University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The lack of gender diversity in executive leadership ranks within higher education

(USC Thesis Other)

The lack of gender diversity in executive leadership ranks within higher education

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

The Lack of Gender Diversity in Executive Leadership Ranks Within Higher Education
by
Lucas A. Dyer

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

December 2021

© Copyright by Lucas A. Dyer 2021
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Lucas A. Dyer certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Alexandra Wilcox
Helena Seli
Jennifer Phillips, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2021

iv
Abstract
Women are under-represented within higher education in executive leadership ranks in the
United States. The tendency for men to outnumber women in executive roles within higher
education has been a problem since the United States higher education institutions formed in the
early 1800s. Historically, women, compared to men, have represented a lower percentage of
executive leadership roles, but they hold more degrees at the bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral
levels compared to their male counterparts (Johnson, 2017). To achieve parity in representation
for women in executive leadership, the key findings of this study suggest that higher education’s
leaders and key stakeholders show room for opportunities within communicating value with
actions towards supporting diversity, equity, and inclusion. Working with stakeholders to
promote a cultural change towards fostering an environment of trust and safety. Lastly, reducing
implicit bias and stereotyping through re-aligning policies and procedures. This study explores
the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences and offers insights into factors that
impact the advancement of women into executive leadership roles within higher education in the
United States by focusing on the experience of female faculty and staff.

v
Dedication
To my amazing children, Dalton and Saige. Both of you provide me with the joys of this world
that allow me to achieve the impossible, so that you know anything is possible if you trust God,
and never quit. I love you dearly.

vi
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank my fellow classmates, who along this journey together as a Cohort
we have read more rough drafts then I care to remember. Together, we have combined
friendships with professionalism, each taking us out of comfort zone in order to achieve
greatness.
To the staff and facility of The University of Southern California, your endless care and
support has been a motivation to keep pushing and always searching for something better.
I believe that it would be with great regret if I did not mention Faith and Flower
restaurant, which has over the past three years been a gathering place to bond friendships of great
diversity around one commonality: English Milk Punch. A drink that is forever engraved in the
amygdala, hippocampus, cerebellum, and the prefrontal cortex memory banks of our brains.
Although the nights may not be remembered, the memories of trying to remember the nights of
what happened shall not be forgotten.

vii
Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ....................................................................................................................................... v
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ vi
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. ix
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ xi
Chapter One: Introduction to the Problem of Practice.................................................................... 1
Background of the Problem ................................................................................................ 2
Importance of Addressing the Problem .............................................................................. 4
Field Context and Mission .................................................................................................. 5
Field Performance Goal ...................................................................................................... 5
Description of Stakeholder Groups ..................................................................................... 6
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions .................................................................... 8
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology .................................................... 9
Definitions of Terms ......................................................................................................... 10
Organization of the Dissertation ....................................................................................... 11
Chapter Two: Literature Review .................................................................................................. 13
History of Women in the Educational Workforce ............................................................ 14
History of Women in Academic Leadership Positions ..................................................... 15
Importance of Gender Diversity ....................................................................................... 16
Barriers to Leadership within Higher Education for Women ........................................... 19
The Clark and Estes’s (2008) Gap Analysis Framework.................................................. 24
Organizational, Motivational and Knowledge Influences ................................................ 25
Conceptual Framework ..................................................................................................... 41
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 43

viii
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 44
Overview of Methodology ................................................................................................ 45
The Researcher.................................................................................................................. 46
Data Sources ..................................................................................................................... 46
Ethics................................................................................................................................. 53
Chapter Four: Results and Findings .............................................................................................. 55
Participating Stakeholders ................................................................................................ 56
Results Research Question (RQ) 1 ................................................................................... 58
Results Research Question (RQ) 2 ................................................................................... 71
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 90
Chapter Five: Recommendations and Discussion......................................................................... 93
Discussion of Results and Findings .................................................................................. 93
Recommendations for Practice ....................................................................................... 107
Limitations and Delimitations ......................................................................................... 111
Recommendations for Future Research .......................................................................... 112
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 114
References ................................................................................................................................... 116
Appendix A: Survey Protocol ..................................................................................................... 126
Appendix B: Interview Protocol ................................................................................................. 132
Appendix C: Information Sheet for Exempt Research ............................................................... 135

ix
List of Tables
Table 1: Stakeholder’s Performance Goals 8
Table 2: Bartel (2018) Methods to Improve Paths to Leadership 23
Table 3: Organizational Influences 32
Table 4: Motivation Influences 36
Table 5: Knowledge Influences 41
Table 6: Survey Protocol Stakeholder Demographics (criterion 1) 45
Table 7: Survey Protocol Stakeholder Demographics (criterion 3) 57
Table 8: Interview Protocol Stakeholder Demographics (criterion 3) 58
Table 9: Distribution of Participant Responses to Organizational Model 1 59
Table 10: Distribution of Participant Responses to Organizational Model 2 61
Table 11: Distribution of Participant Responses to Organizational Setting 1 64
Table 12: Distribution of Participant Responses to Organizational Setting 2 66
Table 13: Distribution of Participant Responses to Organizational Setting 2 67
Table 14: Distribution of Participant Responses to Organizational Setting 3 70
Table 15: Distribution of Participant Responses to Motivation Expectancy 73
Table 16: Distribution of Participant Responses to Motivation Task Value 75
Table 17: Distribution of Participant Responses to Motivation Task Value 76
Table 18: Distribution of Participant Responses to Motivation Self-Efficacy 78
Table 19: Distribution of Participant Responses to Barriers to Advancement 81
Table 20: Relative Frequency Table of Responses to Declarative Knowledge 83
Table 21: Distribution of Participant Responses to Procedural Knowledge 85
Table 22: Distribution of Participant Responses to Procedural Knowledge 86

x
Table 23: Summary Distribution of Needs and Assets 91
Table A1 Survey Protocol 127
Table B1: Interview Protocol 133

xi
List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework 42
Figure 2: Distribution of Keyword Responses Based on Participants Reflections 80

1

Chapter One: Introduction to the Problem of Practice
The world’s increasing globalization requires increased interaction among people from
diverse cultures, beliefs, and backgrounds than ever before (Green et al., 2012). According to
Green et al. (2012), initiatives to increase workforce diversity are not working as evidenced by
the fact that the number of women applying and matriculating into higher education leadership
roles has not increased over the last decade. Women are participating in the workforce in equal
or higher numbers relative to their male peers (Seliger, 2009). Still, they rarely make it to the top
executive roles across the general spectrum, especially within higher education.
At the macro level, women represent the lowest percentage of executive leadership roles
in both higher education and across the workforce (Johnson, 2017). While women make up more
than half of all enrollments (Johnson, 2017) and receive 59% of all degrees (Bartel, 2018), they
fill only slightly more than a quarter of executive roles in undergraduate and graduate levels
(Seliger, 2009). According to the American Council on Education’s (ACE) American College
President Study (2018), only 30% of the nation’s college and university presidents are women
(Bartel, 2018). Furthermore, less than 15% fill executive roles at doctoral degree-granting
institutions (Johnson, 2017). Diversity is beneficial to both associates and employers. Although
associates are interdependent in the workplace, respecting individual differences can increase
productivity. Diversity in the workplace can reduce lawsuits and increase marketing
opportunities, recruitment, creativity, and business image (Esty et al., 1995). In an era when
flexibility and creativity are keys to competitiveness, diversity is critical for an organization’s
success. Also, the consequences (loss of time and money) should not be overlooked (Green et al.,
2012). As a result, there is diminished diversity of thought and lower levels of trust between
employees and leadership within an organization (Johnson, 2017). This study seeks to
2

understand factors that influence the advancement of women into executive leadership roles in
higher education in the United States.
Background of the Problem
Between 1870 and 1930, women who were employed were placed into small
occupational groups called the ‘professions’ (Parker, 2015). Over the years, this percentage of
employed women increased from 5% in 1870 to 14% in 1930, according to Parker (2015). The
following 20 years saw a decline in the percentage of women in the professions due to the Great
Depression. According to Oppenheimer (1970), only 10.8% of professionals were female in
1950, and until 1960, professionals were predominately white males; women and minority men
mainly were excluded from the elite group of occupations. For example, in 1960, women
represented one-third of the labor force, but made up only 3.5% of all lawyers, 5.8% of clergy,
6.8% of doctors, and 4.2% of physicists (Oppenheimer, 1970). At United States universities,
women taught foreign languages, literature, and home economics as opposed to science and
math-related disciplines (Kaufman, 1984). During the 1960s, the percentage of professional
women increased slowly, but not until 1970 would women again claim 14% of the positions in
the professions, the same percentage as in 1930 (Bernard, 1971). The move in the 1960s and
1970s toward equality in the workplace and education encouraged the changing of women's roles
in higher education administration and faculty. The 1964 Civil Rights Act called for equal
treatment of minority groups and the elimination of sexual discrimination. Title IX of the
Education Amendments of 1972 provided protection for employees and students in educational
institutions (Tuttle, 2004). The governmental legislation and the strong movement to gain
equality lead higher education institutions to become organizations based on function and not
gender (Tuttle, 2004). If the legislation were to be followed, colleges had no choice but to
3

decrease the attention they had previously given to women’s campus needs and attempt to treat
men and women as equals.
In 2009, The White House Project, a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization that aims to
advance women’s leadership in all communities and sectors, released their first report,
Benchmarking Women’s Leadership. This was a bench marking system that examined the
leadership roles of women across 10 sectors of the workforce in the United States to quantify and
qualify where women were, or were not, in positional leadership roles (White House Project
report (2009). This study was later updated, adding four additional sectors under the new title
Benchmarking Women’s Leadership (Lennon, 2013). According to the original White House
Project report (2009), evidence highlights that the number of female Presidents in higher
education has not changed in the past 10 years; furthermore, women account for less than 30% of
the board members in college and university boards. This information remains consistent from
2009 into the updated 2013 report, according to Lennon (2013). Benchmarking Women’s
Leadership examined women in leadership roles across 14 sectors, focusing on women in higher
education. Throughout all sectors, women were underrepresented in leadership and underpaid
compared to their male counterparts, regardless of their performance, especially in higher
education, where women only accounted for 29.1% of leadership roles (Lennon, 2013).
Research illustrates the public believes that the fight for parity in the workplace has
already been won for U.S. women (Johnson, 2017). After all, women receive most of all college
degrees and are well represented in entry and mid-level positions in most sectors of the economy
(Seliger, 2009). But equality remains out of reach. Evidence continues to show little progress in
advancement to the boardrooms and the executive leadership roles supported by multiple studies
dating back over 10 years.
4

The society-level factors, with reference to the belief systems, resources, and patterns of
social interchange that are embedded in such overarching systems, focus on the consistencies
among a wide variety of settings within a given society or culture. According to Green (2012),
these barriers exist due to reduced opportunities in the form of discrimination, distrust in women
from male managers and supervisors, as well as lack of understanding or unwillingness, to
understand organizational benefits from gender diversification.
In today's workforce, a diverse staff directly reflects a changing world and marketplace.
Women hold more degrees than men (Johnson, 2017) and are increasingly in the pipeline to the
executive leadership roles within higher education, to include top roles in general. Professors in
higher education come almost entirely from lower ranks of the faculty, and despite this low
positional representation, women continue to outperform men 55.88% to 44.12% in national
research awards and grants (Lennon, 2012), further supporting and showing a problem with
filling leadership roles within higher education.
Importance of Addressing the Problem
The lack of gender diversity in executive leadership within higher education is important
to address because gender diversity promotes a positive reflection on a changing world and
marketplace; high value of thought and problem solving to organizations; and a fair and safe
environment where everyone has access to equal opportunities and challenges (Green e al.,
2012). Additionally, women, compared to their male counterparts, include diverse viewpoints in
decision making, problem-solving, trust, teamwork, and mentorship (Grossblatt, 2016).
According to Johnson (2017), women have a broader conception of public policy and are
also more likely to work through differences to form coalitions, complete objectives, and bring
disenfranchised communities to the table. Research shows in both the public and private sectors
5

as well as the educational field that the need for gender diversification is an invaluable
competitive asset (Green et al., 2012). Not passively examining the problem of practice
reinforces the general public’s misconception that the fight for parity in the workplace has
already been won.
Field Context and Mission
There are approximately 4,313 higher education institutions in the United States which
are defined as any schooling beyond high school (Duffin, 2019). By definition, the following
institutions fit the category: colleges, universities, liberal arts colleges, graduate schools,
community colleges, institutes of technology, and trade schools (Urban Ed Journal, 2010). Such
institutions of higher education are designed to help students make passionate connections to
learning while supporting the mission of higher education. According to Focus on Learning: A
Learning College Reader, O’Banion (2010) concluded that the United States has achieved
worldwide recognition in pursuit of three key missions of higher education: to research, teach,
and provide services. For this study, the executive leadership roles that are used to create a
comprehensive, all-encompassing framework, but not all-inclusive, include positions directed at
higher education within the United States primarily focusing on Provost, Vice Provost, President,
Vice President, and Dean(s).
Field Performance Goal
Higher education aims to implement standard operating procedures which drive the
increase of women serving in executive leadership roles by 30% by May 2025. This goal is
anchored from research conducted by Duffin (2019) based on higher education degrees projected
to be earned by women from 2020 to 2025.
6

Description of Stakeholder Groups
For purposes of this study, the stakeholders within higher education include alumni,
donors, parents, other institutions, or providers, accrediting agencies, vendors, and suppliers
(Marshall, 2018). In other words, stakeholders include all those organizations, networks, and
private people that can influence higher education objectives. This study focused on those
stakeholders within higher education who contribute and benefit from the organizational goal
include students, faculty, staff, and [executive] administration.
The following section aims to expand on the above-mentioned and develop a stakeholder
map within higher education. The stakeholder map described their interests, ensuring that the
institution's strategic objectives are addressed by briefly defining who the stakeholders are. All
stakeholders support the research and development, support services, and education that are the
core processes of the institution (Marshall, 2018).
According to Nska (2012), students are the most important stakeholders. Students are the
most prominent and direct stakeholders in Higher Education (Marshall, 2018) and form a unique
relationship with their educational institution as they perform multiple roles: they are consumers
of the educational service, are customers through their monetary transactions with the institution,
and may go on to support the institution financially or non-financially after they graduate (Nska,
2021).
Faculty are the organizational learning aspect of higher education (AAUP, 2020). They
have an external impact but are internal stakeholders (Marshall, 2018) and do not necessarily
have similar opinions of quality compared to the rest. Faculty are widely recognized as those
who perform the basic tasks of teaching and research (AAUP, 2020). They have three main areas
7

of responsibility on centered work: student, disciplinary/professional, and community focus
(AAUP, 2020).
Like faculty, and often confused amongst the group, staff members are members of a
particular organization consisting of experts in a specific area within that organization (Ba,
2018). In higher education, the staff focus on processes and collaboration, and their perspectives
help shape and describe how students at the university learn with the help of their stakeholders
(Marshall, 2018). Those in executive roles (see executive leadership and executive leadership
roles in definitions) are primarily working with the public and external funding from numerous
funding bodies for the institution's activities (Marshall, 2018). In an article published by Scott
Newman (2015) for Inside Higher Ed, Newman noted that executive leadership positions
experience near-constant demands for their time and attention from a broad spectrum of
stakeholders. Further, their days are typically long and congested, and their roles often require
them to make difficult unpopular decisions.
A complete analysis would involve all stakeholder groups, but this study focused away
from women who have achieved leadership positions to those currently serving in faculty and
staff positions. The purpose of this is expected to yield deeper and more reliable results regarding
barriers facing women on the path towards executive leadership. Increasing gender diversity and
having more women in leadership roles has been proven to improve the overall performance of
organizations (Green, 2012). By failing to meet such goals and expectations, women continue to
be underrepresented at the executive leadership level within the higher education system. The
stakeholder goal for female faculty and staff is to achieve their desired executive leadership roles
within higher education. Table 1 outlines the field mission, field goal, and the stakeholder goal.

8

Table 1
Field Mission, Field Goal, and Stakeholder Performance Goals
Goal Field mission and goals
The mission of higher education is to serve the
public by providing teaching, research, and
service

Field mission

By May 2025, higher education will increase the
percentage of women serving in executive
leadership roles by 30%

Field goal

By May 2025, female faculty and staff members
achieve their desired executive leadership roles
within higher education
Stakeholder performance goal

Purpose of the Study and Research Questions
This study sought to understand factors that influence female faculty and staff’s
advancement into executive leadership roles in higher education in the United States by
exploring information on biases and barriers that may be causing this phenomenon. The intent
was to explore the degree to which the higher education system can achieve the prescribed goal
of increasing the percentage of women serving in executive leadership roles by 30% by May
2025. The primary stakeholder group of focus are those women who are currently serving as
faculty and staff within higher education. Few women are at the leadership table with men, and
the country is not benefiting from their ideas, talent, and experience (Seliger, 2009).
The purpose of this study was to explore factors that influence the advancement of
women into executive leadership roles within higher education in the United States by focusing
on the experience of female faculty and staff. Specifically, this study examined those women
currently serving on faculty and staff within higher education to understand better what supports
9

and influences were present within their organizations. The following questions were designed to
guide the study:
1. What are the organizational influences that impact the ability of female faculty and staff
members to achieve executive leadership roles within higher education?
2. What are female faculty and staff members’ knowledge and motivation related to female
faculty and staff members achieving executive leadership roles within higher education?
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
The conceptual framework used for this study is Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis
framework. Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis is a systematic, analytical method that helps to
clarify organizational goals and identify the knowledge, motivational, and organizational (KMO)
influences. This framework is further outlined in Chapter 2 of this study. This model is beneficial
in supporting the problem of practice surrounding the lack of gender diversity in executive
leadership roles within higher education with the use of individual stakeholders and
organizational stakeholders within the theoretical framework. As this study begins an
examination of KMO working towards goal achievement, it is imperative to note the change
from the traditional KMO to the current presentation of organization, knowledge, and motivation
(OKM) within this study. The flip to OMK emphasizes the organizational influences, leaving out
suggestions that women do not have enough motivation or knowledge.
Knowledge was examined via those currently in higher education serving among faculty
and staff, but not yet in executive leadership roles. Other areas of knowledge were addressed by
approaching the metacognitive and procedural knowledge aspects to determine what areas to
focus on best portray their knowledge, skills, and attributes (KSAs). The motivational aspects
were examined in three areas: turning inward to oneself, in other words, self-efficacy, the desired
10

outcome or outcome expectancy, and lastly, value (the amount of value placed in advancing into
executive leadership roles). Advancement and career path aspirations are quantitative as they are
generalizable and expressed through statistical analysis of numerical data. They can be measured
by the influence within ones’ own motivation on goal setting and KSAs. Another aspect is
examining any gaps or limitations that keep women from moving into executive leadership roles
within the organization. Areas of focus follow the three areas around building an inclusive
workplace, writing better job descriptions, and providing standardized unconscious bias training.
These specific areas directly influence the conceptual framework in understanding the lack of
gender diversity in executive leadership roles within higher education.
The methodology used was a mixed methods research design using a non-probability
purposeful sampling criterion to examine the data. The study consisted of surveys and interviews
of women who are currently serving as faculty or staff within higher education. Research
questions were crafted using previous studies to increase reliability and validity. The
methodology is discussed in depth in Chapter 3.
Definitions of Terms
Throughout this study, key terms present themselves, which aid in understanding the
dissertation design and approach to the research. This list is not all-inclusive and is designed to
clarify words, titles, or phrases used.
• Executive Leadership refers to the ability of those who manage or direct employees in an
organization to influence and guide these individuals (Rouse, 2015).
• Executive Leadership Roles (Ranks) refers to the positions, roles, or titles such as
Provost, Vice Provost, President, Vice President, and Dean (s) (Rouse, 2015).
11

• Gender Diversity refers to the idea that both men and women are hired at the same rate,
paid equally for equal work, and promoted at the same rate (Green et al., 2021).
• Glass Ceiling refers to the metaphor for the intangible systemic barriers that prevent
women from obtaining senior-level positions (Johnson, 2017).
• Higher Education refers to any education beyond high school such as undergraduate,
graduate and doctorate levels, including terms encompassing both colleges and
universities, public and non-profit (Rouse, 2015).
• Pipeline Myth refers to the too few qualified degree holding women to fulfill the higher-
level positions (Johnson, 2017).
• The “higher” the “fewer” refers to the notion that even though women have higher
education attainment levels than men, this is not reflected in the number of women
holding positions with high facility rank, salary, or prestige (Johnson, 2017).
• The Professions refers to the elite occupations such as law, medicine, architecture,
ministry, dentistry, judicial positions, science, and higher education teaching (Parker,
2015).
Organization of the Dissertation
This study is organized into five chapters. Chapter 1 focuses on introducing the problem
of practice as it exists at the macro-level (national level) mixed with the use of statistics and
research providing evidence down to the micro-level. Chapter 2 is the introduction into the
literature review by introducing historical context and barriers, and reasons underlying the
problem of practice. Chapter 3 aligns with the methodology of the framework re-introducing the
research questions and an overview of the methodology. Chapter 4 focuses on the findings and
results and explain each research question in depth. Chapter 5 is the final chapter and focuses on
12

recommendations and further discussions to better understand the problem of practice following
limitations and delimitations culminating in final recommendations for future research.
13

Chapter Two: Literature Review
This literature review presents previous research aligned to this study’s problem of
practice surrounding the lack of gender diversity among executive leadership roles within higher
education. Curtis and West (2016) state that when prominent female academics are involved in
research, it can affect the nature of both the questions that are asked and the findings. Their
research suggested an increase in gender diversity will prove increasingly valuable and prove to
be beneficial in shifting the gender balance in higher education (Curtis & West, 2016).
Hathway (2019) identified a significant body of research investigating the causes
underlining the persistent under representation of women in higher education. Key findings from
these studies highlight several structural issues that can affect women’s career progression.
These include gendered organizational cultures and ideals of leadership, cognitive bias resulting
in “accumulated disadvantage” where “men are consistently overrated while women are
underrated” (Hathway, 2019, p. 1), double standards of evaluation of men and women’s
competencies, and the existence of a persistent homosocial culture which influences many
institutional norms and practices.
The research demonstrates knowledge of this phenomena, revealing key terms, ideas,
theories, and vocabulary within higher education and gender diversity. The overview identifies
important variables discerned from research relevant to the problem of practice by utilizing Clark
and Estes (2008) knowledge, motivation, and organizational (KMO) influences framework. As
this study begins an examination of KMO, it is imperative to note the change from the traditional
KMO to the current presentation of OKM within this study. The flip to OMK emphasizes the
organizational influences, leaving out suggestions that women do not have enough motivation or
knowledge. This is explained in further detail in the following sections.
14

History of Women in the Educational Workforce
Diversity is generally defined as acknowledging, understanding, accepting, valuing, and
celebrating differences among people concerning age, class, ethnicity, gender, physical and
mental ability, race, sexual orientation, spiritual practice, and public assistance status (Green et
al., 2012). The need to understand gender diversity is essential as the representation of women in
the workforce increases. Today’s workforce has the highest levels of employment participation
ever by women (Green et al., 2012). Change in the family structure means fewer men and
women in traditional family roles (Zweigenhaft & Domhoff, 1998).
Historically, females, as compared to males, have represented a lower percentage of
college professors and administrators in the United States (Parker, 2015). Parker (2015) also
states that the tendency for men to outnumber women in the professoriate and college
administration has existed since the United States higher education institutions formed in the
early 1800s and persists today. Fluctuations in women’s participation rate have been influenced
by the economy’s history and society’s expectations of women (Parker, 2015). According to a
2009 report from The White House Project (2009), women in academia make up more than half
of all college students. Still, they represent only slightly more than a quarter of all full professors
and less than 15% of the presidents at doctoral degree-granting intuitions (Seliger, 2009). Female
professors and administrators in the United States higher education have evolved since the early
1800s. Even when female employees were rare in business settings, women found their niche in
teaching. However, certain events in United States history called for women to play important
roles in business and education. Observation of the employment trends for women offers an
interesting look at the evolving role of women in the United States workforce, in general,
primarily in the university setting.
15

History of Women in Academic Leadership Positions
Historically from 1982 to the present, women on average have earned more than 50% of
all degrees compared to males. Specifically, from 1982 to present, 50% of all bachelor’s degrees,
1987 to present, 50% of all master’s degrees, and 2006 to present 50% of all doctoral degrees
(Johnson, 2017). According to American Council on Education (ACE; 2016), the number of
women presidents has increased since 1986, and as of 2016, women only held 30% of
presidencies across all institutions of higher education. The status of not enough women serving
in executive leadership roles goes beyond qualifications. Research has historically shown that
women are not only qualified but educated as well, according to the American Council on
Education (2016).
Interestingly, women presidents are less likely to be married, less likely to have children,
and more likely to have altered their career for dependents, partner, or parent (Johnson, 2017).
According to ACE (2016), 90% of men in higher education compared to 75% of women are
more likely to be married. ACE (2016) also reported that men are 89% more likely to have
children compared to 74% of women, and only 16% of men have altered their career for
someone else compared to 32% of women.
Data collected on college and university Chief Academic Officers (CAOs) from ACE
(2016) shows that women serving in CAO positions has declined from 2008 to 2013 in one
public doctoral degree-granting institution. This finding is of importance given their role in
setting the correct way foreword of an academic institution. However, women CAOs are less still
likely to be married or to have children compared to their male counterparts, which ultimately
points to a barrier of choosing to have a family or not. Unlike presidencies, where data has been
supported by Johnson (2017) where more women possess a PhD or EdD, male CAOs slightly
16

lead women CAOs on possessing a doctorate. Of those currently working as CAOs, men are
89% more likely to be married compared to women, who are at 71% whereas Johnson (2017)
continues to report the numbers are similar for having children, where men are 87% more likely
to have them compared to women at 71%.
Altogether, the data clearly shows that when comparing men to women, moving into
executive leadership roles is cumbersome and timely for women. Women have more degrees,
higher-level degrees, and historically have so. Yet, it takes them twice as long to advance into
executive roles.
Importance of Gender Diversity
Women make up almost half of the world’s population (Koch, 2020). Yet fill nowhere
near that same percentage in the executive leadership world. Despite these numbers, there are
several traits, according to Koch (2020), that women need in order to advance into the executive
leadership roles:
1. Empathy
2. Humility
3. Persuasiveness
4. Entrepreneurial Spirit
5. Resilience
Diversity is beneficial to both associates and employers. Although associates are
interdependent in the workplace, respecting individual differences can increase productivity.
Diversity within an organization can reduce lawsuits and increase marketing opportunities,
recruitment, creativity, and business image (Esty et al., 1995). When flexibility and creativity are
keys to competitiveness, diversity is critical for an organization’s success. Also, the
17

consequences, such as loss of time and money, should never be overlooked. Even though the
percentage of women in the education pipeline has increased, there are still many gaps from
lower to top executive roles. Lesley Grossblatt (2016), who surveyed 21,980 publicly traded
companies in 91 countries, identified the top five benefits of gender diversity. The findings are
discussed and expanded in the following section:
1. More women equal better problem-solving
2. Female leaders are trusted more
3. Women leaders are more collaborative
4. Women make terrific mentors
5. Women hold more professional degrees compared to men
From the list of the key findings above, more women in leadership roles tends to lead to
better problem-solving. Time and time again, researchers find that diversity of thought leads to
better problem-solving. Everyone works better when people collaborate with people of different
genders, sexual orientations, ethnicities, and races in the workplace (Grossblatt, 2016). The
Global Leadership Forecast (2018) concluded that “companies strong in people analytics have
more gender diversity in leadership (especially high-potential pools), a stronger culture of
promotion from within and higher leader success rates” (Ray, 2018, p. 53). In other words, hiring
and promoting women from different backgrounds provides an outstanding base upon which to
build.
Continuing with Grossblatt’s key findings (2016), female leaders are trusted more.
Furthermore, Pew Research Center’s (2015) research conducted via a survey on social and
demographic trends shows that most American workers perceive female executives as being
honest and ethical compared to male executives. Specifically, Pew research showed that 34% of
18

those surveyed believe women are better at building trust compared to only 3% of men. Women
have a somewhat narrower advantage over men when working to improve the quality of life for
Americans and standing up for what they believe in despite political pressure (Pew, 2015).
Women leaders are more collaborative. Women are better at making deals and pushing
ideas than their male peers, collaborating and working across party lines in more significant
numbers than men (Grossblatt, 2016). Outside of higher education, but to drive home research
from The Quorum analysis (2016), which originated a study re-published by Pew Research,
found the average female senator co-sponsored 6.29 bills with another Senate woman compared
to their male counterparts who co-sponsored 4.07 bills. When it came to cross-party
collaborating, findings where similar; average female senator co-sponsored 171.08 bills with a
member of the opposite party. In comparison, a male counterpart only averaged 129.87 bills
(Grossblatt, 2016).
Women make terrific mentors, according to those surveyed by Pew Research (2015)
however, Pew Research found that women have a more difficult time finding mentors than men
30% of those surveyed by Pew Research (2015) felt women made better mentors than men,
while only 5% felt men were better mentors than women. Mentorship and sponsorship can be
incredibly important for career growth and job satisfaction, so having increased supply “on the
bench” can give any company an edge (Pew, 2015). Millennial women are more educated than
men: Today’s women in the workforce are starting their careers better educated than men
(Grossblatt, 2016). A more educated workforce is essential for implementing innovative
techniques, challenging the status quo, and introducing new business approaches. Pew Research
Center (2013) surveyed both men and women who were employed and had at least one child.
Their findings are consistent with recent data in that today’s young women were starting their
19

careers better educated than their male counterparts. The findings show that the percent of 25- to
32-year-olds who have at least a 4-year degree has women up by 7% over their male counterparts
(Pew, 2013).
Historically, women have been underrepresented in higher academic leadership positions
as supported by research of Gallagher and Golant (2000) and Bartel (2018), which both show
that women hold more lower-level positions but are not advancing into higher roles (Gallagher &
Golant, 2000). Furthermore, Bartel (2018) reported consistent data in a study on women in
higher education finding that, although women now earn most of all college degrees and are well
represented in entry-and mid-level positions in most economic sectors, they have made little
progress in advancing to executive leadership roles within higher education.
Barriers to Leadership within Higher Education for Women
According to The Leadership Barriers for Women in Higher Education report (2018),
recent figures show just how much further higher education must go to truly achieve diversity in
higher education leadership. Higher education struggles with two main areas of barriers,
according to Bartel (2018), these two main areas are unconscious bias and stereotyping.
Unconscious bias and stereotyping exist in every organization. The first step toward dismantling
the barriers that these ideas create is understanding what the barriers are in the first place. If not,
women will continue to be asked to take on additional organizational tasks that do not result in
higher pay or advancement into executive leadership because of these barriers (Bird & Wang,
2004). Bartel (2018) described these additional tasks women are often asked to assume as service
work: fulfilling but not necessarily career-advancing. Only 30% of the nation’s college and
university presidents are women, increasing just 4% since 2011 (Bartel, 2018). Women
experience slower promotion rates, higher attrition at pivotal career stages, and
20

underrepresentation of advocacy, all of which are barriers that contribute to the lack of
representation in leadership (Martinez et al., 2007).
Understanding the specific barriers women face in their higher education careers is
critical to resolving women’s lack of representation in executive leadership positions. Research
suggests multilevel intervention is required to overcome these barriers (Isaac et al., 2012).
According to Bartel (2018), once an understanding of barriers is in place, those areas can become
a primary focus of concern. Bartel’s (2018) research provides several specific examples that
higher education needs to improve upon to advance women into leadership.
Women are still seen as caregivers; it is one of the oldest stereotypes, and it is still
preventing women from advancing in the workplace. According to the ACE report on college
presidents, 32% of women presidents altered their career progression to care for a dependent,
compared to 16% of men (Johnson, 2017). The academic career ladder, virtually unchanged for
hundreds of years, does not account for the reality that many women are still expected to have
caregiving roles for their spouses, children, and elderly parents (Bartel, 2018). These additional
responsibilities and time-consuming tasks can be a drag on women's career mobility.
Reduced administrative support leads to increased work for women employees. In recent
years, academic departments at many institutions have reduced administrative support roles. The
rationale is that technology and automation have improved efficiencies and rendered such
positions superfluous (Bartel, 2018). However, much of the service work still needs to be done.
Female faculty and administrators often find themselves falling in line with gendered
stereotypes, assuming tasks traditionally undertaken by secretaries and administrative assistants
(Bartel, 2018). Whether conscious or not, these assumptions of female academic leaders unfairly
affect their workload and subtly undermine their authority. Only at the senior levels of academia,
21

mainly among male administrators and faculty, do administrative support roles still exist (Bartel,
2018).
Bartel’s (2018) research found that women are assigned and take on more work than their
male counterparts, including committee involvement; formal and informal advising roles;
professional service work; and various events related to student life, admissions, and school
organizations. Colleges and universities often do this as part of an effort to correct a gender
imbalance in institutional leadership, which is a positive goal and step forward. However, these
tasks do not necessarily lead to the same kind of career advancement opportunities as the more
highly valued and rewarded activities like scholarship or leadership initiatives do (Bartel, 2018).
Best Practices: Creating Paths to Leadership for Women
According to Bartel (2018), to increase diversity within higher education, the focus
should shift from the influences of women to a more deliberate approach focusing on the barriers
within the organization itself. Bartel (2018) also identified that women are better equipped than
men to increase diversity; women leaders often are more able to listen to various perspectives
and better honor diversity because they have experienced discrimination, loss of opportunity,
powerlessness, and stereotyping themselves. While there may be good intentions behind the push
to increase diversity, women should be able to decide how actively they want to participate in
these efforts rather than being pressured to do so in a disproportionate way.
Higher education has continued to set elevated expectations while lowering recognition
for work, which creates a higher bar for women seeking to advance into executive leadership.
For this to change, higher education needs to create paths to leadership. The leadership
imbalance is not a new problem, and efforts to fix it are not new either. Like most attempts to
change a systemic social problem, types of interventions vary, and results have been mixed
22

(Catherine et al., 2016). Research does suggest that creating gender parity in leadership is going
to require multiple strategies focusing on multiple layers of society: individuals, families,
neighborhoods, educational institutions, employers, and local, state, and federal lawmakers
(Bartel, 2018). However, Bartel (2018) suggested five ways higher education can improve the
paths to leadership for women within their programs. Table 2 explains those paths to leadership.
23

Table 2
Bartel (2018) Methods to Improve Paths to Leadership for Women
Key takeaway Description
Confront Gender Diversity
Head On
Without a baseline understanding of the current situation,
it is difficult to effect any real change. Gather
information and listen to female faculty and staff
members, and senior leaders. Improving gender
diversity requires the work of all members of a team,
not just women. To that end, challenge the
assumption that women automatically want to be
actively involved in improving gender diversity and
inclusiveness.

Set Strategic Objectives To reach these objectives, consider committing to a
program or creating a program in which member
organizations and companies pledge to advance
diversity and inclusion within the workplace. To
date, more than 50 U.S. colleges and universities are
among the 150 organizations that have already taken
the pledge.

Improve Career Mobility for
Women
Avoid scheduling meetings at times that create
disproportionate burdens for women with caregiving
roles, such as early morning or evenings.

Set up Differentiated Contracts The valuable service work that many women undertake
within higher education settings should not go
unnoticed or unrewarded.

Increase Mentorship and
Leadership Programs
Women often already take on the work of mentorship,
and formalized programs that encourage, support,
and reward this work can only benefit both mentors
and mentees.

Note. Adapted from https://bized.aacsb.edu/articles/2018/12/leadership-barriers-for-Women-in-
higher-education. Copyright 2018 by BizEd.

While there is forward momentum toward better gender diversity for women, insidious
influences and unconscious bias remain in place for most women leaders in higher education. To
24

effect real change, gender diversity should be as crucial to both men and women of equal
proportions while focusing their programs on women’s knowledge, motivation, and
organizational structure influence and helping them overcome these challenges.
The Clark and Estes’s (2008) Gap Analysis Framework
The Clark and Estes (2008) knowledge, motivation, and organizational influence gap
analysis is a systematic, analytical method that helps clarify organizational performance goals as
stated in Chapter 1. In this case, the organizational goal is to increase the number of women in
executive leadership positions within higher education by 30% by the end of 2025. Second,
Clark and Estes (2008) recommend identifying those stakeholders who are critical to goal
attainment. For the purpose of this study, the primary stakeholder group in this study are females
currently serving among faculty and staff within higher education with focus on the stakeholder
performance goal. The third step is to set individual goals for the stakeholder group which is to
achieve a 30% increase in the number of women in executive leadership positions in the case of
this study. The fourth stage of problem-solving is to identify the capacity of women among
faculty and staff positions and to examine barriers to their promotion to executive leadership.
This was accomplished by examining barriers to achieving the stakeholder performance goal by
utilizing knowledge, motivational and organizational (KMO) influences, but presented
sequentially following the organizational, motivational, and knowledge (OMK) influences which
have an impact. Next, findings must be synthesized to validate a root influence. Last,
recommendations are presented to address gaps in capacity.
With the use of the Clark and Estes (2008) framework, this study continues to bring
forward previous research further to explore gender diversity following the steps of gap analysis.
The goal is to identify areas for improvement to see what needs to happen for women to achieve
25

more roles within higher education. This study is designed as an exploratory study following the
general steps of gap analysis.
Female Faculty and Staff Members’ Organizational, Motivational and Knowledge
Influences
As this study begins an examination of OMK working towards goal achievement, it is
imperative to note the change from the traditional KMO to the current presentation of OKM
within this study. The flip to OMK emphasizes the organizational influences, leaving out
suggestions that women do not have enough motivation or knowledge. This is important
because, to understand and demonstrate a process path towards goal achievement fully,
leadership in higher education must value the advancement of women and start initiatives that
emphasize this at their colleges and universities. Clark and Estes (2008) state that knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences are the lenses through which performance gaps should
be evaluated as each is tied to organizational performance and each other. In other words, to truly
grasp hold of gender diversity, the literature focus is on OMK related influences that are
pertinent to exploring the stakeholder competency of focus. The overall focus on OMK are those
influences that affect the achievement of the stakeholder goal. The following section covers
research related to such OMK influences surrounding the problem of gender diversity within
higher education.
Organizational Influences
Resolving concerns of individual knowledge and motivation alone is not enough to solve
the gender diversity gap. According to Leadership Barriers for Women in Higher Education
(2019), organizational biases and barriers must be addressed to improve the paths to leadership
for females in higher education. Clark and Estes (2008) defined organizational barriers (settings)
26

as processes, policies, and resources that obstruct performance. On the other hand, cultural
models are defined as the knowledge an organization has around their internal culture driven by
their default values (Bennardo & DeMunck, 2014). Giberson et al. (2009) showed ompany
culture drives organizational behavior and that leadership, combined with company culture,
define organizational norms and how employees should behave. According to Bartel (2019), the
lack of females serving in executive leadership roles within higher education and most
organizations point to barriers within higher education that continue to hinder women’s
advancements in executive leadership roles.
This section focuses on organizational settings explored from the female faculty and staff
perspective, which address those paths to close the gender diversity gap. The overarching goal is
for leadership in higher education to value and emphasize women's advancement at universities
and colleges. This goal would be a critical starting point towards the much-needed momentum
women need to advance into leadership roles. The organizational influences consist of the
following two models to be explored: higher education needs to value gender diversity, equity,
and inclusion; higher education needs to foster an environment of trust and safety to advance
diversity and equity in executive leadership. The remaining organizational influences consist of
the following three cultural settings: higher education needs more availability of female
executive leader mentor or positive influences; higher education needs to create better policies
and procedures to overcome implicit bias and stereotyping; and lastly, higher education needs to
change current hiring practices to enhance gender diversity.

27

Higher Education Needs to Value Gender Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (Model 1)
It has been many years since the Civil Rights Act of 1964 addressed pay inequity, and it
has been over forty years since the passage of Title IX (Lennon, 2013). Yet, women are not
ascending into executive leadership roles in colleges and universities at the same rate than their
male counterparts (Ballenger, 2010). Ballenger (2010) points out that from an organizational
view, executive leadership roles in higher education are like that of a pyramidal structure, and
women are clustered at the bottom of that pyramid. Ballenger (2010) suggests this is relevant in
explaining women’s limited success in attaining executive leadership roles within higher
education and that change is needed in how the organization values gender diversity. Similarly,
Manfredi et al. (2019) suggests that organizational requirements and structural inequalities and
power relations within higher education need a change at the organizational level.
At the organizational level, which includes culture, ideology, and policies, Ballenger
(2010) demonstrated that while management in organizations is represented as gender-neutral, it
often involves consistent practices with characteristics traditionally valued by men. Green et al.
(2012) described managing diversity is more than simply acknowledging differences in people. It
involves the organization recognizing the value of differences, combat discrimination, and
promoting inclusiveness around gender diversity to be successful in the future.
Higher Education Needs to Foster an Environment of Trust and Safety to Advance Diversity
and Equity in Executive Leadership (Model 2)
Dr. Charikleia Tzanakou, a social sciences researcher focusing on gender and academic
careers, believes gender diversity (equality) is a complex phenomenon that requires a continuous
and holistic approach to addressing issues, such as stereotypes and gender schemas, absence of
role models and mentors, tokenism, gendered organizations (Tzanakou, 2021). Another vital
28

requirement of trust and safety when dealing with diversity is promoting a safe place to
communicate (Green et al., 2012). Social gatherings and business meetings, where every member
must listen and have the chance to speak, are good ways to create dialogues. According to Green
et al. (2012), organizations should implement mentoring programs to provide access to
information and opportunities.
Higher Education Needs to Have Women Serving as Role Models and Exemplars in Executive
Leadership Roles (Setting 1)
The number of role models in leadership who are women remains disproportionately low
(Lyman & Chappell, 2018). According to Bandura (1982), role models influence a person’s
motivation by helping shape their self-efficacy. Alternatively, negative stereotyping can hinder a
woman’s career aspirations for leadership. Davies et al. (2005) found in their study that women
exposed to negative stereotype commercials were less likely to aspire to be leaders than those
who were not exposed to negative stereotypes. Historically, women have been seen as
caregivers, which is one of the oldest stereotypes that perpetuate this day (Bartel, 2019).
Negative stereotyping can hinder a women’s self-efficacy and career aspirations for leadership
roles. In another study conducted by Dasgupta and Greenwald (2001), they found that exposure
to counter stereotypical women positively affected their beliefs about leadership.
A role model, which differs from a mentor because they are not required to have a direct
relationship, can be either a close or distant model (Lyman & Chappell, 2018). In a study
published in Psychology of Women Quarterly, Hoyt and Simon (2011) focused on the impact of
female role models on women’s leadership aspirations and self-perceptions after leadership tasks
were assessed across several studies. Their study tested the prediction that upward social
comparisons to female executive leaders would have a relatively detrimental impact on women’s
29

self-perceptions and leadership aspirations compared to males and less elite female job roles
(Hoyt & Simon, 2011). Their work points to a potential dark side of women serving in executive
leadership roles as role models in a domain where individuals are possible targets of a negative
stereotype (Hoyt & Simon, 2011).
The goal of this study is to understand factors that influence the advancement into
executive leadership roles of women in higher education in the United States by presenting
information of biases and barriers which may be causing this phenomenon. Gender diversity
within faculty and staff provides a structural, organizational indicator of a company’s capacity to
improve gender equity (Cox, 2004). Goodman et al. (2003) found that for every increase of 10%
in the number of women in lower levels of leadership, a company is 1.19 times more likely to
have a woman in senior management. The presence of women role models in such leadership
roles could lead to hiring more women from lower to upper levels of management.
Higher Education Needs Policies and Procedures to Overcome Implicit Bias and Stereotyping
(Setting 2)
Implicit bias is described as an automatic and unconscious bias (Brownstein, 2019). Due
to implicit biases, people may often attribute certain qualities or characteristics to all members of
a particular group, also known as stereotyping (Cherry, 2020). Indifferent social interactions,
embarrassing slips of the tongue, unchecked assumptions, stereotypical judgments, and
spontaneous neglect exemplify the automaticity of bias, which creates a subtly hostile
environment for out-group members (Brownstein, 2019). Personal experience and cultural norms
impact how individuals react to other individuals and in different situations. Therefore, culture
determines acceptable levels of expressed bias, from subtle to overt, and differs in forms for
describing perceived differences between social categories (Fiske, 2000). In Kendra Cherry 2020
30

study on implicit biases, she reveals implicit bias can influence how people behave toward the
members of social groups and that such bias can have effects in several settings, including in
school, work, and legal proceedings (Cherry, 2020). Implicit biases can influence how people
behave toward other members of social groups. Focusing on overcoming implicit bias and
stereotyping to increase gender diversity is an effort almost automatically forced onto women,
according to Susan Bartel (2018), author of Leadership Barriers for Women in Higher Education.
This stereotype exists as an expectation that women are better equipped than men to increase
diversity; women leaders often are more able to listen to various perspectives and better honor
diversity because they have experienced discrimination, loss of opportunity, powerlessness, and
stereotyping themselves (Bartel, 2018).
On the organizational spectrum, men occupy most executive leadership roles within
higher education, and hiring managers prefer candidates who are most similar to themselves
(Hathway, 2019). Since men occupy the majority of executive leadership roles and board
positions and hiring decisions for executive leadership are made by current executives and board
members, in-group preferencing due to implicit bias can profoundly impact women that manifest
in subtle ways (Catherine et al., 2016). According to Catherine et al. (2016), implementing a bias
training program that has been well researched and proven to reduce bias can have a profound
organizational impact. Along with training programs, reducing implicit biases can positively
impact a person’s behavior and the individuals as well, according to Cherry (2020). Cherry’s
research also points out that seeing people as individuals rather than focusing on stereotypes to
define people has shown to reduce implicit bias. If organizations can train people to recognize
responses to others that might be rooted in biases or stereotypes, they can try to adjust their
responses consciously.
31

Higher Education Needs to Have Polices That Enhance the Hiring Processes to Promote
Diversity and Metrics to Achieve Closing the Gap within Gender Diversity (Setting 3)
Demographic characteristics of hiring managers have also been found to influence the
advancement of women in executive leadership roles, indicating some opportunities around
changing the hiring process (Catherine et al., 2016). According to Hathway (2019), concerning
structural constraints in the hiring process, the area of focus has been around opening the “black
box” of recruitment and hiring practices for executive leadership appointments to expose the
dynamics that can disadvantage women's process. As mentioned above, research does show that
men fulfill a majority of the hiring manager roles in higher education (Catherine et al., 2016).
Gronn and Lacey (2006) point to the “cloning effect,” where institutions seek to appoint leaders
similar to those already in place.
The capacity of women to advance into executive leadership improves significantly when
hiring practices and programs are structured towards such goals (Goodman et al., 2003).
According to Goodman et al. (2003), the more emphasis an organization puts on development
and promotions for women into advanced leadership, the more likely the company will succeed.
Companies that embrace an internal hiring philosophy, coupled with an emphasis on formal
leadership development achieve higher gender equity in executive leadership positions. This is
because women are more likely to be promoted into these positions from within an organization
rather than be hired by an outside organization into advanced leadership (Brankiewicz, 2020).
Table 3 recaps the organizational influences discussed within this setting.

32

Table 3
Organizational Influences
Organizational influence category Models and settings
Higher education needs to value gender diversity,
equity, and inclusion

Model 1
Higher education needs to foster an environment of
trust and safety to advance diversity and equity in
executive leadership

Model 2
Higher education needs to have women serving as
role models and exemplars in executive
leadership roles

Cultural Setting 1
Higher education needs policies and procedures in
place to overcome implicit bias and stereotyping

Cultural Setting 2
Higher education needs to have policies that enhance
hiring processes to promote diversity and metrics
to achieve closing the gap within gender diversity
Cultural Setting 3

Motivational Influences
Motivation is a crucial aspect and key influence relating to performance. This section of
the literature focuses on motivation-related influences that are pertinent to stakeholder
competency. Motivation drives performance through the willingness of motivated individuals to
work, provide and produce effort, and strive towards the achievement (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Furthermore, Clark and Estes (2008) explained that motivation is the direct link between the
workforce's needs as individuals and the performance goals of their organization. Overall, the
factors that contribute to an individual’s motivation profoundly impact one’s choices, actions,
decisions, thoughts, and ideas. All of which are explained in the following section in three
factors: task value, self-efficacy, and expectancy.
33

Women Serving Within Faculty and Staff Need to Believe Their Investment in Career
Development Can Result in Growth Into Executive Leadership Roles (Outcome Expectancy)
An outcome expectancy is an individual’s judgment of their capabilities (Wigfield,
2014). It answers the question, “will I be able to obtain the desired outcome?” A value is an
individual’s beliefs about the importance of something or why they may engage in specific tasks
(Wigfield, 2014). It answers the question, “do I want to do this task and why?” Expectancies and
values play an essential role in predicting an individual’s future decisions, engagement,
persistence, and achievement (Schunk, 2014).
Outcome expectations have been found to be a valid construct that contributes to career
decisions and interests and has direct and indirect paths to self-efficacy (Fouad & Guilen, 2006).
Yeagley et al. (2010) found that expectations influence career aspirations for women seeking
advancement into executive leadership roles of those women studied in their first year of college.
They found outcome expectations and self-efficacy to indirectly influence goal setting indirectly
through the impact each had on developing women’s career interests. According to Yeagley et al.
(2010) their results supported the work of Bandura as a theoretical framework for understanding
internal factors that may contribute to women’s interests and goals seeking executive leadership
positions. This work focused on three types of outcome expectations, and those positive
expectations serve to influence behavior. These three areas were internal physical implications
(feelings resulting from a given outcome), social reactions (approval, praise, or recognition), and
lastly, self-evaluation (pride or feeling proud of oneself).
Furthermore, Yeagley et al. (2010) research confirmed that when considering
expectations between female leadership self-efficacy and interests, interests partially mediated
the relation between outcome expectations and goals, and the combination of interests and
34

outcome expectations completely mediated the relation between self-efficacy for executive
positions and goals. Based on these findings, it is essential to evaluate the outcome expectancy of
those serving in a facility better to understand the gender diversity gap within higher education.
Outcome expectations influence decision-making and should be measured in addition to self-
efficacy to create a deeper understanding of overall motivation to move into executive leadership
roles.
Women Need to See Value in Growing Their Careers Into Executive Leadership Roles (Value)
When connecting one’s respect for their ability to have task value and their ability to
achieve and thrive, it is important to understand how they are related and the importance behind
the relationship to the lack of gender diversity within higher education. In higher education,
women are under-represented in all leadership roles and face constant barriers, including
cognitive bias and entrenched homosocial cultures (Hathway, 2019). It is critical to have task
value to have the happiness one feels about themselves given the lack of movement in the right
direction over the past decade.
Working within higher education is always challenging but ultimately deeply rewarding,
according to Howard and Gagliardi (2017), while opportunities exist to support women in both
advancing, succeeding, and persisting in executive leadership roles. Women who have reached
advanced roles emphasize the value of mentorship in helping them see the position as a goal and
continue to make progress along their path (Howard & Gagliardi, 2017). One area which has
been effective in moving forward to parity is the seemingly simple act of imagining themselves
in the position which can help turn desire into action (Howard & Gagliardi, 2017).
35

Women Need to Believe They Have What It Takes to Reach Executive Leadership Roles (Self-
Efficacy)
Borelli (2019) discusses a significant barrier for women advancing and having career
success: their self-confidence and self-efficacy. Self-efficacy, which comes from the research of
Bandura (1982), refers to the task-specific confidence in one’s beliefs of their capacity to
succeed. This self-appraisal of abilities functions as a determinant of “how people behave, their
thought patterns and the emotional reactions they experience in taxing situations” (Bandura,
1989, p. 123). Perceptions of self-efficacy, whether accurate or not, influence motivation to
pursue a goal and affect the amount of effort and persistence a person has toward achieving goals
(Bandura, 1982). Self-efficacy is not the same as task value, self-worth, self-esteem, or self-
regards, although they complement one another. Self-efficacy focuses on the abilities,
specifically the abilities to meet the challenges ahead and complete those tasks (Ackerman,
2020).
Self-efficacy within leadership takes the concept and applies it specifically to an
individual’s self-confidence and abilities within their leadership style (McCormick & Tanguma,
2008). Bakken and Farrington (2003) conducted a study of leadership among scientists and
found that leadership self-efficacy is higher in men than in women. This same study also
performed a series of evaluations on men and women looking at differences among the two
genders and found overwhelmingly their research shows that women experience comparatively
lower self-efficacy. Isaac et al. (2012) developed an educational intervention in response to
women’s low efficacy scores. Their research found self-efficacy in women to be particularly low
in male-dominated fields such as medicine, science, and engineering. In their study, women were
asked to rate their efficacy beliefs before and following a 16-week educational course (Isaac et
36

al., 2012). The questionnaire used eight efficacy statements and asked participants to rate on a
Likert scale from one (strongly agree) to seven (strongly disagree) their abilities in leadership
(Murphy, 1992). The study concluded women’s leadership self-efficacy did increase following
the course and that efforts to improve self-efficacy through similar training may increase
women’s participation in leadership more broadly (Isaac et al., 2012). Understanding women's
self-efficacy of those which work in executive leadership roles within higher education will help
guide recommendations within the field.
Women who are advancing into leadership roles can adopt a handful of proven best
practices, which will help them succeed in their new roles (Borelli, 2019). For women who are
advancing and able to succeed, it is directly related to how they are equipped, according to Hart
and Hecht-Harrison (2019). This is accomplished by displaying distinguishing behaviors and
beliefs that allow them to overcome barriers and the knowledge where women were equally
represented and promoted into leadership positions. Table 4 recaps the motivational influences
mentioned within this section.

Table 4
Motivational Influences

Assumed motivational influence Motivational theory
Women need to believe their investment in their
career can result in growth into executive
leadership roles in higher education

Outcome Expectancy
Women need to see value in growing their careers
into executive leadership roles in higher
education

Value

Women need to believe in their ability to perform in
an executive leadership role in higher education
Self-efficacy

37

Knowledge Influences
Knowledge and skill enhancement are required for job performance under two
conditions: first, they are required when people do not know how to accomplish their
performance goals, and second, when people anticipate that future challenges require novel
problem solving (Clark & Estes, 2008). Clark and Estes (2008) continue to expand on the four
types of knowledge: factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive, stating that the first
condition usually indicates a need for information, job aids, or training, and the second condition
suggests a need for continuing education. Human beings are made up of two distinct yet
cooperating psychological systems-knowledge and motivation (Clark & Estes, 2008). Research
suggests as the knowledge required for a leadership position increases, gender diversity
decreases (Rankin & Caccamise, 2017). During gap analysis, it is essential to analyze how
leaders understand the knowledge they need to achieve performance goals (Clark & Estes 2008).
Understanding the Leadership Barriers (Declarative)
Women serving among faculty and staff need to know and understand the leadership
barriers they face in achieving career advancement to executive leadership roles. Declarative
knowledge is explicit knowledge passed verbally from one person to another (McFarland 2014).
To achieve a move into executive leadership roles, women in higher education need declarative
knowledge and information to promote into executive roles (Gallagher & Golant, 2000).
According to Clark and Estes (2008), information is something that is told about a situation or
about someone’s job, which they need to know to succeed on their own that is called
information. Suppose people do not need help practicing in order to apply the information
successfully. In that case, information is necessary to reduce their uncertainty about how to
achieve a performance goal (Clark & Estes, 2008). The first step utilizing information towards
38

dismantling barriers is understanding the precise nature of the barriers. Research conducted by
Rankin and Caccamise (2017) focuses on the importance of exploring effective ways to develop
and promote qualified women into leadership roles. In terms of qualifications, the pipeline for
women leaders has expanded significantly over the last half-century (AAUW, 2016). Dramatic
changes in women’s educational attainment and workforce participation have given millions of
women the background and skills they need to become leaders, taking on roles that were once
reserved for men and providing organizations with a more extensive and more diverse pool of
potential leaders (AAUW, 2016).
Research continues to collect and report on data which reveals patterns of bias and
understanding these patterns of bias is imperative to increasing the number of women in higher
education leadership positions (Johnson, 2017). Gallagher and Golant (2000) recommends that
women explicitly ask for knowledge of the required competencies, the expected outcomes, and
the recommended pathways for positive mentor-like relationships.
Skills Needed to Navigate the Hiring Process (Procedural)
Women who serve among faculty and staff need to know the hiring procedures to
advance into executive leadership roles. Training is defined as any situation where people must
acquire “how-to” knowledge and skills and need practice and corrective feedback to help them
achieve specific work goals (Clark & Estes, 2008). Knowing the hiring process is a combination
of information (and sometimes job aids) plus guided practice and corrective feedback (Clark &
Estes, 2008). This section identifies areas of focus within the procedural knowledge influences
that relate to the information and the need for women to navigate the hiring process and common
best practices used to advance.
39

Knowing the hiring process is essential and is a decisive step toward hiring more women
and creating a gender-balanced workforce according to (Ignatova, 2019). Those who desire to
move up into executive leadership roles can apply through internal job postings or openings and
seek advice for advancement within their organization. These gender insight reports revealed an
analysis of billions of interactions on LinkedIn between professionals, companies, and recruiters.
Further, it examined how women and men searched for jobs, researched jobs, how they
interacted with recruiters and how likely they were to get hired after applying. The results
revealed that both genders do their homework upfront, with the average number of jobs viewed
in 2018 at 46 jobs per male candidate and 44 jobs per female candidate (Ignatova, 2019).
Similarities in research conducted for those who researched a company on LinkedIn before
applying to a job showed that 42% of men researched and applied to a job, and 41% of women
researched and applied to jobs (Ignatova, 2019). In other words, recruiters are more likely to
open a man’s profile than they are a woman’s profile; 13% less likely to click on a woman’s
profile when she shows up in a search and 3% less likely to send women an InMail after viewing
her profile. According to Ignatova (2009), the data shows that when recruiters are searching for
candidates and they see a list of men and women, they tend to open men’s LinkedIn profiles
more frequently. However, data showed that once women navigate the initial starting point,
women are 16% more likely than men to get hired for lower to mid-level roles and 18% more
likely than men to get hired after applying for senior roles (Ignatova, 2019). Similar research
conducted in Babcock and Laschever’s 2009 study, the cost of negotiating found response and
outcomes similar to Ignatova. Babcock and Lascherer’s study focused on the behaviors of
women and men in the workplace and measurements of people’s perceptions of the importance
of asking for what they want, men negotiated more often compared to men women. In other
40

words, their research indicates that men are significantly more likely than women to use
negotiation to promote their interests. Their findings point out that women are 45% less likely to
see the benefits of asking for what they want (Babcock & Lascherer, 2009).
Reflection on Strengths and Weaknesses to Determine Self-Awareness (Metacognitive)
Education is any situation in which people acquire conceptual, theoretical, and strategic
knowledge that might help them handle novel and unexpired future challenges and problems
(Clark & Estes, 2008). The key aspect to focus on with strengths and weaknesses is
understanding that education does not provide “how-to” information since there are endless
possibilities in any situation on what needs to be done (Clark & Estes, 2008). Instead, focusing
on self-awareness and knowing one’s strengths and weaknesses, mixed with education, can
improve one’s ability to manage conflict, communicate, respond to criticism, and navigate
complex social dynamics (Sangerma, 2015). Furthermore, along with understanding the
knowledge, skills, and attributes required for advancement into executive leadership roles, it is
equally important for women to be able to analyze and understand their current strengths and
where they align with their current opportunities (Clark & Estes, 2008). Research has found that
self-awareness is critical to effective leadership because it allows leaders to identify their
performance while seeking areas for self-improvement (Koch, 2020). Koch (2020) continued to
posit that self-awareness is also a critical component of knowing which attributes are commonly
found among those who serve in leadership roles and how to use those to benefit one’s desire to
advance into executive leadership roles. Table 5 recaps the knowledge influences mentioned
within this section.

41

Table 5
Knowledge Influences
Assumed knowledge influence Knowledge type
Women need to know the leadership barriers to advance into
executive roles within higher education
Declarative

Women need to know and understand how to navigate the hiring
process to advance into executive leadership roles within higher
education

Procedural

Women need to know and be able to reflect on their strengths and
weaknesses to develop strategies to advance into executive
leadership roles within higher education
Metacognitive

Conceptual Framework
The literature review analysis focuses on evaluating the lack of gender diversity in
executive leadership roles within higher education. The review focuses on barriers that create
gender diversity and increased more women holding executive leadership roles. Furthermore, the
review revealed that unconscious bias and existing stereotyping affect women's self-efficacy and
negatively affect their motivation to progress into executive leadership roles. The consequence of
this development is that higher education loses the benefits of not only having women serve in
leadership roles but the benefits of having a diverse organization. The literature review
highlighted primary areas focusing on knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences.
Each influence produced general theory and helped shape the factors of influence that either
facilitate or hinder women in advance. These three KMO influences work together to ensure that
women are highly motivated, committed to the organization, and trust that they are to be given a
fair chance despite existing biases and barriers in place.
42

Figure 1 represents the conceptual framework presented with the KMO influences. At the
top are the three influences, knowledge, motivational, and organizational. The diagram then
descends either negatively (down to the left), which are areas that hinder the advancement of
women into higher education executive roles, or descends to the right, which is the ideal settings
to facilitate the advancement of women into higher education executive roles. The left side
represents female faculty and staff as not able to advance into their desired executive leadership
role due to the absence of the organizational, motivational, and knowledge influences. The right
side represents female faculty and staff are able to achieve their desired executive leadership
roles because the influences are present.

Figure 1
Conceptual Framework: Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences

43

Summary
The literature review addressed this study’s problem of practice surrounding the lack of
gender diversity among executive leadership roles in higher education. Most of the available
literature is focused on biases and barriers within those influences, which may or may not hinder
the advancement of women into executive leadership roles. This study used information from the
literature related to knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences on female faculty and
staff while evaluating those influences which better help understand the lack of gender diversity
among executive leadership roles in higher education.

44

Chapter Three: Methodology
This study focused factors that influence the advancement of women into executive
leadership roles within higher education in the United States by focusing on the experience of
female faculty and staff. The key focus was to identify areas that affect gender diversity and
focus on root causes hindering the advancement of female faculty and staff into executive
leadership roles. Chapter 3 presents a mixed-method approach to seek out and understand the
experiences and views of females currently serving among faculty and staff within higher
education. Because a review of the current literature has not fully disclosed or answered why
women have not seen much growth into executive leadership roles within higher education,
further research was needed. This study used the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework
and sampled a population of women currently serving as faculty and staff within higher
education with questions specifically designed to understand the gaps in knowledge, motivation,
and organizational influences to support a greater understanding specific to the conceptual
framework as stated within this study. The following research questions were drafted to help
guide this study:
1. What Are the Organizational Influences That Impact the Ability of Female Faculty and
Staff Members to Achieve Executive Leadership Roles Within Higher Education
2. What Were Female Faculty and Staff Members’ Knowledge and Motivation Related to
Female Faculty and Staff Members Achieving Executive Leadership Roles Within
Higher Education?
45

Overview of Methodology
The methodology for this study was a sequential, mixed methods research design
consisting of a survey followed by a semi-structured interview approach using a non-probability
purposeful sampling criterion. The purpose of this approach was to develop a baseline to better
understand the lack of gender diversity in executive leadership roles within higher education.
Mixed methods research resides in the middle of the qualitative and quantitative continuum
because it incorporates both approaches (Creswell, 2014), which allows for a complete
understanding of the problem of practice by a convergent design of the qualitative and
quantitative methods. Table 6 provides the research questions (RQ) used within this study:

Table 6
Survey Stakeholder Demographics (Criterion 1): Are You Currently Alumni or Enrolled in The
OCL EdD Program? (n = 13)
Status Assigned participants Target weight (%)
Current student 11 84
Alumni 2 16
Neither student nor alumni 0 0

46

The Researcher
My positionality as a male researcher is essential to note. As the person who conducted
the interviews, there was room for bias that had to be considered. The research was focused on
women and their real-world experiences centered around their careers and goals, all of whom
were currently working as faculty and staff within higher education. It was vital for me to have
full transparency and be honest about the intent of the study to develop a sense of trust. The
primary benefit to help guard against such biases and barriers was to admit and state that I do not
work in higher education, nor have I ever been a part of any faculty or staff group working in
education. I am outside looking in; thus, I had to remain open to my own experiences not to be
reflected in this study, committed to maintaining authenticity and guard against making
judgments or dismissing responses that were unfamiliar to me. Assumptions of women's
motivation to go into higher education were presented by questions specific to value and
outcome expectancies. Additionally, I worked to guard against my own prior beliefs as a
researcher and remain open to all responses during the interviews and surveys.
Data Sources
The study incorporated two methods: surveys and interviews, which are presented in the
order used, surveys, then interviews. Both methods focused on exploring the perspectives of
women currently serving among faculty and staff within higher education. Protocol questions
were crafted using previous studies to increase reliability and validity. This study design was
preferred for this study because it enabled me to conduct extensive analyses and review different
data types to make credible conclusive statements on the research topic of gender diversity
within higher education. This study was based on the lack of women serving in executive roles
47

within higher education. The key stakeholders involved in this study are those currently serving
among faculty and staff positions within higher education.
Method 1: Survey
The first method used to collect data was the quantitative surveys designed and issued
through Qualtrics, an easy-to-use web-based platform tool for surveys and other data collection
activities. The method used was a valuable tool to reach a large group of participants within a
short time frame and simplicity of preparing and issuing the surveys. The Qualtrics designed
surveys were distributed through email and LinkedIn. These methods required a response rate of
at least half to three-quarters of the surveys sent for both efficiency and timeliness of this study.
The ideal goal to reach for a sample group was between 10 and 20 responses, of which 15
completed the surveys; two were removed due to not meeting the criteria, which left a final
survey sample of 13 participants (n = 13).
Participants
The participants were female faculty and staff members working within higher education.
This group represents the education system's backbone and is the direct link between students
and higher executive roles. The following criteria were used to select the participant sample:
1. Criterion 1: Any alumni or current students of the University of Southern California’s
Rossier School of Education Doctor of Education in Organizational Change and
Leadership (OCL) program. Selected as the population based on the ease of convenience
and accessibility to me as a current doctoral candidate in this program.
2. Criterion 2: Currently working as faculty or staff member within the field of higher
education within the United States.
48

3. Criterion 3: Greater than one year of experience in current role or within higher
education.
Instrumentation
Questionnaire surveys were used for this study to collect quantitative data. The design of
the questionnaire surveys was structured in line with the KMO influences about how they apply
to the research study, in this case, the lack of gender diversity among women serving in
executive leadership roles in higher education. The questionnaire surveys were used to collect
quantitative data as they are easily accessible via the online platform of Qualtrics. Furthermore,
analysis of questionnaire data was simplified because the questionnaire helps facilitate
quantification of the respondents’ answers to different questions using Likert scales. The Likert
scale is a point system scale that allows individuals to express how much they agree or disagree
with a particular statement (McLeod, 2019).
Data Collection Procedures
The online platform Qualtrics was used to enhance the efficiency of the collection
process. This method was preferred as the freedom of online surveys allowed the participant to
do them independently, in their preferred setting with no risk to the participant. Qualtrics for this
study was preferred because of the convenience and efficiency of the data collection process, as
well as enhancing the timeline in the data collection process. In both distributing the online
surveys, a link of the online survey was emailed out and posted on LinkedIn, which allowed the
participants to click, open, and begin the survey at their convenience. The survey opened in mid-
December 2020 and closed the last week of February 2021, allowing for maximum participation.
As a result, more time was spent on identifying and collecting the sample group utilizing the
criteria designed for the surveys.
49

Data Analysis
Descriptive data analysis of survey responses was conducted using Qualtrics to analyze
quantitative data. To further assist in the process, each response was given a rating scale of one
to five, with one being the least favorable response and five being the more favorable response.
Each score is presented in Chapter 4 by presenting the mean and standard deviation for the
responses and discussing the differences in absolute values for that question. Privacy was
maintained for participants by removing any personal information (names are not needed) from
the actual survey and utilizing a number, such as a Participant 1, to describe responses to open
ended questions. For this study, personal information, such as the names of the participants, was
not collected. Only basic demographics and information related to the participant criteria was
collected to further enhance the data analysis. Furthermore, all data is to be stored for
approximately five years, as suggested by Creswell (2018). The analysis procedures is
documented to ensure readers can determine the validity and reliability for themselves.
Validity and Reliability
The validity and reliability of the research was determined by the methodological choices
made throughout this study. These include the discussions of preexisting studies, peer reviews,
and the dissertation committee review (DCR). All participants were selected based on the criteria
stated above to assist in the quantitative data gathering. The choice of statistical analyses for
quantitative data was essential in ensuring the validity and reliability of the study’s findings.
These methodological choices ensured that the study was conducted in accordance with the
identified RQs, which focused on reduced probability for errors while ensuring collection and
analysis of accurate and credible data (Creswell, 2014).
50

Method 2: Interviews
Interviewing was the primary method for gathering information to enable responses about
the lived experiences of women who, at the time of the study, served as faculty and staff within
higher education. The semi-structured interview protocol was preferred because it facilitated the
effective collection of qualitative data pertaining to the research questions, in addition to
integrating human interest into the research process (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). This process also
ensured the flexibility needed to gain a deep understanding of women’s unique experiences
while also ensuring consistency and adherence to the outlined research questions (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2015). Open-ended questions were used to assess the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences among females in faculty and staff working within higher education.
As a result of this interview process, procedural, metacognitive, and factual knowledge were
assessed, and self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and values.
Participants
Women working among faculty and staff within higher education were selected as the
primary sample group for the interviews. This group represents the backbone of the education
system and is the direct link between students and higher executive roles. For this group, the next
most likely course of action is moving into an executive leadership role, or at minimum, a desire
to do so. The initial goal for interview participants was between 10 to 15 participants, dependent
upon both willingness to participate in the interview and reaching data saturation. Twelve
participants were asked to be interviewed, but 10 ended up completing the process (n = 10). The
population was determined purposefully using the following criteria from the survey and agreed
to participate in an interview.
51

Instrumentation
Several methods were used for the interview process; both methods involved the same
interview questions and incorporated either virtual (video) interviews or emails. The use of
emails for interviews was a less than desirable, but appropriate technique when live interviews
were not possible. One interview was an exception to the above methods and was conducted in
person. This in-person interview was not originally planned due to research restrictions in place
due to the COVID-19 pandemic, but it was cleared and processed by the IRB retroactively. The
interview itself consisted of 14 questions. All participants were advised that they should expect
approximately 30 minutes for the interviews. For accuracy and reliability, each interview
question was directly tied to the RQs and each fitting a KMO influence.
Data Collection Procedures
Zoom was originally planned to be used as the primary source for video conferencing due
to an unexpected limitation at an unprecedented time of COVID-19, the global Corona Virus
Disease 2019 pandemic. The pandemic caused the majority of faculty and staff within higher
education to transition from in classroom to working from home through the remainder of 2020.
Prior to the interviews, participants were informed they were participating in a study and were
asked for permission to be interviewed and recorded for accuracy of information. However, not
all were conducted via Zoom due to time constraints which were generated from a lack of
participation or willingness to conduct Zoom meetings. The primary reason this occurred with a
difference between those who originally agreed, or showed interest compared to who
participated when the time came. Participation privacy was maintained, and names and other
personal information have been removed from the transcripts to maintain confidentiality.
52

Data Analysis
The qualitative data was analyzed using the thematic analysis technique. The thematic
analysis identifies the common themes, patterns, trends, and opinions shared by the interviewees
and then reviews them in line with the critical objectives of the study. As such, the thematic
analysis technique did provide an effective platform for analyzing the interview transcript.
Privacy was maintained for participants by removing names and other personal information from
the actual survey and utilizing a number to identify the number of interviews completed, such as
Participant 1; identifiability of participants was not important. Rather the information they
provided along with basic demographics to further enhance the data. Furthermore, all data is to
be stored for approximately five years, as suggested by Creswell (2018). The analysis procedure
is documented to ensure readers can determine the credibility and trustworthiness for themselves.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
Credibility in qualitative research shows the study methodology’s consistency and can be
increased with detailed process documentation (Yin, 2009). Merriam and Tisdell (2016)
identified various methods to minimize bias through strategies such as triangulation and member
checking. Triangulation requires fact checking or verifying the information captured during the
interview (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). One method of triangulation is to verify the information
received during the interview by approaching other parties who share a relationship with the
interviewee, but this would have potentially ‘harmed’ the individual as confidentiality and
anonymity could not be maintained. Alternatively, aligning the code data and information to the
document and artifact analysis allowed for further corroboration of the information.
Another method used was a commitment to present all sides of the information, despite
the response outcomes. Additionally, self-reflection was completed and shared with the reader to
53

increase visibility and accountability for bias that could influence data interpretation and
findings. Privacy was maintained for all participants by removing names and other personal
information from all transcripts before completing the analysis.
Ethics
Due to the nature of the topic surrounding gender diversity, especially in higher
education, I did ensure that all data and information collected reflected the participants’ results
rather than the researcher’s emotions or beliefs. All permeated biases related to gender, race, or
ethnicity that operate within the broader culture did not influence the outcome of the results. It
was important to mitigate these biases and act so that the researcher’s attitudes and beliefs aimed
to focus on the facts presented during this study. In other words, the data speaks for the study.
Mitigation for such observations and experiences was understood to so that they could drastically
restrict the range of admissible belief. Knowing so helps differentiate between what the facts
state compared to the personal feelings and biases of the researcher.
For this study, the use of human subjects for both data collection for quantitative and
qualitative review was used. Common ethical considerations with human subjects when
conducting research are anonymity, free will, and informed consent of the research participants.
During this study, and while gathering data, the anonymity of the participants was adhered to by
hiding their identities while presenting the research findings. This confidentiality exercised by
the study ensured that no participants would be mentioned, nor was their non-pseudo identity, if
used, be released because of their participation. Free will was observed by inviting participants to
choose to take part in the study without coercion, intimidation, or convincing. The same policy
was observed during their responses, as they responded to the questions asked without any
external influence or interference to ensure the credibility of the results obtained. This study
54

utilized an informed consent so that the participants were aware by providing them a Participant
Information Sheet. This indicated that the participant were aware of what the research study was
about and what was expected of him or her during the study; a signature was not required as this
was an exempt study (presented in Appendix C). All participants have the option to see the
results of the study upon request. To further promote ethical procedures, this study is not
intended to be published beyond the scope of the USC library, publicly searchable, but limited to
professional journals or directed to release to the open public.

55

Chapter Four: Results and Findings
Chapter 4 presents both the results and findings of this study. This study sought to
understand factors that influence the advancement of women into executive leadership in higher
education in the United States. The method involved a sequential, mixed-method approach
consisting of an online survey and questions via interviews, which are presented in this chapter
the order they were conducted. All participants met the criteria for this study discussed in
Chapter 3. The research questions that guided the study are as follows:
1. What are the organizational influences that impact the ability of female faculty and
staff members to achieve executive leadership roles within higher education?
2. What are female faculty and staff members’ knowledge and motivation related to
female faculty and staff members achieving executive leadership roles within higher
education?
This study analyzed the organizational, motivational, and knowledge influences of
women who are currently working in higher education, focusing on barriers that hinder the
advancement of women in executive leadership roles within higher education. For each one of
the influences, a combined analysis was conducted to determine needs and assets based on the
level of negative or positive responses for questions aligning to each assumed influence. For
surveys, the determining threshold was based on the Likert scale with a determining score that
was analyzed by the best measure of central tendency. Therefore, the closer the total score to the
scale’s measurement, the more positive the response is, which determines an asset. The further
away the score is from the scale’s measurement, the more negative the response determines a
need. For interviews, the determining threshold was based on the review of transcripts to identify
themes, which for qualitative data analysis used identification of recurring language, opinions,
56

and beliefs aligned to the a priori codes established for the assumed knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences. An influence was categorized as an asset when more than 50% of
participants’ responses aligned positively to an influence, and a need was determined when more
than 50% of participants’ responses aligned negatively to an influence.
Participating Stakeholders
This study focused on female faculty and staff members working within higher
education. This group represents the education system’s backbone and is the direct link between
students and executive roles within higher education. The following two sections, both survey
participants and interview participants, articulate the characteristics of each participant group.
These two participant groups are separate as each participant group is unrelated to the other. A
total of 23 participants (n = 23) were involved in this study. The following sections further break
down each participant group as the survey and interview participants did not overlap.
Survey Participants
Fifteen participants initially completed the surveys, but two participants were excluded in
this study due to not meeting the criteria: n = 13. Qualtrics powered the surveys, and distribution
took place via social media with a direct link for accessibility. The key stakeholders involved in
this study were women currently serving among faculty and staff within higher education. The
characteristics of the women included in the survey sample met all the criteria mentioned in
Chapter 3. For this study, it was not a requirement to discuss what type of institution the
participants work at, rather that they only be currently employed among staff and faculty. The
data representing student versus alumni is in Table 6, and Table 7 depicts tenure in current
employment of their role.

57

Table 7
Survey Stakeholder Demographics (Criterion 3): How Long Have You Been Employed in Your
Current Role? (n = 13)
Tenure Assigned participants Target weight (%)
Less than one year 0 0%
One year to five years 10 77%
Greater than five years 3 23%

Interview Participants
Twelve participants were initially asked to be interviewed, which was a different sample
group from those surveyed. Direct recruitment for the interviews was conducted due to not
enough survey respondents volunteering for interviews. Even using a separate, direct recruitment
approach, only 10 participants volunteered (n = 10). The process used to recruit the sample group
for interviews was via LinkedIn and the online Learning Management System (LMS) dashboard
through University of Southern California. As mentioned previously, the quantitative and
qualitative data collection used the same criteria for both protocols. For those participants that
completed the interviews, all 10 participants were current students; no alumni agreed to
participate in the interviews. This study did not collect basic demographics from the participant
groups such as, but not limited to, age, race, education, income, and marital status. However,
Table 8 depicts demographics of tenure in current employment of their role.

58

Table 8
Interview Stakeholder Demographics (Criterion 3): How Long Have You Been Employed in Your
Current Role? (n = 10)
Tenure Assigned participants Target weight (%)
One to two years 6 60
Two to three years 2 20
Three to four years
Greater than four years
2
0
20
0

The following sections transition from the initial demographics gathered from the survey
and interviews into the analysis of the data aligned to the research questions. Each influence
within the research question is presented as either a need or an asset and is done so by displaying
survey data first, then interview data.
Research Question (RQ) 1: What Are the Organizational Influences That Impact the
Ability of Female Faculty and Staff Members to Achieve Executive Leadership Roles
Within Higher Education?
The assumed influences associated with this first research question are centered around
organizational models and settings. This section provides both the results and findings for the
five assumed organizational influences and identifies each one as a need or an asset. Results and
findings were determined based on the aggregation, analysis, and synthesis of raw survey data
and coding of interview responses. Both structured and unstructured questions were examined
closely to determine how participants responded. Survey and interview data indicate that most
participants do not feel their current organization supports or provides the tools necessary for
women to advance into executive leadership roles.
59

Higher Education Female Faculty and Staff Do Not Think Their Organization Values
Gender Diversity
This study found, that according to the participants, both quantitative and qualitative data
indicate that the participants do not feel their current organization values gender diversity.
Therefore, this organizational influence is determined to be a need. Question number 11 asked
the participants: To what degree do you agree with the following: “My current organization
values gender diversity, equity, and inclusion?” Out of the 13 participants surveyed, 62% (eight)
indicated they “disagree” with the survey question, while only 15% (two) fully agreed. Table 9
depicts the distribution of participant responses to organizational influence model 1 (n = 13). The
survey data indicate this influence is a need as a clear majority of the participants indicated that
their organization does not value gender diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Table 9
Distribution of Survey Participant Responses to Organizational Influence Model 1 (n = 13)
Survey item Response (value) n %
11 My current
organization values
gender diversity,
equity, and inclusion?
Fully agree (5)
Agree (4)
Undecided (3)
Disagree (2)
Fully disagree (1)
2
2
1
8
0
15
15
8
62
0

60

Within the interview protocol, question number 12 asked the participants: “In what ways,
if at all, does your organization communicate value for gender diversity, equity, and inclusion?”
Out of the 10 participants interviewed, the responses were mixed. For example, Participant 1
expressed a negative response indicating, “To my knowledge, other than Title IX training, we do
not have any formal discussions on diversity, equity, and inclusion.” This participant is
indicating that training is outdated, and the participant does not see their organization valuing
DEI, whereas participant 2 is an example of an expressed positive response. “Currently my
organization has two policies in place as well as a diversity team which works with learning
department as well as HR on all diversity policies, best practice, and benefits.” Within this aspect
of value, for participant 2, their organization has actions in place where value is demonstrated.
Though the interview participants expressed a mixed response to this question, the combination
of survey and interview data results in the overall finding that this influence is a need.
Higher Education Female Faculty and Staff Believe Their Organization Does Not Foster an
Environment of Trust and Safety
This study found, that according to the participants, both quantitative results and
qualitative findings identified that many participants do not feel their current organization creates
an environment of trust and safety. Therefore, this influence is determined to be a need. Question
number 12 asked the participants: To what degree do you agree with the following: “My current
organization creates an environment of trust and safety to advance diversity and equity in
executive leadership?” Of the 13 participants surveyed, 39% (five) indicated they “disagree”
with the survey question, while only 15% (two) fully agree. Table 10 depicts the distribution of
participant responses to the question (n = 13). The survey data indicate this influence is a need as
61

a clear majority of the participants indicated that their organization does not create an
environment of trust and safety.

Table 10
Distribution of Participant Responses to Organizational Influence Model 2 (n = 13)
Survey item Response (value) n %
12 My current
organization creates
an environment of
trust and safety to
advance diversity and
equity in executive
leadership
Fully agree (5)
Agree (4)
Undecided (3)
Disagree (2)
Fully disagree (1)
2
2
1
8
0
15
15
31
39
0
62

Within the interview protocol, question number 13 asked the participants: “In what ways,
if at all, does your organization foster an environment of trust and safety to advance diversity and
equity in executive leadership?” Out of the 10 participants interviewed, the responses were split.
50% (five) indicated a negative response to the interview question, communicating the
perception that their organization does not foster an environment of trust and safety to advance
diversity and equity in executive leadership; whereas the remaining 50% (five) indicated a
positive response with the interview question, which equals yes, the organization does foster an
environment of trust and safety to advance diversity and equity in executive leadership. Of those
participants who were interviewed, their shared experiences and comments balanced out across
the narratives, which is why the interview data indicate a mixed result.
Participant 5 expressed a negative shared perception indicating, “I would hope so, but I
don’t see it. The University’s executive leadership team seems to be mostly still males, White.”
Similarly, Participant 7 expressed, “It is not really clear if they foster this type of environment. I
say this because yes, we do things with purpose and intent, but it comes across as just another
check in the box to show compliance.” These two examples are the indicators that lead to the
feeling that the organization does not foster an environment of trust and safety. From the other
perspective, Participant 2 shared that her organization has “abundant feedback, radical candor,
high trust relationships with weekly collaboration and mentorship groups.” Participant 6 shared,
“We have a culture of calling people out and working to improve this area. Executive leadership
models the notion that we are all working to better.” Indicators such as that which participant 6
provided, display that their organization is providing an environment of trust and safety. The
survey data indicate this influence is a need as most of the participants indicated that their
organization does not create an environment of trust and safety. Although, both the survey and
63

interview data does show encouraging percentages for several participates, overall, more do not
feel as such and therefore their organization does not foster a safe environment as this influence
is a need.
Higher Education Female Faculty and Staff Shared Mixed Results With Presence of
Female Role Models in Executive Leadership Roles Within Their Organizations
Organizational Influence Setting 1 focused on each participant’s current organization’s
examples of positive women mentors and role models. Of those surveyed, overwhelmingly, all
13 respondents indicated that female role models are present in their organizations. However, of
those interviewed, 70% indicated female role models were absent. Due to many of the responses
in the quantitative data in the highest range, this organizational influence is determined to be an
asset. Although there is a gap among the two it does show.
Question number 7 asked the participants: To what degree do you agree with the
following: “Within my organization, I can find examples of women serving in executive
leadership roles which I see as role models or a person of positive influence?” Out of the 13
participants surveyed, 70% (nine) indicated they “agree” with the survey question and 30%
(four) fully agree. Table 11 depicts the distribution of participant responses to organizational
influence setting 1 (n = 13). Given the overwhelmingly positive responses to this survey
question, and a similar overwhelmingly responses within the interviews, the survey data indicate
this influence is mixed.

64

Table 11
Distribution of Participant Responses to Organizational Influence Setting 1 (n = 13)
Survey item Response (value) n %
7 Within my
organization, I can
find examples of
women serving in
executive leadership
roles who I see as role
models, or person of
positive influence
Fully agree (5)
Agree (4)
Undecided (3)
Disagree (2)
Fully disagree (1)
9
4
0
0
0
69
31
0
0
0

Within the interview protocol, question number 9 asked the participants: “What
examples, if any, can you think of where there are women who serve as role models, or persons
of positive influence, currently in executive leadership roles within your organization?” Out of
the 10 participants interviewed, 70% (seven) indicated female role models do not exist within
their organization. The remaining 30% (three) indicated female role models do exist.
In general, the narratives that had negative designation expressed similar responses
related to no women in such roles, or not having any role model relationship. Participant 2
expressed, “my experience is that those executive leadership positions are male dominated. Very
few women leaders within the department. I have seen women struggle more than their male
counterparts.” Participant 4 expressed a negative response indicating, “I have never had a female
mentor within my organization. There has not been a female above me in a while, not in the
higher education area.” Participant 7 expressed a negative response indicating, “Unfortunately, I
do not have any; our school is mostly males. I had a mentor when I first started, but it did not
actually evolve.”
65

Whereas, in general, the narratives that had positive designation expressed similar
responses of either having a current role model relationship or knowing of a positive influence
they can turn to. Participant 1 expressed a positive response indicating, “I have made great
strides in the Professional and Continuing Education Division. I do feel like I am moving up and
in the right direction.” Similar, Participant 6 expressed a positive response indicating, “I have
had several strong female role models from my early days starting and as I have grown in this
role. She was a badass and a great example of hard work and determination paving the way to
success.” The interview data indicate this influence is a need as a clear majority of the
participants indicated that their organization does not have nor support women as role models
and as such there is a perception that the industry is still male dominated. However, complete
survey and interview data analysis indicate this influence is mixed.
Higher Education Female Faculty and Staff Do Not Believe Their Organization’s Policies
and Procedures Address Implicit Bias and Stereotyping
Organizational Setting 2 focused on whether policies and procedures within the higher
education institutions of the participants support overcoming implicit bias and addressing
stereotypes of women in higher education. This study found, that according to the participants,
both quantitative and qualitative data indicate that the participants do not feel their current
organization’s policies and procedures effectively overcome implicit bias against women.
Therefore, this influence is determined to be a need.
There were two questions associated with this organizational influence. Question number
8 asked the participants: To what degree do you agree with the following: “My current
organization’s policies and procedures are effective in overcoming implicit bias against women.”
Of the 13 participants surveyed, 38% (five) indicated they are “undecided” with the survey
66

question, leaving the second most popular response at 31% (four) “disagree.” Table 12 depicts
the distribution of participant responses to this question (n = 13). The survey data indicate this
influence is a need as a clear majority of the participants indicated that their organization’s
policies and procedures are not effective in overcoming implicit bias against women.

Table 12
Distribution of Participant Responses to Organizational Influence Setting 2 (n = 13)
Survey item Response (value) n %
8 My current
organization’s
policies and
procedures are
effective in
overcoming implicit
bias against women
Fully agree (5)
Agree (4)
Undecided (3)
Disagree (2)
Fully disagree (1)
1
2
5
4
1
8
15
38
31
8

67

Survey question number 9 asked the participants: To what degree do you agree with the
following: “My current organization does a good job of addressing stereotypes about the ability
of women to serve in leadership positions?” Of the 13 participants surveyed, 50% (six) indicated
they are “undecided” with the survey question, leaving the second most popular response at 25%
(four) “disagree.” Table 13 depicts the distribution of participant responses to organizational
influence setting 2 (n = 13). The survey data indicate this influence is a need as a clear majority
of the participants indicated their current organization’s policies and procedures are not effective
in overcoming implicit bias against women.

Table 13
Distribution of Participant Responses to Organizational Influence Setting 2 (n = 13)
Survey item Response (value) n %
9 My current
organization does a
good job of
addressing
stereotypes about the
ability of women to
serve in leadership
positions
Fully agree (5)
Agree (4)
Undecided (3)
Disagree (2)
Fully disagree (1)
1
2
6
4
0
8
17
50
25
0

68

Within the interview protocol, question number 10 asked the participants: “In what ways,
if at all, are your organization’s policies and procedures effective in overcoming implicit bias
against women?” Of the 10 participants interviewed, 70% (seven) indicated a negative response
with the interview question, whereas the remaining 30% (three) indicated a positive response
with the interview question. Furthermore, to show the disparity between those responses that
were determined to be negative compared to those determined to be positive, several
participant’s responses are expressed as examples, each with a different response that
distinguishes a definitive trend between a negative or positive response. Participant 1 expressed
confusion about her organization’s policies, “I am not sure now what we are doing or what our
policies are. Our focus is all over the place and it’s unfortunate.” Participant 9 shared a clear lack
of policy at her institution, “I am not aware of any actions taken to overcome bias against
women. I know I can discuss this with our University’s HR but would not be the one to take on
this measure unless I had concrete evidence.” One commonalty among the two participants is
that both express a level of concern and confusion. Their organization’s policies and procedures
do not appear to be effective in overcoming implicit bias against women.
Participant 3 expressed a different opinion, a positive response, but does did not address
policies or procedures in particular, “I don’t feel it is an organizational thing, or at least with my
current organization. All of my views and beliefs are positive within this organization.”
Participant 4 shared, “We seem to be effective. We have a lot of focus on all aspects, lately there
seems to be a focus on race, more than gender, but that is just my perception. I think we are
doing great.” Participant 10 shared a similar perception as well, “We have a lot of diversity and
inclusion efforts in place. Implicit bias training is required as part of our onboarding, and there is
also an implicit bias checklist we go over before any new hires.” The main difference between
69

those who expressed a negative narrative compared to a positive narrative is that their current
organization’s policies and procedures seem to align with reducing implicit bias against women.
The interview data indicate this influence is a need as a clear majority of the participants
responded that their organization’s policies and procedures are not effective in overcoming
implicit bias against women.
Higher Education Female Faculty and Staff Shared Mixed Results on Whether Their
Organization’s Polices Help Support Gender Diversity
Organizational Setting 3 focused on the participant’s current organization’s policies and
procedures to enhance the hiring process to help promote gender diversity. This study found, that
according to the participants, both quantitative and qualitative data revealed mixed results and
findings for this influence. For the participants who completed the survey, respondents
overwhelmingly showed that setting three organizational influences is needed. However, more
than half of interviewees provided responses that indicate this influence is an asset for those
participants who completed the interviews. As a result of a clear majority not emerging when
considering both survey and interviewee responses, this influence is determined to be mixed.
Question number 10 asked the participants: To what degree do you agree with the
following: “My current organization’s policies enhance the hiring process to help promote
gender diversity?” Of the 13 participants surveyed, 55% (seven) indicated they “disagree” with
the survey question, leaving the second most popular response at 15% (2), which was shared
equally among the other three response options. Table 14 depicts the distribution of participant
responses to the question (n = 13). Given the survey data, this influence trended towards a need
with 55% of participants disagreeing with the question and 15% “undecided”.
70

Table 14
Distribution of Participant Responses to Organizational Influence Setting 3 (n = 13)
Survey item Response (value) n %
10 My current
organization’s
policies enhance the
hiring process to
help promote
gender diversity
Fully agree (5)
Agree (4)
Undecided (3)
Disagree (2)
Fully disagree (1)
2
2
2
7
0
15
15
15
55
0

Within the interview protocol, question number 11 asked the participants: “Can you
explain your organization’s policies, if any, that enhance hiring processes to promote gender
diversity?” Of the 10 participants interviewed, 40% (four) indicated a negative response with the
interview question, which equals no, they are not able to explain, or no such policies exist which
enhance the hiring processes to promote gender diversity; whereas the remaining 60% (six)
indicated a positive response with the interview question, which equals yes, policies do exist that
enhance the hiring processes to promote gender diversity.
Continuing with the trend of shared perceptions and experiences between those responses
that were determined to be negative compared to those determined to be positive, participants
expressed varying responses to this interview question. Participant 3 expressed a negative
response indicating, “Our directives do not explicitly mention any policies that would promote
gender diversity. The only mentioning of anything closely related is anti-discrimination inside
the employee handbook.” Participant 8 shared an opinion which indicates there is room for
improvement within her particular organization, “I am not sure. We don’t really talk too much
about these policies unless something happens, or we are required to conduct some training. I
think it is assumed we should know this, but it doesn’t appear to be practice.”
71

Of those participants who shared experiences with policies that indicated their
organization policies support gender diversity, the participants were able to provide clear
examples of these policies in practice. Participant 2 expressed a positive response indicating,
“We use software that reviews all job descriptions for language bias so the editing team can
adjust prior to posting as needed, this is based on a gender natural score the software rates with.”
Participant 5 expressed, “I am not directly involved, but on the few times I have been a part of
the hiring committee, we look at each candidate equally and do not discuss balancing out gender,
or race or use our personal feelings to make a decision. We try to stay fair.” This example
provides a good indication that several organizations do have policies in place and the
participants believe their polices are helping to support gender diversity. Given the interview
data this influence is a need as a clear majority of the participants indicated that their
organization’s policies do not appear to support gender diversity as it relates to hiring practices.
Research Question (RQ) 2: What Were Female Faculty and Staff Members’ Knowledge
and Motivation Related to Female Faculty and Staff Members Achieving Executive
Leadership Roles Within Higher Education?
The assumed influences most associated with this second research question are the
motivational and knowledge influences. Results and findings were determined based on the
aggregation, analysis, and synthesis of raw survey data and coding of interview responses. Both
structured and unstructured questions were examined closely to determine how participants
responded. Survey and interview results indicated that most participants fare well in the assessed
motivational factors as well as their level of knowledge around women advancing into executive
leadership roles.
72

Motivation and knowledge are key influences related to performance (Clark & Estes,
2008). The following sections focus on the results and findings of motivation-related and
knowledge-related influences pertinent to the stakeholder competency as introduced in Chapter
2. The first sub-section focuses on motivation, which drives performance through the willingness
of motivated individuals to work, provide and produce effort, and strive towards achievement
(Clark & Estes, 2008). Furthermore, Clark and Estes (2008) explained that motivation was the
direct link between the workforce's needs as individuals and the performance goals of their
organization.
Motivation Results and Findings
The motivation influences associated with the second research question are centered
around the participants' views of their motivation to work, provide, produce effort, and strive
towards advancement in higher education. In other words, the factors that contribute to an
individual’s motivation have a profound impact on one’s choices, actions, decisions, and
thoughts (Clark & Estes, 2008). Survey and interview results indicated that most participants
have the needed motivation to advance into executive leadership roles. The data is explained in
the following sub-sections through exploration of three influences: expectancy, task value, and
self-efficacy.
Women Believe Investment in Their Career Can Result in Growth Into Executive Leadership
Roles in Higher Education
The first motivation influence focused on expectancy. An outcome expectancy is an
individual’s judgment of their capabilities (Wigfield, 2014). It answers the question, “will I be
able to obtain the desired outcome?” This study found, that according to the participants, both
quantitative results and qualitative findings indicate that the participants believe they will
73

succeed at gaining a position in executive leadership. Therefore, outcome expectancy is
determined to be an asset.
Question number 5 asked the participants, on a scale of one to five utilizing the provided
response option, how would you rate the following, “If I applied effort in pursuing a leadership
role, I believe I would succeed at gaining a position in executive leadership?” Of the 13
participants surveyed, 54% (seven) indicated they “agree” with the survey question, while the
second most popular response at 38% (five) was “fully agree.” None of the participants either
disagreed or fully disagreed with the prompt. Table 15 depicts the distribution of participant
responses to motivation influence outcome expectancy (n = 13). The survey data indicate this
influence is an asset as a clear majority of the participants indicated they believe they would
succeed at gaining a position in executive leadership if given an opportunity.

Table 15
Distribution of Participant Responses to Motivational Influence Expectancy (n = 13)
Survey item Response (value) n %
5 If I applied effort in
pursuing a leadership
role, I believe I would
succeed at gaining a
position in executive
leadership
Fully agree (5)
Agree (4)
Undecided (3)
Disagree (2)
Fully disagree (1)
5
7
1
0
0
38
54
8
0
0

74

During the interviews, participants were asked similar questions to that of the surveys
which aligned with the appropriate influence. Each question asked required an open-ended
response so the participant could explain their answer in more detail. Within the interview
protocol, question number 8 asked the participants: “Do you believe that with effort, you have
the opportunity to achieve a role in higher education executive leadership?” Of the 10
participants interviewed, 80% (eight) indicated a positive response with the interview question,
which equals yes, the participants believe they can achieve a role in higher education executive
leadership if opportunity and effort were to be applied. The remaining two participants both
stated they were “undecided” and not sure if they expected they would advance into an executive
leadership role. As such, Participant 5 expressed uncertainty in response to the question:
I am not sure now. Some days I would say yes, and others I would say no. I don’t think it
is my effort, I think it is more of what day it is and what opportunity seems to come
down. But in general, I am not sure.
From the two participants who were “undecided”, the data indicate that there is not
enough motivation from within to drive a positive indication of advancement within higher
education. Whereas, if the participants had perceptions and experiences which indicate
positive belief in obtaining a role in higher education if given the opportunity, there comments
would have aligned more so with the following. Participant 1 expressed, “I know I can, and it is
possible.” Clear indication of positive outcome expectancy just as participant 3 expressed a
similarly positive response indicating, “Yes. I have been intentional in the cultivation of my
career path. I have procured advanced degrees designed for each job path. I have built a valuable
network of mentors, and I don’t see any barriers.” The interview data indicate this influence is an
75

asset as a clear majority of the participants indicated that they do believe they have both the
effort and opportunities to move into an executive leadership role.
Women See Value in Growing Their Careers Into Executive Leadership Roles in Higher
Education
The second motivation influence focused on the participants’ values for advancing into
executive leadership roles. This study found, that according to the participants, both quantitative
and qualitative results presents findings that the participants share positive value for advancing
into executive leadership roles. Therefore, task value is determined to be an asset.
Question number 4 asked the participants: To what degree do you agree with the
following on a scale of one to five: “It is important for me to advance my career by moving into
a higher education executive role.” Of the 13 participants surveyed, 46% (six) indicated “very
important” with the survey question, with the second most popular response at 23% (three)
indicated “extremely important.” Table 16 depicts the distribution of participant responses
motivation task value (n = 13). The survey data indicate this influence is an asset as a clear
majority of the participants indicated that it is important for them to advance into an executive
role within higher education.

Table 16
Distribution of Participant Responses to Motivational Influence Task Value (n = 13)
Survey item Response (value) n %
4 It is important for me to
advance my career by
moving into a higher
education executive
role
Extremely (5)
Very (4)
Moderately (3)
Slightly (2)
Not at all (1)
3
6
1
1
2
23
46
8
8
15

76

Within the interview protocol, question number 7 asked the participants: “what if
anything, do you value that makes you want to move into an executive leadership role within
higher education?” Of the 10 participants interviewed, 30% (three) indicated a response that was
neither negative nor positive, rather their response provided little to no insight into their value for
advancing into an executive leadership role within higher education. However, the remaining
70% (seven) indicated a positive response that illuminates their value for pursuing a move into
an executive leadership role within higher education.
Table 17 aims to visually display the qualitative data, which describes the characteristic
of certain words used by the participants. This table is a summary of the data with counts of how
often a code occurred. In this instance, the response value is associated with a reason, or what the
participants value, about wanting to move into an executive leadership role within higher
education. Since raw numbers are not always useful, the second and third columns were added to
show each response value's frequency and relative frequency. The relative frequency column is
simply the frequency divided by the total. In this case, five divided 38 is equal to .28. Table 17
depicts the relative frequency of responses to motivation task value (n = 10).

Table 17
Relative Frequency Table of Responses to Motivation Task Value (n = 10)
Response value Frequency Relative frequency
Difference making 11 .28
Decision-making 6 .15
Gain knowledge 6 .15
Team 6 .15
Students 5 .13
Change 5 .13
Total 38 1.00
77

Due to the findings in the participants’ responses in the interviews, there is no need to
show the range of disparity between those responses that were determined to be negative
compared to those determined to be positive. All 10 interviewees showed positive value for
advancing into executive leadership roles. For example, Participant 8 expressed a positive
response related to a desire to create change:
I want to make a broader impact. I constantly like to think about what higher education
should be and where it can be. The real value is in the advancement of equity through
deeper learning. I want to be a part of that.
Participant 9 on the other hand, expressed a positive response that centered around the
value of leading a team:
I have always wanted to be in on the decision-making. I never liked leadership that
ignored my input. I like to include my entire team in the decision-making process, this
way giving as much information to as many as I can while fixing the process.
Participant 9 expresses her desire to be involved and not isolated. She shares value in
teamwork and the process to advance into executive leadership roles.
Women Believe in Their Ability to Perform in an Executive Leadership Role in Higher
Education
The self-efficacy influence in this study focused on the participants’ perceptions of their
ability to perform in an executive leadership role. Only surveys were used to inform this
motivation influence. The results show that the participants’ responses indicate they possess self-
efficacy. Therefore, motivation self-efficacy is determined to be an asset.
Question number 6 asked the participants, on a scale of one to five utilizing the provided
response option, to what degree do you agree with the following statement: “I am confident in
78

my ability to perform if advanced into an executive leadership role.” Of the 13 participants
surveyed, 46% (six) indicated “agree” and 46% (six) indicated “fully agree” with the survey
question. Only one participant was “undecided”, and none of the participants disagreed. Table 18
depicts the distribution of participant responses motivation self-efficacy (n = 13). The responses
overwhelming indicated participants have confidence in their ability to perform in executive
leadership roles which makes this an asset.

Table 18
Distribution of Participant Responses to Motivational Influence Self-Efficacy (n = 13)
Survey item Response (value) n %
6 I am confident in my
ability to perform if
advanced into an
executive leadership
role
Fully agree (5)
Agree (4)
Undecided (3)
Disagree (2)
Fully disagree (1)
6
6
1
0
0
46
46
8
0
0

79

This motivational influence was not associated with an interview question. The survey
did include a skip-logic question to ask participants to explain further if they selected either
“disagree” or “fully disagree.” However, due to the responses not falling into either category, no
additional data is available.
Knowledge Results and Findings
This section focuses on knowledge-related influences that are pertinent to stakeholder
competency in advancing into higher education executive leadership roles. Knowledge and skill
enhancement are required for job performance under only two conditions: first, they are required
when people do not know how to accomplish their performance goals; second, when people
anticipate that future challenges require novel problem solving (Clark & Estes, 2008). The
following sub-sections analyze both quantitative and qualitative data examining whether female
faculty and staff possesses the declarative, procedural, and metacognitive knowledge they need
to achieve their performance goal.
Women Are Aware of Barriers Hindering Advancement Into Executive Roles Within Higher
Education
The first knowledge influence is declarative knowledge. Declarative knowledge is
explicit knowledge of basic facts or information that can be passed verbally from one person to
another (McFarland, 2014). This section focuses on the declarative knowledge of the barriers in
place that could hinder female faculty and staff advancement into an executive leadership role
within higher education; this section also explores the qualities needed, according to the
participants, of someone to advance into an executive leadership role within higher education.
The data within this study indicate that the participants have the required knowledge of
leadership barriers. Participants' abilities to list terms, provide short response, and demonstrate
80

basic facts and information related to barriers were measured. Therefore, declarative knowledge
is determined to be an asset.
Question number 2 asked the participants to provide short responses based on their
reflection, “what barriers, if any, have you seen for women moving into executive roles within
higher education?” Out of the 13 participants surveyed, the responses fell into two main
categories: family and glass ceiling. Participants’ responses are further discussed in Chapter 5 in
relation to other research in this area. Figure 2 depicts a word cloud grouping of keywords based
on the participants own reflections (n = 13).

Figure 2
Distribution of Keyword Responses Based on Participants Reflections (n = 13)

Note. The number values in parentheses following each word indicates the frequency count for
the words in the word cloud based on analysis of interview data.

81

The survey question was open-ended. Therefore, there was no numerical scoring
associated with participants’ responses. The data shows that, of those participants surveyed, the
number one response to barriers seen or experienced for women moving into executive
leadership roles within higher education is “family.” The word “family” appeared 15 times, and
the term “glass ceiling” appeared 10 times. To provide clarity and specifics, several of the
responses are quoted from the survey and listed in Table 19, provides further insight into the
participants’ perceptions. Table 19 displays keywords used along with specific, representative
quotes pulled from the survey responses, which provides insight into why the participants
perceive these barriers to be present. The responses are an accumulation of all 13 respondents
and analyzed into the top four responses, which present the data with the best clarity.

Table 19
Distribution of Participant Responses to Barriers to Advancement (n = 13)
Key words Specific quotes
Family

Requires women to leave their job for several months to a year.

Little to no option for any kind of work while raising a family. Because I
am a female, I am already at a disadvantage if I want to have children.

Glass Ceiling Women have been viewed as “less than” because they cannot work long
hours compared to men.

These executive positions require women to make a choice between having
a life or no life. If you don’t make it, the organization defaults to “glass
ceiling” and moves on.

82

Unlike the quantitative surveys, which focused on declarative knowledge of barriers, the
interviews focused on declarative knowledge of what qualities or attributes are required to
advance into executive leadership roles within higher education. Each question asked required an
open-ended response so the participant could explain their answer in more detail.
Within the interview protocol, question number 6 asked the participants: “to the best of
your knowledge, describe what you perceive to be the top three qualities or attributes of someone
in an executive leadership role within higher education.” Findings presented in Table 21 display
the qualitative data by the commonality of words used by the participants. This table is a
summary of the data with counts of how often a data value occurred. The response value is
associated with a reason or what the respondents perceive to be the top qualities or attributes.
Since raw numbers are not always useful, the second and third columns were added to show the
frequency and relative frequency of each response value. The relative frequency column is the
frequency divided by the total. For Table 20, seven divided by thirty-four would have a relative
frequency of twenty-one. Table 20 depicts the relative frequency of responses to declarative
knowledge (n = 10).

83

Table 20
Relative Frequency Table of Responses to Declarative Knowledge (n = 10)
Response value Frequency Relative frequency
People skills 7 .20
Strategic 6 .17
Sense of direction 6 .17
Flexible 6 .17
Adaptive 5 .14
Passionate 4 .11
Total 34 1.00

Note. The number values in the frequency column following each word indicates the frequency
count for the words in the response value based on analysis of interview data.

The interview data shows the results of the key words or responses used which best
describes the qualities or attributes required to advance into executive leadership roles within
higher education. The information is what the participants perceive to be the top qualities or
attributes of someone in an executive leadership role based on their responses.
Women Reported Mixed Levels of Ability to Navigate the Hiring Process to Advance Into
Executive Leadership Roles Within Higher Education
The second knowledge influence is procedural knowledge. This is the knowledge of the
skills and procedures involved with the task or process, including techniques, methods, and
necessary steps (Clark & Estes, 2008). The data reveal participants have the required knowledge
to explain how to navigate the hiring process of advancing into executive leadership roles within
higher education. This information was measured by each participant’s ability to select a
response option based on the questions provided. Procedural knowledge as it relates to the
quantitative data is determined to be an asset. However, interview data reveal the participants do
84

not have the required procedural knowledge to explain how to navigate the hiring process of
advancing into executive leadership roles within higher education. This information was
measured by the participants’ abilities to articulate the steps necessary to navigate the hiring
process into executive leadership roles within higher education. Therefore, procedural
knowledge as it relates to qualitative data is determined to be a need. This study found, that
according to the participants, both quantitative results and qualitative findings indicate this
influence is mixed for the participants.
Two questions were asked in order to explore female faculty and staff’s procedural
knowledge of the hiring process. The first question asked: “in my current organization, the
process for applying for an executive leadership position in higher education is clear?” Out of the
13 participants surveyed, most of the participants, 46% (six), indicated “somewhat clear” while
the second most common response, 31% (four), indicated “not clear at all.” A clear majority did
not emerge. Table 21 depicts the distribution of participant responses for procedural knowledge
(n = 13). Both survey and interview data combined indicated this influence is mixed, as neither
produced a clear majority indicating a need or an asset.

85

Table 21
Distribution of Participant Responses to Knowledge Influence Procedural, Question 1 (n = 13)
Survey item Response (value) n %
1 In my current
organization, the
process for applying
for an executive
leadership position in
higher education was
clear
Very (5)
Somewhat (4)
Undecided (3)
Unclear (2)
Not clear at all (1)
0
6
3
0
4
0
46
23
0
31

The second question, asked on a scale of one to five, how would you rate the following:
“if asked for advice, how would you rate your ability to explain techniques, methods, or steps to
take to navigate the hiring process at your organization to advance into an executive leadership
role.” Of the 13 participants surveyed, 61% (eight) indicated “good” while 31% (four) indicated
“fair” with the survey question. In the case of this question, a combined 69% (nine) of
respondents indicated they had a “good” or “excellent” ability to explain the hiring process. With
most of the responses rated at good or excellent, the responses to this question are within the
asset threshold, therefore the survey data for this influence in an asset. Table 22 depicts the
distribution of participant responses for this question (n = 13).

86

Table 22
Distribution of Participant Responses to Knowledge Procedural, Question 3 (n = 13)
Survey item Response (value) n %
3 If asked for advice,
how would you rate
your ability to explain
techniques, methods,
or steps to take to
navigate the hiring
process in order to
advance into an
executive leadership
role
Excellent (5)
Good (4)
Fair (3)
Poor (2)
Very poor (1)
1
8
4
0
0
8
61
31
0
0

Within the interview protocol, two questions were asked to better explore participants’
understanding of the hiring process in order to advance into executive leadership roles within
higher education. The first question asked the participants: “does your current organization have
a clear promotion pipeline in place? If so, could you explain your understanding of how one
advances into an executive leadership position? The second question, asked the participants:
“what steps would you need to take to advance into executive leadership within higher
education?” The intent of this question was not to primarily focus on the participants response of
whether said pipeline exists, but more importantly to explore the participants’ knowledge of the
process to advance into executive leadership roles, regardless of the existence of a clear path to
promotion within said organization or not.
Of the 10 participants interviewed for question 3, 80% (eight) indicated a negative
response when asked if their current organization has a clear promotion pipeline in place. The
remaining 20% (two) indicated a positive response when asked if their current organization has a
clear promotion pipeline in place. Of the 10 participants interviewed, 30% (three) indicated they
87

could not list or describe the process to advance into executive leadership roles within higher
education. 70% (seven) were able to list and describe the process to advance into executive
leadership roles within their higher education organization. For those participants who could not
or have not seen a clear promotion pipeline in place, Participant 1 indicated, “no, I had to push
for advancement and just when I thought a Director role was coming, they created a new role
which stopped my promotion. I still don’t understand the new role nor the steps to get there; it’s
unclear to me why.” Participant 5 shared a similar response indicating, “I was working towards a
promotion as I had been on staff for years, I have tenure. Then out of nowhere it seemed the
opportunity vanished for me while others, men, still promoted.” On the other end, Participant 5
stated, “Yes, our roles are clear just as our path to get to the top is clear. It is less about clarity,
and more about availability. Nobody wants to leave their role, which makes it harder to
advance.” Participant 10 indicated, “we got a new President last year, female, who has laid out
her plan for future roles in higher education to be filled by more women, and she seems to have a
solid push towards these opportunities.” This indicates a hopeful future for advancement and the
participant gives an example of future plans within her organization for advancement into an
executive leadership role.
This study found, that according to the participants, combining both question 3 and 5, the
threshold does emerge into an asset, which does support the ability to display procedural
knowledge of their current organization’s pipeline to promotion or the ability to accurately
articulate the process to advance into an executive role within higher education.
88

Women Frequently Reflect on Their Strengths and Weaknesses to Develop Strategies to
Advance Into Executive Leadership Roles Within Higher Education
The final knowledge influence is metacognitive, which explores one’s ability to reflect on
and adjust necessary skills and knowledge, including general strategies, assessing demands,
planning one’s approach, and monitoring progress (Clark & Estes, 2008). For this influence, only
qualitative data were collected via open-ended interview questions. Respondents sought to
explore the degree to which women frequently reflect on strengths and weaknesses to develop
strategies to advance into executive leadership roles within higher education. The data reveal that
the participants could recognize their strengths and weaknesses and develop strategies to advance
into executive leadership roles within higher education. Therefore, metacognitive knowledge is
determined to be an asset.
Within the interview protocol, three questions were asked to explore metacognitive
knowledge. The first question asked the participants: “If at all, how do your current experiences
as a leader prepare you for a role in executive leadership?” The second question asked
participants: “how do you engage in self-development concerning your skills and abilities to
better position yourself for an executive leadership role in the future?” Finally, Question three
asked the participants: “do you believe there are growth opportunities for you in your current
role as a leader?”
The analysis of question one indicates that all 10 participants consider themselves leaders
in their current role. Additionally, they were all able to provide reflections on how their current
experiences prepare them for advancement. Participant 1 expressed a positive response
indicating, “I am looked up to; I am one of the subject matter experts in my field. I know the
history of our school. I have great work experience and have a great connection with other
89

professionals within the campus.” This participant’s response indicates a clear view of what is
needed to advance, and it is evident by the response they are on the correct path into executive
leadership roles. Participant 5 shared a similar positive response indicating:
I have worked with several administrators over the past years within my department,
working with multiple people on various projects, all requiring strong leadership skills
built around department collaboration not only with our team but other university teams
as well.
The analysis of question two indicated that all the participants who believed in the need
for continued education were actively engaged in methods to help them advance. This included
self-development, advanced reading, schooling, or other means of improving their skills and
abilities to better position themselves for future advancement into executive leadership roles
within higher education. Participant 2 expressed this idea as follows, “At the moment, I am
currently pursuing a doctorate. I read a book per month on leadership and teach our director
(plus) group on leadership within the organization.” Demographically, all participants are current
students in a doctoral program, therefore all participants had similar responses of pursuing higher
level education. However, Participant 6 and Participant 10 both shared identical responses to
Participant 2 regarding being part of a team within their organization that must read leadership
material and then teach one another about what they read.
The analysis of question four indicated that all the participants believe there are growth
opportunities available to them within their organizations and will be ready when their time
comes. Even where current opportunities may not exist within their organizations, participants
were actively considering their next opportunities. For example, Participant 3 stated that “At this
exact moment, there is not an opportunity for me within my current role. However, there are
90

opportunities at other Universities, which I have been looking into as I near completion of my
education.” Participant 10 expressed a similar positive response indicating, “Yes, we got a new
President last year, female, and doors are opening up for myself to grow into senior leadership
here at my university. It is a great time to be working for this organization.” This participant
displays an excellent view of a clear promotion path and appears to have the support needed to
advance into executive leadership roles within her organization. Complete analysis of this
influence produces overwhelmingly that this influence is an asset.
Summary
This chapter included key results and findings from research associated with this study
into the lack of gender diversity in executive leadership roles within higher education. The data
analyzed was populated from both narratives and numerical survey data, which deepen the
understanding influences impacting gender diversity within higher education in executive
leadership roles within the United States. In this chapter, information collected and presented
was based on two research questions analyzing 11 assumed knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences. Data gained and analyzed as a part of this study from both surveys and
interviews indicate that organizational biases and barriers exist that hinder the advancement of
women into executive leadership roles within higher education. Concerning motivation and
knowledge, the participants desire continued growth to advance their skills, and they display the
motivation, despite organizational setbacks, to advance into executive leadership roles within
higher education. Within this chapter, the data indicate a need for most of the organizational
influences, whereas all but one of the influences from motivation and knowledge present a clear
asset. The results and findings within this chapter are based completely from the data analyzed
91

and provide a first-hand perspective from faculty and staff. Table 23 depicts a summary
distribution of needs and assets as they relate to the influence presented.

Table 23
Summary of Influence Needs and Assets
Influence Need Asset Mixed result
Model 1 (O) X
Model 2 (O) X
Setting 1 (O) X
Setting 2 (O) X
Setting 3 (O) X
Expectancy (M) X
Task value (M) X
Self-efficacy (M) X
Declarative (K) X
Procedural (K) X
Metacognitive (K) X

92

The final chapter of this study provides recommendations and suggestions for expanded
research. The final portions of Chapter 5 covers both the limitations and delimitations associated
with this study and recommendations for future research along with conclusions of the study of
the lack of gender diversity in executive leadership roles within higher education.
93

Chapter Five: Recommendations and Discussion
The final chapter in the study on the lack of gender diversity in executive leadership roles
within higher education provide a series of recommendations and practices aimed at improving
the representation of female faculty and staff within higher education, specifically in executive
leadership roles. These suggestions include recommendations that are directed at the
organization in order to increase representation among women in executive leadership roles. The
initial section focuses on a discussion of the results and findings. The final portions of Chapter 5
cover integrated recommendations, the study’s limitations and delimitations, potential topics for
future research, and concluding thoughts on this study.
Discussion of Results and Findings
This study utilized Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis framework to explore needs and
assets surrounding the lack of gender diversity in executive leadership roles within higher
education. Results and findings came from the research discussed in Chapter 3 and Chapter 4.
The recommendations discussed in this chapter were derived from the quantitative survey results
and qualitative interview findings discussed in Chapter 4, which were subjected to descriptive
analysis for the survey data and coding of responses for the interview data. The results and
findings provide insight into recommendations for future research and three specific
recommendations for institutions of higher education to support the advancement of women into
executive leadership.
Three assumed organizational influences, model 1, model 2, and cultural setting 2, were
identified as needs and are discussed in detail in the next section. As for the other organizational,
motivation, and knowledge influences that were determined to be either assets or mixed results,
those influences are not discussed for future recommendations for practice. The intent of this
94

chapter is to only address those areas that the data demonstrated to be a need based on
participants’ responses. The findings for each organizational influence are detailed in the
following section.
Discussion of Organizational Findings
The organizational findings are related to five assumed influences that included two
models and three cultural settings. Clark and Estes (2008) defined organizational barriers as
settings (processes, policies, and resources) that obstruct performance. On the other hand,
organizational models are defined as the knowledge an organization has around their internal
culture driven by their default values (Bennardo & DeMunck, 2014). This study’s findings, as
discussed in Chapter 2 and Chapter 3, involve concerns of organizational biases and barriers that
must be addressed in order to improve the advancement of women within higher education. This
discussion of organizational findings focus on the models and settings explored from the female
faculty and staff perspective, which address those organizational findings towards closing the
gender diversity gap in executive leadership roles within higher education. As presented in
Chapter 4, three assumed organizational influences were determined to be needs, including
model 1, model 2, and cultural setting 2. These organizational influences are discussed in detail
in both findings and recommendation for future research practices.
Higher Education Needs to Value Gender Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (Model 1)
The first need identified in this study focused on each participant’s current organization’s
value for gender diversity, equity, and inclusion. As explored in Chapter 2, it has been well over
40 years since initiatives were put in motion seeking to address pay inequity and gender diversity
in the United States (Lennon, 2013). Yet, women leaders are not ascending into executive
leadership roles in colleges and universities at the same rate as their male counterparts
95

(Ballenger, 2010). This slow movement upward creates what is known as pyramidal structure
within the organization, where women are clustered at the bottom while men move up the narrow
path to the top positions (Ballenger, 2010).
This study found that higher education organizations do not value gender diversity,
equity, and inclusion as reported by the participants. These results align with other studies that
focus on confronting gender diversity head on, such as that of Bartel (2018). According to Bartel
(2018), without a baseline understanding of gender diversity, it is difficult to effect any real
change let alone gather information and to listen to female faculty, staff members, and senior
leaders. Bartel’s study finds a lack of diversity understanding as a concern from women among
staff and faculty, which is also supported by this study. Among this study’s interviews, aside
from Title IX training, Participant 1 noted, “we do not have any formal discussions on diversity,
equity, and inclusion.” Bartel (2018) contended that improving gender diversity requires the
work of all members of a team, not just women. It was clear from the perspective of the
participants that men were in positions of power and influence in their organization, as noted by
Participant 1, “Executive leadership within my department seems to still be mostly White
males.” When the departments are predominantly White males, and the participants have stated
that overall, they do not feel their organization vales diversity, equity, and inclusion, this creates
an area of opportunity to change this perception through actions. However, change requires more
than simply acknowledging differences in people. As discussed in the recommendation sections,
change involves the organizational leaders communicating the value of differences, combating
discrimination, and promoting inclusiveness around gender diversity to be successful in the
future.
96

Higher Education Needs to Foster an Environment of Trust and Safety to Advance Diversity
and Equity in Executive Leadership (Model 2)
The second need identified in this study focused on each participant’s current
organization’s ability to foster an environment of trust and safety to advance diversity and equity
in executive leadership. As mentioned in Chapter 2 within the literature review, creating an
environment around trust in order to solve a complex phenomenon requires a continuous and
holistic approach to addressing issues associated with trust and safety, and fostering this
environment requires addressing issues such as stereotypes, gender schemas, absent of role
models, mentors, and tokenism (Tzanakou, 2021).
This study found that, according to 56% of participants, their higher education
organizations do not foster an environment of trust and safety to advance diversity and equity in
executive leadership roles. These results align with previous studies that focus on the vital
requirements of trust and safety when working with diversity and safe places of communication.
Specifically, Green et al. (2012) found during their research that part of creating a safe place was
creating situations of social gatherings and business meetings, where every member must listen
and have a chance to speak, as practical ways to create safe dialogues. Over half of the
participants in this study felt this was not the case that they felt they could have safe dialogues,
and several participants stated in their interviews that their executive departments are
predominately White males. Participant 5 said, “With a White male led organization, mostly,
leadership within the University says we are on the right path for changes in diversity, but I don’t
see it nor feel it.” Historically, research has demonstrated that executive leadership within higher
education has not improved significantly in increasing gender diversity among women compared
to males (Johnson, 2017). When the mix of faculty and staff within leadership is not diverse,
97

there is not a culture of trust and phycological safety. This is also supported by Grossblatt’s
(2016) research which found that of the top five benefits of a diverse organization, the leading
benefit was improved trust. Her research also found specifically that female leaders are trusted
more compared to their male counterparts.
Higher Education Needs More Availability of Female Executive Leader Mentors and Role
Models (Setting 1)
The third influence identified in this study, which was determined an asset in the analysis
of data, focused on the availability of mentors and positive influences of female role models
within higher education. As mentioned in Chapter 2 within the literature review, role models
influence a person’s motivation by helping shape their self-efficacy (Bandura, 1982). Although
this study found self-efficacy to be high among 92% of those surveyed, it is important to note
that self-efficacy is only one of many benefits of having female mentors. The focus of this
influence was whether female faculty and staff believe female role models in executive
leadership roles are present within their organizations. Previous research has noted the
importance of positive mentors, including the negative effects of both an absence of role models
and poor role models. Specific to negative role models, Davies et al. (2005) found in their study
that women exposed to negative stereotypes of women in commercials were less likely to aspire
to be leaders than those who were not exposed to negative stereotypes.
This study found that, according to participants, higher education does have the ability to
provide positive examples of female mentors in executive leadership roles. Participants’
responses varied from either having a current role model in place, to knowing who to reach out
to as a mentor, and to not having any program or persons in place that provided for clear role
models. As mentioned in Chapter 2 within the literature review, previous studies do show that
98

compared to their male counterparts, the number of role models in leadership who are women
remains disproportionately low (Lyman & Chappell, 2018). However, within the findings and
results of this study, there is data supporting the presence of women in executive leadership
roles. According to Bartel (2019), more women are entering into executive leadership roles,
which provides more opportunities for mentorship. Additionally, Bartel reported women are
being viewed less pervasively as only caregivers within the United States, which is one of the
strongest negative stereotypes surrounding this influence related to the presence of women in
leadership positions to serve as role models for women who are rising behind them.
Finally, within the interviews, multiple participants mentioned having a newly appointed
female President of their college of university. According to the participants, the presence of a
woman in such a senior position clearly evoked inspiration and hope of positive change for
opportunities of advancement into executive leadership roles. According to previous research,
the number of role models in leadership who are women remains disproportionately low (Lyman
& Chappel, 2018). However, this study found there were an overwhelming percentage of
participants who reported having a role model or knowing of someone who fits the role of a
mentor or positive influence. As such, this influence is not discussed in further detail.
Policies and Procedures Are Ineffective in Overcoming Implicit Bias and Stereotyping (Setting
2)
The fourth assumed organizational influence explored within this study, which was the
third and final organizational influence to be determined a need, focused on whether participants
perceived that higher education organizations had policies and procedures in place to overcome
implicit bias and stereotyping. As mentioned in Chapter 2 within the literature review, implicit
bias is described as an automatic and unconscious bias (Brownstein, 2019). Due to implicit
99

biases, people may often attribute certain qualities or characteristics to all members of a
particular group, which is also known as stereotyping (Cherry, 2020). Indifferent social
interactions, embarrassing slips of the tongue, unchecked assumptions, stereotypical judgments,
and spontaneous neglect exemplify the automaticity of bias, which creates a subtly hostile
environment for out-group members (Brownstein, 2019).
This study found that, according to the participants, higher education organizations’
policies and procedures do not address implicit bias and stereotyping. Men historically have
occupied most executive leadership roles within higher education, and research has found hiring
managers prefer candidates who are most like themselves (Hathway, 2019). Since men occupy
most of the executive leadership roles, a male dominated culture still exists that is more likely to
produce implicit bias and stereotyping which negatively impact women. Importantly, among
those surveyed in this study, the majority of responses fell into “undecided” or disagree when
participants were asked whether their organizations had processes and procedures in place to
address implicit bias and stereotyping. Only two respondents fully agreed that their current
organization either has any polices in place or is doing a good job of addressing biases and
stereotyping.
Higher Education’s Current Hiring Process to Enhance Gender Diversity Is Neither Effective
nor Ineffective (Setting 3)
The fifth organizational influence explored in this study, which was found to be mixed,
focused on each participant’s perception regarding their organization’s polices and whether those
policies help support gender diversity. Previous research shows demographic characteristics of
hiring managers have been found to influence the advancement of women in executive
leadership roles, indicating some opportunities around changing the hiring process (Catherine et
100

al., 2016). Research conducted by Goodman et al. (2003) found that it is more likely that men
hire men, and if more women were to occupy those roles to influence hiring practices, the
capacity of women to advance into executive leadership improves significantly when hiring
practices and programs are structured towards such goals.
This study found that, according to the participants, higher education’s policies and
procedures to enhance the hiring process to help promote gender diversity was found to be
mixed. This was due to a clear majority not emerging when considering both survey and
interviewee responses. Previous research does conclude that men fulfill a majority of the hiring
manager roles within higher education (Catherine et al., 2016). This causes what researchers
refer to as the “cloning effect,” wherein institutions seek to hire and appoint leaders similar to
those already in place (Gronn & Lacey, 2006). This study found that several of the participants’
organizations’ hiring policies do not appear to directly combat this problem, and participants
indicated policies they were aware of seem to focus more on race, rather than gender. For
example, Participant 4 stated, “within my organization there is a strong focus on race, but less so
on gender.” Participant 8 echoed a similar remark: “I think we are more race driven at the
moment and the hiring practices to enhance gender diversity is talked about, but I don’t see any
results.”
Discussion of Motivation Findings
The motivational findings are related to three influences, which are outcome expectancy,
task value, and self-efficacy, listed in the order they are discussed in the following sub-sections.
This study found that, according to participants, all three influences were determined to be an
asset. As discussed in Chapter 2, motivation is a crucial aspect and key influence relating to
performance. Motivation drives performance through the willingness of motivated individuals to
101

work, provide and produce effort, and strive towards the achievement (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Furthermore, Clark and Estes (2008) explained that motivation is the direct link between the
workforce's needs as individuals and the performance goals of their organization. Overall, the
factors that contribute to an individual’s motivation profoundly impact one’s choices, actions,
decisions, thoughts, and ideas.
Both faculty and staff overwhelmingly presented clear indications regarding their
motivation to work, to provide skills needed in their organization, produce results wanted, and
desire to strive towards advancement in higher education. The participants responded to
questions and expressed feelings aligned with their ability to obtain a desired outcome if given
the opportunity (outcome expectancy). Participants displayed strong indications within their
responses seeing value in growing and advancing in their careers (task value). Lastly,
participants perceptions of their ability to perform in an executive leadership role was shown to
display both confidence and motivation to do so (self-efficacy). As such, recommendations are
not provided related to the motivation influences.
Women Serving Within Faculty and Staff Need to Believe Their Investment in Career
Development Can Result in Growth Into Executive Leadership Roles (Outcome Expectancy)
The first motivation influence focused on outcome expectancy and whether women
believe investment in their career can result in growth into executive leadership roles within
higher education. As mentioned in Chapter 2 within the literature review, an outcome expectancy
is an individual’s judgment of their capabilities (Wigfield, 2014). It answers the question, “will I
be able to obtain the desired outcome?” Outcome expectations have been found to be a valid
construct that contributes to career decisions and interests and has direct and indirect paths to
self-efficacy (Fouad & Guilen, 2006). Yeagley et al. (2010) found that expectations influence
102

career aspirations for women seeking advancement into executive leadership roles of those
women studied in their first year of college. They also found outcome expectations to directly
influence goal setting indirectly through the impact each had on developing women’s career
interests (Yeagley et al., 2010). This study found that according to the participants, 87% of both
faculty and staff indicate they believe investment in their career can result in growth into
executive leadership roles within higher education. Most of the participants displayed positive
feelings in their response, and strong belief that if given an opportunity, they would succeed at
advancement. This influence does not require any future recommendations for practice as it
relates to this study.
Women Need to See Value in Growing Their Careers Into Executive Leadership Roles (Task
Value)
The second motivation influence explored whether women see value in growing their
careers into executive leadership roles within higher education. As mentioned in Chapter 2
within the literature review, task value is about connecting one’s respect for their ability to value
not only their achievements, but also believing in themselves as they grow their career (Hathway,
2019). In higher education, women are underrepresented among the ranks of executive leaders
and in turn limits their opportunities to advance into formal leadership positions at colleges and
universities (Catherine et al., 2016). As such, it was important to explore task value in relation to
their perspectives on advancement into executive leadership.
This study found 74% of both female faculty and staff participants see value in growing
their careers. All participants showed positive responses and articulated reasons for valuing
advancement into executive leadership roles. Participants were able to imagine themselves in
roles where they had “the ability to make a difference” and held positions that gave them
103

“authority on the decision-making process.” Both ideas align with previous research where the
seemingly simple act of individuals imagining themselves in the position which they want can
help turn desire into action (Howard & Gagliardi, 2017). This influence does not require any
future recommendations for practice.
Women Need to Believe They Have What It Takes to Reach Executive Leadership Roles (Self-
Efficacy)
The third and last motivation influence focused on female faculty and staff’s self-efficacy
in their ability to perform in an executive leadership role within higher education. As mentioned
in Chapter 2 within the literature review, a significant barrier found in past research for women
advancing and having career success is their self-efficacy (Bandura, 1982). Self-efficacy, which
comes from the research of Bandura (1982), refers to the task-specific confidence in one’s
beliefs of their capacity to succeed. This self-appraisal of abilities functions as a determinant of
“how people behave, their thought patterns and the emotional reactions they experience in taxing
situations” (Bandura, 1989, p. 123). Perceptions of self-efficacy, whether accurate or not,
influence motivation to pursue a goal and affect the amount of effort and persistence a person has
toward achieving goals (Bandura, 1982).
This study found that of those participants surveyed, the data supports female faculty and
staff believe in their ability to perform in an executive leadership role in higher education.
Previous research has concluded in some studies that a significant barrier for women advancing
and having career success is their self-confidence and self-efficacy (Borelli, 2019). However,
studies have shown when participants focus on their abilities to meet challenges and complete
tasks (Ackerman, 2020), self-efficacy increases. This study found that 92% of both faculty and
104

staff believe in their ability to meet challenges and enjoy completing tasks. This influence does
not require any future recommendations for practice as it relates to this study.
Discussion of Knowledge Findings
The knowledge findings are related to three assumed influences that focused on
declarative, procedural, and metacognitive knowledge, which are listed in the order they are
discussed in the following sections. Knowledge and skill enhancement are required for job
performance under two conditions: first, they are required when people do not know how to
accomplish their performance goals, and second, when people anticipate that future challenges
require novel problem solving (Clark & Estes, 2008). Two influences, declarative and
metacognitive knowledge, were found to be assets, and procedural knowledge was found to be
mixed among participants. In this study, declarative knowledge explored participants’ knowing
and understanding the leadership barriers to advance into executive roles within higher
education. Procedural knowledge was about knowing and understanding how to navigate the
higher process in order to advance into executive leadership roles, and metacognitive knowledge
was about women’s ability to execute strengths, while developing weaknesses in order to
develop strategies which help them advance into executive leadership roles within higher
education. This study has concluded that female faculty and staff participants do have the
knowledge needed in order to advance into executive leadership roles within higher education.
Understanding the Leadership Barriers (Declarative)
The first knowledge influence focused on declarative knowledge and the awareness
among female faculty and staff of barriers hindering advancement into executive roles within
higher education. Declarative knowledge is explicit knowledge passed verbally from one person
to another (McFarland, 2014). As mentioned in Chapter 2 within the literature review,
105

declarative knowledge was explored based on how well faculty and staff could demonstrate their
knowledge of understanding barriers that could be hindering them from advancing into executive
leadership roles. The results and findings of this study specifically related to women in higher
education. However, previous studies are similar to the findings of Gallagher and Golant (2000),
who found that in the business industry, in order to promote into an executive leadership role,
women need declarative knowledge and information in order to help accelerate their careers.
According to Clark and Estes (2008), information is something that is told about a situation or
about someone’s job, which they need to know to succeed on their own.
This study found that women are aware and can explain the biases and barriers hindering
advancement into executive rules within higher education. Participants displayed the abilities to
list terms, provide short responses, and demonstrated basic facts and information related to
barriers. There was a common factor when asked to provide short responses or words
surrounding what they have seen for women trying to move into executive leadership roles.
Often mentioned in the responses, the participants related navigating their careers is challenging
due to raising a family. Family was seen not as a barrier, but an added layer to overcome when
trying to advance. Comments such as “little to no options for any kind of work while raising a
family” and “women are viewed as less than because we cannot work long hours as men” are a
few examples of such added layers as voiced by the participants. This study has confirmed that
women have displayed the ability to describe what barriers are present and an understanding of
what those barriers are. As such, this influence is not discussed in further detail in future
recommendations for practice.

106

Skills Needed to Navigate the Hiring Process (Procedural)
The second knowledge influence focused on procedural knowledge and the ability of
female faculty and staff to navigate the hiring process to advance into executive leadership roles
within higher education. As mentioned in Chapter 2 within the literature review, procedural
knowledge is the knowledge of the skills and procedures involved with the task or process,
including techniques, methods, and necessary steps (Clark & Estes, 2008). According to the
participants, navigating the hiring process towards advancement remains to be an area that shows
mixed results. While half could articulate the process, or paths towards advancement, there still
were participants who could not articulate what the process entails with compete assurance. This
study found that according to the participants, navigating the hiring process towards
advancement remains neither a need nor an asset, resulting in a mixed result.
Reflection on Strengths and Weaknesses to Determine Self-Awareness (Metacognitive)
The final influence focused on metacognitive knowledge and the self-awareness to reflect
on strengths and weaknesses. Clark and Estes (2008) described metacognitive strength as the
ability to reflect on and to adjust necessary skills and knowledge. Other research has found that
self-awareness is critical to effective leadership because it allows leaders to identify their
performance while seeking areas for self-improvement (Koch, 2020). This study found
respondents demonstrate frequent metacognitive analysis surrounding their ability to reflect on
strengths and weaknesses to develop strategies to advance into executive leadership roles within
higher education. As such, this influence does not require any future recommendations for
practice as it relates to this study.

107

Recommendations for Practice
Based on this study’s research, informed through the lens of Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap
analysis framework for organizational change, the recommendations to follow are centered
around actions leadership within higher education can take to address organizational influence
needs. These recommendations for the problem of practice include action items and suggestions
focused on improving awareness and increasing the pipeline of female faculty and staff moving
into executive leadership roles within higher education. As mentioned earlier, for assumed
influences that were determined to be either an asset or mixed results, no recommendations are
made. However, those influences with mixed results are discussed in the section on
recommendations for future research.
Recommendation 1: Higher Education Executives Need to Both Communicate Value for
and Take Tangible Actions to Support Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
At the organizational level, which includes culture, ideology, and policies, Ballenger
(2010) found that while management in organizations is represented as gender-neutral, it often
involves consistent practices with characteristics traditionally valued by White men. Green et al.
(2012) described managing diversity as more than simply acknowledging differences in people.
It involves the organization recognizing the value of differences, combating discrimination, and
promoting inclusiveness around gender diversity to be successful in the future.
This study found that 62% of participants surveyed do not feel that their current
organization values gender diversity, equity, and inclusion. Additionally, of those interviewed,
half felt that their current organization does not communicate value for gender diversity, equity,
and inclusion. Clark and Estes (2008) identified that in order to have effective change, efforts
must be communicated regularly and frequently to all key stakeholders. Stakeholders included
108

within this study are those within the organization, outside networks, and private people that can
influence the organizational objectives.
Clark and Estes (2008) suggested the critical component in influencing change is to target
both the stakeholders and those who work within the organization of higher education. Executive
staff should use maximize communication processes and mediums within their institutions to
facilitate organizational change towards developing value for diversity, equity, and inclusion.
They can start by looking at the current methods of communicating and sharing of information
surrounding change initiative. Following effective communication, Clark and Estes’s (2008)
research shows that effective change efforts should utilize feedback and evidence-based
solutions with regular check in meetings to review data and make course corrections as needed.
Faculty and staff should be incorporated into these initiatives to offer feedback canon current
methods of communication and offer preferred alternatives for receiving information as well as
resources that may be limited. The purpose and intent of effective change should align with the
mission of the organization with clear accountability measures in place which support
developing value for diversity within higher education.
Recommendation 2: Work With Stakeholders to Promote a Cultural Change Towards
Fostering an Environment of Trust and Safety
This study has found that the 56% of participants expressed that they did not feel their
organization creates an environment of trust and safety. Executive leadership within higher
education, with support of other organizational stakeholders, need to drive effective change
within the culture of higher education by creating an environment of trust and safety. This
environment can be achieved by establishing three distinct organizational processes.
109

Green et al. (2012) found during their research that a vital requirement for creating trust
and safety when addressing diversity is promoting a safe place to communicate. A safe place is a
place where every member must listen and have a chance to speak, while encouraging diversity
of thought. Clark and Estes (2008) found organizational effectiveness increases when leaders
facilitate creative and collaborative problem solving to ensure that all information is to be put on
the table in a safe place for opposing viewpoints to be heard.
Second, mentoring programs designed to support the advancement of female faculty and
staff further promote an environment of trust and safety (Green et al., 2021). Green et al.’s
(2012) research also recommended implementing mentoring programs to provide access to
information and opportunities for underrepresented groups. Their research aligns with Bartel
(2012), whose research focused on improving paths to leadership for women through increasing
mentorship and leadership programs within organizations.
Finally, accountability is essential to establishing an organizational model that values
diversity, equity, and inclusion. Bartel’s (2018) research suggested confronting problems “head
on,” while gathering information from participants in order to understand the problem, is an
effective approach to create such an environment. Without a baseline understanding of the
current situation within individual higher education organizations, it is difficult for the leadership
of these organizations to achieve real change. To ensure the purpose and intent of promoting a
cultural change, clear goals with mission alignment need to put in place which support an
environment of trust and safety within higher education.
110

Recommendation 3: Reduce Implicit Bias and Stereotyping Through Re-aligning Policies
and Procedures
The outcome for this recommendation is to improve policies and procedures already in
place within organizations in order to reduce the influence of implicit bias and stereotyping on
women in higher education. This recommendation is based off the majority of participants
stating their current organization’s policies and procedures that are in place are not effective in
overcoming implicit bias. According to Kalev at el. (2006), in order to reduce bias, a behavioral
change must occur through education and feedback. Reducing implicit biases has been found to
positively impact a person’s behavior (Cherry, 2020). Kalev et al. (2006) recommend two areas
of initiatives to counter bias and stereotyping: diversity training and diversity evaluations. It is
important to note that although Kalev et al. (2006) did find diversity training had negative
impacts, this was only on programs that did not establish responsibility (affirmative action plans,
diversity committees, and diversity staff positions). Therefore, in order for diversity training to
be effective, Kalev et al. (2006) suggested establishing responsibility.
Diversity training is intended to create awareness of how bias affects one’s actions and
those of subordinates. The approach to increasing diversity within the training framework is to
work towards diminishing inequality. This can be achieved by explicitly aligning learning
outcomes and demonstration of competencies of goal setting by following specific, measurable,
attainable, relevant, and time-based (SMART) goals. The use of SMART goals have been shown
to be effective in achieving strategic outcomes (Ford, 2017; Hagstrom & Backstrom, 2017).
Focusing diversity training for all personnel working within higher education organizations can
produce a cultural change. The second part, as described by Kalev et al. (2006), is equal
opportunity diversity evaluations that provide feedback showing the effects of their decision on
111

diversity, which has been shown to reduce bias by directing managerial attention and motivation.
Implementing evaluations would create opportunities to conduct informal audits of current
policies and procedures to ensure they are in alignment or interference with goals (Clark & Estes,
2008). The purpose and intent of implementing effective procedures and policies should align
with the mission of the organization with clear accountability measures in place which will help
improve implicit bias and stereotyping within higher education.
Limitations and Delimitations
Every research study encounters a series of unforeseen events and factors that could
potentially compromise the quality and accuracy of the study findings by representing a wide
range of uncontrolled obstacles. Those could be choices made by researchers, such as how they
describe the boundaries for their study (Pierce et al. 2019) or trusting the authenticity of the
responses of those who participated. Both limitations and delimitations are important factors
when reviewing research.
Limitations
The primary limitation of this study was posed by the impact of the unprecedented time
of COVID-19, the global Corona Virus Disease 2019 pandemic, which caused the majority of
faculty and staff within higher education to transition from in classroom to working from home
through the remainder of 2020 and into mid-2021. Many standard policies and procedures
associated with normal higher education operations came to an abrupt halt. This also added in
new obstacles for my research in identifying and recruiting research participants. To address
these barriers, I utilized online platforms, such as Qualtrics and virtual interviews via Zoom to
make contact with the participants. This was a version self-reported data which allowed the
respondents to respond to my questions without my presence or interference. Another area,
112

which was original planned for but not expected to be used as much, was email correspondence
to solicit survey participants and when interviewees were not available for synchronous
interviews. For the surveys, the Qualtrics link was a live link, and the information regarding the
study was shared via LinkedIn for those who met the criteria. The single isolated method to
distribute the survey did not yield a high response rate, and email distribution was added to
directly send the link to prospective participants for both speed and efficiency.
Delimitations
Regarding delimitations, the stakeholder group for this study focused on females serving
among faculty and staff in the academia organization. This was a particular stakeholder group
based on convenience and availability within the higher education organization. However, based
on that stakeholder group, a delimitation did present a limitation on the perspective which was
gathered. Other demographic factors of diversity such as, but not limited to race, ethnicity,
socioeconomic, and age where not included in this study so that the targeted stakeholder group
would not become too expansive possibly diminishing the results and findings. Another
delimitation within the gap analysis was found in that this study was exploring the participant
group that is impacted by the problem of practice and not the hiring authorities themselves. In
particular, when concluding findings from the organizational settings, several of the participant
responses focused more on the hiring authorities, which presented an obstacle in determining
recommendations as additional data collection would be needed to better explore this stakeholder
group.
Recommendations for Future Research
This study explored the problem of practice surrounding the lack of gender diversity
within higher education utilizing the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences from
113

Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis model. The study sought to evaluate organizational and
individual stakeholder knowledge and motivation influences related to this problem to better
understand the lack of gender diversity among executive leadership roles in higher education.
The methods used for data collection involved surveys and interviews, which presented
quantitative results and qualitative findings respectively, to assist in distinguishing between those
influences that were determined to be a need, an asset, or mixed results. Of these, the
organizational influence had three areas that data showed to be a need and one area which was
determined to be mixed. The one area within the organizational influences that did not present as
either a clear asset or need was setting 3. This area focused on the policies that enhance the
hiring process to promote diversity and metrics to achieve closing the gap within gender
diversity. Although the recommendations for practice only mentioned a focus on needs, this
research uncovered mixed results for several organizational influences, which should be
addressed in future research.
Moving on from the organizational influences, another influence that did not emerge as a
clear need or an asset was procedural knowledge. There is an emerging theme among the
participants of this study in that they presented mixed data in their ability to articulate the steps
towards promotion and describing policies and procedures surrounding diversity, equity, and
inclusion. Therefore, as a consideration for future research, emphasis should be placed upon
exploring promising practice methods of communication among higher education organizations
regarding their processes and procedures for promotion to explore perceptions of actions that can
be taken as seen from the perspective of female faculty and staff as well as other stakeholders.
While there is forward momentum toward gender diversity among the ranks of executive
leadership within higher education, this study found insidious influences and unconscious bias
114

remain in place as barriers preventing the advancement of female faculty and staff in higher
education. To effect real change, gender diversity should be as crucial to both men and women of
equal proportions while focusing their programs on women’s knowledge, motivation, and
organizational structure influence and helping them overcome these challenges. Since the scope
of this study did not explore the influences surrounding those in executive leadership roles,
further research should be considered to focus on the perspectives of those in executive
leadership roles to better understand their path towards advancement and mechanisms that they
perceive as preventing the advancement of female faculty and staff into those positions.
Conclusion
The purpose of this study was to explore factors that influence the advancement of
women into executive leadership roles within higher education in the United States by focusing
on the experience of female faculty and staff. The intent was to learn what influences contribute
to that gap and how best to address increasing gender diversity in executive leadership roles
within higher education by utilizing Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework. The key
results and findings of this study were among those influences which were determined to be a
need, as portrayed by those who participated in the study. An emerging theme was evident when
analyzing the data that within the organizational influences, participants did not think their
current organizations communicate value, earn their trust, or foster an environment of safety
when it comes to diversity, equity, and inclusion. It is also equally important to note that data
emerged within this study that overwhelming supported that female faculty and staff, in the
motivation and knowledge domains, possess self-efficacy, value, and the knowledge required to
advance into executive roles within higher education.
115

This study used Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis framework, which helped identify
the assumed organizational, knowledge, and motivation influences in both Chapter 2 and in
Chapter 4. Chapter 5 discussed the results and findings of the research and proposed three
recommendations to address organizational influence needs identified by participants to promote
gender diversity within higher education executive leadership. The proposed recommendations
in this study require a change within higher education which aims at breaking the pattern of
barriers allowing for an increase in the number of women advancing into executive leadership
roles within higher education.
These recommendations move beyond recognizing a problem exists. The
recommendations require putting forth directives, policies, and educating organizational
members to enact a culture change leading towards more opportunities for women to advance
into executive leadership roles withing higher education. This culture change will lead to a more
diverse workplace within the higher education field where women are represented in executive
leadership roles including tenured Professors, Deans, Chief Academic Officers, Presidents,
Board members and Chairs. Furthermore, this research along with recommendations will help
individuals, organizations, and policies from perpetuating bias. Further, search, promotion, and
tenure committees and governing boards can use this information and related research to inform
the hiring and promotion of staff and faculty in an effort to chip away at the glass ceiling and
engage the talents, and resourced of women, in leading our nation’s colleges and universities to
full parity.

116

References
Ackerman, C. (2020). What is self-efficacy theory in psychology? PositivePsychology.com.
https://positivepsychology.com/self-efficacy/
American Association of University Professors. (n.d.). What do faculty do? AAUP.
https://www.aaup.org/issues/faculty-work-workload/what-do-faculty-do
American Council on Education. (2016). New report looks at the status of women in higher
education. ACEnet. https://www.acenet.edu/News-Room/Pages/New-Report-Looks-at-
the-Status-of-Women-in-Higher-Education.aspx
Babcock, L., & Laschever, S. (2009). The costs of not negotiating. Harvard Business Review.
https://hbr.org/2009/01/is-talent-going-to-waste-in-you
Ballenger, J. (2010). Women's access to higher education leadership: Cultural and structural
barriers. Forum on Public Policy Online, 2010(5). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ913023
Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37(2),

122–147. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.37.2.122
Bartel, S. (2018). Leadership barriers for women in higher education. BizEd.
https://bized.aacsb.edu/articles/2018/12/leadership-barriers-for-Women-in-higher-
education
Bennardo, G. (2018). Cultural models theory. Anthropology News, 59(4), 139–142.
https://doi.org/10.1111/an.919
Borelli, E. (2019). How women advance into leadership. Thrive Global.
https://thriveglobal.com/stories/how-Women-advance-into-leadership/
117

Brooks, D. C., Galanek, J., Gierdowski, D. C., & McCormack, M. (2019). The IT workforce in
higher education. Educause. https://library.educause.edu/resources/2019/2/the-it-
workforce-in-higher-education-2019
Brownstein, M. (2019). Implicit bias. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/implicit-bias/ (Original work published in 2015).
Catherine, H., Miller, K., Benson, K., & Handley, G. (2016). Barriers & bias: The status of
women in leadership. American Association of University Women.
https://www.aauw.org/resources/research/barrier-bias/
Cherry, K., & Marsh, A. (2020). How does implicit bias influence behavior? Explanations and
impacts of unconscious bias. Very Well Mind. https://www.verywellmind.com/implicit-
bias-overview-4178401
Chow, C. (2020). 15 ways to improve diversity and inclusion in the workplace. Social Chorus.
https://www.socialchorus.com/blog/employee-experience/15-ways-to-improve-diversity-
and-inclusion-in-the-workplace/
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Information Age Publishing.
Cole, B. (2015). Executive leadership. Search CIO.
https://searchcio.techtarget.com/definition/executive-leadership
Cox, T. H. (2004). Cultural diversity in organizations: Theory, practice, research. Berrett-
Kohler Publishers
Cresswell, J. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches
(4th ed.). Sage Publications, Inc
118

Dasgupta, N., & Asgari, S. (2004). Seeing is believing Exposure to counter stereotypic women
leaders and its effect on the malleability of automatic gender stereotyping. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology, 40(5), 642–658.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2004.02.003
Davies, P. G., Spencer, S. J., & Steele, C. M. (2005). Clearing the air: Identity safety moderates
the effects of stereotype threat on women's leadership aspirations. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 88(2), 276–287. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.88.2.276
Difference between faculty and staff. (2018). PEDIAA. https://pediaa.com/difference-between-
faculty-and-staff/
Duffin, E. (2021). College & university - statistics & facts. Statistica.
https://www.statista.com/topics/829/college-and-university/
Fiske, S. (2000). Stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination at the seam between the centuries:
Evolution, culture, mind, and brain. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30(3), 299–
322. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(200005/06)30:3%3C299::AID-
EJSP2%3E3.0.CO;2-F
Ford, R. C. (2017). Combining performance, learning, and behavioral goals to match job with
person: Three steps to enhance employee performance with goal setting. Business
Horizons, 60(3), 345–352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2016.12.001
Fouad, N. A. & Guillen, A. (2006). Outcome expectations: Looking to the past and potential
future. Journal of Career Assessment, 14(1), 130-142.

https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072705281370

119

Frankiewicz, B. (2020). 5 ways we lack gender balance in the workplace. World Economic
Forum. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/01/5-ways-companies-can-progress-
more-Women-into-leadership-roles
Gallagher, C. A. & Golant, S. K. (2000). Going to the top: A road map for success in
America’s leading women executives. Penguin Group
Gibbs, G. (2008). Analyzing qualitative data (1st ed.). Sage Publications, Ltd.
Giberson, T. R., Resick, C. J., Dickson, M. W., Mitchelson, J. K., Randall, K. R., & Clark, M. A.
(2009). Leadership and organizational culture: Linking CEO characteristics to cultural
values. Journal of Business and Psychology, 24(2), 123–137.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-009-9109-1
Goodman, J. S., Fields, D. L., & Blum, T. C. (2003). Cracks in the glass ceiling: In what kinds
of organizations do women make it to the top? Group & Organization Management,
28(4), 475-501. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601103251232
Gray, L. (2020). Gender diversity in the workplace: Definitions, trends, and examples.
Study.com. https://study.com/academy/lesson/gender-diversity-in-the-workplace-
definition-trends-examples.html
Green, K. A., Lopez, M., Wysocki, A., & Kepner, K. (2012). Diversity in the workplace:
Benefits, challenges, and the required managerial tools. Penn State University.
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.548.9931&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Grossblatt, L. (2016). Five reasons why having women in leadership benefits your entire
company. The Boardlist. https://medium.com/@theBoardlist/5-reasons-why-having-
Women-in-leadership-benefits-your-entire-company-labor-day-2016-a3e46162a7a0
120

Hagstrom, T., & Backstrom, T. (2017). Decentralized autonomy and company culture
integration: Individual and organizational development incentives and potentials
contextualized. Behavioral Development Bulletin, 22(2), 361.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/bdb0000035
Hecht-Harrison, L. (2017). Lee Hecht Harrison and HR people + strategy research reveals key
behaviors of leaders that advance women in business organizations. PR Newswire.
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/lee-hecht-harrison-and-hr-people--strategy-
research-reveals-key-behaviors-of-leaders-that-advance-women-in-business-
organizations-300563069.html
Hill, J. (2020). What is self-worth and how to recognize yours. Lifehack.
https://www.lifehack.org/854916/what-is-self-worth
Howard, E., & Gagliardi, J. (2017). Leading the way to parity: Preparation, persistence, and the
role of women presidents. ACEnet. https://www.acenet.edu/Documents/Leading-the-
Way-to-Parity.pdf
Hoyt, C., & Simon, S. (2011). Female leaders. Psychology Of Women Quarterly, 35(1), 143-157.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684310385216
Ignatova, M. (2019). New report: Women apply to fewer jobs than men but are more likely to get
hired. LinkedIn. https://www.linkedin.com/business/talent/blog/talent-acquisition/how-
women-find-jobs-gender-report
Isaac, C., Kaatz, A., Lee, B., & Carnes, M. (2012). An educational intervention designed
to increase women’s leadership self-efficacy. CBE-Life Sciences Edition, 11(3), 307-322.
https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-02-0022
121

Johnson, H. L. (2017). Pipelines, pathways, and institutional leadership: An update on the status
of women in higher education. ACEnet. https://www.acenet.edu/news-
room/Documents/HES-Pipelines-Pathways-and-Institutional-Leadership-2017.pdf
Kalev, A., Dobbin, F., & Kelly, E. (2006). Best practices or best guesses? Assessing the efficacy
of corporate affirmative action and diversity policies. American Sociological Review,
71(8), 589-617. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240607100404
Kettunen, J. (2014). The stakeholder map in higher education. International Proceedings of
Economics Development and Research http://www.ipedr.com/vol78/007-ICSEP2014-
S00020.pdf
King, E., Botsford, W., Hebl, M., Kazama, S., Dawson, J., & Perkins, A. (2012). Benevolent
sexism at work: Gender differences in the distribution of challenging developmental
experiences. Journal of Management, 38(6), 1835-1866.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310365902
Kip, A. (2018). 7 secrets of women who value themselves. Annie Kip Coaching & Strategy.
https://anniekipstyle.com/12-self-worth-Women-value/
Koch, A. (2019). 5 female traits that make for a great leader. Business.com.
https://www.business.com/articles/feminine-traits-for-leaders/
Lennon, T. (2013). Benchmarking women's leadership in the United States. Issue Lab.
https://www.issuelab.org/resources/26706/26706.pdf
Manfredi, S., Clayton-Hathway, K., & Cousens, E. (2019). Increasing gender diversity in higher
education leadership: The role of executive search firms. Social Sciences, 8(6), 168.
https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci8060168
Marshall, S. J. (2018). Internal and external stakeholders in higher education. Shaping the
122

University of the Future, 77–102. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-7620-6_4
Martinez, E. D., Botos, J., Dohoney, K. M., Geiman, T. M., Kolla, S. S., Olivera, A., Qiu, Y.,
Rayasam, G. V., Stavreva, D. A., & Cohen-Fix, O. (2007). Falling off the academic
bandwagon. Women are more likely to quit at the postdoc to principal investigator
transition. EMBO Reports, 8(11), 977–981. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.embor.7401110
McCormick, M., & Tanguma, J. (2008). The constraining effect of pre-training leadership self-
efficacy beliefs on change in post-training leadership self-efficacy beliefs. Journal Of
Leadership Education, 6(1), 109. https://doi.org/10.17148/iarjset.2019.61204
McFarland, D. (2014). A dictionary of animal behaviour (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
McLeod, S. (2019). Likert scale definition, examples and analysis. Simply Psychology.
https://www.simplypsychology.org/likert-scale.html
Newman, S. (2015). Common characteristics of successful leaders. Inside Higher Ed.
https://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2015/12/09/defining-common-characteristics-
successful-postsecondary-ceos-essay
Number of Colleges and Educational Institutions in the United States (2010). Urban Education
Journal. https://www.urbanedjournal.org/education/how-many-colleges-are-in-the-us-
numbers-of-colleges-and-educational-institutions
O'Banion, T., & Wilson, C. (2011). The core mission of higher education. In Focus on learning:
A learning college reader. League for Innovation in the Community College
Pew Research Center’s Social & Demographic Trends Project. (2013). 10 findings about women
in the workplace. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/12/11/10-
findings-about-Women-in-the-workplace/
123

Pew Research Center’s Social & Demographic Trends Project. (2015). Women and leadership.
Pew Research Center. https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2015/01/14/Women-and-
leadership/
Pierce, T. W., Steele, J. C., Flood, G. M., & Elliott, A. N. (2019). Ethical considerations for
student-based reminiscence projects. The International Journal of Reminiscence and Life
Review, 6(1), 34-39. https://doi.org/10.1093/geroni/igy023.649
Ragins, B., & Cotton, J. (2017). Easier said than done: Gender differences in perceived barriers
to gaining a mentor. Academy of Management, 34(4), 2. https://doi.org/10.5465/256398
Rankin, P., & Caccamise, D. (2017). Why women arenʼt where they are needed in the
workforce: Putting the pieces together. University of Colorado Boulder.
https://www.colorado.edu/physics/sites/default/files/attached-
files/academic_paper_en_2_170517.pdf
Ray, R. (2018). For CEOs, it's still about developing leaders: Strategy is nothing without
effective leaders to execute. In Global leadership forecast 2018: 25 research insights to
fuel your people strategy. Global Leadership Forecast.
http://docs.hrmarket.net/year20186/pdf-201861/report/file_180601175740357893.pdf
Sangerma, E. (2015). How to improve self-awareness. Medium.
https://medium.com/wholistique/how-to-improve-self-awareness-5a42055c8fcb
Schein, E. (2004). Organizational culture and leadership (3rd ed.). Jossey-Bass
Schunk, D. H. (2014). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications. Pearson
Education, Inc
Seliger, S., & Shames, S. L. (2009). The White House project: Benchmarking women's
124

leadership. The White House Project. https://www.in.gov/icw/files/
benchmark_wom_leadership.pdf
Seligsohn, A. (2015). An observation about the mission of higher education. Campus Compact
Minnesota. https://mncampuscompact.org/resource-posts/an-observation-about-the-
mission-of-higher-education/
Tzanakou, D. (2021). Gender equality in higher education: A view from a social scientist.
WHPC. https://womeninhpc.org/diversity-and-inclusion/gender-equality-in-higher-
education-a-view-from-a-social-scientist
Vidyasagar, S., Hatti, P., Lyman, A., & Chappell, S. (2018). Close and distant female role
models in the workplace. In Leadership and role modelling: Understanding workplace
dynamics (1st ed., pp. 79–104). Palgrave Macmillan
Wenner, E. (2017). Religion bestsellers: ‘Purpose driven life’ makes a comeback; James
Patterson tops. Publishers Weekly. https://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-
topic/industry-news/religion/article/74435-july-religion-bestsellers-purpose-driven-life-
makes-a-comeback-james-patterson-tops.html
Wigfield, A. (1994). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation: A developmental
perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 6(1), 49–78.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02209024
Williams, K. (2018). The obscurity inside the margins: The preparation, recruitment, and
retention of women of color superintendents (Publication No. 10750293) [Doctoral
dissertation, University of Southern California]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global
125

Yeagley, E. E., Subich, L. M. & Tokar, D. M. (2010). Modeling college women’s perceptions of
elite leadership positions with social cognitive career theory. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 77(1), 30-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2010.02.003
Yin, R.K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Sage Publications, Inc.
126

Appendix A: Survey Protocol
Thank you for volunteering to participate in this survey. I appreciate your willingness to
spend time answering and responding to the following questions. This survey was expected to
five minutes or less. If you have any questions, or are unable to answer a particular question,
please feel free to note this in the comment box at the end of the survey.
I am currently working on my doctoral dissertation at the University of Southern
California and this survey, along with others will be incorporated into my final dissertation. My
dissertation focuses on gender diversity in executive leadership within higher education. For the
purpose of my paper and this survey, those executive roles are higher educational positions such
as Provost, Vice Provost, President, Deans, General Counsel, Chief Technology Officer (CTO),
Chief of Finance and Vice President of Finance (not all inclusive).

127

Table A1
Survey Protocol
Question

Open
or
closed

Level of
measurement

Response
option

RQ
Concept
measured
from
conceptual
framework

C1. Are you an alumni
of or currently
enrolled in USC’s
EdD in
Organizational
Change and
Leadership
Program?

Closed Nominal Current Student
Alumni
Neither an
Alumni nor a
Student
Criterion
1

Are you currently
working in the
field of higher
education?
Closed Nominal Yes
No
Criterion
2

What was your current
role in higher
education?

Closed Nominal Faculty
member
Staff member
Other
Criterion
2

Skip Logic-- Other
answer from
question above:
What was your
current role?

Open Fill in Blank Criterion
2

C2. How long have
you been
employed in your
current role?
Closed Interval Less than 1
year, 1 to 5
years, more
than 5 years

Criterion
3

1. To what degree of
clarity was the
following
statement: “In my
current
organization, the
process for
Closed Interval Very Clear;
Somewhat
Clear;
Undecided;
Somewhat
Unclear; Not
Clear at All
2 K (P)
128

Question

Open
or
closed

Level of
measurement

Response
option

RQ
Concept
measured
from
conceptual
framework

applying for an
executive
leadership position
in higher education
was clear.”
2. Based on your own
reflection, what
barriers, if any,
have you seen for
women moving
into executive
roles within higher
education

Open
Ended
Identify and
articulate
(explain)
2 K (D)
3. On a scale 1-5 (1
being excellent and
5 being poor) how
would you rate the
following: “If
asked for advice,
how would you
rate your ability to
explain techniques,
methods or steps to
take in order to
navigate the hiring
process at your
organization in
order to advance
into an executive
leadership role.”

Closed 1. Excellent
2. Good
3. Fair
4. Poor
5. Very Poor
2 K (P)
4. On a scale 1-5 (1
being extremely
important and 5
being not at all
important) how
would you rate the
following
statement: “It was
Closed Interval 1. Extremely
important
2. Very
important
3. Moderately
important
4. Slightly
important
2 M (Value)
129

Question

Open
or
closed

Level of
measurement

Response
option

RQ
Concept
measured
from
conceptual
framework

important for me to
advance my career
by moving into a
higher education
executive role.”

5. Not at all
important
5. On a scale 1 to 5
using the response
option provided,
how would you
rate the following
statement: “If I
applied effort in
pursuing a
leadership role, I
believe I would
succeed at gaining
a position in
executive
leadership”
Closed Interval 1. Fully agree
2. Agree
3. Undecided
4. Disagree
5. Fully
Disagree
2 M
(Outcome
Expectancy)
6. Utilizing the same
scale from above,
to what degree do
you agree with the
following
statement: “I am
confident in my
ability to perform
if advanced into an
executive
leadership role.”

Closed Interval 1. Fully agree
2. Agree
3. Undecided
4. Disagree
5. Fully
Disagree
2 M
(Self-
Efficacy)
Skip-Logic: (If
disagree of fully
disagree) What are
the primary
reasons you feel
this way?

Open 2 M
(Self-
Efficacy)
130

Question

Open
or
closed

Level of
measurement

Response
option

RQ
Concept
measured
from
conceptual
framework

7. To what degree do
you agree with the
following: “Within
my organization I
can find examples
of women serving
in executive
leadership roles
who I see as role
models, or person
of positive
influence.”

Closed Interval 1. Fully agree
2. Agree
3. Undecided
4. Disagree
5. Fully
Disagree
1 O
(Setting 1)
8. To what degree do
you agree with the
following: “My
current
organization’s
policies and
procedures are
effective in
overcoming
implicit bias
against women.”

Closed Interval 1. Fully agree
2. Agree
3. Undecided
4. Disagree
5. Fully
Disagree
1 O
(Setting 2)
9. To what degree do
you agree with the
following: “My
current
organization does a
good job of
addressing
stereotypes about
the ability of
women to serve in
leadership
positions?”

Closed Interval 1. Fully agree,
2. Agree
3. Undecided
4. Disagree
5. Fully
Disagree
1 O
(Setting 2)
10. To what degree do
you agree with the
Closed Interval 1. Fully agree
2. Agree
1 O
(Setting 3)
131

Question

Open
or
closed

Level of
measurement

Response
option

RQ
Concept
measured
from
conceptual
framework

following: “My
current
organization’s
policies enhance
the hiring process
to help promote
gender diversity.”

3. Undecided
4. Disagree
5. Fully
Disagree
11. To what degree do
you agree with the
following: “My
current
organization values
gender diversity,
equity and
inclusion.”

Closed Interval 1. Fully agree
2. Agree
3. Undecided
4. Disagree
5. Fully
Disagree
1 O
Model 1
12. To what degree do
you agree with the
following: “My
current
organization
creates an
environment of
trust and safety to
advance diversity
and equity in
executive
leadership.”
Closed Interval 1. Fully agree
2. Agree
3. Undecided
4. Disagree
5. Fully
Disagree
1 O
Model 2
132

Appendix B: Interview Protocol
Thank you for volunteering to participate in this interview. I appreciate your willingness
to spend time with me today to talk about your experience as a female currently working among
faculty and staff within the education sector. This interview was expected to take between 30
minutes to one hour. There was of course time allotted if should we need more time. If you have
any questions, please feel free to ask at any time.
I am currently working on my doctoral dissertation at the University of Southern
California and this interview along with others will be incorporated into my final dissertation.
My dissertation focuses on gender diversity in executive leadership within higher education. For
the purpose of this paper and this interview, those executive roles are higher educational
positions such as Provost, Vice Provost, President, Deans, General Counsel, Chief Technology
Officer (CTO), Chief of Finance and Vice President of Finance (not all inclusive).
It is important for me that you understand this interview was not at the request of any
organization and was being conducted separately for the purpose of academic research. I will
make a copy of the findings available to you upon request. All information shared was
confidential. With your permission, I will record the interview so that the audio can be
transcribed may that be in person or via a video conference call. This will help me capture your
answers in your words and reduce the chance of me missing portions of your answers in my
notes. The audio recordings will be deleted once they are transcribed, and I will maintain
transcriptions in a password secured location.

133

Table B1
Interview Protocol Crosswalk
Question

RQ

Concept which
questions aligned
with current
KMO

A) Before we begin, could you explain to me what your
current role was and how long have you been in this role?

B) Do you feel you are advancing, or moving in the right
direction based on your current role and time in this role?

1. Do you consider yourself a leader in your current role?
a) Probe: How do your current experiences as a leader
prepare you for a role in executive leadership?
2 K-Metacognitive
2. How do you engage in self-development with respect to
your skills and abilities to better position yourself for an
executive leadership role in the future
b) a) Probe: Can you provide some examples?

2 K-Metacognitive
3. Does your current organization have a clear promotion
pipeline in place? If so, could you explain your
understanding how one advances into an executive
leadership position?
2 K-Procedural
4. Do you believe there are growth opportunities for you in
your current role as a leader?
2 K-Metacognitive
5. What steps would you need to take to advance into
executive leadership within higher education? Probe: What
barriers, if any, are obstacles to achieving this path?

1 K-Procedural
6. To the best of your knowledge, describe what you perceive
to be the top three qualities or attributes of someone in an
executive leadership role within higher education?

2 K-Declarative
7. What if anything, do you value, about that makes you want
to move into an executive leadership role within higher
education?
2 M-Value
8. Do you believe that with effort, you have the opportunity to
achieve a role in higher education executive leadership?
1 M
Outcome
Expectancy
134

Question

RQ

Concept which
questions aligned
with current
KMO

9. What examples, if any, can you think of where there are
women who serve as role models, or persons of positive
influence, currently in executive leadership roles within
your organization?
c) Probe: Can you tell me ways in which the organization
supports promoting them as role models, if at all?
d) Probe: Do you currently have a mentor who was a
female in executive leadership? How did they come to
be your mentor?

1 O
(Setting 1)
10. In what ways, if at all, are your organization’s policies and
procedures effective in overcoming implicit bias against
women?

1 O
(Setting 2)
11. Can you explain your organizations polices, if any, that
enhance hiring processes to promote gender diversity?

1 O
(Setting 3)
12. In what ways, if at all, does your organization
communicate value for gender diversity, equity, and
inclusion?

1 O
(Model 1)
13. In what ways, if at all, does your organization foster an
environment of trust and safety to advance diversity and
equity in executive leadership?
1 O
(Model 2)

135

Appendix C: Information Sheet for Exempt Research
STUDY TITLE: A study of women in leadership: Understanding the gender diversity gap in
executive leadership roles within higher education.
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Lucas Dyer
FACULTY ADVISOR: Dr. Jennifer Phillips, Assistant (Teaching) Professor of Education
You are invited to participate in a research study. Your participation was voluntary. This
document explains information about this study. You should ask questions about anything that
was unclear to you.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this study was to explore factors that influence the advancement of women into
executive leadership roles within higher education in the United States by focusing on the
experience of female faculty and staff. We hope to learn what influences contribute to that gap
and how best to address increasing gender diversity in executive leadership roles within higher
education.
PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
As a voluntary participant, you will be asked to participate in an interview over zoom where you
will be asked questions specific to your experiences as a female working within the education
sector among faculty. The interview will take approximately 45 to 60 minutes to complete. For
accuracy purposes, the interview will be recorded; however, if you would like to decline a video
recording, notes can be taken instead. If you decide to take part, you will be asked to provide a
60-minute window in which you will be scheduled for an interview over zoom.

136

PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
You will not be compensated for your participation; however, interview timing will be based
completely on your preferences working around your preferred schedule.
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 results of the research are published
or discussed in conferences, no identifiable information will be used. Your anonymity will be
protected by removing all identifying information at the time of transcription and findings will be
synthesized and presented thematically rather than individually.
INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about this study, please contact myself, Lucas A. Dyer via email,
lucasdye@usc.edu and/or Dr. Jennifer Phillips via email, jlp62386@usc.edu
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.

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Women in executive leadership: a study of the gender diversity gap

PDF

Racial and gender gaps in executive management: a retrospective examination of the problem cause and strategies to address disparities

PDF

Lack of Latinx senior executive service members in a federal government agency

PDF

Improving the representation of female executives in a large utility provider: a modified KMO framework

PDF

Transformational leadership theory aligned-practices and social workers' well-being: an exploratory study of leadership practices in the context of stress and job burnout

PDF

Hail to the chief: an exploration of female chief executives’ successes

PDF

The lack of Black women in higher education executive leadership in four-year colleges and universities

PDF

Corporate America after Ursula Burns: building a pipeline of Black female executives

PDF

Prescription for change: gender barriers impact on healthcare leadership equity

PDF

Early to mid-career employee development: an exploratory study

PDF

Implicit bias: an advancement opportunity limiter for African American women in entertainment

PDF

Gender barriers towards women on the career path and within executive leadership

PDF

Environmental influences on the diversity of professional sports executive leadership

PDF

Exploring the experience of acquired employees within an organization following acquisition

PDF

Where are all the ""leadhers""? Female leaders' experiences in finance

PDF

Gender-based leadership barriers: an exploratory study of the underrepresentation of women of color in technology

PDF

Raising women leaders of Christian higher education: an innovation study

PDF

Stress and burnout: a qualitative study of the influences on female leaders' decision to leave

PDF

Causes for a lack of gender diversity in leadership

PDF

Lack of diversity in leadership: An organizational problem

Asset Metadata

Creator Dyer, Lucas Anthony (author)

Core Title The lack of gender diversity in executive leadership ranks within higher education

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2021-12

Publication Date 09/16/2021

Defense Date 09/16/2021

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

Tag advance,Barriers,Clark,DEI,diversity,Dyer,Education,Estes,executive,faculty,Female,gender,higher,hiring,influence,KMO,Knowledge,leadership,Lucas,models,Motivation,OAI-PMH Harvest,organization,staff,stakeholder,USC,Value,Women

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Phillips, Jennifer (committee chair), Seli, Helena (committee chair), Wilcox, Alexandra (committee chair)

Creator Email lucas.dyer16@gmail.com,lucasdye@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC15919467

Unique identifier UC15919467

Legacy Identifier etd-DyerLucasA-10072

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Dyer, Lucas Anthony

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the 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. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.

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