addition, their current intrinsic motivation will serve
highly beneficial as they engage in training to grow their leadership capacity. Table 20 details a
summary of the specific motivation influences examined in this study, the determination of the
influence as either a need or asset, priority status, principle and citation and specific
recommendations.

91

Table 20
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Assumed motivation
influence
Asset or
need
Priority
yes or no
Principle and citation Context-specific
recommendation
Operations leaders
need to feel
confident that
they are trained
properly and
possess the
necessary
leadership skills
for their position.
(Self-efficacy)
Asset No High self-efficacy can
positively influence
motivation (Pajares, 2006).
The study found
OPS have high
individual self-
efficacy. This is
not a priority at
this time.
Operations leaders
need to value
self-development
and desire to
expand their
leadership
capacity.
(Expectancy
value)
Asset No Learning and motivation are
enhanced if the learner values
the task (Eccles, 2006).
Expectancy/value: the more a
person values a task and the
more they think they are likely
to succeed at it, the greater
their motivation to do it
(Wigfield & Eccles, 2000).
The study found
OPS are confident
and possess high
expectancy-value.
This is not a
priority at this
time.

Lastly, regarding motivation recommendations, it is recommended that documents be
created and kept current that reflect any self-efficacy and expectancy value that are taking place
in the organization. Having documents that reflect training and learning in these areas will
support the goal of closing these motivation-related gaps. For example, having documents
detailing any training, guest speakers, or job aides used to boost leader confidence would support
this knowledge recommendation.

92

Conclusions for Research Question 2
The following section presents conclusions to include recommendations for RQ2.
Organizational influences from the KMO model will be addressed. Recommendations include
increasing the number of organizational documents associated with the findings in this area.
RQ2: Organization Recommendations: Time, Access to Professional Development,
Onboarding/Transition
Organizational culture is essential to consider when attempting to make any change effort
(Clark & Estes, 2008). According to the study’s findings, all eight participants expressed they
would benefit from more time to train, more onboarding/transition training, and more
professional development opportunities geared toward LD. A very positive outcome was that
they feel the organization values leaders, but they would welcome more leadership growth
opportunities.
The recommendation to close this organizational setting gap involves providing
dedicated time and opportunities for OPS leaders to develop by establishing an annual
professional development calendar that carves out specific days and times OPS leaders will be
released from duties to engage in LD. Conversations and surveys will help to identify training
needs. There is also a need for training content that meets their needs, as they are different from
the leaders on the academic side of K–12 schools. In addition, the activities and training
designed for these days will result from the needs identified by speaking with and surveying
OPS leaders directly. Lastly, the organization will develop an onboarding program with a
specific checklist to help orientate new leaders. All of these strategies align with change
management theory and transitioning from what currently exists to new, improved practices (By,
2005). It is important that all of the activities held, calendars created, surveys, and training held
93

be documented in such a way that it supports the learning in this area and is easy for a leader to
follow.
Executive-Level Knowledge Sharing/Opportunities for OPS Leaders
The interviewees felt there were opportunities to connect with executive leadership on an
informal basis throughout the year but would welcome more formal opportunities to learn
leadership skills and advice from this group. The recommendation to close this organizational
setting gap involves several strategies based on the social learning theory. According to
Longenecker and Insch (2018), social learning theory teaches us that people in organizations
want to emulate the behavior of people at the top. Therefore, one strategy would be to institute
more opportunities for leaders to develop other leaders. This can be done through learning walks
where executive leadership spends time in OPS departments. Another approach is running a
lunch and learn series with district and OPS leaders. Another specific recommendation is to start
an operations leadership training (OLT) committee similar to instructional leadership training
(ILT) committees run on the academic side. Lastly, establishing an electronic library that houses
interviews with top leaders sharing their wisdom and leadership insights would provide another
way for OPS to develop through the application of knowledge sharing/transfer. All of the
strategies just mentioned should have corresponding documents that explain and detail the
approach so that any leader in the organization can learn more from reading the appropriate
document(s). These are a few interventions that could help close this gap.
Offer Individualized Coaching Opportunities to OPS Leaders
All interviewees felt optimistic that incorporating coaching into their development would
serve highly beneficial. Several commented that they thought it would be helpful when
transitioning into a leadership role or when newly hired. It was mentioned that it tends to happen
94

informally, but a formal individualized plan could help accelerate learning and skill
development. There was an acknowledgment that every OPS department is unique. Therefore, a
coaching approach tailored to the specific individual and department was exciting to them.
Leadership coaching strengthens both the individual and the organization (Anthony, 2017).
The recommendation to close this organizational setting gap involves instituting coaching
as a core element in the LD of OPS leaders. The control theory supports coaching as a powerful
tool for leaders developing other leaders through goals and feedback (Gregory et al., 2011). As a
first step, the organization would assign a coach to an OPS leader upon promotion or hiring into
the leadership role. The coach and the OPS leader would work on specific knowledge and skill
areas to develop goals, timelines, and feedback sessions. A second phase of instituting coaching
across this vertical would be to establish a coaching list for leaders within the organization. The
list would identify a leader (volunteer coach) with their identified strength areas that they are
willing to provide peer coaching to another leader. For example, coaching in communication
skills, time management, handling conflict, and calming difficult people could be available. Once
this list is established, leaders can elect to be coached, on a volunteer basis, by a peer that is
willing to do so. All coaching programs and strategies created should have corresponding
documents that explain and detail the programs. These documents should support this overall
goal and be easy to read and follow. Table 21 summarizes the specific motivation influence
examined in this study, the determination of the influence as either a need or asset, priority
status, principle and citation, and specific recommendations.

95

Table 21
Summary of Organizational Influences and Recommendations
Assumed organizational
influence
asset or
need
Priority
yes or no
Principle and citation Context-specific
recommendation
The organization supports
operations leader
development by
providing time, access,
and professional
development
opportunities. (Cultural
setting)
Need Yes Create a community
of learners where
everyone supports
everyone else’s
attempts to learn
(Yough &
Anderman, 2006).
Personalized, active
learning that can be
applied directly to
a job setting with
follow-up is most
effective (Holt et
al., 2018).
Effective change
efforts ensure that
everyone has the
resources
(equipment,
personnel, time,
etc.) needed to do
their job and that if
there are resource
shortages, then
resources are
aligned with
organizational
priorities (Clark &
Estes, 2008).
Develop an annual
professional
development calendar
that carves out specific
days and times OPS
leaders will be released
from duties to engage
in LD.
Conduct a needs analysis
by surveying OPS so
that the activities and
training designed for
these PD days are
valuable for them.
The organization will
develop an onboarding
program with a specific
checklist to help
orientate new leaders.

Executive leadership
engages in knowledge
sharing with OPS.
(Cultural setting)
Need Yes Facilitating transfer
promotes learning
(Mayer, 2011).
Social interaction,
cooperative
learning, and
cognitive
apprenticeships
(such as reciprocal
Institute more
opportunities for
leaders to develop
other leaders.
Learning walks where
executive leadership
spends time in OPS
departments.
96

Assumed organizational
influence
asset or
need
Priority
yes or no
Principle and citation Context-specific
recommendation
teaching) facilitate
the construction of
new knowledge
(Scott & Palincsar,
2006).
Successful leaders
know how to tap
into “network
intelligence” and
learn from other
leaders rather than
just classes
(Hoffman et al.,
2018).
It is the practice of
seeking out others
and engaging in
knowledge sharing
that brings
incredible, long-
lasting results.
(Ardichvili et al.,
2016).
Lunch and learn series
with district leaders
and OPS leaders.
Start an OLT committee
similar to ILT
committees run on the
academic side.
Establishing an
electronic library that
houses interviews with
top leaders sharing
their wisdom and
leadership insights
would provide another
way for OPS to
develop through the
application of
knowledge
sharing/transfer.
Coaching is provided to
OPS as a tool for
building leadership
capacity. (Cultural
setting)
Need Yes Provide guidance,
modeling,
coaching, and other
scaffolding during
the performance
(Mayer, 2011).
Institute coaching as a
core element in the LD
of OPS leaders.
Assign a coach to an
OPS leader upon
promotion or hiring
into the leadership role.
Offer to coach veteran
OPS leaders in areas
such as communication
skills, time
management, handling
conflict, calming
difficult people and so
forth.

97

Discussion
This study was designed to learn more about LD for OPS in K–12 education. Overall, the
study, from beginning to end, supports the need for K–12 OPS leadership training using the
KMO theoretical framework. There is an identified gap in the literature and practice. The study
suggests a need for an intentional plan for OPS to transition into leadership roles and foster their
development over time. The KMO model, and the new world Kirkpatrick model (NWKM),
support a program such as LNLB.
Regarding knowledge (K) factors of the KMO model, a need for communication, goal
setting, growth mindset and self-knowledge were clearly identified in the research and this study.
Furthermore, the participants validated the gaps in various knowledge-related areas for
themselves as leaders through their first-hand accounts. I was not surprised that I had to explain
terms to them and describe skills in greater detail because they have not had leadership training
and are not as familiar with the language of leadership.
This study also allowed me to explore the research and data on motivation in greater
detail. Motivation (M) as part of the KMO model is critical to an individual’s and organization’s
success. In terms of Motivation (M) for this study, interview data and document analysis
revealed that the participants are motivated to learn and value growing as leaders; this is very
positive. However, this may not be true for all OPS leaders in K–12 education. Therefore,
districts need to assess the motivation of their leaders before engaging in any leadership training
rollout to ensure the leaders are ready and willing to engage. The organization’s culture must
prioritize learning, and individuals need to believe that acquiring new skills and education will
benefit them in some way.
98

Regarding the organization (O) of the KMO model, it was interesting to learn what OPS
believe and their overall perspectives on the organization’s part in their LD. All participants
expressed they would like more leadership training opportunities to grow their knowledge and
skills. Current practices can be enhanced at the organizational level by offering OPS leaders the
time, access, and opportunities to learn and grow, stronger onboarding, more executive
knowledge sharing, and coaching.
Overall, the findings confirm the gap in LD in K–12. The KMO framework guided the
study, and the results suggest that changes at the individual and organizational levels will benefit
OPS. Individual development and organizational support would aid in greater individual success
and strengthen the overall leadership in K–12 schools. In addition, what I found most exciting
was the OPS leaders’ positive attitudes, dedication, and motivation to do their best. They were
eager to learn more and possessed a strong desire to engage in any training that would be offered.
I am thankful for the opportunity to study and research such an important topic and to
validate through an innovative study the need to offer LD to OPS leaders. However,
organizations must realize that for any change process to have a lasting impact, there must be a
comprehensive and effective implementation and evaluation plan. The NWKM is a
comprehensive plan that is presented in the next section and outlined in Appendices H–Q. This
plan is essential to the LNLB program.
Implementation and Evaluation Plan
It is important with any change initiative to plan accordingly for the implementation and
evaluation of that initiative. Meaningfully assessing the results of training will provide
information on whether the process is working, getting better, or getting worse (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016). Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2016) implementation and evaluation
99

framework, known as the new world Kirkpatrick plan, entails using a four-level model that
works well with Clark and Estes’s (2008) KMO framework. The model involves beginning with
Level 1 and moving through Levels 2, 3, and 4. The information from the prior level should help
serve as a basis for the next level’s evaluation (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). As it moves
from Levels 1 through 4, the evaluation’s techniques become increasingly complex, and the data
generated becomes increasingly valuable. The four levels of learning are reaction, learning,
transfer, and results. The justification for the four levels is to measure the effectiveness of
training to improve the program, maximize the transfer of learning to behavior and subsequent
organizational results, and demonstrate the value of training to the organization (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016). The framework serves as an accountability mechanism for garnering
stakeholder investment and yields goal attainment by emphasizing that results (Level 4) must be
identified upfront by asking the right questions, such as, Why are we doing this training? What
skills are we seeking to develop? What are the desired outcomes? How does it increase
performance? These questions help validate the absolute need for clarity in the training process.
Stakeholders need to know the value of a particular program or incentive. If an organization can
demonstrate that training evaluation improves the performance and results they sought, they can
share with stakeholders that the goals were met. Evaluation helps to quantify the value and
investment of time and dollars. Return on evaluation is the ultimate indicator of value
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Appendices H–Q present the implementation and evaluation
plan associated with the LNLB training model. Figure 9 presents the LNLB model program
outline.

100

Figure 9
LNLB Chart

Suggestions for Future Research
This study examined the backgrounds, experiences, and perceptions of OPS leaders and
the KMO factors that influence their LD. Data were collected from semi-structured interviews
and analysis of district documents. At the same time, the study yielded findings that present
opportunities to improve LD for this stakeholder group and further research that could address
the study’s limitations. This section provides several recommendations for future study.
In future research, I suggest a larger sample. The participants in this study were OPS at
one school district. It would be beneficial to conduct research across several school districts in
Pennsylvania to include more participant perspectives to compare the findings. Doing so could
101

allow for generalizations across the state in this leader group. In addition, it would be beneficial
to study the effectiveness of this study’s recommendations to determine the overall effectiveness
in building leadership capacity for OPS leaders. Due to time limitations, that was not possible in
this study, but a future longitudinal study exploring the effectiveness of leadership training for
OPS leaders would be important. Another suggestion for future research would be to have an
independent person conduct the interviews. This would combat any potential leader feeling
compelled to answer according to what they believe I may have wanted to hear. Future research
may also want to incorporate academic leaders, such as principals and assistant principals, in the
study and compare their LD to OPS. This type of comparison study would provide actual data
and perspectives from both sides of K–12: academic and operations. Also, including participants
from the academic side of education would counter any bias that may result from only focusing
on the operations leaders. Incorporating the use of a formal research analysis tool such as TCA
or NVivo to help look for keywords in the transcripts is another suggestion. Lastly, future
research might look at this problem of practice from another conceptual framework. The KMO
framework is limited to exploring KMO factors, but other theories could examine this issue from
different perspectives, such as transformational leadership theory or career transition framework.
Conclusion
I just completed a dissertation on the lack of LD for OPS in K–12 education. It was years
in the making, and it took many months and hours to research, collect data, and ultimately write
the dissertation findings and recommendations.
The question now is, how does this study impact an individual OPS leader and any K–12
educational organization? What is new or different from what currently exists in the field? These
are critical questions.
102

What Is the Study ’s Impact on OPS Leaders and K –12 Organizations?
Leaders affect an organization’s success. Poor and ill-equipped leaders are the primary
reasons organizations, departments, and individuals struggle and possibly fail, and OPS support
the learning and teaching enterprise. Their work, departments, and personnel provide services
that can directly impact the community, parents, teachers, students, and staff. They have an
overall organizational impact on how children get to school, how facilities are maintained, how
employees are paid, how students are fed, the technology infrastructure, and the general day-to-
day operations of school buildings and personnel associated with running schools. In addition,
OPS supervise large numbers of personnel in K–12 organizations yet have little to no leadership
training in their backgrounds. They are often behind the scenes but critical to carrying out the
daily mission of an educational organization.
The impact of not addressing this issue is significant; potential increased personnel
issues, unmet goals, lack of teamwork, performance issues, communication challenges,
complaints from external stakeholders such as community and parents, and hiring and retention
issues, to name a few. As the study findings indicated, no established system for upskilling OPS
leadership capacity and skills exists. It is common for OPS leaders to be staff members reporting
to a supervisor one day, and the next day, after promotion, they are a supervisor with little to no
leadership training, course work, or certificate required. Academic leaders have formal systems,
education, required certificates and ongoing training to assist in their LD. Private industry has
established programs and well-developed training to develop all leaders. As the findings support,
it is now time for our educational organizations to fill this gap for OPS leaders so they, too, have
opportunities for LD.

103

What Is New or Different in This Study?
A detailed literature review found no past research on this topic related to LD for OPS
leaders in K–12 leader development. This study offers a proposed model (LNLB) to help bridge
the current gap of LD for OPS. The LNLB model is based on research, data collection, and first-
hand accounts of OPS leaders. The study and proposed model are aligned with the KMO
conceptual framework. The KMO model addresses knowledge and skills. It also incorporates
motivation and the organizational factors affecting LD. Specific recommendations, including a
detailed Implementation and Evaluation plan, according to the NWKM, are incorporated into the
LNLB training model. Tiered learning is utilized to achieve mastery and the desired critical
behaviors necessary for LD. In essence, the research and findings of this study offer new and
significant contributions to the field of education. An area of need, LD for OPS leaders, has been
identified and studied to meet the needs of a population of leaders that have gone unnoticed.
In summary, OPS are forgotten leaders. It is time we make them an equal part of the
equation and ensure they are appropriately trained to carry out the important leadership positions
they hold in K–12 education. Intentional LD, with a well-developed model for this group of
stakeholders, is non-existent in the literature and the data collected for this study. This is
unacceptable, and it is time for K–12 education to incorporate this needed change into leadership
practices.
In conclusion, John Maxwell (2022), a well-known leadership guru, noted that focusing
on leader development is the best way to impact an organization. He speaks about the unlimited
potential of an organization that continually develops its leaders. This study supports and
recommends we do just as Maxwell suggested and begin implementing promising practices such
as the LNLB model to develop the leadership capacity of OPS in K–12 education. Their impact
104

on educational organizations is too significant not to make this a top priority. It is time to
incorporate LD for OPS leaders in K–12 education. We can no longer leave these leaders behind!
Their time has come.

105

References
Aghera, A., Emery, M., Bounds, R., Bush, C., Stansfield, R. B., Gillett, B., & Santen, S. A.
(2018). A randomized trial of SMART goal-enhanced debriefing after simulation to
promote educational actions. The Western Journal of Emergency Medicine, 19(1), 112–
120. https://doi.org/10.5811/westjem.2017.11.36524
Aguinis, H., & Kraiger, K. (2009). Benefits of training and development for individuals and
teams, organizations, and society. Annual Review of Psychology, 60(1), 451–474.
Ali, H. E., Schalk, R., Van Engen, M., & Van Assen, M. (2018). Leadership self‐efficacy and
effectiveness: The moderating influence of task complexity. Journal of Leadership
Studies, 11(4), 21–40. https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.21550
Al Khajeh, E. H. (2018). Impact of leadership styles on organizational performance. Journal of
Human Resources Management Research, 2018, 1–10.
https://doi.org/10.5171/2018.687849
Anderman, E., & Anderman, L. (2009). Attribution theory.
http://www.education.com/reference/article/attribution-theory/
Anthony, E. L. (2017). The impact of leadership coaching on leadership behaviors. Journal of
Management Development, 36(7), 930–939. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-06-2016-0092
Ardichvili, A., Nattoch Dag, K., & Manderscheid, S. (2016). Leadership development: Current
and emerging models and practices. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 18(3),
275–285. https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422316645506
Armenakis, A., Brown, S., & Mehta, A. (2011). Organizational culture: Assessment and
transformation. Journal of Change Management, 11(3), 305–328.
Baker M. N. (2014). Peer-to-peer leadership: Why the network is the leader. Berrett-Koehler.
106

Baldoni, J. (2004). Powerful leadership communication. Leader to Leader, 2004(32), 20–24.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ltl.72
Balser, D. B., & Carmin, J. (2009). Leadership succession and the emergence of an
organizational identity threat. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 20(2), 185-201.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. H.W. Freeman.
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual review of
psychology, 52(1), 1-26.
Barrett, D. J. (2006). Strong communication skills: A must for today’s leaders. Handbook of
Business Strategy, 7(1), 385–390.
Beck, R., & Harter, J. (2014, March 25). Why great managers are so rare. Gallup Business
Journal. https://www.gallup.com/workplace/231593/why-great-managers-rare.aspx
Bhalla, V., Caye, J. M., Lovich, D., & Tollman, P. (2018). A CEO ’s guide to talent management
today. Boston Consulting Group.
Borgogni, L., Dello Russo, S., & Latham, G. P. (2011). The relationship of employee perceptions
of the immediate supervisor and top management with collective efficacy. Journal of
Leadership & Organizational Studies, 18(1), 5-13.
Bridges, W., & Mitchell, S. (2000). Leading transition: A new model for change. Leader to
Leader, 16(3), 30–36.
Buerger, C., & Harris, D. N. (2020). The impact of government contracting out on spending: The
case of public education in New Orleans. American Review of Public Administration,
512), 139–154.
By, R. T. (2005). Organisational change management: A critical review. Journal of Change
Management, 5(4), 369–380. https://doi.org/10.1080/14697010500359250
107

Cacioppe, R. (1998). An integrated model and approach for the design of effective leadership
development programs. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 19, 44–53.
https://doi.org/10.1108/01437739810368820
Castelli, P. A. (2016). Reflective leadership review: A framework for improving organizational
performance. Journal of Management Development, 35, 217–236.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-08-2015-0112
Center for Creative Leadership. (2003). Emerging leaders research survey summary report.
Channing, J. (2020). How can leadership be taught? Implications for leadership educators. The
International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 15(1), 134–148.
Chemers, M. M., Watson, C. B., & May, S. T. (2000). Dispositional affect and leadership
effectiveness: A comparison of self-esteem, optimism, and efficacy. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(3), 267–277. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167200265001
Childress, S., Elmore, R., & Grossman, A. (2006). How to manage urban school districts.
Harvard Business Review, 84(11), 55.
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Information Age.
Clayton, J. K. (2014). The leadership lens: Perspectives on leadership from school district
personnel and university faculty. The International Journal of Educational Leadership
Preparation, 9(1), n1.
Clifton, J., & Harter, J. K. (2019). It ’s the manager: Gallup finds the quality of managers and
team leaders is the single biggest factor in your organization ’s long-term success. Gallup
Press.
108

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approach (5th ed.). SAGE.
Daniëls, E., Hondeghem, A., & Dochy, F. (2019). A review on leadership and leadership
development in educational settings. Educational Research Review, 27, 110–125.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.02.003
Darling-Hammond, L., LaPointe, M., Meyerson, D., Orr, M. T., & Cohen, C. (2007). Preparing
school leaders for a changing world: Lessons from exemplary leadership development
programs. School Leadership Study. Final Report. Stanford Educational Leadership
Institute.
Davis, S. H., & Leon, R. J. (2011). How not to prepare school principals. Planning and
Changing, 42, 274–287.
Day, D. V. (2000). Leadership development: A review in context. The Leadership Quarterly,
11(4), 581–613. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(00)00061-8
Day, D. V. (2011). Leadership development. In A. Bryman, D. L. Collinson, K. Grint, B.
Jackson, & M. Uhl-Bien (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Leadership (pp. 37–50). SAGE
Publications, Ltd.
Della-Latta, J., & Burkett, K. (2021). From popular theory to practical application: How Brené
Brown’s theories of courageous leadership inform the fields of international education,
adult education, and online education. In B. Kutsyuruba, S. Cherkowski, & K. D. Walker
(Eds.), Leadership for flourishing in educational contexts (pp. 163–176). Canadian
Scholars Press
DeLong, D., & Trautman, S. (2011). The executive guide to high school impact talent
management: Powerful tools for leveraging a changing workforce. McGraw-Hill.
109

Dembo, M., & Eaton, M. J. (2000). Self-regulation of academic learning in middle-level schools.
The Elementary School Journal, 100(5), 473–490. https://doi.org/10.1086/499651
Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House Digital, Inc.
Dweck, C. S. (2021). Developing talent through a growth mindset. Olympic Coach, 21(1), 4–7.
Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and
personality. Psychological Review, 95(2), 256–273. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-
295X.95.2.256
Dwyer, L. P. (2019). Leadership self-efficacy: Review and leader development implications.
Journal of Management Development, 38(8), 637–650. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-03-
2019-0073
Dziczkowski, J. (2013). Mentoring and leadership development. The Educational Forum, 77(3),
351–360. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131725.2013.792896
Eccles, J. (2006). Expectancy-value theory. http://www.education.com/reference/
article/expectancy-value-theory
Fernandez, A. A., & Shaw, G. P. (2020). Academic leadership in a time of crisis: The
Coronavirus and COVID-19. Journal of Leadership Studies, 14(1), 39–45.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.21684
Fernández-Aráoz, C., Roscoe, A., & Aramaki, K. (2017). Turning potential into success: The
missing link in leadership development. Harvard Business Review, 95(6), 86–93.
Garvin, D. A., Edmondson, A. C., & Gino, F. (2008). Is yours a learning organization? Harvard
Business Review, 86(3), 109.
Gibson, M., & Weber, R. J. (2015). Applying leadership qualities of great people to your
department: Sir Winston Churchill. Hospital Pharmacy, 50(1), 078–083.
110

Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The
qualitative report, 8(4), 597-607.
Gottfredson, R., & Reina, C. (2020, January 17). To be a great leader, you need the right
mindset. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2020/01/to-be-a-great-leader-you-
need-the-right-mindset.
Grant, H., Slaughter, M., & Derler, A. (2018, July 23). 5 mistakes companies make about growth
mindsets. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2018/07/5-mistakes-companies-
make-about-growth-mindsets
Gregory, J. B., Beck, J. W., & Carr, A. E. (2011). Goals, feedback, and self-regulation: Control
theory as a natural framework for executive coaching. Consulting Psychology Journal,
63(1), 26–38. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023398
Groves, K. S. (2006). Leader emotional expressivity, visionary leadership, and organizational
change. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 27(7), 566–583.
https://doi.org/10.1108/01437730610692425
Guillén, L., Mayo, M., & Korotov, K. (2015). Is leadership a part of me? A leader identity
approach to understanding the motivation to lead. The Leadership Quarterly, 26(5), 802–
820. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2015.05.001
Hargreaves, A. (2009). Leadership succession and sustainable improvement. School
Administrator, 66(11), 10–15.
Hastings, L. J., & Kane, C. (2018). Distinguishing mentoring, coaching, and advising for
leadership development. New directions for student leadership, 2018(158), 9–22.
111

Heslin, P. A., & VandeWalle, D. (2008). Managers’ implicit assumptions about personnel.
Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17(3), 219–223.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2008.00578.x
Hinga, B. (2021). Lecture on IRB. USC Rossier School of Education.
Hoffman, R., Casnocha, B., & Yeh, C. (2013). Tours of duty: The new employer-employee
compact. Harvard Business Review, 91(6), 49–58.
Holt, S., Hall, A., & Gilley, A. (2018). Essential components of leadership development
programs. Journal of Managerial Issues, 30(2), 214–229.
Hoyle, E., & Wallace, M. (2005). Educational leadership: Ambiguity, professionals and
managerialism. Sage.
Huber, G. P. (1991). Organizational learning: The contributing processes and the literatures.
Organization Science, 2(1), 88–115. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.88
Kalsoom, Z., Khan, M. A., & Zubair, D. S. S. (2018). Impact of transactional leadership and
transformational leadership on employee performance: A case of FMCG industry of
Pakistan. Industrial engineering letters, 8(3), 23-30.
Kessler, R. (2002). Nurturing deep connections: Five principles for welcoming soul into school
leadership. School Administrator, 59(8), 22-26.
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick ’s four levels of training evaluation.
Association for Talent Development.
Kirkpatrick, S. A., & Locke, E. A. (1991). Leadership: Do traits matter? The Academy of
Management Perspectives, 5(2), 48–60. https://doi.org/10.5465/ame.1991.4274679
112

Kjellström, S., Stålne, K., & Törnblom, O. (2020). Six ways of understanding leadership
development: An exploration of increasing complexity. Leadership, 16(4), 434–460.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1742715020926731
Kolzow, D. R. (2014). Leading from within: Building organizational leadership capacity.
Kouzes and Posner, Influence of managers mindset on leadership behavior. International
Economic Development Council.
Korotov, K. (2016). Coaching for leadership development. The SAGE handbook of coaching,
11(3), 139-58.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2017). A coach ’s guide to developing exemplary leaders:
Making the most of the leadership challenge and the leadership practices inventory
(LPI). John Wiley & Sons.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice,
41(4), 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
Kuhn, C., Hagenauer, G., & Gröschner, A. (2022). “Because you always learn something new
yourself!” An expectancy-value-theory perspective on mentor teachers’ initial
motivations. Teaching and Teacher Education, 113, Article 103659.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103659
Kuper, A., Lingard, L., & Levinson, W. (2008). Critically appraising qualitative research. Bmj,
337.
Latham, G. P., & Locke, E. A. (2006). Enhancing the benefits and overcoming the pitfalls of
goal setting. Organizational Dynamics, 35(4), 332–340.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2006.08.008
113

Leithwood, K. (1992, January 2–5). Transformational leadership and school restructuring
[Paper presentation]. Annual meeting of the International Congress for School
Effectiveness and Improvement. Victoria, British Columbia, Canada.
Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2020). Seven strong claims about successful school
leadership revisited. School Leadership & Management, 40(1), 5–22.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2019.1596077
Leskiw, S. L., & Singh, P. (2007). Leadership development: Learning from best practices.
Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 28, 444–464.
https://doi.org/10.1108/01437730710761742
Longenecker, C., & Insch, G. S. (2018), “Senior leaders’ strategic role in leadership
development. Strategic HR Review, 17(3), 143–149. https://doi.org/10.1108/SHR-02-
2018-0014
Longenecker, C. O., Simonetti, J. L., & Sharkey, T. W. (1999). Why organizations fail: The view
from the frontline. Management Decision, 37(6), 503–513.
https://doi.org/10.1108/00251749910278023
Lopez, S. O. (2018). Vulnerability in leadership: The power of the courage to descend
(Publication No. 10789508) [Doctoral dissertation, Seattle Pacific University]. ProQuest
Dissertations and Theses Global.
Lunenburg, F. C. (2010). Communication: The process, barriers, and improving effectiveness.
Schooling, 1(1), 1–10.
Lunenburg, F. C. (2011a). Goal-setting theory of motivation. International Journal of
Management, Business, and Administration, 15(1), 1–6.
114

Lunenburg, F. C. (2011b). Self-efficacy in the workplace: Implications for motivation and
performance. International Journal of Management, Business, and Administration, 14(1),
1–6.
Luqman, R. A., Farhan, H. M., Shahzad, F., & Shaheen, S. (2012). 21st-century challenges of
educational leaders, way out and need of reflective practice. International Journal of
Learning and Development, 2(1), 195–208. https://doi.org/10.5296/ijld.v2i1.1238
Manderscheid, S. V., & Ardichvili, A. (2008). A conceptual model for leadership transition.
Performance Improvement Quarterly, 20(3‐4), 113-129.
Margerison, C. (1991). Management development policies and practices. Journal of European
Industrial Training, 15(4).
Maxwell, J. C. (2002). What every leader needs to know. HarperCollins Leadership.
Maxwell, J. A. (2004). Using qualitative methods for causal explanation. Field Methods, 16(3),
243–264.
Maxwell, J. C. (2022). The 15 invaluable laws of growth: Live them and reach your potential.
Center Street.
McCauley, C. D., & Van Velsor, E. (Eds.). (2004). The center for creative leadership handbook
of leadership development (Vol. 29). John Wiley & Sons.
McGurk, P. (2009). Developing “middle leaders” in the public services? The realities of
management and leadership development for public managers. International Journal of
Public Sector Management, 22, 464–477. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513550910982841
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. Jossey-Bass.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey Bass.
115

Moldoveanu, M., & Narayandas, D. (2019). The future of leadership development. Harvard
Business Review, 97(2), 40–48.
Northouse, P. G. (2001). Leadership (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
Northouse, P. (2019). Leadership: Theory and practice (8th ed.). Sage
Osabiya, B. J. (2015). The effect of employees’ motivation on organizational performance.
Journal of public administration and policy research, 7(4), 62–75.
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy theory. http://www.education.com/reference/ article/self-
efficacy-theory
Park, S., & Kim, E. J. (2018). Fostering organizational learning through leadership and
knowledge sharing. Journal of Knowledge Management, 22, 1408–1423.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-10-2017-0467
Passmore, J. (Ed.). (2015). Excellence in coaching: The industry guide. Kogan Page Publishers.
Patti, J., Holzer, A. A., Brackett, M. A., & Stern, R. (2015). Twenty-first-century professional
development for educators: A coaching approach grounded in emotional intelligence.
Coaching, 8(2), 96–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/17521882.2015.1061031
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Two decades of developments in qualitative inquiry: A personal,
experiential perspective. Qualitative social work, 1(3), 261-283.
Pennsylvania Department of Education. (2008). The framework for principal preparation
program guidelines.
Petrie, N. (2014). Vertical leadership development–part 1: Developing leaders for a complex
world. Center for Creative Leadership, 1-13.
Petushek, E., Arsal, G., Ward, P., Upton, M., Whyte, J., & Hoffman, R. R. (2018). Learning at
the Edge: The Role of Mentors, Coaches, and Their Surrogates in Developing Expertise.
116

Pintrich, P. R. (2002). The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessing.
Theory into Practice, 41(4), 219–225. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_3
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667.
Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2010). Generalization in quantitative and qualitative research: Myths
and strategies. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 47(11), 1451–1458.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2010.06.004
Rosser, V. J. (2004). A national study on midlevel leaders in higher education: The unsung
professionals in the academy. Higher Education, 48(3), 317–337.
https://doi.org/10.1023/B:HIGH.0000035543.58672.52
Roupnel, S., Rinfre, N., & Grenier, J. (2019). Leadership development: Three programs that
maximize learning over time. Journal of Leadership Education, 18(2), 126–143.
Rubin, E. N. (2013). Assessing your leadership style to achieve organizational objectives. Global
Business and Organizational Excellence, 32(6), 55–66. https://doi.org/10.1002/joe.21515
Salkind, N. J. (2017). Tests & measurement for people who (think they) hate tests &
measurement. Sage Publications.
Schein, E. (2004). Organizational culture and leadership (3rd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Schein, E. H., & Schein, P. A. (2018). Humble leadership: The power of relationships, openness,
and trust. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Schettler, J. (2003). Exclusive research that will change the way you think about leadership.
Training, 40(6), 70-75.
Schraw, G., & McCrudden, M. (2006). Information processing theory.
http://www.education.com/reference/article/information-processingtheory/
117

Scott, S. N. & Palincsar, A. S. (2006). Sociocultural theory. http://www.education.
com/reference/article/sociocultural-theory/
Sebastian, J., Allensworth, E., Wiedermann, W., Hochbein, C., & Cunningham, M. (2019).
Principal leadership and school performance: An examination of instructional leadership
and organizational management. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 18(4), 591–613.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15700763.2018.1513151
Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization.
Broadway Business.
Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects.
Education for Information, 22(2), 63-75.
Sinar E., Wellins R. S., Ray R., Abel A. L., Neal S. N. (2015). Global leadership forecast
2014/2015. Development Dimensions International.
http://www.ddiworld.com/ddi/media/trend-research/global-leadership-forecast-2014-
2015_tr_ddi.pdf?ext=.pdf
Smith, B. S., & Squires, V. (2016). The role of leadership style in creating a great school. SELU
Research Review Journal, 1(1), 65–78.
Sun, J., & Leithwood, K. (2012). Transformational school leadership effects on student
achievement. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 11(4), 418–451.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15700763.2012.681001
Ugaddan, R. G., & Park, S. M. (2017). Quality of leadership and public service motivation: A
social exchange perspective on employee engagement. International Journal of Public
Sector Management, 30(3), 270–285. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-08-2016-0133
118

Van Velsor, E., McCauley, C. D., & Ruderman, M. N. (Eds.). (2010). The center for creative
leadership handbook of leadership development (Vol. 122). John Wiley & Sons.
Van Zyl, E. S., Mathafena, R. B., & Ras, J. (2017). The development of a talent management
framework for the private sector. SA Journal of Human Resource Management, 15,
Article a820. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajhrm.v15i0.820
Venkatesh, B. (2008). Leadership transitions: The key to organizational success. Academic
Leadership: The Online Journal, 6(3), Article 12.
https://scholars.fhsu.edu/alj/vol6/iss3/12
Versland, T. M. (2016). Exploring self-efficacy in education leadership programs: What makes
the difference? Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 11(3), 298–320.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1942775115618503
Vogel, L. R. (2018). Learning outside the classroom: How principals define and prepare to be
instructional leaders. Education Research International, 2018, Article 8034270.
https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/8034270
Watkins, M. D. (2009). Your next move: The leader ’s guide to navigating major career
transitions. Harvard Business Press.
Wen, T. B., Ho, T. C., Kelana, B. W. Y., Othman, R., & Syed, O. R. (2019). Leadership styles in
influencing employees’ job performances. International Journal of Academic Research in
Business & Social Sciences, 9(9), 55–65. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v9-i9/6269
Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy–value theory of achievement motivation.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 68–81.
https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1015
119

Wigfield, A., Eccles, J. S., Schiefele, U., Roeser, R. W., & Davis-Kean, P. (2006). Development
of achievement motivation. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Wikaningrum, T., Udin, & Yuniawan, A. (2018). The relationships among leadership styles,
communication skills, and employee satisfaction: A study on equal employment
opportunity in leadership. The Journal of Business and Retail Management Research,
13(1). https://doi.org/10.24052/JBRMR/V13IS01/ART-14
Wilson, P. M., Petticrew, M., Calnan, M. W., & Nazareth, I. (2010). Disseminating research
findings: what should researchers do? A systematic scoping review of conceptual
frameworks. Implementation Science, 5(1), 1-16.
Yeager, D. S., & Dweck, C. S. (2020). What can be learned from growth mindset controversies?
American psychologist, 75(9), 1269.
Yough, M., & Anderman, E. (2006). Goal orientation theory.
http://www.education.com/reference/article/goal-orientation-theory/

120

Appendix A: Semi-Structured Interviews
The following questions formed the basis for the interviews used in this study.
Background Questions
1. What is your current department?
2. Please tell me how long you have worked in the organization. (Total years regardless of
position)
3. How long have you worked in a leadership role for the organization?
4. Was your previous role on the Academic or Operations side of K–12?
5. What is your highest level of education? Do you need to hold a specific certificate or
degree for your current role?
6. Please highlight any roles that were considered administrative, supervisory/leadership
roles before joining the organization. (Or were you promoted from within)
7. How many employees do you currently supervise?
8. Was any leadership training offered or provided by the district upon hiring? (Was it
effective or not? If so, who provided any training?)
9. Is there any formal leadership training provided to you now? By whom?
Research Question 1
What are the knowledge, skills, and motivation (KM) influences related to the current
leadership development system for operations leaders?
Knowledge Influences Questions
1. Communication: Can you talk to me about the various ways you communicate as a
leader to your staff? Please share a recent example of when you communicated
effectively. How effective do you feel overall as a leader with your communication
121

skills? Tell me about any training (professional development) you have received
relative to communication skills. How important is communication to you as a
leader?
2. Growth mindset: Please share your knowledge of and any experiences you have had
(training etc.) on “growth mindset.” What does possessing a growth mindset mean to
you as a leader? How do you use it? How might it benefit your staff?
3. Goal setting: Please share your knowledge and experiences with goal setting (if any)
in your role. Do you set goals? (written done?) Can you walk me through the goal-
setting process you use for yourself and your team? Please also describe any training
you have had relative to goal setting. Benefits?
4. Self-awareness/ Self-Knowledge/Reflection: How would you describe yourself as a
leader? In what ways, if any, do you seek to increase your individual self-awareness
and self-knowledge as a leader? Please share any training you have received in this
area. (leadership styles/models etc.) that has assisted you in growing your knowledge
and skills. Reflection—heard of it? Do you practice self-reflection? If so, please share
a recent example. Benefits?
5. Self-Efficacy: How confident did you feel as a leader (1-10 scale?) What has had the
most significant positive/(or negative) impact on your self-confidence as a leader?
What strategies have you found effective in building your self-confidence as a leader?
6. Expectancy-Value: How important is it for you to grow as a leader? Why? Please
share your thoughts relative to growing your leadership capacity. What
interests/doesn’t interest you most about this idea? What value, if any, do you think
122

this might have for you as a leader? Who in the organization do you believe is
responsible for your development as a leader? Why?
Research Question 2
What are the organization (O) influences related to their current leadership development
system?
Organization Influence Questions
7. Cultural settings/organizational support: Access/PD: What leadership opportunities
(if any) have been offered to you to grow your leadership skills and capacity? How
were they communicated to you? How did you benefit from these? Describe any
professional development opportunities offered. Time: How often do you engage in
leadership capacity-building activities? Is there any specific times?
Probe: What areas do you think need the most attention to develop as an OPS leader?
How can the organization provide support in these areas?
8. Cultural settings/knowledge sharing: Can you talk to me about opportunities you have
to interact with top leadership? How often? Why? Is it beneficial? Would you
welcome more opportunities to learn from senior leadership? Why or Why not?
9. Cultural sharing/coaching: Please share any experiences you have had with coaching
(mentoring). What are your thoughts on coaching as a tool for increasing leadership
skills and knowledge?
10. Is there anything else you would like to share regarding LD for OPS leaders?

123

Appendix B: Interview Protocol
Thank you for agreeing to participate in my study. I appreciate the time you have set
aside today to answer my questions. As we previously discussed, the interview should take about
1 hour. Does that still work for you?
Before we get started, I want to ensure you had the opportunity to review the study
information sheet, which gave an overview of my study. Did you get a chance to review it, and
do you have any questions about participating in this interview? As you know, I am a student at
USC, and I am conducting a study on the leadership training and development offered to non-
academic (operations) leaders in K–12 education and how it can be improved. I am particularly
interested in gathering information about your experiences and perceptions as it relates to leader
development. I am talking to multiple operations leaders within K–12 education to gain various
perspectives.
I want to assure you that I am strictly wearing the hat of a researcher today. What that
means is that the nature of my questions is not evaluative. I will not be making judgments on
how you are performing. My goal is to understand your perspective.
This interview is confidential. What that means is that your name will not be shared with
anyone other than me. The data for this study will be compiled into a report, and while I do plan
to use some of what you say as direct quotes, none of this data will be directly attributed to you. I
will use a pseudonym to protect your confidentiality and will try my best to de-identify any of
the data I gather from you. I am happy to provide you with a copy of my final paper if you are
interested.
Do you have any questions before we get started? I have brought a recorder with me
today so that I can accurately capture what you share with me. The recording is solely for my
124

purposes to best capture your perspectives and will not be shared with anyone outside the
research team. May I have your permission to record our conversation?

125

Appendix C: Listing of Documents for Data Analysis
Document analysis consisted of reviewing a combination of internal organizational
documents, such as meeting agendas and professional development calendars, to public
documents, such as board agendas and budget documents. A listing can be found below as to
various types of documents collected. To protect the organization, the documents are listed
without specific titles and dates. The documents were reviewed and assessed to determine
possible alignment with the KMO assumed influences of the study.
• Professional development calendars
• Instructional leadership meeting agendas
• Principal leadership meeting agendas
• Mindfulness training agendas
• Administrative salary and benefit plans
• District budget
• District leadership series agendas
• Summer leadership training agendas
• Budget approved goals
• Department-level goals
• Policy and procedures
• Labor contracts

126

Appendix D: Pre-Interview Recruiting Communications
Hi _________
As you know, I am a doctorate student at the University of Southern California (USC). I
am conducting research on leadership development for OPS leaders in K–12 education. I hope to
learn from you about factors that impact the leadership development of OPS leaders. I have
received USC Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval and am in the stage of my dissertation
where I am gathering data for my research study. I am inviting OPS leaders to be participants
because of your unique perspective and experiences within the district.
I would like to invite you to participate in an interview. All participant and
organizational information will be completely confidential. My goal as a student researcher is to
provide insight to our field as to how we might be able to overcome the challenges of leadership
development for OPS leaders. Ultimately, it is my hope that this information will benefit K–12
education and OPS leaders. Your participation would involve an interview that would be
approximately 1 hour. I would like to schedule this interview at your convenience in the next
month. Is this something you would like to participate in? If so, let’s schedule a date and time. I
am extremely grateful for your willingness to participate and your time. Thank you very much.

127

Appendix E: Informed Consent for Exempt Research
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
3470 Trousdale Pkwy Ste 1100, Los Angeles, CA 90089
INFORMATION SHEET FOR EXEMPT RESEARCH
STUDY TITLE: Leave No Leader Behind; Examining the Influences Related to K–12 School
Operational Leader Development
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Pamela M. Kelly, Doctoral Candidate
FACULTY ADVISOR: Dr. Marsha Riggio
You are invited to participate in a research study. Your participation is voluntary. This document
explains information about this study. You should ask questions about anything that is unclear to
you.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this study is to examine the knowledge and skills, motivation and organizational
influences on operation leader development. I hope to learn what influences can positively
impact the individual, human resources, and organizational systems in order to develop
leadership capacity. You are invited as a participant because of your specific role within your
organization, which fits the defined research population of the study.
PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
You are asked to participate in an individual meeting to be interviewed about the research topic.
The interview is expected to last no more than one hour. All interaction for you and your
organization is confidential and anonymous. Neither you nor your organization will be named or
alluded to in a manner that would provide identification.
While it is the desire of the researcher to record the conversation for subsequent confidential and
anonymous transcription so that your responses can be accurately analyzed, such recording is
purely voluntary on your part and is not a condition for participation. The researcher will take
notes as an alternative during the interview as needed.
There is no ‘prework’ necessary for the interview, and it will be held at a time that is to your
convenience and with respect to your schedule and responsibilities.

128

CONFIDENTIALITY
The members of the research team and the University of Southern California Institutional
Review Board (IRB) may access the data. The IRB reviews and monitors research studies to
protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.
When the findings of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information will be used.
Audio recordings, if made, will not have any direct reference to the full name or organization of
the participant and will be used solely for the purpose of analyzing the transcript for relevant
content. The recordings will remain in the sole possession of the research team and will be
destroyed not later than one year from completion and final approval of the study. The study is
expected to be fully completed by March 2023. For this study, the Research Team is the
researcher and the chair of the researcher’s dissertation committee.
Audio recordings, if made, will not be started until the preliminary and identifying remarks of
the participant, and their organization, are concluded. The researcher will refer to the participant
by an arbitrary identification to maintain confidentiality and anonymity. If a participant desires, a
copy of that transcript will be provided for review, editing, of declination of participation.
INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about this study, please contact Pamela M. Kelly, pmkelly@usc.edu,
484-357-3425.
IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about your rights as a research participant, please contact the
University of Southern California Institutional Review Board at (323) 442-0114 or email
irb@usc.edu.
USC IRB Information Sheet Template Version Date: 01/30/2021

129

Appendix F: Assumed Influences and Interview Items
Appendix G: Assumed Influences and Interview Items
Assumed influence Interview item
Knowledge
Operations leaders need to
communicate effectively
to lead teams/staff. (K-P,
K-M)
Can you talk to me about the various ways in which you
communicate as a leader to your staff? Tell me about any
training (professional development) you have received
relative to communication skills. How important is
communication to you as a leader?
Operations leaders need to
possess a Growth Mindset.
(K-P, K-M)
Are you familiar with the term, growth mindset? If so, can you
talk to me about what possessing a growth mindset means to
you as a leader? Please share any experiences in which you
have been trained on “mindset.” What does possessing a
growth mindset mean to you? How do you use it?
Operations leaders need to
know how to set goals,
individually and
departmentally, to achieve
organizational goals. (K-P,
K-M)
Please share your experiences with goal setting (if any) in
your role. Do you set goals? (written?) Can you walk me
through the goal-setting process you use for yourself and for
your team? Please also describe any training you have had
relative to goal setting.
Operations leaders need to
possess self-awareness
and knowledge to lead
others as well as self-
reflect. (K-P, K-M)

In what ways, if any, do you seek to increase your individual
self-awareness & self-knowledge as a leader? What benefits,
if any, have you seen in terms of your leadership? Please
share any training you have received in this area. (leadership
styles/models etc.) Was it helpful?
Motivation
Operations leaders need to
feel confident that they are
trained properly and
possess the necessary
leadership skills for their
position. (Self-efficacy)
How confident do you feel as a leader? (In your
communication skills, goal setting, growth mindset and
overall self-development?)
What specific leadership skills do you believe are required for
operations leaders? How confident did you feel when hired
into your current leadership role that you possessed all these
necessary leadership skills? Tell me more about that
experience. How confident are you now in your leadership?
What has had the biggest positive/(or negative) impact on
your self-confidence as a leader? What strategies have you
found most effective in building your self-confidence as a
leader?
130

Operations leaders need to
value self-development
and desire to expand their
leadership capacity.
(Expectancy-value)
Who in the organization do you believe is responsible for your
development as a leader? Why? Please share your thoughts
relative to growing your leadership capacity. What
interests/doesn’t interest you most about this idea? What
value, if any, do you think this might have for you as a
leader?
Organization
The organization supports
operations leader
development by providing
time, access, and
professional development
opportunities. (Cultural
setting)
What leadership opportunities (if any) have been offered to
you to grow your leadership skills and capacity? How were
they communicated to you? How did you benefit from these?
Describe any professional development opportunities you
are offered.
What areas do you think need the most attention/development
to continually develop as a leader? How can the organization
provide support in these areas?
How can the organization provide support in these areas?
What types of opportunities does the district offer to enhance
the leadership skills for all leaders? For operations leaders?
Please describe any professional development opportunities
or other support, you are offered. Who offers? How often?
Where? Why? Probe: What do you feel the organization
could provide to further support you/operations leaders?
Executive leadership
engages in knowledge
sharing with operations
leaders. (Cultural setting)
Can you talk to me about opportunities you have to interact
with top leadership? How often? Why? Is it beneficial?
Would you welcome more opportunities to learn from senior
leadership? Why or why not?
Coaching is provided to
operations leaders as a
tool for building
leadership capacity.
(Cultural setting)
Please share any experiences you have had with coaching
(mentoring). What are your thoughts on coaching as a tool
for increasing leadership skills and knowledge?

131

Appendix G: IRB Approval Letter

University of Southern California Institutional Review Board 3720 S. Flower Street, Suite 325
Los Angeles, CA 90089 Telephone: (323) 442-0114
Fax: (323) 224-8389
Email: irb@usc.edu

Date: Oct 06, 2022, 03:42pm
Action Taken: Approve
Principal
Investigator:
Pamela Kelly
ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
Faculty Advisor: Marsha Riggio
ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
Co-Investigator(s):

Project Title: Leadership Development for K–12 Operations Leaders
Study ID: UP-22-00777
Funding:
N/A

The University of Southern California Institutional Review Board (IRB) designee reviewed your iStar application and
attachments on 10/06/2022.

Based on the information submitted for review, this study is determined to be exempt from 45 CFR 46 according to
§46.104(d) category (2).

As research which is considered exempt according to §46.104(d), this project is not subject to requirements for continuing
review. You are authorized to conduct this research as approved.

If there are significant changes that increase the risk to subjects or if the funding has changed, you must submit an
amendment to the IRB for review and approval. For other revisions to the application, use the “Send Message to
IRB” link.

The materials submitted and considered for review of this project included:
1. iStar application dated 09/20/2022
2. Social-Behavioral Protocol Form_ Pamela_Kelly(0.01)
3. Interview_Protocol_Pamela Kelly (0.01)

NOTES TO PI:
1. The PI must not use their employment role to access proprietary district information, such as employee email
lists, if that information is not publicly available. If the PI is employed by the district and wishes to access employee
email lists, they must formally obtain that list from the district in the same manner used by an outside researcher.

2. The IRBA has made minor changes to the following sections of the application: 22.1 (to specify that
participants are employees), 22b (to indicate that the PI does not have a supervisory relationship over the
participants, as stated in the protocol); 26.2 (to indicate data are identifiable, due to the nature of the Zoom
recordings/face to face interviews, though this will not alter the exemption determination); 26.5 (to indicate that at
the completion of the study, once direct identifiers are destroyed, the remaining de-identified data may be retained
for future research use).

CONSENT RESPONSIBILITIES:
Individuals who are knowledgeable about the protocol must obtain consent from subjects for participation in a study.
Specifically, they must be able to describe the purpose, procedures, benefits, risks, and alternatives to participation in the
study. They must be able to answer subjects’ questions about the protocol and about risks of the research procedures and
alternatives. The PI must identify all individuals who will obtain consent and attest that they fit the above criteria. The PI is
ultimately responsible for ensuring that ethically and legally valid consent is obtained from all research subjects.

132

INFORMATION SHEET AND RECRUITMENT:
It is the responsibility of the principal investigator to follow the principles of the Belmont Report, which requires all potential
participants to be informed of the research study, their rights as a participant, confidentiality of their data, etc. per USC IRB
policy. Please utilize the attached Information Sheet For Exempt Research and Guidance for Recruitment materials. The
documents should include information specific to your study. These documents will not be reviewed by the IRB; however, it
is the responsibility of the researcher to make sure the documents are consistent with the study procedures listed in the IRB
application. NOTE: In the event that this study is audited by the IRB, you are required to provide the Information Sheet and
recruitment documents used for this study.

RESEARCH WITH STUDENTS/EMPLOYEES:
Per USC Policy, someone may not collect data about people he or she oversees in a professional capacity. Please ensure
that someone on the study (represented in 2.1, with the required human subjects certification) is able to serve as an
independent data collector. Further, data must be stripped of any identifying information before being provided to people who
have the supervisory relationship in order to protect the confidentiality of the participant responses.

SITE PERMISSIONS:
The principal investigator for this study is responsible for obtaining site permissions. IRB approval does not convey approval
to commence research in the event that other requirements have not been satisfied.

ONLINE RESEARCH:
As the Principal Investigator, you are responsible for ensuring that you have reviewed the user agreement and policies of the
online platforms prior to starting your research. You must ensure the informed consent language and study procedures
comply with the terms of service agreements or policies from those platforms. Any IRB approved procedures that conflict
with the user agreements and/or the policies of any online platforms may not be conducted. Please refer to the USC HSPP
Policies and Procedures for social media research.

Attachments:
2019-10-31_guidance-for-recruitment-tool-final.pdf
Information-Sheet-for-Exempt-Studies-07-27-2019 (4).doc

Social-behavioral health-related interventions or health-outcome studies must register with clinicaltrials.gov or other
International Community of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) approved registries in order to be published in an ICJME
journal. The ICMJE will not accept studies for publication unless the studies are registered prior to enrollment, despite the
fact that these studies are not applicable “clinical trials” as defined by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). For support
with registration, go to www.clinicaltrials.gov or contact Jean Chan
( jeanbcha@usc.edu, 323-442-2825).

This is an auto-generated email. Please do not respond directly to this message using
the "reply" address. A response sent in this manner cannot be answered. If you have
further questions, please contact iStar Support at (323) 276-2238 or istar@usc.edu.
Important

The principal investigator for this study is responsible for obtaining all necessary approvals before
commencing research. Please be sure that you have satisfied applicable requirements, for example
conflicts of interest, bio safety, radiation safety, biorepositories, credentialing, data security, sponsor
approval, clinicaltrials.gov or school approval. IRB approval does not convey approval to commence
research in the event that other requirements have not been satisfied.
The contents of this email are confidential and intended for the specified recipients only. If
you have received this email in error, please notify istar@usc.edu and delete this
message.
133

Appendix H: Level 4 Results and Leading Indicators
Level 4: results and leading indicators in the form of outcomes, metrics and methods for
both external and internal outcomes for OPS leaders.

Table E1
Level 4 Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes
Outcome Metrics Data collection methods
Internal outcomes
OPS are engaged in goal setting
and understand how their
goals connect to district goals
and department goals. They
possess the techniques and
ability to reflect on their goals
and adjust accordingly.
OPS leaders attend leadership
training and learn the process
of goal setting.
OPS write and submit annual
goals.
Goals submitted to the
supervisor on an annual basis
through technology.
OPS are knowledgeable about
growth-mindset work as it
relates to leadership. OPS are
able to utilize techniques and
strategies aligned with a
growth mindset and practice
reflection in this area to
analyze how it can positively
impact staff and outcomes.
OPS leaders attend leadership
training and learn details and
components of growth-
mindset work by Carol
Dweck.
The words, actions and
techniques OPS leaders
demonstrate when handling
challenges indicate they are
utilizing a growth mindset.
Discussion with supervisors on
observable behaviors OPS
demonstrate when handling
challenges as well as
motivating teams.
OPS are skilled and trained in
reflection techniques. OPS
are applying reflection in
their leadership operations
and feel more confident.
OPS have attended leadership
training on reflection
strategies and its use for
leaders.
OPS can write reflective
paragraphs.
OPS can engage in discussions
with peers on reflective
thoughts/activities.
Track the number of OPS
leaders that attend training
and any follow-up sessions.
Collect samples of reflective
paragraphs after training.
Talk with OPS leaders about
situations and how they
reflected. What did they
learn?
Increased OPS confidence
regarding leadership
OPS leaders attend leadership
training.
Informal survey and gathering
feedback after PD sessions
134

Outcome Metrics Data collection methods
knowledge and skills. The feedback received from
OPS leaders on their
confidence and skills.
Increased self-awareness by
OPS about their leadership
style.
Attendance at a leadership
styles workshop to enhance
understanding of
characteristics and
psychology of leadership
Fill out exit forms after
training, asking about
leadership styles and what
was learned.
External outcomes
Organizationally, all OPS
leaders have time and access
to leadership training.
An increase in the number of
OPS leaders who desire
additional skill training
Track and compare the number
of OPS leaders that attend
training each year and any
follow-up sessions.

135

Appendix I: Level 3 Critical Behaviors
The stakeholders of focus are the OPS leaders. The first critical behavior is that they are
motivated to engage in and value leadership growth activities. The second critical behavior is
that they are willing to do the “self-work” to include increasing skills and knowledge in
communication skills, goal setting, growth mindset, and self-awareness/reflection. The third
critical behavior is that they must be committed to helping others develop on their teams and in
their department.

136

Appendix J: Level 3 Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for OPS Leaders
Appendix I: Level 3: Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for OPS Leaders
Critical behavior Metrics Data collection Timing
1. OPS must be
motivated and value
leadership
development.
The number of activities
they engage in as part
of the LNLB program.
HR to track attendance at
training and other
activities via Google
spreadsheet
Human resources
coordinator to
report to DHR,
quarterly
attendance
2. OPS must be willing
to engage in specific
leadership training in
communication skills,
goal setting, growth
mindset work, and
active reflection.
The completion of a set
of goals, reflection
paragraphs and
conversations and the
ability to train staff on
growth mindset
DHR to collect and view
goals, reflection activities.
DHR to meet individually
with each OPS to review
growth mindset and
discuss any questions on
motivation related to staff.
In the first year of
training: after
completion of
activities/training.
Thereafter, as
dictated by new
training
3. OPS must be
committed to helping
others develop on their
teams and in their
departments.

Instituting regular
department team
meetings to help coach
others up. Share
knowledge and skills.
One agenda item in
every meeting must be
related to growing
others skills. Add
value.
Agendas from department
meetings.
Monthly; every
month to be
collected by the
Department Head.

Note. Items are numbered for referencing in Appendix K.

137

Appendix K: Required Drivers
The recommended drivers to reinforce, encourage, reward and monitor critical
behaviors are found in Table K1.

Table K1
Required Drivers to Support OPS Critical Behaviors
Methods Critical
behaviors
supported
1, 2, 3 etc.
Timing
Reinforcing
Facilitate a post-training reflection session on skills learned during a
session. Pair up with a peer. Share outs with all OPS so they can all
hear information.
1,2,3 Ongoing,
after
training.
Encourage self-directed learning by providing online professional
development related to the skill(s) being taught at workshop.
1,2,3 Ongoing
Encouraging
Coach OPS at monthly OLT meetings on tips to be most successful at
their jobs.
1, 2, 3 Monthly
Provide opportunities to share real-life, real-time problems that were
solved in the organization. Allow OPS to share how they are
encouraging and developing others on their teams.
1,2,3 Monthly
Rewarding
Select an OPS who is very skilled to become a coach to another OPS. 1,2,3
Host bi-annual lunches to celebrate OPS and their learning. Invite a
guest speaker.
1,2,3 Bi-annual
Monitoring
Conduct regular checkpoints to assess progress toward skill
development and action steps.
1,2,3 Periodically
Survey OPS motivation and self-efficacy regarding developing
leadership capacity.
1,2,3 Annually
138

Appendix L: Level 2 Learning
To support required drivers, a training program has been developed that specifically
targets Level 3.
Following the completion of the training program, the stakeholders will be able to
1. OPS are effectively communicating with their teams, colleagues, supervisors, and
public. They have learned skills and techniques that enable them to be more effective
and confident in their communications. (K-P, K-M)
2. OPS are engaged in the goal setting process and understand how their goals connect
to district goals and department goals. They write and submit annual goals. They
know the techniques and have the ability to reflect on their goals and adjust
accordingly. (K-P, K-M)
3. OPS are knowledgeable about growth-mindset work as it relates to leadership. They
utilize techniques and strategies aligned with a growth mindset and practice reflection
in this area to analyze how it can positively impact staff and outcomes. (K-P, K-M)
4. OPS are skilled and trained in reflection techniques. They are applying reflection in
their leadership operations and feel more confident. (K-P, K-M)
5. OPS recognize their increased self-efficacy regarding leadership knowledge and
skills. (Confidence)
6. OPS recognize the benefit of leadership development activities and training. (Value)

139

Appendix M: The Program
The following sections describe the organizational goal and the stakeholders of focus.
Organizational SMART Goal
BHSD’s goal is to offer a leadership training program to OPS leaders. The individual
responsible for creating the program will be the director of human resources (DHR), along with
human resources staff. Cabinet-level administrators and director-level department heads will also
be involved in certain aspects of the program.
Stakeholder of Focus SMART Goal
BHSD’s specific Stakeholder SMART goal is to have a formal training program to
include knowledge and leadership skill training offered through robust in-person training as well
as online options, a formal onboarding program of new leaders, executive knowledge sharing
events, and opportunities and coaching for OPS by January 2025.
The learning goals will be achieved with a training program (LNLB) that provides in-
depth leadership development training to develop the critical behaviors identified earlier in this
paper. The OPS leaders will study leadership through workshops and various professional
development opportunities. The focus will be to enhance existing strengths and offer
opportunities to acquire new knowledge and skills. The training program will consist of four
group workshop sessions held over a year, followed by one individual session with the DHR.
Each training session will be 1 to 2 hours in length. The meetings will be held in a training room
at one of the district’s office locations. The format will be informal but structured in terms of
materials and accountability to learn the desired critical behaviors. The cohort group will be
composed of all OPS leaders. Lastly, an exit ticket will be collected at the end of Workshop
Session 2. The exit ticket will contain three questions: (a) On a scale of 1–10, how valuable have
140

the workshops been for building your leadership knowledge and skills? (b) Please describe two
specific takeaways that you believe will help you as a leader. (c) What would you like to spend
more time reviewing and/or discussing in the next two workshops in order to build your
leadership skills? There will be no names on the pieces of paper collected. This information and
the data will be reviewed by the DHR and superintendent of schools prior to Session 3. With
regards to motivation, motivation at this stage will also be very important and will be developed
in the training primarily by reinforcing, encouraging, rewarding, and monitoring the learning
goals.

141

Appendix N: Level 2: Evaluation of the Components of Learning
For Level 2, the trainer will utilize both formative and summative evaluation tools. Using
formative measures at Level 2, the trainer will conduct activities and group discussions around
leader development and utilize role play and simulation to ensure trainees are learning skills and
increasing their knowledge base. In terms of summative evaluation, the trainer will include
action planning as well as demonstration and surveys to ensure the trainees have captured the
necessary knowledge. The trainer will also include questions in the post-evaluation surveys
about confidence and commitment to the recruitment activities.
Table N1 contains the data collection methods and activities as well as the timing for
Level 2. The various learning components, such as declarative knowledge, procedural
knowledge, attitude, confidence, and commitment, will be evaluated to ensure they are being
taught in the training. It is important that the trainees can demonstrate and provide evidence, via
the activities chosen, of the various aspects of learning so that they can proceed to higher levels
and apply their newly acquired knowledge and skills. It is also important that the trainees have
the self-efficacy and commitment to complete the tasks being assigned.

142

Table N1
Level 2 Components of Learning for the Program
Data collection methods or activities Timing
Declarative knowledge “I know it.”
Formative knowledge checks using checklists Periodically during workshop sessions
Discussions with the group as well as
individual/group activities
During the workshop sessions
Procedural skills “I can do it right now.”
Open-ended questions to the group during the
training sessions
At the beginning, middle and end of each
workshop session
Role-play conversations regarding goal setting,
growth mindset, reflection activities and
techniques
During the workshops
Simulation of how to handle tough
conversations with staff members
During the workshops
Observation by DHR during sessions on skills
and communication; take notes
During the workshops
Demonstrate evidence of being able to identify
steps involved in goal setting, practicing
reflection.
During and at the end of the workshop
Survey trainees about their levels of confidence
before and after training sessions.
At the end of the 4-hour training workshops
Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile.”
Observation of trainee’s involvements in
training activities and discussions.
During the workshop
Share and pair discussions on the value of skills
being learned
During the workshop sessions
Confidence “I think I can do it on the job.”
Individual and group activities using job aids
and checklists
At end of each workshop session
Survey confidence before each session and after
each session in whole group.
At the beginning and end of each session
143

Data collection methods or activities Timing
Commitment “I will do it on the job.”
Demonstration/role play among trainees During the workshop
Developing an action plan During the workshop
Post-assessment after all sessions After the completion of the training course

144

Appendix O: Level 1
Level 1: Immediately Following the Program Implementation
The function of the immediate evaluation is to measure the reaction, engagement,
relevance, and satisfaction at Level 1. At Level 1, the trainer will conduct formative and
summative evaluation methods. The district will use observation, pulse-checks, ask questions,
and take surveys to measure reaction to the professional development sessions.

Table P1
Level 1 Components to Measure Reactions to the Program
Data collection methods or tools Timing
Engagement
Ask questions during the training. Ongoing
Pulse-checks Ongoing
Observation by DHR and ADMIN team During the professional development sessions
Attendance During the workshop
Training evaluation 30 days after completion
Relevance
Conduct pulse-checks with trainees. During and after each training session
Course evaluation At the completion of each training session as
well as annually
Observation Throughout the training sessions
Trainee satisfaction
Pulse-checks During and after each workshop session
Course survey evaluation One week after the course completion

145

Appendix P: Immediate Evaluation Instrument (L1, L2)
L1 and L2 combined evaluation of leadership
development activities
Item/Likert survey question (LS)
Declarative knowledge (I know it) Item: I communicate effectively and know how
to practice reflection.
Procedural knowledge (I can do it) Item: Using a checklist, I can write my annual
goals so they not only meet department
objectives but are aligned with district goals.
Attitude (I believe I can do it) LS: Even though I might not get everything
right, I enjoy leading others and know I can be
of service.
Confidence (I think I can do it) LS: I feel confident in leading others and enjoy
accomplishing tasks with a team.
Commitment (I will do it on the job) LS: I will transfer my new learning about
leadership to my activities as an OPS.
Engagement LS: My interest in becoming a more skilled and
knowledgeable leader was stimulated during
my leadership training.
Relevance LS: What I learned from training is helpful to
me as an OPS leader and makes me more
effective and satisfied as a leader.
Customer satisfaction LS: I will recommend this training to other
OPS, both inside and outside the organization.

146

Appendix Q: Delayed-Blended Evaluation Instrument (L1, L2, L3, L4)
Appendix Q: Delayed-Blended Evaluation Instrument (L1, L2, L3, L4)
Level Item/Likert survey question
L1: Reaction What I learned in the workshop sessions was very helpful to
me when I engage in leadership activities and manage staff.
L2: Learning I am now well-versed in leadership language and
developmental activities. I have learned so much that I did
not know before the training. I have engaged in formal
leadership training.
L3: Behavior I am able to communicate effectively, set goals, practice a
growth mindset, and engage in reflection. I use the job aids
provided at the training.
L4: Results When I manage and lead others, I am confident I possess the
necessary skills and training to be effective.

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Leadership psychological safety: exploring its development and relationship with leader-member exchange theory

PDF

Gender inequity in executive leadership of midsize and large organizations in Los Angeles County: overcoming barriers & building leaders

PDF

Improving audience development for small town arts non-profits

PDF

The development of change leadership skills in aspiring community college leaders

PDF

Employee standardization for interchangeability across states: an improvement study

PDF

Organizational agility and agile development methods: an evaluation study

PDF

Evaluating emergency nurse leader capacity to reduce first-year employee turnover

PDF

Raising women leaders of Christian higher education: an innovation study

PDF

A framework for customer reputation evaluation: an innovation study

PDF

A path to K-12 educational equity: the practice of adaptive leadership, culture, and mindset

PDF

Healthcare leaders developing highly reliable organizations

PDF

Developing the next generation of organization leaders: a gap analysis

PDF

Closing the leadership development learning transfer gap

PDF

Deckplate leadership: a promising practice study of chief petty officer development

PDF

An evaluation of teacher retention in K-12 public schools

PDF

Developing socially intelligent leaders through field education: an evaluation study of behavioral competency education methods

PDF

Leadership education and development that incorporates e-leadership: the “e” factor in leading in an electronic (virtual) work environment

PDF

Employee engagement and leadership collaboration: a gap analysis of performance improvement teams in healthcare

PDF

Workforce system collaboration

PDF

Preparing Asian American leaders in higher education: an exploration study using Bronfenbrenner's ecological model

Asset Metadata

Creator Kelly, Pamela Marie (author)

Core Title Leave no leader behind (LNLB): leadership development for K-12 operations leaders

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2023-08

Publication Date 06/15/2023

Defense Date 03/09/2023

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag educational operations leaders,K-12 operations leaders,leadership development for operations leaders,leadership development training for operations leaders.,OAI-PMH Harvest,operational leadership training,operations leaders (OPS)

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Riggio, Marcia (committee chair), Canny, Eric (committee member), Trahan, Don (committee member)

Creator Email pmkelly@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC113170751

Unique identifier UC113170751

Identifier etd-KellyPamel-11961.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-KellyPamel-11961

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Kelly, Pamela Marie

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20230616-usctheses-batch-1056 (batch), 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 author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright.

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

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu