University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Leadership and identity: perceptions, experiences and negotiations of women leaders in higher education

(USC Thesis Other)

Leadership and identity: perceptions, experiences and negotiations of women leaders in higher education

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY

LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY: PERCEPTIONS, EXPERIENCES AND NEGOTIATIONS
OF WOMEN LEADERS IN HIGHER EDUCATION

by
Carlos A. Mora

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements of the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

August 2019

Copyright 2019 Carlos A. Mora

LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 2
DEDICATION
I would like to dedicate this work to my wife, Minnette. You have given me support and
inspiration throughout our journey together and I could not imagine any other life than the one
we have together. In addition, I would like to dedicate this to my grandparents who made
sacrifices to come to California and are directly responsible for the educational opportunities that
were available to me. Juan A. Mora, Carmen I. Mora, Igancio Magdaleno and Amelia
Magdaleno. This was never lost on me and provided me with the motivation and self-efficacy to
persevere in all my educational endeavors.
Lastly, a special dedication to my paternal grandmother, Carmen I. Mora. You raised me
during my early formative years and spurred my life of inquiry at an early age with the purchase
of a dictionary during elementary school so I could complete homework assignments. I will
forever be grateful.

LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 3
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to recognize my dissertation chair and committee, Dr. Margo Pensavalle, Dr.
Angela Marie Hasan and Dr. Darlene Robles and acknowledge their hard work and time
involved in this study. Thank you for supporting me through the dissertation process and
pushing me to do my best work.
Next, I would like to thank and acknowledge the support given by my supervisors and
colleagues during this process. Dr. Frank J. Chang and Laura Estrada were my supervisors
during this process and I am forever grateful for your support. Likewise, my academic records &
registrar team. There are too many to name, however I appreciated you all tremendously.
Lastly, I would like to acknowledge women of this study. Without you, I have no
participants and no research. Amelia, Aria, Aubrey, Ava, Hailey, Hannah, Taylor and Teagan
are only pseudonyms on paper; however, they are powerful narratives that will go beyond this
study to inform practice and research for future women leaders. You had nothing to gain and
much to lose by sharing with me your perceptions and experiences and for that, I am grateful.
Thank you.
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication 2
Acknowledgments 3
List of Tables 6
Abstract 7
Chapter One: Overview of the Study 8
Background of the Problem 9
Statement of the Problem 13
Purpose of the Study 16
Research Questions 16
Theoretical Framework 17
Importance of the Study 18
Organization of the Study 19
Chapter Two: Literature Review 21
History of Women in Leadership 21
History of Women Leaders in Social Movements. 21
History of Women Leaders in the Professions 23
History of Women in Higher Education: Dean of Women 24
Concepts of Leadership 28
Definitions of Leadership 28
Process Versus Trait 30
Assigned & Emergent Leadership 31
Leadership and Power 32
Leadership Framework 33
Concepts of Leadership and Gender 35
Gender Role Congruity Theory 35
Gender Stereotypes 38
Barriers to Women in Leadership 41
Leadership Style 41
Double Bind 44
Mentorship 46
Queen Bee 49
Glass Ceiling Versus Labyrinth 51
Concepts of Identity 54
Historic Concepts of Identity 55
Professional Identity 57
Identity Negotiation 61
Theoretical Framework 63
Conclusion 66
Chapter Three: Methodology 68
Rationale for Design 68
Sample and Population 69
Sampling Method 70
Participation Criteria 71
Data Collection 73
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 5
Interviews 73
Data Analysis 76
Credibility and Trustworthiness 78
Limitations of the Study 79
Summary 79
Chapter Four: Findings 80
Participants 81
Amelia 81
Aria 82
Aubrey 84
Ava 85
Hailey 86
Hannah 87
Taylor 89
Teagan 90
Research Question One 91
Frames in Higher Education Leadership 91
The Labyrinth in Higher Education Leadership 95
Gender, Race and Ethnicity in Higher Education Leadership 96
The Double Bind of Higher Education Leadership 101
Summary 104
Research Question Two 104
Childhood Identity Negotiation 105
Post-Secondary Education Identity Negotiation 106
Work-Life Identity Negotiation 109
Professional Identity Negotiation 112
Summary 117
Conclusion 118
Chapter Five: Discussion 119
Discussion of Findings 120
Recommendations for Practice 122
Leadership Modules 122
Sponsorship Development 124
Recommendations for Further Research 125
Conclusion 126
References 129
Appendix A: Recruitment Email/Letter 148
Appendix B: Interview Protocol 149

LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 6
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Definition of Terms 19
Table 2: Communal and Agentic Characteristics 37
Table 3: Leadership Styles of Women and Men 42
Table 4: Classification of Leadership Behaviors by Stereotypic Perceptions 43
Table 5: Seven Reasons the Glass Ceiling Metaphor is Misleading 54
Table 6: Josselson’s Theory of Women’s Identity Development 65
Table 7: Literature Review 65
Table 8: Women Leaders: Participant List 72
Table 9: Participants’ Educational Credentials 73
Table 10: Links Between Interview Questions and Research questions 75
Table 11: Gannt Chart Schedule of Data Collection and Analysis 77
Table 12: Findings for Research Question One 104
Table 13: Findings for Research Question Two 117

LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 7
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this qualitative study was to interview women leaders at a private 4-year
research university to hear directly from them about their perceptions. In addition, this study
sought to gain insight into how women leaders negotiate the multiple identities that shape their
professional identity. Josselson’s (1987) identity development model was utilized as the lens to
highlight the negotiations of multiple identities that shape professional identity of middle-level
women leaders at a private 4-year research university. All findings are considered barriers that
may prevent a path to senior leadership positions. The implications of these findings for
departments are to acknowledge the barriers exist and create awareness through learning
modules. The implications for these findings call for departments to train their senior leaders on
sponsorship development with middle-level women leaders. Further research should examine
the financial implications of professional identity beyond the gender pay gap. Race and ethnicity
should be examined through a lens more appropriate for that discussion and observations can
further examine barriers.
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 8
CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
Women make up a growing portion of leaders in higher education. Excluding the
president position, women hold 45% of all senior leadership positions in higher education (King
& Gomez, 2008), and the National Center for Education Statistics (2003) reported that women
hold 51% of middle-level positions in higher education. Yet, very little research has analyzed
the intersection of leadership and identity in higher education practice among women in roles
outside of faculty positions (Chávez & Sanlo, 2013; Marshall, 2009). Higher education
administrators would benefit from better understanding how women leaders successfully manage
the multiple identities within their professional identity to support their professional development
and retention.
Starting with Schein’s (1973, 1975) early empirical research on men and women in the
workplace, the literature shows women leaders experience stereotypes. Eagly and Karau (2002)
developed a theory to understand gender roles and the prejudice women leaders’ face in terms of
perception and the roles they hold. Archer (1996) found that men and women express leadership
differently in social actions as well. When it comes to perception, women leaders were
perceived differently than men, which results in additional barriers (Eagly & Karau, 2002).
Researchers state that gender roles cascade into the workplace and offer a background
identity that is always present (Gutek & Morasch, 1982). No one identity dominates leadership;
rather, a wide variety of identities manifest at many levels and with different types of leadership
(Chávez & Sanlo, 2013). Due to this variety, a better understanding of the perceptions and
experiences of women leaders at a private, 4-year university is needed in terms of how they
develop their professional identity.

LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 9
Background of the Problem
At one time, access to post-secondary education was a barrier to women closing the
gender gap in the workplace. Over the last four decades, there has been significant growth in
college education women entering the workplace. In 1970, only 12% of women between the
ages of 25 and 32 had at least a 4-year college degree, compared to 20% of men (Pew Research
Center, 2013a). The pipeline metaphor was utilized to explain that it was only a matter of time
before women reached parity with men in securing senior higher education leadership positions
(Dominici, Fried, & Zeger, 2009; Madsen, 2008, 2012). However, the lack of women leaders in
higher education is not a pipeline issue due to advances in degree attainment at all levels of post-
secondary programs (Dominici et al., 2009; Madsen, 2008, 2012).
Women earn 57% of bachelor’s degrees, 60% of master’s degrees and 51.7% of doctoral
degrees (Sawyer & Valerio, 2017). The positive trend for women in post-secondary degree
attainment persisted through the 1970s and 1980s, and in the mid-1990s, women entered the
workplace better educated than men. In 2013, 38% of women between the ages of 25 and 32 had
at least a bachelor’s degree, whereas 31% of men the same age range had a college degree (Pew
Research Center, 2013a).
Given the positive trajectory of college-educated women, one might surmise that women
have equaled or surpassed men in leadership positions as well. However, that is not the case. In
higher education, there remains a gap in senior leadership when looking at the data by gender
(Madsen, 2008, 2012). Women represented approximately 30% of college/university
presidencies in 2017, increasing from 24% in 2011 and 23% in 2006 (Seltzer, 2017). In addition,
women represent 39% of deans, a position that serves as a stepping-stone to the provost position,
one leadership position below that of the president (Behr & Schneider, 2015). Given the
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 10
numbers describing the progression of women in the workplace, many still struggle with a
work/life balance and coping with the pressures associated with developing professional and
personal identities (Marshall, 2009). Due to struggle, the perceptions and experiences of women
leaders in higher education are more likely to affect the formation of their professional identity in
contrast to men who have occupied senior leadership positions historically (Dominici et al.,
2009; Morley, 2012).
Women gained the right to vote in 1920, but research concerning women leaders did not
emerge until the 1960s (Eagly & Carli, 2007). Due to this lapse, very little has changed in the
literature regarding the perception of women in leadership. Looking historically at women
leaders in this country’s history and in higher education, it is men who make the decisions,
researching topics on women’s issues or excluding them from the narrative altogether (Josselson,
1987; Schwartz, 1997; Sokoloff, 1992). In addition, success in leadership has been examined in
the literature, and the findings report that people more commonly associate success and
effectiveness with men when looking at the characteristics and behaviors of a leader (Chliwniak,
1997; Eagly & Carli, 2007; Eagly & Karau, 2002; Growe & Montgomery, 1999; Lämsä &
Sintonen, 2001; Prime, Carter, & Welbourne, 2009; Uhlir, 1989).
Research tends to center on the communal and agentic characteristics of leadership and
the perception of others who associate leadership success with gender and gender roles (Eagly &
Karau, 2002). Leadership styles are described as the behaviors of leaders and the focus on
differences and similarities between women and men has been well-documented (Brenner,
Tomkiewicz, & Schein, 1989; Garcia-Retamero & López-Zafra, 2006; Watson & Hoffman,
2004). In the past, research showed men to be more task-oriented, goal achieving, and strongly
desiring to win in an authoritative leadership style, whereas women leaders’ emphasis is on
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 11
collaboration, relationship building, and a democratic means of team building (Chliwniak, 1997;
Growe & Montgomery, 1999; Prime et al., 2009; Uhlir, 1989).
Researchers have observed the leadership behaviors of women and men to determine
their effectiveness in the workplace (Prime et al., 2009). Prime et al. (2009) labeled behaviors as
feminine and masculine based on gender stereotypes. The study found feminine behaviors were
supporting, rewarding, mentoring, networking, consulting, team building, and inspiring. The
male behaviors were associated with problem solving, influencing upward, and delegating. The
findings do not suggest that women are limited to feminine behaviors. Rather, men and women
can possess either set of gender-ascribed leadership behaviors or a combination of both (Growe
& Montgomery, 1999). Generally, leadership duties are the same for both genders. However, the
focus is different between women and men, as is the importance placed on completing certain
tasks (Growe & Montgomery, 1999). This is due to the claim that men lead to complete tasks
and accomplish goals while women lead by embracing relationships and sharing in the process of
goal attainment (Growe & Montgomery, 1999).
A Pew Research Center (2015b) survey found no significant differences between women
and men in the leadership characteristics of intelligence and innovation. In fact, the survey
found that women were stronger than men in the leadership characteristics of compassion and
organizational skills. However, participants surveyed still believed women are held to a double
standard. Eagly and Carli (2007) describe the “double bind” women experience in the workplace
and when occupying a senior leadership position. The double bind is when women are
communal but seen as ineffective because they do not demonstrate agentic leadership
characteristics. In contrast, when women are highly agentic, they are criticized because they are
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 12
not communal (Eagly & Carli, 2007). Due to these experiences and perceptions, women leaders’
professional identity might be affected because of the double standard.
Gender differences between women and men leaders are discussed as part of the “glass
ceiling” leadership barrier, a concept coined to explain why women do not advance to senior
leadership positions (Eagly & Carli, 2007; Glass & Cook, 2016; Jones & Palmer, 2011; Madsen,
2012). This invisible barrier has intrigued researchers who have analyzed women leaders’
experiences and the barriers they face to senior leadership positions (Eagly & Carli, 2007).
Others have explored the factors preventing advancement for women in contrast to their male
counterparts (Dominici et al., 2009). Originally, the phrase was coined by two Wall Street
Journal journalists to explain how women had executive suite positions within their grasp, yet
could not reach them (Hymowitz & Schellhardt, 1986).
Others believe that rigid, impenetrable metaphor is no longer accurate due to the
advancement and progress of women across a wide range of senior leadership roles (Eagly &
Carli, 2007). This may be due to women’s degree attainment. Eagly and Carli (2007) stated the
glass ceiling was a concrete wall at one point for women seeking post-secondary education at
selective universities. It was not until the 1960s when a few Ivy League schools admitted female
students. Generally, admission was granted only to the women’s colleges affiliated with the
main campus (Eagly & Carli, 2007).
Some researchers argue that, at times, women can serve as barriers to themselves and
other women (Jones & Palmer, 2011). In turn, these experiences can also shape how women
leaders shape their professional identity. In one study, surveyed women stated they were in
support of career advancement for women in the workplace (Jones & Palmer, 2011). In addition,
they reported female peers and their institution supported aspiring women leaders. However, in
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 13
interviews, they stated women held each other back through covert actions to prevent
advancement opportunities. Women stated the actions of female peers and supervisors showed
that they did not fully support the career advancement of female colleagues due to jealousy and
competition in their relationships (Jones & Palmer, 2011).
While the participants found that the workplace environment was supportive of the
professional development of women leaders, sabotaging via covert actions contradicted their
responses (Jones & Palmer, 2011). This study lends itself to the idea that individual attitudes
toward women leaders and the way in which women leaders perceive themselves can also
contribute to the gender gap in senior leadership positions (Ely & Rhode, 2010).
Statement of the Problem
The perceptions and experiences of women leaders are different due to gender
stereotypes and barriers they face in leadership positions (Eagly & Carli, 2007). As leaders,
women are perceived more harshly than men are (Eagly & Karau, 2002). Traditionally, men
have secured and retained most of the senior leadership positions in higher education (Dominici
et al., 2009; Madsen, 2012). The male leader has been ascribed agentic characteristics that have
been associated with successful leadership, whereas women have been ascribed more communal
characteristics, which have not been perceived or associated with successful and effective
leadership (Schein, 1973, 1975). Women leaders’ professional identity development can be
different than for men and likely more fragmented due to the various barriers women face
throughout their careers. Furthermore, when looking at higher education institutions, the
traditional understanding of professional identity may no longer apply due to the unique
experiences of women leaders, a group that now holds a growing portion of leadership positions
(King & Gomez, 2008). Higher education institutions face a leadership crisis due to the
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 14
anticipated retirement of senior leadership (Marshall, 2009). While this may present a leadership
void for the institutions, it also provides an opportunity for women to progress to positions
traditionally held in greater numbers by men.
There is limited research on the multiple identities that make up the professional identity
of women leaders at a private, 4-year research university and on women who occupy senior
leadership positions (King & Gomez, 2008). Generally, many of the studies have focused on
women’s experiences and the gender stereotypes to which they are subjected (Parks-Stamm, &
Heilman, 2007; Prime et al., 2009). This has given way to prejudice in the workplace due to a
belief in gender role congruity, the congruity between gender and other roles (Eagly & Karau,
2002). Leadership roles can shape women’s professional identity based on gender stereotypes
and the effective leadership characteristics that have historically been ascribed to men. Hence,
these gender stereotypes make some believe a woman’s gender is incongruent with their role as a
leader, especially in male-dominated environments such as senior leadership positions in higher
education (Eagly & Karau, 2002; Garcia-Retamero & López-Zafra, 2006; Madsen, 2012).
A lack of women in positions such as dean and above is also a barrier in the progression
of a woman’s career from a role modeling and mentor perspective (King & Gomez, 2008). This
is due to the complexities of mentoring, a potential identity within a woman leader’s professional
identity in higher education. Once again, the negative aspect of an issue has been highlighted in
the literature regarding a woman’s lack of mentors in the workplace. This has introduced the
“queen bee” phenomenon (Staines, Tarvis & Jayaratne, 1978) that proposes that women who do
advance to senior leadership positions distance themselves from junior women leaders and
legitimize the current gender hierarchy (Derks, Van Laar, & Ellemers, 2016). However, there
are other studies that state women report no difference between cross-gender mentorship
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 15
relationships and same-gender mentor relationships (Feist-Price, 1994). Some believe men can
serve as allies in the fight against gender bias (Sawyer & Valerio, 2017), and others recommend
a whole new model of mentorship that focuses on sponsors (Hewlett, 2013; Sandberg, 2013).
Cross-gender mentor relationships are not without risks and complexities, which can reinforce
gender stereotypes (Feist-Price, 1994).
The intersection of leadership and identity within higher education has been unexplored
(Chávez & Sanlo, 2013). Not only is the development of future leaders an issue, but institutions
will also need to develop leaders with different skills to take on the challenges of globalization,
technological advances, and questioning of authority (Kezar, Carducci, & Contreras-McGavin,
2006). Kezar, Carducci and Contreras-McGavin, (2006) also state that higher education is
undergoing a revolution due to technological advances over the last few decades. Higher
education was once a highly structured, hierarchical institution with an emphasis on social
control; however, new nonhierarchical democratic forms of leadership are being introduced that
embrace cross-culture understanding, collaboration, and a genuine social responsibility to care
for others (Kezar et al., 2006). This is counter to the current, male-dominated leadership model
of authority and calls for a more collaborative model of leadership.
If professionalizing the identity of women leaders in higher education can dispel gender
stereotypes regarding their leadership and improve their representation at the dean level and
above, it is important to understand how their perceptions, experiences, and negotiations of their
multiple identities shape their professional identity as middle-level leaders now. There is limited
research on women leaders in higher education and the negotiation of personal and professional
lives (Baumgartner & Schneider, 2010; Marshall, 2009). The focus has been on senior
leadership positions and women who have reached the top (Hannum, Muhly, Shockley-Zalabak,
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 16
& White, 2015; White, 2012). One study aimed to look at women faculty in higher education
and the factors that prevent them from progressing to senior roles in relation to their professional
and personal lives (Dominici et al., 2009). Other studies analyzed the professional identities of
middle-level leaders. However, none specifically focused on women leaders at a private, 4-year
research university (Briggs, 2007; Busher, 2005).
In summary, the experiences of women leaders in higher education are fragmented, and
the literature needs to be built upon to emphasize and focus on women leaders at a private 4-year
research university and how their multiple identities shape their professional identity. This study
sought to build on previous studies with the understanding that not all women’s leadership
experiences are the same. In addition, women leaders have different perceptions and experiences
that might shape how they develop a professional identity and lead in the workplace.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this qualitative study was to interview women leaders at a private 4-year
research university to hear directly from them about how they perceive and experience their
careers in higher education as middle-level leaders below the dean position. In addition, this
study sought to gain insight into how women leaders negotiate the multiple identities that shape
their professional identity. There is limited research on the intersection of leadership and
identity in addition to limited research on women leaders below the dean position in higher
education and at private, 4-year research institutions (King & Gomez, 2008; Madsen, 2008,
2012).
Research Questions
The research questions drafted for this study are important within the context of women’s
leadership due to the significance of professional identity development and role it plays in
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 17
advancing women’s careers in higher education. Alignment is key when drafting a research
study. A research question is the most important component of a study, as it links all other
components to each other and will heavily influence or impact the other areas of a study
(Maxwell, 2013). Therefore, this study was guided by the following research questions:
1. What are the leadership perceptions and experiences of women leaders at a private 4-year
research university?
2. How do women leaders’ negotiations of their multiple identities shape their professional
identity at a private 4-year research university?
Theoretical Framework
One theoretical framework guided this study, yet others have been referenced in the
literature review to provide context and deep understanding. Josselson (1987) developed a
theory on women’s identity development to fill a gap in the literature. Josselson provides a
theoretical understanding of women’s identity development and the progression of identity crises
women experience on their way to identity achievement. An identity crisis is defined as a
turning point or challenge to one’s sense of self (Erikson, 1968).
Josselson (1987) explored women’s identity development by building upon Marcia’s
(1966) four identity statuses. Foreclosure is a stage where identity is directed by parents or other
authority figures during childhood; therefore no or very little crisis is experienced since the
values are accepted and no exploration takes place (Patton, Renn, Guido, & Quaye, 2016).
Moratorium is a status where exploration takes place and parental values are questioned as
individuals form their identity. Once the exploration and identity crises have evolved over a
period of time and strong commitments have been made, an identity achievement status is
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 18
reached. Lastly, identity diffusion is where no exploration takes place or a commitment is not
made and the individual is in lack of identity crisis (Patton et al., 2016).
Importance of the Study
The workplace in higher education is changing (Kezar et al., 2006). Women are
persisting to all levels of post-secondary education and attaining more degrees than men (Sawyer
& Valerio, 2017). The idea that women lack occupancy in leadership positions due to a pipeline
issue is no longer valid (Eagly & Carli, 2007; Marshall, 2009; Dominici et al., 2009). The
professional identity of the male senior administrator may no longer be the norm with the
growing ranks of women leaders at post-secondary institutions and the large amount of
anticipated president retirements over the next decade (American Council on Education, 2012).
Due to this, current senior administrators and institutions can no longer ignore women, their
perceptions, or the experiences and integral role they play in daily operations and decision-
making (Hill & Wheat, 2017).
Previous qualitative studies examined the perceptions and experiences of women in
senior leadership positions, with a majority on the president and president cabinet member
positions, such as dean, provost, executive vice presidents, chief academic officer, etc.
(Lepkowski, 2009; Marshall, 2009). However, this study fills a gap, as it examined the
perceptions, experiences, and professional identity development of women leaders below the
dean-level position at a 4-year research university. Potentially, by gaining a rich understanding,
it will energize women leaders to persist to more senior administrator positions. This is a
positive for institutions, as it may assist with retention of mid-level women leaders if they can
gain insight into the experiences of women leaders and their professional identity development
(Hill & Wheat, 2017).
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 19
In turn, women leaders will be committed to their departments and institutions, leading to
less turnover (Morley, 2013). With less turnover, the issue regarding a lack of women leaders,
being perpetuated in previous studies (Madsen, 2008, 2012; Marshall, 2009), will diminish,
providing a more equitable and welcoming workplace environment for aspiring women leaders.
Lastly, this study may provide women leaders an opportunity to learn more about themselves and
their workplace, providing them a voice to address injustices and collaborate with peers to
initiate change in their respective workplace within the institution.
Table 1
Definition of Terms
Leadership “Leadership entails being in charge of other
people in multiple ways” (Eagly & Carli,
2007, p. 8).

Leader “A person who exercises authority over other
people” (Eagly & Carli, 2007, p. 8)

Identity “Identity work is ongoing work. It is work
that is constituted by history and by the
conditions within which we live and work,
including the conflicts and tensions within
specific workplaces” (Taylor, 2008, p. 27).

Professional Identity “Professional identity is not a stable entity, it
is complex, personal, and shaped by
contextual factors” (Clarke, Hyde, &
Drennan, 2013, p. 8).

Organization of the Study
This study is presented in five chapters. Chapter Two reviews the literature, beginning
with the history of women in leadership. Next, leadership and gender concepts are discussed
with a focus on differences between women and men. Barriers to women in leadership are
explored in the third section. Concepts of identity are explored along with the theoretical
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 20
framework. Chapter Three describes the methodology of this study and why it was appropriate.
The fourth chapter presents the findings by analyzing and discussing the data collected to answer
the research questions regarding professional identity development of women leaders in higher
education. Chapter Five provides a broader discussion of the findings and presents
recommendations for future research and implications for practice.

LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 21
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
The previous chapter argued that women leaders in higher education experience
leadership differently than the traditional leader due to prejudice, stereotypes and barriers.
Therefore, the purpose of this qualitative study was to examine and analyze the perceptions and
lived experiences of women leaders and their professional identity at a 4-year research
university. It is important to hear women describe their experience in the workplace. In
addition, it is important to gain insight into how they develop their professional identity and how
their professional identity is shaped by the negotiations among their multiple identities.
History of Women in Leadership
To explain the context of this study and evaluate its contributions to the research, the
existing literature is reviewed in this chapter. The first section discusses the history of women in
leadership and their role in U.S. social movements. The second part looks at the history of the
professions. The third section discusses the history of women leaders in higher education under
the role of dean of women.
History of Women Leaders in Social Movements.
O’Connor (2010) states that leaders are intrinsic to the success of social movements. In
addition, the author stated that at least one woman has played a significant leadership role in
almost all social movements in the United States since the country was founded. At the time of
the Revolutionary War, Daughters of Liberty was an organization made up of women who
played a significant role disseminating revolutionary communication in social circles. During
the abolition movement, women activists such as Sarah Grimke, Angelina Grimke, Maria W.
Stewart and Sojourner Truth spoke out against slavery. Elizabeth Stanton and Susan B. Anthony
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 22
continued as activists during the Civil War and formed the National Loyal League, an
organization concerned about rights for both women and African Americans (O’Connor, 2010).
Amid the Suffrage Movement, Stanton continued the activism by calling a convention
with Lucretia Mott to petition for greater social and political rights for women. In 1869, Stanton
and Mott founded the National Woman Suffrage Association (NWSA), which focused on social
and economic equality (O’Connor, 2010). Later in 1869, Lucy Stone founded American Woman
Suffrage Association (AWSA), whose goal was to win the right for women to vote. With
different foci at each association’s inception, the two groups were later merged by the daughter
of Lucy Stone. Alice Stone brokered the deal between NWSA and AWSA to become the
National American Woman Suffrage Association. While progress was slow after the
associations’ merger, Alice Paul and Carrie Chapman Catt provided a turning point and
ultimately achieved the movement’s goal, winning ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment to
the U.S. Constitution and granting women the right to vote (O’Connor, 2010).
Another social movement, beyond suffrage, was the Settlement House movement. Its
notable leader was Jane Addams, who co-founded the Hull House in 1891 with Ellen Gates Star
(O’Connor, 2010). Together, they focused on providing social and economic opportunities to the
working class, yet became concerned about the low pay and long hours of immigrant women in
Chicago, Illinois. This led to the formation of the Women’s Trade Union League in 1909 to
secure labor laws for women workers (O’Connor, 2010).
The next line of women leaders did not emerge until the late 1950s and early 1960s, the
most notable being Rosa Parks and her example of leadership by resisting the segregation of seat
locations on public buses in the South (O’Connor, 2010). There were other issues beyond racial
equality and anti-war groups during the Civil Rights Era, and there was no consensus on an
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 23
action plan by the various activist leaders and their organizations. It was not until 1963, when
President John F. Kennedy issued a report by the Commission on the Status of Women that a
social movement started to get the attention of a majority of women. The next year, the
ratification of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 started the rallying cry of women to get behind a
common cause and start a start a social movement (O’Connor, 2010).
In the 1970s, many progressive outcomes for women occurred with increases in military
and post-secondary education enrollment and advances in the corporate and political worlds
(O’Connor, 2010). This was in addition to the landmark case of Roe v. Wade in 1973.
Throughout this time period, women were not just obtaining authority positions and the power
that goes along with them; rather, it was a time where women were redefining power. The
National Organization for Women came in to existence in the 1990s and focused on women’s
rights to political representation, education opportunity, and economic equity (O’Connor, 2010).
History of Women Leaders in the Professions
During the 1960s, women only represented in the single digits in professional schools,
such as law and medicine (Sokoloff, 1992). The professional schools also constitute the sciences
and higher education, historically teaching male-dominated fields, when combined with law and
medicine. Until the 1960s, women and minorities were, in essence, barred from the professions
(Sokoloff, 1992). This is not to say there were no women professionals prior to the 1960s, but
there was a question of whether they could practice beyond the “women’s domains.” Women
were able to excel in family law and estate planning sectors of law and were actively recruited
into those sectors. Likewise in medicine, women physicians worked in pediatrics and psychiatry.
Sokoloff (1992) stated that education, foreign languages and literature were deemed more
appropriate for women in higher education teaching. What these domains and areas of interest
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 24
within the professions have in common is that they were deemed lower in prestige, pay, and rank
within the professions (Sokoloff, 1992).
Elite occupations offer greater control, autonomy, power, and rewards due to the higher
status society places upon them and the end result when a person comes out of a professional
school. Sokoloff (1992) defined the professions of the workplace as elite occupations in law,
medicine, architecture, ministry, dentistry, justice system, science, and university teaching.
These positions have been traditionally filled by White men from privileged backgrounds due to
the high pay, autonomy, and control offered in these positions (Sokoloff, 1992).
Sokoloff (1992) also introduced the semiprofessions as the handmaidens of the core
professions since they are distinctly different theoretically and empirically. Nursing, elementary
teaching, librarianship and social work are defined as the core semiprofessions. It is believed
that it is no accident that there is a correlation between professions and semiprofessions based on
gender segregation (Theodore, 1971). According to Theodore (1971), the semiprofessions are
heavily populated by females and are coined the “female professions.” The semiprofessions
have shorter training sessions and, in status, have less autonomy and/or control than the
professions. At times, the semiprofessions can be controlled by the orders of the professions,
such as a nurse who must follow the orders of a doctor and is thereby defined as a subordinate in
the field of medicine (Sokoloff, 1992).
History of Women in Higher Education: Dean of Women
During the late 1800s, a new profession was created by college presidents to assist with
the new minority population, female students (Schwartz, 1997). Female faculty members were
appointed to advise, assist, and counsel female students and given the title of dean of women.
This position established a new profession in higher education for over 60 years until the end of
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 25
World War II (Schwartz, 1997). Much effort was put into developing professional associations
and literature to legitimize the role among male-dominated administrators. In addition, they had
a clear leadership pattern that guided young women post-secondary education through guidance
counseling, including the academic and personal advisement of female and male students.
According to Schwartz (1997), the entire field of student services can be traced to the work of
deans of women as they developed admission, orientation, and student activities in addition to
residential housing and career services.
Yet, the work and accomplishments of women have been either ignored, limited or
inaccurate due the male dominant voice in written and oral histories of higher education that has
not given credit to deans of women or women leaders in higher education in general (Schwartz,
1997). Clifford (1995) notes that a widely used text on the history of colleges and universities by
Brubacher and Rudy (1997) contains 514 pages, yet only six pages cover women’s education,
women’s colleges, and coeducation. The text minimizes the work of women and their
contributions. However, when looking at the accomplishments of women leaders in higher
education, many of today’s well-established and significant practices in student development and
student services were developed by deans of women (Schwartz, 1997), as women are
overrepresented in student services positions within higher education (Nidiffer, 2010).
Furthermore, the deans of women professionalized their role and grounded their work in
academic principles via rigorous research and scholarly dissemination of their findings to the
academic community.
The dean of women gained prominence across college and university campuses as the
enrollment of women increased. There was an interest in gaining more of a specific skill set and
training on the position. This led to a new graduate program at Teachers College of Columbia
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 26
University (TCCU) to train aspiring and existing deans of women in 1916 (Schwartz, 1997).
Yet, many of the deans of women were also serving as faculty and had advanced degrees in their
fields of study in addition to the added responsibility of the dean of women position.
A year after the first graduate program was set up at TCCU, a professional organization
was established on a national scale, the National Association of Deans of Women to continue to
build the profession on academic discipline, research, and publication (Schwartz, 1997). During
the 1920s, new research on deans of women and women in higher education was conducted by
students in the program. One study found that 91% of deans of women had at least a bachelor’s
degree, 57% had a master’s and 15% had a doctorate (Schwartz, 1997). In addition, of the deans
of women who also served as faculty, less than one percent (0.9) held the position of lecturer,
whereas 39% were listed as professor. Lastly, a majority of deans of women also taught in
traditional arts and science disciplines, not in nursing or education, two areas assumed to be
more prevalent for women (Sokoloff, 1992; Schwartz, 1997).
As the dean of women position grew, the credentials of the women who held this title
were on par with their male counterparts, yet their position as a figurehead was challenged in
terms of numbers and as a symbol on campus. Two major events in the early part of the 20th
century started the change of perception and importance of education (Schwartz, 1997). After
the Great Depression and World War II, the call for a return to “normalcy” meant for men to
return to their positions in education and the workplace at the expense of women (Schwartz,
1997). Ignoring the contributions of women, men were rewarded for the successful war effort
and started to erode the progress women had made in research, developmental practices, and
training programs.
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 27
In addition, women’s issues in higher education were pushed aside and more pressing
problems geared toward male students were placed at the forefront (Schwartz, 1997). One factor
was due to the influx of male students returning to higher education under the Servicemen’s
Readjustment Act, better known as the GI Bill. Colleges and universities had to deal with issues
such as housing and having enough instructors to teach courses (Schwartz, 1997). In turn, the
numbers of female students steadily declined from the 1930s to the 1950s. In the 1920s, women
represented almost half the student population at colleges and universities at 47%, but those
numbers dwindled to 21% by the mid-1950s (Graham, 1978).
According to Schwartz (1997), the return of male students under the GI Bill not only
provided a steady stream of students into higher education and an economic push for a fragile
economy susceptible to falling into another depression, but also covered for true sentiments
regarding women in higher education. Women were never welcomed in higher education on a
permanent, equal basis and men resented their presence (Schwartz, 1997). Higher education was
a male environment of learning and leadership, and male students and faculty did not welcome
women. Women, at the time of their steady rise in student population and faculty ranks, served
an economic purpose when the alternative would have been to fund and build two single-sex
institutions (Schwartz, 1997).
In summary, women leaders have played an integral role in America’s social movements
and continue to lead social movements regarding equity issues for women in the workplace.
When it comes to leaders within the professions, women have not been represented historically,
which resulted in the “woman’s domain” of the professions, or semiprofessions. The professions
generally have been occupied by white men in the fields of law, medicine and science. The
semiprofessions are considered more in line with women’s work in elementary education and
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 28
nursing, professions that may be subordinate to a profession occupied by a man, such as a male
principal or doctor. Lastly, the dean of women was a new position on college and university
campuses at the turn of the 19th century. The position laid the foundation for many of the
principles used by student services professionals today. In the next section, leadership is defined
and components of leadership and gender are discussed.
Concepts of Leadership
Leadership has been defined in multiple ways, depending on the context of the situation.
This next section defines leadership and demonstrate how the nature of leadership can change,
depending on the leader’s assigned position of authority, influence, perception, likeability,
knowledge, and competency within a group. Power also has a role to play in leadership and can
be positional or personal. Lastly, a leadership framework is introduced to show how women
leaders can generate change through four frames or mental models and as an identity to solve
problems within their organizations.
Definitions of Leadership
There are many dynamic definitions of leadership in the literature, and the word
leadership can have different meanings for different people. Northouse (2016) states that, once
one person tries to define leadership, that person realizes the different meanings leadership can
have for various people in different contexts. Over the past 70 years, more than 60 classification
systems have developed the definitions of various dimensions of leadership (Fleishman et al.,
1991). The systems vary from group processes to personality perspectives and behaviors
(Northouse, 2016). According to Bass and Stogdill (1990), the group process is centered on a
leader who embodies the will of the group as a whole. The personality perspective is centered on
the traits or characteristics of a leader and how they may utilize those traits to prompt others into
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 29
accomplishing tasks. Lastly, behaviors or acts are what leaders do to induce change within a
group for a specific purpose (Northouse, 2016).
When looking at the various ways leadership is conceptualized, one can see it still has
central components as a phenomenon. Leadership is a process (Northouse, 2016). The
leadership process involves influence, and a leader cannot lead without having influence on
followers, or else leadership is nonexistent, according to Northouse (2016). Leadership also
occurs in groups, and leaders influence others, known as followers, in a group setting toward a
common purpose, goal, or task. Within a common purpose are goals, another component that
leaders use to get others within the group to achieve together (Northouse, 2016). The terms
“leaders” and “followers” are used by Northouse (2016) to demonstrate that both parties are part
of the leadership process. This is due to the concept that leaders and followers need each other
(Burns, 1978; Heller & Van Til, 1982; Hollander, 1992; Jago, 1982) and that a leader is the one
who initiates the relationship, creates communication channels and, in most cases, has the
responsibility to maintain the relationship (Northouse, 2016).
Considering these components, Northouse (2016) defines leadership as “a process
whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal” (p. 3).
There is a difference in defining leadership as a process, instead of as a trait or characteristic.
When leadership is defined as a process, the implication is that a leader has an effect on and is
affected by followers (Northouse, 2016). In this definition, leadership is not linear; rather, it is
an interactive event that occurs between leader and followers. This definition allows leadership
to be available to all and not just limited to the leader within a group.
Eagly and Carli (2007) take a different approach to defining leadership: “leadership
entails being in charge of other people in multiple ways” (p. 8). They also take a
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 30
straightforward approach to defining a leader: “a person who exercises authority over other
people (p. 8).” Leaders bring people together by influencing, motivating, organizing, and
coordinating others to work toward shared goals and cultivate an environment of progress for a
group or organization (Eagly & Carli, 2007).
Process Versus Trait
The definition of leadership is important, and it also imperative to understand the nature
of leadership. To do so, one needs to understand how leadership as a process is different than
leadership as trait or behavior. Trait leadership is conceptualized through a set of properties that
may vary in degrees, depending on the person (Jago, 1982). Special innate or inborn
characteristics that individuals possess can include physical factors such as height, personality,
and ability, which are characteristics that make up trait leadership (Bryman, 1992). In addition,
trait theories look to identify leadership characteristics that can be applied to all leaders to make
them effective.
A list of traits may include integrity, competence, intelligence, self-confidence,
determination, and sociability (Kezar et al., 2006; Northouse, 2016). This concept suggests that
leadership is restricted to only those leaders who are believed to have been born with special
talents (Northouse, 2016). Behavioral leadership theories examine the roles, the categories in
which behaviors take place, and the tasks of leadership (Birnbaum, Bensimon, & Neumann,
1989). Some tasks have been identified as planning, fundraising, and mentoring in behavior
studies on leadership (Kezar et al., 2006). Researchers have also focused on the leader’s
orientation to tasks to determine if one orientation is more effective than the others, since
relationships are not the focus. Similar to traits, behaviors are generic and applicable to all
leaders in all settings and organizations due to the focus being on the leader (Kezar et al., 2006)
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 31
In contrast, leadership as a process can be observed, and the behaviors of a leader can be
learned (Jago, 1982). Kezar et al. (2006) state that the leader and leadership are synonymous
with trait and behavioral theories of leadership whereas theories on power, influence
contingency, cognitive and culture are more concerned with the process of leadership and are no
longer concerned with the leader being interchangeable with leadership. Researchers using
power and influence theories look at the amount of power a leader has and at the source of power
(Kezar et al., 2006). Situational factors that affect followers within a group, such as the external
environment, are the focus of contingency theories (Birnbaum et al., 1989). Within higher
education, those factors could be bureaucratic, collegial, or political subsystems. Cognitive
theories focus on the perception process of influence and how followers attribute leadership to
leaders. Lastly, cultural theories of leadership place importance on context with an emphasis on
interactions to better understand the symbolism of leadership. For example, rituals and traditions
can be used by leaders to inspire followers (Kezar et al., 2006).
Assigned & Emergent Leadership
Furthermore, there are different forms of leadership based on positionality within an
organization and the perception of the leader. These forms of leadership are called assigned and
emergent (Northouse, 2016). This is different than the concept of leadership that states, “leaders
are born” or that someone is a “natural born leader.” Rather, a leader can be assigned due to
their formal position within an organization or emerge as a leader due to the response they
receive from other members in the group (Northouse, 2016). Examples of leaders who are
assigned leadership are department heads, directors, and administrators. It is not always the case
that the person assigned to the leadership role is the real leader within an organization. The
perceptions of the other members of the group matter, and a person can be perceived as the most
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 32
influential member of the group, the real leader, regardless of that person’s title. Emergent
leadership occurs due to a group’s support and acceptance of a leader’s behavior and influence
(Northouse, 2016). Positive communication behaviors can have success within a group, and
personality plays a role with emergent leadership.
However, gender bias may also affect emergent leadership. In a study of 40 mixed-sex
college groups where men and women were tasked with persuading their groups to make
decisions, women were just as successful as men as influential leaders (Watson & Hoffman,
2004). Yet, women in the study were rated lower than men on leadership by their groups. In
addition, women were rated as significantly less likeable than men. The study’s results
demonstrate women continue to face barriers in emergent leadership in certain settings (Watson
& Hoffman, 2004).
Leadership and Power
While barriers to women’s leadership are discussed later in this chapter, the concept of
power and leadership are related due to the process of power and its potential to influence.
Leaders have power when they can affect the beliefs, attitudes, and actions of others (Northouse,
2016). In a widely cited study on power, French, Raven, and Cartwright (1959) conceptualized
power in a framework centered on the dyadic relationship of a person doing the influencing and
the person being influenced. The study identified five bases of power that increase a leader’s
capacity to influence the attitudes, values, or behaviors of others. The bases of power consist of
reward, coercive, legitimate, referent, and expert (French et al., 1959).
Northouse (2016) states there are two kinds of power within organizations, position and
personal power. Similar to assigned leadership, position power is derived from a particular
office or rank within an organization or formal setting. The higher status over followers gives
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 33
leaders of positional power influence and capacity. Included in position power are three of
French et al.’s (1959) five bases of power: legitimate, reward, and coercive. Legitimate power is
like a judge in a courtroom due to the judge’s status in a formal position of authority. When a
leader can provide rewards, such as supervisor rewarding an employee for their work ethic, that
is reward power. Lastly, when that same supervisor can punish or penalize an employee for their
lack of hard work, that is coercive power (Northouse, 2016).
Personal power places importance on the actions of leaders and how they are favorably
perceived by followers (Northouse, 2016). If a leader is viewed as likeable, knowledgeable or as
a good role model, personal power is being ascribed based on how the leader is seen in their
relationship with followers. The last two bases of power, referent and expert, are included in
personal power(French et al., 1959). Referent power is based on a leader’s likeability, such as a
teacher being adored by students in an elementary school setting. The perception of competency
in a leader is expert power and can be seen in tour guides who have vast knowledge of a city,
country, or region (Northouse, 2016).
Leadership Framework
Leadership has been defined many ways within concepts and frameworks of leadership.
Leadership can also occur from a skills perspective, when a leader has knowledge and skills to
lead followers to accomplish goals and make progress for a group or organization (Northouse,
2016). Part of the skills leaders need are mental models to lead organizations. While mental
models have been described in many ways, Bolman and Deal (2017) label them as frames.
Frames are “a set of ideas and assumptions- that you carry in your head to help you understand
and negotiate a particular ‘territory’” (Bolman & Deal, 2017, p. 10). Essentially, a frame is a
lens through which leaders understand a situation. Framing and reframing a situation using one
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 34
or multiple frames assists in developing a diagnosis of challenges in addition to planning
strategies until an understanding of a situation has been achieved. This is what leaders do when
they go beyond singular means of solving problems (Bolman & Deal, 2017).
The four frames of leadership, according to Bolman and Deal (2017), are structural,
human resource, political, and symbolic. The structural frame has been described as focused on
the structural elements of an organization: the formal roles, goals, policies and technological
environment. A machine or factory is used as the organizational metaphor. The human resource
frame has central concepts focused on the needs, skills, and relationships of an organization.
Family is the metaphor for this frame, as the organization’s challenge is to align with human
needs (Bolman & Deal, 2017). The political frame is comparable to a jungle as its organizational
metaphor due to the focus on power, conflict, competition, and politics. In the political frame,
the challenge for leaders is to develop an agenda and power base. The last frame is symbolic and
the concepts center on culture, meaning, ritual, ceremony, stories and heroes. The challenge for
leaders within this frame is to create faith, beauty, and meaning. The metaphor for this frame is
a carnival, temple, or theater (Bolman & Deal, 2017).
In summary, the definitions of leadership and the nature in which leadership is defined
can vary depending on the concepts. Some concepts have leadership as a trait, or a behavior.
Research shows that leaders can have innate characteristics, or they can learn leadership
behaviors by observation. As a framework, leadership change can be approached by looking at
problems and issues through a lens of Bolman and Deal’s (2017) four frames of leadership. By
reviewing these leadership concepts, a better understanding can be had regarding the perceptions
and experiences of women leaders at a 4-year research university. They also give a foundation
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 35
to understand how women leaders may negotiate their multiple identities within their
professional identity.
Concepts of Leadership and Gender
Leadership and gender are important when looking at how women leaders shape their
professional identity. Gutek and Morasch (1982) found that gender roles cascade into the
workplace. Once there, gender provides “implicit, background identity” in the workplace
(Ridgeway, 1997, p. 231). Understanding how gender affects leadership and the negotiations
women leaders’ process to develop their professional identity requires a better understanding of
gender roles and their impact on leadership. Women not only express leadership differently than
men in social actions (Archer, 1996; Eagly, 1995; Eagly & Wood, 1999), but they also face more
barriers as they are perceived differently than men (Eagly & Karau, 2002). This section first
presents the theoretical framework to provide a foundation of understanding on gender prejudice
and discrimination. Subsequently, the research is examined to better understand the barriers
women leaders face in relation to men.
Gender Role Congruity Theory
Eagly and Karau (2002) developed a theory on prejudice to better understand the
perceptions of women leaders and their leadership roles. The researchers found that gender role
congruity pertains to the congruity between their role and their gender, which may include
leadership roles. When a woman and her leadership role are perceived to be incongruent, two
forms of prejudice are formed. In the first, women are perceived less favorably than men as
potential leaders. In the second, perceptions of women when exhibiting the behaviors of
leadership are less favorable due to their gender (Eagly & Karau, 2002).
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 36
This theory is a built upon Eagly’s (1987) previous research on social role theory and
gender role differences, similarities, and consensual beliefs about the attributes of women and
men. According to social role theory, perceivers infer a connection between the actions of
people and their inner dispositions (Eagly, 1987). The descriptive aspect is the behavior of
women and men and the activities performed in their typical social roles and the personal
qualities required to perform those tasks. Thus, gender stereotypes follow from observations of
people in sex-typical social roles, where it is believed men are the breadwinners or have other
high social roles and women are “homemakers” and have lower social roles (Diekman & Eagly,
2000).
Gender roles are descriptive and injunctive norms, with descriptive norms most
commonly known as stereotypes (Eagly & Karau, 2002). There is a perception that women and
men have typical and divergent traits. In addition to traits, behaviors are key propositions of
social role theory and the belief is characteristics are either communal or agentic (Eagly, 1987).
Communal characteristics are ascribed more strongly with women and can be classified as
having concern for the well-being of others, such as affectionate, helpful, kind, sympathetic,
interpersonally sensitive, nurturant, and gentle. Agentic characteristics are assertiveness,
controlling, confidence, aggressive, ambitious, dominant, forceful, independent, self-sufficient,
self-confident, and prone to act like a leader (Eagly, 1987; Eagly & Karau, 2002). See Table 2.

LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 37
Table 2
Communal and Agentic Characteristics
Communal Agentic
Affectionate Assertiveness
Helpful Controlling
Kind Confidence
Sympathetic Aggressive
Interpersonally sensitive Ambitious
Nurturing Dominant
Gentle Forceful
Independent
Self-sufficient
Self-confident
Prone to act like a leader
Note. Adapted from Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice
toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109(3), 573–598.

Injunctive norms about women and men and their behavior are embraced by gender
norms as well. There is an overall approval in the research on three levels regarding the
communal characteristics women exhibit and the agentic characteristics men demonstrate (Eagly
& Karau, 2002). The first is women and men are ideal when perceived by others within the
ascribed gender norms (Spence & Helmreich, 1979). In addition, women and men hold these
norms for their ideal selves as well (Wood, Christensen, Hebl, & Rothgerber, 1997). Third are
the approval of attitudes and prescriptive beliefs of gender roles and the responsibilities that
people hold of women and men (Glick & Fiske, 1996). Essentially, the more sex differentiated
the characteristics or behaviors, the more people perceived them to be appropriate for one sex
(Hall & Carter, 1999; Eagly & Karau, 2002).
The difference between social role theory and gender role congruity theory is that the
latter considers congruity between gender roles and other roles a person may have, particularly
leadership roles. Gender role congruity theory specifies the key factors that influence congruity
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 38
perceptions that may result in prejudice or prejudicial behavior (Eagly & Karau, 2002). The
theory holds that people have expectations about leaders. Therefore, there is the potential for
prejudice against women leaders due to inherent gender roles. Women leaders, due to the
communal characteristics associated with women, are dissimilar to the expectations held for
leaders. Rather, per people’s perceptions, leaders should be associated with agentic
characteristics to be successful (Eagly & Karau, 2002).
However, Uhlir (1989) believes that leadership is androgynous, which means a leader has
both communal and agentic characteristics. The author also believes higher education is
experiencing a leadership crisis and should seek androgynous leaders. Historically, the selection
process ignored half of the talent pool, and there is a shifting perception that current leadership
has low confidence in constituents and serves shorter terms as institutions utilize outside firms
for candidacy searches due to senior administrator positions staying vacant for longer durations.
A shift in leadership is needed from “task performance” indicators to leaders who are in tune
with the “human dimensions” in higher education. Androgynous leaders can select from a full
range of characteristics and behaviors to meet an institution’s demands (Uhlir, 1989).
Gender Stereotypes
In early empirical research, Schein (1973, 1975) examined the male construal of
leadership by gathering the impressions of male and female managers on successful leadership.
The studies concluded that participants perceived a successful leader considerably more similar
to men than women based on the agentic characteristics of competitiveness, self-confident,
objective, aggressive, ambitious, and able to lead. To define gender stereotypes and the
characteristics of successful leaders, three forms of the Schein Descriptive Index were
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 39
developed. The three forms asked for the description of men in general, women in general, and a
successful middle leader (Schein, 1973, 1975).
Due to Schein’s (1973, 1975) studies, researchers have replicated the work with the same
methodology to determine if people’s perceptions continue to be that the requisite characteristics
of leadership are more commonly ascribed to men in general than to women in general. Brenner
et al. (1989) sampled 420 male middle-level managers and 173 female middle-level managers
and found that the attitudes of male managers were very similar to the male managers in the
studies that took place in the 1970s. The results confirmed that male managers perceive the
requisite characteristics of leadership are more likely held by men than women (Brenner et al.,
1989). However, the researchers also found that the attitudes of women are not similar to the
those of the women participants in studies conducted in the 1970s. The evidence of Brenner et
al. (1989) highlights that women’s attitudes regarding the requisite characteristics of leadership
are no longer more commonly ascribed to men. This finding is a result of women changing their
view, rather than a change in the way they view men or the perceptions they have for success in
leadership.
Research has also been conducted on the perceptions of people prior to entering the
workplace. Two studies used management programs in graduate school (Schein, Mueller, &
Jacobson, 1989; Dodge, Gilroy, & Fenzel, 1995). On study’s sample consisted of 113 male
students and 77 female students in a Master of Business Administration program (Dodge et al.,
1995). The researchers captured results similar to those of Brenner et al. (1989). The hypothesis
of leadership characteristics and the perception that they are more commonly ascribed to men
was likely to be held by male students and not by female students. Schein et al. (1989) were not
able to confirm the hypothesis of the study.
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 40
Schein (2007) noted that further studies have been conducted all over the world
replicating the work completed over the last few decades. Nonetheless, the idea “think manager -
think male” is still the perception of men in the workplace and in management graduate
programs, regardless of the cultural contexts of the country. While that may be the case, one
study was found results similar to those attributed to women of the 1970s.
In a study looking at gender role congruity, participants evaluated male and female
candidates for leadership positions in industries that are congruent or incongruent with their
gender (Garcia-Retamero & López-Zafra, 2006). The purpose of the study was to determine if
the gender and age of participants influenced the perception of incongruence between the
leadership role and the gender role. Participants consisted of 326 men and 379 women in four
age ranges: 11 to 15 years old, 18 to 25 years old, 30 to 50 years old, and 65 years or older.
Participants answered a questionnaire on associating a potential leader’s success in a
manager role in each of the three industries presented, one of which was unspecified (Garcia-
Retamero & López-Zafra, 2006). The other two industries were automotive and clothing, set by
a previous survey and purposely selected as masculine and feminine. The findings supported the
study’s hypothesis, stereotyping of women leaders is automatically activated due to the
perception that leadership and the more male-congenial industry is more aligned with men. The
main finding to counter the change in perception of women found by Schein et al. (1989)
concludes that some women still believe women leaders are less qualified to be successful than
men (Garcia-Retamero & López-Zafra, 2006). According to Schein (2007), it was believed that,
with more women in leadership roles, gender stereotyping of leaders would abate. It has with
some women, yet gender stereotypes and requisite leadership characteristics are still prevalent
among male leaders (Schein, 2007). As women leaders develop their identity, the expectations
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 41
and the perceptions of leadership they ascribe to within gender roles could play a role in the
development of their professional identity in the workplace.
To conclude, gender role congruity states that women leaders are not perceived as
successful and may experience prejudicial behaviors in leadership positions. This is due to the
associations made about women and communal characteristics and the dissimilarity with
expectations people have about successful leaders and the agentic characteristics more frequently
associated with men. It is important to understand gender roles and the perceptions of women
leaders as they develop their professional identity. The potential for prejudice could be a
consequence if expectations are not met and agentic characteristics are not exhibited.
Barriers to Women in Leadership
Antal and Izraeli (1993) stated, “the single most important hurdle for women in
management in all industrialized countries is the persistent stereotype that associates
management with being male” (p. 63). As discussed in the previous section, the challenges
women leaders face with leadership characteristics ascribed to gender roles and the experience of
gender stereotypes are barriers to their advancement. However, there are other barriers women
leaders face that may affect the development of a professional identity. The next section
explores some of these barriers and how multiple identities must be negotiated regularly,
depending on the various barriers.
Leadership Style
The literature on leadership styles is similar to the research on gender roles. Women and
men can have distinct and similar styles due to the behaviors they exhibit as leaders (Chliwniak,
1997; Eagly & Carli, 2007; Eagly & Karau, 2002; Growe & Montgomery, 1999; Kark, Waismel-
Manor, & Shamir, 2012; Parks-Stamm & Heilman, 2007; Prentice & Carranza, 2002; Prime et
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 42
al., 2009). Some studies also found that there can be some overlap in behaviors. Leadership
styles are described as behaviors exhibited by a leader (Northouse, 2016). Yet, Carli and Eagly
(2001) state women experience special challenges and pitfalls due to leadership’s perception as a
male establishment. Research in the past has focused on whether women had a particular
leadership style and if it was more effective than a particular male style (Northouse, 2016).
Some studies found leadership differences (Book, 2000; Helgensen, 1990; Rosener, 2011), and
others counter those findings and argue that gender has minimal or no effect on leadership style
or effectiveness (Growe & Montgomery, 1999). See Table 3 for leadership styles.
Table 3
Leadership Styles of Women and Men
Women Men
Emphasize relationships, sharing and process Focus on completing tasks, achieving goals,
hoarding of information and winning

Focus on instructional leadership Emphasize organizational matters
Facilitative leadership Lead from the front and stresses task
accomplishment

Interact more with colleagues, community,
etc. more than men
Lean toward majority rule and leads by
rewarding and punishing adequate and
inadequate work

Emphasize process Emphasize the product, goal

Encourage feelings of self-worth, active
participation, and sharing of power and
information, which helps to transform
people’s self-interest into organizational goals
Utilize the traditional top-down
administrative style
Note. Growe, R., & Montgomery, P. (1999). Women and the leadership paradigm: Bridging the
gender gap. The Phi Kappa Phi Journal, 17E, 1–10.
Due to research that states that women and men can have different styles, it needs to be
said that the variance does not equal dominance by one over the other (Growe & Montgomery,
1999). The difference may be perspective; men see leadership as leading whereas women see
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 43
leadership as facilitating (Schaef, 1985). Chliwniak (1997) found that, while women and men
perform the same tasks as leaders, emphasis is often placed on different aspects of their
positions. The author noted that women embrace relationships, sharing and the process, and men
focus on completing tasks, achieving goals, hoarding information, and winning (Chliwniak,
1997).
Prime et al. (2009) developed a classification of leadership behaviors based upon prior
studies (Eagly & Carli, 2007; Kark et al., 2012; Yukl, 1999). The difference from those styles of
Chliwniak (1997) is that Prime et al. (2009) defined the behaviors and classified them as
Feminine behaviors-taking care and Masculine behaviors-taking charge. For example, the
authors state “supporting” is under the “taking care” group and is defined as encouraging,
assisting, and providing resources for others. A behavior under the “taking charge” column,
problem-solving is defined as identifying, analyzing, and acting decisively to remove
impediments to work performance (Prime et al., 2009). Table 4 presents more behaviors in the
taking care and taking charge groups.
Table 4
Classification of Leadership Behaviors by Stereotypic Perceptions
Feminine Masculine
Supporting
Encouraging, assisting and providing
resources for others
Problem-Solving
Identifying, analyzing, and acting decisively
to remove impediments to work performance

Rewarding Providing praise, recognition, and
financial remuneration when appropriate

Influencing Upward
Affecting others in positions of higher rank
Mentoring
Facilitating the skill development and career
advancement of subordinates

Delegating
Authorizing others to have substantial
responsibility and discretion

LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 44
Table 4, continued
Feminine Masculine
Networking
Developing and maintaining relationships
with other who may provide information or
support resources

Lean toward majority rule and leads by
rewarding and punishing adequate and
inadequate work

Consulting
Checking with others before making plans or
decisions that affect them

Emphasize the product, goal

Team-Building
Encouraging positive identification with the
organization unit, cooperation and
constructive conflict resolution

Utilize the traditional top-down
administrative style
Inspiring
Motivating other toward greater enthusiasm
for and commitment to work objects by
appealing to emotion, value or personal
example

Note. Adapted from Prime, J. L., Carter, N. M., & Welbourne, T. M. (2009). Women “take
care,” men “take charge”: Managers’ stereotypic perceptions of women and men leaders. The
Psychologist Manager Journal, 12(1), 25–49.

Double Bind
With different leadership styles and behaviors, there is a concept that has been defined as
a dilemma and is often referred to as a “double-bind.” This is a barrier that women leaders face
that men do not (Brescoll, 2016; Eagly & Carli, 2007; Parks-Stamm & Heilman, 2007).
Revisiting the communal and agentic characteristics of gender roles, women are prescribed to be
communal and leaders are prescribed to agentic (Eagly & Carli, 2007). Parks-Stamm and
Heilman (2007) state, “Descriptive gender stereotypes designate what women and men are like.
Prescriptive gender stereotypes indicate what women and men should be like” (p. 48). Due to
the mismatch of prescriptions between the female gender role and most leadership roles, there is
a perception issue for women leaders which places them in a double bind and subjects them to a
double standard.
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 45
Aggressiveness is considered an agentic characteristic and is ascribed to successful
leadership; however, women leaders can be perceived as too aggressive or not aggressive enough
(Ely, Ibarra, & Kolb, 2011). When women leaders are in a double bind, the perception is being
too little of something or not enough of something. Due to this, a woman leader could be seen as
not self-confident enough if she lacks aggressiveness or too arrogant or abrasive if she is too
aggressive (Ely et al., 2011).
Eagly and Carli (2007) state that, to be effective as a leader, one needs to have influence,
“the ability to affect the beliefs or behaviors of others” (p. 102). The authors found that, due to
the double bind, women leaders may experience resistance to their influence. If a woman leader
is perceived to lack communion, she is not likeable. If a woman leader is resisted because she is
perceived to lack competence, she is not respected (Eagly & Carli, 2007). However, research
shows that leaders have greater influence when they are perceived as competent and warm,
eliciting both likeability and respect (Carli, 1989; Rhoads & Cialdini, 2002).
Furthermore, one of the strongest gender stereotypes against women in the workplace is
the belief they are more emotional than men (Shields, 2002). Given the backlash women are apt
to face for expressing too much emotion at work, some display very little to no emotion
(Brescoll & Uhlmann, 2008). This is not without risks, as those women may be perceived as
emotionally cold and labeled as “ice queens,” a subtype of working women who want to avoid
negative reactions for being emotional (Parks-Stamm & Heilman, 2007). The literature shows
there are at least three costs to the balancing act for women leaders when they chronically find
themselves in double binds, especially when emotion is involved (Brescoll, 2016; Hülsheger &
Schewe, 2011; Richards & Gross, 1999). One, cognitive resources and self-regulatory ability
could be depleted quickly, leading to an underperformance in job duties. Two, they will need to
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 46
suppress emotions, which can lead to psychological costs, such as impaired memory and
negative health consequences (Richards & Gross, 1999). Lastly, when a woman alters her
emotional expression at work, the consequences can be an impaired well-being, inauthenticity
and a disconnection from job duties (Hülsheger & Schewe, 2011).
Mentorship
Recent studies show mentorship is a positive experience for higher education
professionals (Baumgartner & Schneider, 2010; Blood et al., 2012; Cullen & Luna, 1993; Hill &
Wheat, 2017; Hunt & Michael, 1983; Kram, 1985). Mentorship can be defined as a dyadic
relationship between a mentor/mentee, where advice is sought and the mentor has traits and
behaviors that can be passed on to a mentee for success in life and their career (Hunt & Michael,
1983). However, given the double bind women leaders face, likeability and respect could be two
of many characteristics of mentorship that would assist them with the development of a
professional identity, yet the lack of mentors is also a barrier.
The issue for women leaders in male-dominated fields such as higher education is the
lack of female mentors (Ely et al., 2011; Madsen, 2008). The majority of senior positions in
higher education are still held by men (Madsen, 2012). Yet, the use of mentorship is an effective
tool and strategy for women to gain professional and identity development as they progress in
their leadership careers (Hill & Wheat, 2017). While same-sex mentorship relationships were
deemed important to women in a study of senior women leaders in higher education, it was
deemed a barrier for senior women leaders due to the lack of female role models these women
could utilize in their career progression (Ely et al., 2011; Blood et al., 2012; Cullen & Luna,
1993).
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 47
Mentor relationships can be informal or formal and each has distinct differences that can
impact the initiation, structure and process. Ragins and Cotton (1999) state that informal
mentorship develops on mutual identification to advance the career needs of a mentee who is
considered an up and coming star with a high-performing mentor. Formal mentorships are
generally program-generated relationships set up by a program coordinator attempting to create a
match based on information or criteria (Ragins & Cotton, 1999).
Sawyer and Valerio (2017) believe men could play a role in mentorship. Although
women favor women mentors (Brown, 2005), male mentors can provide women with tools to be
more assertive and the management of crises (Davey, 2008). However, cross-gender mentor
relationships require a higher level of confidence and trust than same-gender mentor
relationships. The need to feel secure and communicate openly is key, but it may never occur in
cross-gender relationships (Feist-Price, 1994). In addition, Feist-Price (1994) found five
complexities of cross-gender mentor relationships that could lead to further barriers for women
leaders.
The first complexity consists of men and women assuming stereotypical roles based upon
norms, assumptions, or expectations (Feist-Price, 1994). Second, there are limits to role
modeling, as women have unique dilemmas or issues not experienced by men. Intimacy and
sexual tensions are listed as the third complexity in cross-gender mentor relationships (Feist-
Price, 1994). The fourth complexity is public scrutiny and suspicion that may come from others
in an organization of damaging gossip regarding sexual involvement, especially when the
woman is the mentee. The fifth complexity is related to the fourth, in that peer resentment may
occur when a woman is the mentee and is perceived as receiving special treatment from a senior
male mentor (Feist-Price, 1994).
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 48
Yet, male champions of women leadership have been proposed to combine the impact of
mentoring with an ally mentality to fight gender bias (Valerio & Sawyer, 2016). Male
champions, “genuinely believe in fairness, gender equity, and the development of talent in their
organizations, and that they are easily identified by female leaders for the critical role they play
advancing women’s careers” (Valerio & Sawyer, 2016, para. 3). Furthermore, the concept of
male champions in the workplace is necessary to create gender inclusivity. Generally, women
lack organizational power, and men possess it and can utilize it to enact change (Valerio &
Sawyer, 2016).
Furthermore, male champions go beyond mentorship to deal with gender bias and work
with women to systematically eliminate it from the workplace (Valerio & Sawyer, 2016). The
inspiration behind becoming a male champion is rooted in having a strong sense of fair play
(Prime & Moss-Racusin, 2009). In addition to that sense, male champions are willing to stand
up publicly for gender equity. The choice to become a male champion stems from personal
experiences of marginalization and exclusion (Prime & Moss-Racusin, 2009).
Scholars suggest that women leaders need mentors, role models, and male champions
(Sawyer & Valerio, 2017; Kurtz‐Costes, Andrews Helmke, & Ülkü‐Steiner, 2006), but there is
an argument against the concept of mentorship for today’s women leaders, which is that
mentorship is an antiquated model in today’s workplace (Hewlett, 2013; Sandberg, 2013).
Rather, sponsorship is the best path for women leaders due to the nature of the relationship.
Hewlett (2013) noted that a sponsor “sees furthering your career as an important investment in
his or her own career, organization or vision” (p. 20).
Sandberg stated, “the strongest relationships spring out of a real and often earned
connection felt by both sides” (p. 67). This is not to say the author is against mentorship;
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 49
however, the difficulty in finding a mentor for women leaders has been equated to the “Prince
Charming” concept of women waiting for a prince to arrive so they can progress up the career
ladder (Sandberg, 2013). In addition, Sandberg (2013) states this continues to perpetuate the
notion that women are too dependent on others. To reach the top, women leaders need to know,
“mentors give, whereas sponsors invest” (Hewlett, 2013, p. 19).
Hewlett (2013) states that sponsors do not have mentees; rather, they have protégés who
give sponsors high-octane support in the relationship. With this relationship, each side gives
something to receive something. The protégé outperforms other employees. In addition, the
protégé is loyal to the sponsor and the organization as a whole (Hewlett, 2013). Furthermore, a
protégé comes through on behalf of the sponsor by being trustworthy and discreet and covering
the back of the sponsor. A protégé will promote the legacy and bring a “value-added” skill set to
the relationship. Lastly, the protégé builds the “A” team, leads with “Yes” and promotes the
sponsor’s brand across the organization (Hewlett, 2013).
In return, the sponsor, at a minimum, provides high-octane advocacy to the protégé with
backing and goes out on a limb by advocating for their next promotion (Hewlett, 2013). This
provides the protégé “air cover” to take risks. Sponsors come through for protégé’s in the
following ways. Expands the perceptions of what the protégé can do and promotes visibility
(Hewlett, 2013). Sponsors make connections with clients/customers and other senior leaders on
behalf of protégés. Lastly, sponsors give feedback on skill gaps and advice on “presentation of
self” for protégés (Hewlett, 2013).
Queen Bee
The discussion regarding mentorship and sponsorship in the literature has led to another
phenomenon for women’s leadership. The discussion shifts to women who have secured a
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 50
senior leadership position and who will then distance themselves from other women leaders still
aspiring for the top. The concept of the “queen bee” has been examined by scholars and it, too,
can be a barrier for aspiring women leaders (Baumgartner & Schneider, 2010; Derks et al.,
2016). Staines, Tarvis, and Jayaratne (1978) coined the term “Queen Bee Syndrome.” The
concept revolves around the derogatory term “queen bee” given to women who pursue individual
success in male-dominated work settings (Derks et al., 2016). In addition, the concept describes
women who have reached success in the workplace who do not support other women’s success,
given their attitude that “if I can do it” without support, “so can other women” (Staines, et al.,
1978). Furthermore, they “relish” being one of the few senior women leaders within the
organization.
Women leaders labeled as queen bees exhibit behaviors in three ways, according to the
literature (Derks et al., 2016). One, they present themselves to be more like men, as Faniko,
Ellemers, and Derks (2015) found when senior women leaders described themselves as more
masculine and ambitious than junior women leaders. Two, queen bees will physically and
psychologically distance themselves from other women. Ely (1994) found that junior women
leaders at a male-dominant law firm perceived that senior women leaders had distanced
themselves from their gender identity. In the third, and deemed by the authors as perhaps the
most harmful way, queen bees will legitimize the current gender inequality and hierarchy of the
workplace (Derks et al., 2016). Derks, Ellemers, van Laar, and de Groot (2011) found that
senior women leaders denied gender discrimination within their male-dominated organization as
a present issue and reported an unwillingness to mentor junior women leaders.
Research also shows that the competition and the unwillingness of women to help fellow
women in the workplace starts before a woman makes it to a senior leadership position. In a
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 51
mixed-methods study, Jones and Palmer (2011) were interested in examining the female
relationships at the community college level. In addition, there was an objective to determine the
perceptions of aspiring women leaders. This was done by examining the support they received
from female colleagues, supervisors, their department, and the institution as a whole. A survey
was given first, and a majority of women did report that they supported female colleagues and
their career advancement and that there was general support from the institution.
In contrast to the quantitative portion of the study, women reported competition and
jealousy during interviews (Jones & Palmer, 2011). Examples of competition and jealousy were
covert actions to keep each other down due to the idea that others must fail so one can succeed
were reported as well. Jones and Palmer (2011) stated that, for women, outward competition is
deemed inappropriate; therefore, to respond to gender roles and expectations, women will
compete without engaging directly with other women. Therefore, sometimes, women will carry
out acts of sabotage to succeed (Jones & Palmer, 2011).
In addition, there were perceptions of women who felt that women in senior positions did
not want to help junior women, and would state, “your time will come, just stick around and see
what happens” (Jones & Palmer, 2011, p. 8). The perception was that some women would rather
stymie the process for the entire gender than allow another woman to succeed. Due to this,
suspicions grew and speculation surmised that women participated in inappropriate relationships
with supervisors (Jones & Palmer, 2011).
Glass Ceiling Versus Labyrinth
A term was coined to describe the barriers that women leaders face as an all-
encompassing metaphor to represent the challenges experienced as they progressed to senior
leadership positions. This invisible barrier has intrigued researchers who have analyzed women
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 52
leaders’ experiences and the barriers they face to senior leadership positions (Eagly & Carli,
2007; Glass & Cook, 2016; Madsen, 2012). Originally, the phrase was coined by two journalists
from The Wall Street Journal to explain how women had executive suite positions within their
grasp, but could not break through the glass ceiling (Hymowitz & Schellhardt, 1986).
Eagly and Carli (2007) discuss the concept of the glass ceiling to explain why it may not
be an accurate depiction for today’s leaders. The authors began by stating there are three types
of barriers women leaders had to navigate and overcome in leadership. The first barrier is the
“concrete wall,” a barrier with no options. There were explicit rules and clear-cut norms that
served as barriers to women leaders in history and at the start of the 20th century that said
women cannot vote or hold political office (Eagly & Carli, 2007). In addition, some credentials
for certain professions were not available to women due to the lack of educational opportunities
or limited domains within the professions (Sokoloff, 1992). Even women who had the
credentials in the 1970s were not given interviews due to the notion that men were the
breadwinners and women had their proper work in the home (Eagly & Carli, 2007).
According to Eagly and Carli (2007), the glass ceiling is the second type of barrier that,
while not restricting access to all leadership positions, did restrict access to top-level positions.
The shift began in the 1970s, and, in the 1980s, it began to catch on with the introduction to the
phrase in a report in The Wall Street Journal (Hymowitz & Schellhardt, 1986). The glass portion
pertains to women being misled about opportunities they progressed up the career ladder, only to
find they could not obtain them (Eagly & Carli, 2007). Public interest grew enough to gain
acknowledgement from the U.S. Congress, which declared this type of discrimination was
central to the belief that women leaders were a risky investment due to the chance they could
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 53
quit and start a family. This led to severe penalties for women who had children or disclosed
they planned on having children during interviews (Eagly & Carli, 2007).
The same author who coined the glass ceiling also discussed a new era for women leaders
in a report in The Wall Street Journal (Hymowitz, 2004). The author described a force of new
women leaders making it to the corporate executive suite. The obstacle once deemed
insurmountable and symbolized by the glass ceiling was no longer present. A path to senior
leadership positions did exist, for some women at least, and, while it still had difficult routes and
obstacles, women discovered a circuitous path to these positions (Eagly & Carli, 2007).
Eagly and Carli (2007) labeled this circuitous path, the “labyrinth.” The labyrinth still
contains many overt and subtle barriers, but there are no laws or widely accepted norms that
exclude women from reaching certain positions due to their gender. The path may be delayed,
yet women do make it to the top of organizations.
Therefore, the glass ceiling is no longer applicable to Eagly and Carli (2007). According
to the authors, glass ceiling barriers today would be deemed unfair by decision makers and do
not explain why some women do obtain senior leadership positions. In addition, others have
come up with other types of glass ceiling concepts, such as the glass cliff, glass staircase, and
glass elevator. These types of glass ceiling concepts explain that women who do reach senior
leadership positions only do so when the position is risky, challenging, and they are set up to fail,
whereas men do not (Evans, 2014; Ryan & Haslam, 2005). Table 5, provides seven reasons the
glass ceiling metaphor is misleading (Eagly & Carli, 2007).

LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 54
Table 5
Seven Reasons the Glass Ceiling Metaphor is Misleading
1. It erroneously implies that women have equal access to entry-level positions.
2. It erroneously assumes the presence of an absolute barrier at a specific high level in
organizations.
3. It erroneously suggests that all barriers to women are difficult to detect and therefore
unforeseen.
4. It erroneously assumes that there exists a single, homogeneous barrier and thereby
ignores the complexity and variety of obstacles that women leaders can face.
5. It fails to recognize the diverse strategies that women devise to become leaders.
6. It precludes the possibility that women can overcome barriers and become leaders.
7. It fails to suggest that thoughtful problem solving can facilitate women’s paths to
leadership.
Note. Adapted from Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (2007). Through the labyrinth: The truth about
how women become leaders. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Press.

In summary, the barriers women leaders face are numerous and generally start with
gender roles and the stereotypes associated with them. Per the literature, gender cannot be
separated from women in leadership, and, in turn, barriers such as the double bind, mentorship
and the queen bee concept could stymie their progress. However, the path is not filled with
absolute barriers. Eagly and Carli (2007) have demonstrated that a new concept, the labyrinth, is
a more appropriate concept for today’s women leaders. All labyrinths have a viable route to the
center. Therefore, goals are attainable, and the journey can be much more demanding. Lastly,
the labyrinth is an encouraging metaphor. Unlike the glass ceiling, aspiring women leaders may
face challenges, yet they will progress up the career ladder and reach their professional goals.
Concepts of Identity
Concepts of identity are best understood through identity development. Taylor (2008)
stated, “identity work is ongoing work. It is work that is constituted by history and by the
conditions within which we live and work, including the conflicts and tensions within specific
workplaces” (p. 27). Identity is not fixed, and most concepts and definitions reflect that.
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 55
According to Chávez and Sanlo (2013), identity is ongoing process that “manifests in the way we
lead, supervise, make decisions, persuade, form relationships, and negotiate the myriad
responsibilities face each day” (p. 3). Josselson (2005) believes that identity is an unparalleled
act of creativity, and individuals are building a bridge between their internal and external selves.
The internal self is what is felt and the external self is, “who we are recognized as being by our
social world” (Josselson, 2005, p. 191). In addition, identities are multiple, mutable and socially
constructed (Baumeister, 1989, 2011; Goffman, 1959; Mead, 1934). To start, a brief historical
look at identity concepts focuses on identity development.
Historic Concepts of Identity
Symbolic interactionism is how Mead (1934) described identity. Individuals develop
identity through interactions between self and environment in symbolic interactionism. Mead
(1934) was a social theorist and is attributed as the most important theorist of the symbolic
school (Aksan, Kisac, Aydin, & Demirbuken, 2009). Symbolic interactionism focuses on
“which symbols and meanings emerge from the interaction between people” (Aksan et al., 2009,
p. 902). Erikson (1968) was a clinical psychologist and the first to examine identity
development from adolescence through adulthood, using a biological and psychological
approach to identity. There were eight stages of development in Erikson’s (1959) model, each
distinguished by a crisis. A crisis was defined as a turning point a person would though a
balancing act between the internal self and the external environment (Erikson, 1959). This is not
to suggest a crisis is a negative experiences; alternatively, it serves as a catalyst for identity
development.
Marcia (1966) believed the most important stage in Erikson’s (1959) model was stage
five: Identity versus Identity Diffusion. This stage signals a transition between childhood and
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 56
adulthood, where there is a push to define oneself. In this stage, the self begins to develop the as
the individual experiences the complexities of life to answer the question, “who am I?” (Marcia,
1966; Patton et al., 2016). Erikson (1959) emphasized that identity in this stage “connotes both a
persistent sameness within oneself and a persistent sharing of some kind of essential character
with others” (p. 109). Identity diffusion represents a point where an individual does not have a
sense of purpose or self. In addition, those who lack understanding of the role they play in life
may over identify with influential people in their lives and become intolerant of the unknown,
unfamiliar, or different. Patton et al. (2016) stated, “identity is ever changing from birth to
death, but as each crisis is successfully resolved, commitment to an established identity becomes
stronger” (p. 289).
Erikson’s (1959) stages were hard to test empirically; therefore, Marcia (1966) was the
first to ground the stage theory of identity development in young adults, with a focus on identity
versus identity diffusion (Patton et al., 2016). Marcia (1966, 1976, 1980) created identity
statuses to explain how young adults experience and resolve crises with two critical variables,
exploration (crisis) and commitment. The contexts of exploration and commitment occur in
political, religious, and occupational decision-making (Marcia, 1980) when one is questioning
values and goals within the definitions set by parents or people in an authoritative position and
weighing the multiple options of identity options. Waterman and Archer (1990) stated that
knowledgeable others serve as resources for individuals seeking advice due to the excitement
and curiosity of exploration at the start, which can turn as pressure mounts due to fear and
anxiety created when seeking a resolution. Commitment is when an individual has attached
ownership to notable choices, values, and goals (Bilsker, Schiedel, & Marcia, 1988).
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 57
Foreclosure is the first and most common status. This status is where authoritative
figures define the path of individuals who accept parental values (Patton et al., 2016). These
individuals have experienced very little diversity in their lives, encourage status quo, have
inflexible thinking, follow rules, and will remain in this status as long as authoritative influences
remain present. Should a crisis arise, the individual may not be able to handle the challenge on
their own (Patton et al., 2016). Moratorium is the shortest interval status and where individuals
question parental values to facilitate identity development; however, there is no commitment
after the crisis or exploration. As individuals struggle with the fluctuations between resisting or
conforming to parental values, they can be expected to transition to identity achievement,
generally (Patton et al., 2016).
Identity achievement is the status that comes after a crisis where a foundation has been
set after sifting alternatives and making deliberate choices, commitments, and goals (Patton et
al., 2016). More crises are experienced in this status due to risk-taking; however, identity
foundation is secure enough to experiment with alternatives and make sound choices. Diffusion
is the status where individuals have not experienced a significant crisis (Patton et al., 2016).
This may be due to their refusal to do so or to being unable to make commitments. In that status,
individuals lack interest and do not question the direction of life, nor do they account for the
positive or negative consequences that may affect them personally (Patton, et al., 2016).
Professional Identity
According to Rhoades (2007), professional identity is similar to identity in that it is not a
fixed entity. Identity can be complex and does not have one set definition (Rhoades, 2007).
Although there may be multiple definitions, there is still a lack of research to advance
understanding on the experiences of those working within the system of higher education
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 58
(Rhoades, 2007). Rhoades (2007) suggests that the relationships and interactions of all
professions within an organization must be considered when defining identity. Yet, in higher
education literature, the definition of professional identity has focused on teaching and is viewed
as “an ongoing process of interpretation and re-interpretation of experiences” (Kerby, 1991, p.
22). Clarke, Hyde, and Drennan (2013) state, “professional identity is not a stable entity, it is
complex, personal, and shaped by contextual factors” (p. 8). Outside of higher education, Ibarra
(1999) defined professional identity, using concepts from Schein, as “the relatively stable and
enduring constellation of attributes, beliefs, values, motives and experiences in terms of which
people define themselves in a professional role” (pp. 764–765). Professional identity formation
is considered the relationship between professional and personal aspects of life (Billett &
Pavlova, 2005).
Research has analyzed the literature on professional identity (Clarke et al., 2013) and
found 22 concepts of professional identity in higher education, all with a focus on teaching
(Beijaard, Meijer, & Verloop, 2004). In those studies, Beijaard et al. (2004) found different
definitions or no definitions at all of professional identity. Still, many believe there is a growing
interest in professional identity development, whether it takes place in higher education or in
other industries (Nyström, 2009; Slay & Smith, 2011). This is due to the changes in the labor
market and social mobilization, which, in large part, is due to identity links to race, ethnicity, and
gender (Slay & Smith, 2011).
In addition, the development of professional identity is shaped in three primary ways.
First, professional identity is the result of the socialization process where meanings are
associated with a profession (Fine, 1996; Hall, 1987). According to the literature, career
transition is the second way individuals adjust and adapt their professional identity (Ibarra,
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 59
1999). Finally, Schein (1978) states that life and work experiences influence professional
identity due to the clarification of personal priorities and self-understanding.
In the literature, some research on professional identity centered on students and senior
administrators in higher education, with the focus on how their professional and personal lives
develop (Nyström, 2009; Marshall, 2009). Nyström (2009) was interested in graduate students
and the transition from higher education to work life. Of interest to the scholar was how
professional identity was developed among three different experiences, called spheres:
educational institutions, working life, and other aspects of life. The characteristics of
relationships between professional and personal life, in addition to other experiences, were
examined (Nyström, 2009). The researcher found that negotiations take place in the
development of professional identity between professional and personal lives, with an aspect of a
private life.
In addition, Nyström (2009) noted categories of identity: non-differentiated identity,
compartmentalized identity, and integrated identity. The non-differentiated identity allowed
students to incorporate all identities without the need to separate or mute an identity, as there are
no boundaries or reason to separate their spheres. Compartmentalized identity meant students
had a separation between spheres of life and assigned a lower priority to other spheres or
excluded them all together. Lastly, integrated identity is when students were able to establish
boundaries with an integrated approach to their spheres to handle their professional identity in a
more mature manner. This allowed the students to see how each sphere related to one another
and to their identity as a whole (Nyström, 2009).
Marshall (2009) looked at women senior administrators in an exploratory study to
understand how they negotiated their multiple roles between their professional and personal lives
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 60
as parents. There were 17 participants in professional positions in academic affairs, and no
participant held a position below dean level. Findings from interviews consisted of themes on
professional compromises, personal trade-offs, martial strain, missing out, feeling guilty,
personal benefits, and professional benefits. Professional compromises consisted of accepting
positions that were conducive to family life, delaying further education opportunities, limiting
professional development opportunities, and making less money. The primary consideration for
some women is children and their needs, which is consistent with the literature that states women
sometimes limit their careers by choice (Apter, 1993; Dominici et al., 2009). Personal trade-offs
consisted of limited time for wellness activities, such as sleep and exercise. In addition, personal
friendships and martial strain were also cited as considerations (Marshall, 2009).
Participants also felt like they were missing their children’s lives due to work and not
having enough time to spend with children (Marshall, 2009). The idea of children growing up
and missing life events had some women feeling guilty due to the tension. Women felt torn
between their children and their careers and did not feel like they were at their best in both
forums. Yet, not all was negative as participants offered strategies to ease the tension and the
guilt of missing out. In addition, women found benefits, despite the frustrations of being a
working mother. The benefits included satisfying incomes, enriched lives, and making others in
their lives proud (Marshall, 2009). Many cited the personal benefits far outweigh the negatives
of being a mother and a professional. The professional benefits were also a positive for the
participants. Many cited high levels of job satisfaction and believed being mothers made them
better professionals. They felt they were more sensitive to individuals’ needs by becoming more
compassionate and understanding. Lastly, they felt that their professional lives exposed their
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 61
children to experiences they would not have been exposed to otherwise, including the impact of
those enriching experiences on the futures of their children (Marshall, 2009).
Identity Negotiation
Most people are unaware that negotiation happens daily in the workplace, and most
people do not recognize when it is happening (Kolb & McGinn, 2009; Strauss, 1978).
Nonetheless, people negotiate daily job routines, support for projects, job opportunities or
expanded roles, goals, and recognition for successful work. There is also a perspective that
women do not negotiate (Babcock, Laschever, Gelfand, & Small, 2003), which misses all the
negotiations women do engage in. Women negotiate over issues that are of priority to them,
such as time and flexibility (Bohnet & Greig, 2007). As leaders, women show concern for others
and negotiate for the betterment of the group and themselves collectively (Kolb & Kickul, 2006).
This is something they do better than men, negotiate on behalf of others (Bowles & McGinn,
2008). Lastly, women negotiate to call out unfair treatment or disadvantages (Bowles, Bear, &
Thomason, 2010).
Identity is no different and women negotiate multiple identities, one being gender, which
is a part of many other identities that shapes a self-concept. Goffman (1959), a sociologist in the
school of symbolic interactionism, developed an analysis, the dramaturgical approach, wherein
life is like a stage and individuals negotiate identity by acting differently in different social
settings than when alone and in private. Furthermore, individuals aim to guide and control how
others perceive them in social stages by playing roles to achieve personal goals. Goffman (1959)
refers to these efforts as impression management, whereby an individual projects an ideal image
and conceals any personal gain from the performance.
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 62
Goffman (1959) added that there are two stages: the front stage and the backstage. The
front stage is a place where individuals can make themselves more appealing to other people in a
carefully crafted representation of the self. This act is demanding. Therefore, there is also a
backstage where individuals can assume an identity closer to their true selves. In addition, the
backstage is where one can prepare for one’s roles by practicing these in the social settings one
needs to manipulate. Acting can be of one of two types: sincere or contrived (Goffman, 1959).
Lastly, some of the roles an individual can play may contradict each other; therefore, some
audiences and social settings need to be kept separate so an individual is not perceived as out of
character.
The process by which people negotiate identities with themselves and with others during
transitions in the workplace has received little empirical attention (Ibarra, 1999). However, there
are two other concepts on identity negotiation which center on possible selves and provisional
selves (Markus & Nurius, 1986; Ibarra, 1999). The concept of possible selves is defined as ideas
about whom one may become, would like to become, or has fear of becoming (Markus &
Nurius, 1986), yet the process in which professional identity evolves was missing from the study
as the authors did not specify how possible selves were retained or rejected, nor did they state
what occurs when individuals are challenged to create new possibilities or put old selves to a
public test. Ibarra (1999) aimed to further the study of Markus and Nurius (1986) by building
upon possible selves and investigating how possible selves are created, tested, discarded, and
revised during a career transition.
Ibarra (1999) conducted a study on 19 female junior members of an investment and
consulting firms. The results were that the participants adapted to new roles in three tasks. First,
in observation of role models, senior members of the firms, they identified potential professional
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 63
identities as provisional selves. Next, they began to experiment with the provisional selves.
Third, they evaluated the experiments against internal standards in the workplace and external
feedback (Ibarra, 1999). The most prevalent form of experimentation was imitation, and there
were two forms: wholesale and selective. Wholesale imitation refers to a junior member
mimicking the self-presentation of a single role model, without making adaptations. Selective
imitation entailed adapting certain skills and styles from multiple role models to develop a more
self-tailored professional identity. The experimentation with provisional selves allowed
participants the opportunity to rehearse, learn about limitations, and make decisions about what
to keep, refine, reject, or continue to search for in the development of a professional identity
(Ibarra, 1999).
Theoretical Framework
Identity is complex, and the way in which individuals make meaning changes over time
(Josselson, 2005). Josselson’s (1987) provides a theoretical understanding of women’s identity
development and the progression of identity crises they could experience on their way to identity
achievement. Josselson (1987) explored women’s identity development by building upon
Marcia’s (1966) four identity statuses.
According to Josselson (2005), most psychological studies associated women with men
or excluded them altogether when applying findings derived from men to all people. Studies in
the 1970s had a tendency to identify male patterns of identity development in women, and it was
not until the 1980s that researchers observed the differences in identity development between
women and men (Josselson, 2005). Women construct their identity in relational terms, and they
are not defined by their husband or children. In contrast to Erikson’s (1959) assertation that
women ready themselves for the men they wish to be courted by, Josselson (1987) defined
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 64
women’s identity development beyond marriage and the male sense of self “to understand the
internal and developmental roots of identity formation in women” (p. 33).
To do this, Josselson (1987) built upon Marcia’s (1966) identity statuses and explored the
internal differences among the four statuses to explain why some women resolve identity crises,
avoid identity crises, or fail to move beyond a crisis all together. The first status, Foreclosure:
Purveyors of the Heritage, is a stage where identity is directed by parents or other authority
figures. Therefore, no or very little crisis is experienced since values are accepted and no
exploration takes place. These women have been named the Guardians, and they knew where
they were going without considering alternatives (Josselson, 1987). Moratoriums: Daughters of
the Crisis is a status where exploration takes place and parental values are questioned. This is an
unstable time of experimenting, and those in this stage were named the Searchers. It is also the
stage where women do not want to become their mothers yet are closer to their mothers, more so
than any other identity status group (Josselson, 1987).
Once the exploration and identity crises have evolved, and strong commitments have
been made, identity achievement has been reached. This identity status group Pavers of the Way,
also called Pathmakers, cut psychological ties with childhood and develop distinct identities
(Josselson, 1987). Major crisis does not happen in this status; rather, women test and explore
their options internally, never fully abandoning their old selves. Lastly, Identity diffusions: Lost
and Sometimes Found, is the last status and is where no identity exploration takes place and no
commitment is made. Women in this status are in constant exploration (Patton et al., 2016).
Based upon research, women in this group score the lowest out of all statuses “on all measures of
healthy psychological functioning” (Josselson, 1987, p. 140). See Table 6 for Josselson’s (1987)
identity statuses.
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 65
Table 6
Josselson’s Theory of Women’s Identity Development
Search/Exploration No Search/Exploration
Commitment
Identity Achievement: Pavers
of the Way (Pathmakers)
Foreclosures: Purveyors of
the Heritage (Guardians)
No Commitment Moratoriums: Daughters of
the Crisis (Searchers)
Identity Diffusions: Lost and
Sometimes Found (Drifters)
Note. Adapted from Josselson, R. (1987). Finding herself: Pathways to identity development in
women. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Therefore, Josselson’s (1987) theoretical framework on identity development framed this
study to determine how women leaders at a 4-year university shape their professional identity.
How do women become leaders? How do they develop their leadership identity due to their
perceptions of their professional work experience? How has their work experience shaped their
professional identity? Did they experience identity crises? Do they anticipate identity crises in
the future? Have they relinquished other aspects of their identity or self-concept for the
development of their professional identity? This study sought to answer these questions. See
Table 7 below for this study’s literature review highlights.
Table 7
Literature Review
Themes Highlights Author
History of Women in
Leadership
Women leaders in Social
Movements.
The professions &
semiprofessions.
Dean of Women.
O’Connor (2010); Sokoloff
(1992); Schwartz (1997);
Nidiffer (2010)
Concepts of Leadership Process vs Trait.
Assigned vs Emergent.
Leadership & Power.
Four Frames of Leadership.
Northouse (2016); Kezar et
al. (2006); Eagly & Carli
(2007);French et al. (1959)

LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 66
Table 7, continued
Themes Highlights Author
Concepts of Leadership &
Gender
Gender Role Congruity
Theory.
Gender stereotypes.

Eagly & Karau (2002);
Schein (1973, 1975); Garcia-
Retamero & Lopez-Zafra,
(2006);
Barriers of Women in
Leadership
Leadership Style; communal
and agentic.
Double Bind.
Mentorship.
Queen Bee.
Glass Ceiling vs Labyrinth.

Chliwniak (1997); Eagly &
Carli (2007); Eagly & Karau,
(2002); Growe &
Montgomery (1999); Prime et
al. (2009); Hill & Wheat
(2017); Madsen (2008, 2012);
Hunt & Michael (1983);
Sawyer & Valerio (2017);
Staines, et al. (1978)
Concepts of Identity Symbolic Interactionism.
Professional Identity.
Identity Negotiation;
dramaturgical analysis,
possible selves, provisional
selves.

Erickson (1959); Rhodes
(2007); Clarke et al. (2013);
Beijaard et al. (2004); Slay &
Smith (2011); Nystrom,
(2009); Fine (1996); Hall
(1987); Marshall (2009);
Goffman (1959); Ibarra
(1999)
Theoretical Framework Women’s Identity
Development; Pathmakers,
Guardians, Searchers,
Drifters.
Josselson (1978, 1987, 2005)

Conclusion
Women have served in integral leadership roles in this country’s social movements. In
addition, women have filled many of the professions that have traditionally been associated with
men, although with different perceptions than men due to less control and autonomy. Women
also served as senior administrators in higher education in the dean of women position.
However, there are many gender stereotypes that women face in leadership and in the workplace,
as successful leadership characteristics are more likely to be ascribed to men. Women also face
more barriers as leaders than men. Yet, they persist to senior leadership positions, although their
path is circuitous and more time consuming than men’s. Their identity development is also
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 67
different than men, as women are more relational and may use experimentation as a means to act
out possible identities before making a commitment. A theoretical framework was selected to
frame the identity crises women leaders at a 4-year university may experience as they negotiate
to shape their professional identity. The next chapter discusses the research design and the
study’s methodology to collect data and gain a better understanding of the contextual factors that
shape professional identity for women leaders at a 4-year university.

LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 68
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
In the previous chapter, theoretical models of leadership and identity development were
discussed and examined in the literature review. The studies reviewed provide insight into how
women leaders perceive and experience leadership at their workplace and how they negotiate the
multiple identities that shape their professional identity. This was done by speaking directly with
women leaders to hear their stories. This chapter provides an overview of the methodology and
research design used to answer the following questions:
1. What are the leadership perceptions and experiences of women leaders at a private 4-year
research university?
2. How do women leaders’ negotiations of their multiple identities shape their professional
identity at a private 4-year research university?
Rationale for Design
According to Merriam and Tisdell (2016), qualitative research seeks to understand how
people make meaning from their lived experiences and how they make sense of those
experiences to construct their lives in their worlds. This study’s goal was to understand how
women leaders’ perceptions and experiences shape their professional identity. To do so,
perceptions and experiences, in the form of words, were collected through interviews. Words,
not numbers, are what define qualitative research (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
This study used a narrative qualitative design to gain a comprehensive understanding of
the perceptions and lived experiences that shape the professional identity of women leaders.
“Narrative analysis uses the stories people tell, analyzing them in various ways, to understand the
meaning of the experiences as revealed in a story” (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p. 24). This is the
oldest and most natural approach to qualitative studies (Jonassen & Hernandez-Serrano, 2002).
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 69
According to Merriam and Tisdell (2016), stories are how people make sense, communicate and
understand experiences. This study made meaning out of the answers from women leaders
regarding their leadership, identity perceptions, and experiences at a 4-year research university.
Sample and Population
For the purposes of this study, I selected a population who had the perceptions and
experiences to answer the research questions. Pacific Coast University (PCU) is a private, highly
selective research university located in the southwestern United States and the site of this study.
A private university is different from public universities in organization and governance. This is
due to funding and the faculty’s substantial input into personnel policies (Bess & Dee, 2008).
While institutions of higher education can be non-profit or for-profit, there are far fewer for-
profit institutions, and public non-profit institutions rely heavily on state funding, whereas
private institutions rely heavily on donations and their endowments (Winston, 1999).
PCU is a highly selective university, as it receives over 60,000 applicants and admits less
than 15% of them. Due to the low admission rate and many other factors, US News & World
Report ranks PCU in the top 25 United States universities. The student population exceeds
47,000, with a majority of students enrolled in graduate programs, exceeding 27,000 students. In
addition, 135 countries are represented with over 11,000 international students enrolled at PCU.
Annually, PCU is one of the top three universities in the United States with the most
international students. The institution consists of 22 colleges and professional schools with
various offices that make up each academic unit.
Due to this, many of the staff within the offices and departments are experts in their
fields. Information is compartmentalized in each academic unit and can be difficult to obtain
without multiple conversations. In addition, the institution has a shared governance model;
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 70
therefore, change is also difficult to enact university-wide without multiple discussions in
various committees. Departments can enact change within their respective areas, but it is
difficult to make policy changes that would apply to all academic units and be universal for all
university staff. For example, each academic unit and division has its own human resource
department in addition to a central human resource department to the university as a whole.
All of the study’s participants were recruited from the same site due to one of this study’s
underlying assumptions regarding the importance of context and the role it plays in shaping
professional identity. It is necessary to keep the context the same to interpret women leaders’
perceptions and experiences and understand how they shape professional identity. PCU is
appropriate for this study due to being a 4-year private research university. Much of the data on
professional identity has focused in other contexts within education or outside of education and
in other workplace environments (Clarke et al., 2013; Beijaard, Meijer, & Verloop, 2004). In
addition, the site provided the researcher access to the individuals who met the sample criteria of
the study. The physical location of the site provided convenience to the researcher and enabled
efficiency for the researcher in conducting interviews, as time was a constraint.
Sampling Method
Research has identified the different types of purposeful sampling (Creswell, 2014;
Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Patton, 2015). Using a purposeful sampling method, the researcher
sought women leaders at a 4-year private research university for this study who met the selection
criteria. This is a non-probability sampling method used in qualitative research (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). An underlying assumption of purposeful sampling is the investigator’s desire to
understand, discover, and gain insight from participants of a study; in turn, this will provide an
opportunity to glean the most information from a sample population. Information-rich cases are
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 71
those a researcher can learn the most from about the problem or issues that are central to the
purpose of a study (Patton, 2015).
A gatekeeper was utilized to gain entry into the research setting and the study’s
participants (Creswell, 2014; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This gatekeeper acted as a port of entry
into the Division of Enrollment Resources (DER) within PCU on behalf of the researcher. The
gatekeeper sent a participant request email to 15 women leaders within DER to determine their
interest in participating in this study. There were no objections, so a subsequent recruitment
email was sent to all 15 identified women who met the study’s participant criteria. In this
recruitment email, a description of the study was given to participants along with a request to
contact them to schedule an interview.
Participation Criteria
Participants were selected based on predetermined criteria for this study. Criteria-based
selection is when the researcher has identified attributes of the sample that are pivotal to the
study and seeks participants who meet that criteria (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The criteria for
participants of this study were that each participant had to self-report their gender as a female,
their current leadership position as below the dean position in their respective department, and
had to hold at least a bachelor’s degree. The sample provided the study a variety of perceptions
and experiences, from the leadership positions held to the education and professional
backgrounds of each participant. See Table 8 for participant list.

LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 72
Table 8
Women Leaders: Participant List
Name Years in Current Higher
Education Position
Total Years in Higher
Education Position
Race/Ethnicity
Amelia 10 17 Latina
Aria 5 37 Middle Eastern
Aubrey 2 23 African-American
Ava 3.5 13 White
Hailey 8 18 White
Hannah 1 4 Asian
Taylor 3 8 White
Teagan 5 33 White

The educational credentials of the participants varied, with no single major dominant
within the group. However, social sciences seemed to be the discipline of choice, as sociology,
psychology, political science and communication were the majors self-reported by a majority of
the participants. All but two participants started their professional careers in higher education.
Amelia strived for a management position; however, she was only able to secure that type of
leadership role outside of higher education. Hannah also started her career in a different field,
yet, due to the demands of being an attorney, she, too, made her transition to higher education
after years in the field of law.
Most participants also earned a master’s degree. There was no single master’s program
of study that all participants had completed, but three of them had master’s degrees in education.
In addition, one participant has not completed a master’s program, while another is enrolled in a
master’s program in executive leadership. Table 9 provides a review of the participants and their
education credentials in alphabetical order by pseudonym.

LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 73
Table 9
Participants’ Educational Credentials
Name Bachelor’s Degree Master’s Degree
Amelia Sociology Public Policy
Aria Psychology Education (MFT)
Aubrey Communication No master’s degree
Ava Communication Education
Hailey Sociology Communication
Management
Hannah Political Science Law
Taylor English Literature Education
Teagan Theater In Progress

Data Collection
In a qualitative study, the researcher is the primary instrument that collects the data
(Creswell & Creswell, 2017). Data were collected through interviews in a natural setting.
Interviews were best to understand the experiences and perceptions of women leaders and to
highlight their multiple identities that shape their professional identity at a 4-year research
university. According to Merriam and Tisdell (2016), special kinds of information can be
obtained through interviews by exploring what is in the interviewees’ minds and how they
process thoughts since those cannot be observed.
Interviews
The purpose of interviewing is to enter another person’s perspective, with the assumption
that the perspective is meaningful, knowable, and able to be made explicit (Patton, 2015).
Interviews enable the researcher to find out what is in a person’s mind to tell a story. The
procedure, as outlined in the interview protocol, was semi-structured. Semi-structured
interviews are a hybrid between highly structured and unstructured interviews. Semi-structured
interviews allow for flexibility in the wording of questions and follow-up or probing questions to
address emerging concepts that may not be in listed the interview protocol (Merriam & Tisdell,
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 74
2016). This flexibility allows the researcher to explore topics not accounted for in the interview
protocol.
While participant perspectives are key to a qualitative study and interviews are the
primary source of data collection, triangulation is also important to ensure validity of the
research (Maxwell, 2013). As a result, interviews were conducted with women leaders across all
three departments within DER: admissions, financial aid, and registrar. To maintain alignment
with the study’s research questions, the primary goal of the interview questions was to gain
insight and understanding on the perceptions and experiences of women leaders and how they
shape their professional identity. The goal was met, as a rich understanding of the way women
leaders make sense of their lives and experiences (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) in the workplace
was obtained from the interviews.
Interviews were set after the recruitment email was sent and participants responded with
approval to proceed. Interviews were scheduled in one-hour increments. Interviews averaged 41
minutes with a high of 52 minutes and a low of 29 minutes. The researcher read the interview
protocol that requested permission to start the interview and consent to audio record. All
participants gave consent, and supplemental notes were taken during and after each interview.
The setting of each interview was a private office location, and no interruptions occurred.
Table 10 presents the links between the interview questions and this study’s research questions.

LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 75
Table 10
Links Between Interview Questions and Research questions
Question Number Interview Question Research Question
1 Can you please briefly tell me
about your career up to this
point and the path to your
current position?
RQ1:
What are the leadership
perceptions and experiences
of women leaders at a private,
4-year research university?

2 What is your current
leadership role like on a daily
basis?
RQ1:
What are the leadership
perceptions and experiences
of women leaders at a private,
4-year research university?

3 How would describe your
experience to date as a
woman leader in higher
education?
RQ1:
What are the leadership
perceptions and experiences
of women leaders at a private,
4-year research university?

4 What identities do you
believe you bring to your
current leadership role?
RQ2:
How do women leaders’
negotiations of their multiple
identities shape their
professional identity at a
private, 4-year university?

5 How do you describe your
professional identity?
RQ2:
How do women leaders’
negotiations of their multiple
identities shape their
professional identity at a
private, 4-year university?

6 In what ways do you believe
your identity negotiations
shape your professional
identity?
RQ2:
How do women leaders’
negotiations of their multiple
identities shape their
professional identity at a
private, 4-year university?

LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 76
Data Analysis
During and after each interview, the researcher wrote notes and reflections as a form of
data analysis documentation. This allowed the researcher to begin analysis immediately after
data collection, which is recommended in qualitative research (Maxwell, 2013). The purpose
was twofold: to researcher identify themes immediately and to address any bias or assumptions
that may have come from the interview. Furthermore, the notes and reflections allowed the
researcher time to adjust the interview protocol and questions. When a concept or theme
emerged, it was explored in subsequent interviews.
There is no manual that provides a single or correct way of analyzing data in qualitative
research (Maxwell, 2013), yet there are ways to stimulate the process through analytical tools,
such as questioning, constant comparisons, and comparing the various meanings of different
words in the data (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). These tools were utilized during interviews and data
analysis. Data analysis is the process of making meaning from what people have said to answer
the research question (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
A constant-comparative method was utilized for transcribing and coding interviews in
this study. This three-step coding process allows each raw data incident to be compared with
other incidents for similarities and differences (Corbin & Strauss, 2008; Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). First-level codes, such as a priori and in vivo, were assigned to data incidents in a
process referred to as open coding (Miles, Huberman, & Saldana, 2014). For example, an a
priori code in this study was “first-generation college student,” whereas an in vivo code was the
acronym “DACA” that came from participants’ own words in the context of answer on
professional identity development (Corbin & Strauss, 2008; Creswell, 2014).
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 77
To categorize the first-level codes, axial coding, or pattern coding, was utilized to start
the second-level coding process (Miles et al., 2014). Themes and categories start to emerge at
this level of coding. Patterns were established by identifying relationships among codes or
theoretical constructs of this study. For example, codes like “Family” and “Motherhood” were
combined to make an overarching code of “Identity.”
In the final coding process, the researcher identified selective codes as the most important
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Themes were established as the most important to answer the
study’s research questions by highlighting participants’ perceptions, experiences, and
negotiations and how they shape their professional identity. By using the constant-comparative
method, the researcher built perspectives and understanding to inform practice. Table 11
presents this study’s data collection and analysis schedule.
Table 11
Gannt Chart Schedule of Data Collection and Analysis
Data Collection February March April
Interviews -----
Analysis ----- ----- -----
Note. Data Analysis was continuous and ongoing during data collection.
The researcher of this study used ATLAS.ti as a computer software program to assist
with qualitative data analysis. First, interview transcripts were loaded into the program. At this
time, first level coding commenced. Subsequently, reports were printed to start the second level
coding process of identifying the themes and categories of the data via hand coding as a
preliminary step. Once themes and categories were established, groups were created in
ATLAS.it to begin the third and final coding level of analysis to answer this study’s research
questions.
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 78
Credibility and Trustworthiness
During data analysis, the researcher accounted for personal perceptions and experiences
and the unique role played in the research process. This is referred to as the positionality of the
researcher when analyzing and interpreting the data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The researcher
is male and a middle-level leader in a non-academic position. As a result, the researcher was
self-aware and reflected constantly on his role as a male researcher.
Early critiques of qualitative research consisted of tests in reliability and validity
(Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). However, there are several strategies that mitigated
validity threats. One strategy was to collect rich, descriptive data by transcribing interviews
verbatim and providing detail of the participants’ perceptions, experiences, and identity
negotiations. Respondent validation is another strategy to check validity threats and is known as
“member checking” (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This allows participants to check the data
collected by the researcher for accuracy and rule out the possibility misinterpreting perceptions
and experiences. Follow-up emails were utilized to clarify participants’ interview answers. The
study’s findings were shared with the participants as a means to identify bias as well (Maxwell,
2013).
Triangulation is another strategy to ensure trustworthiness and involves collecting data
from multiple sources and settings to combat researcher bias (Maxwell, 2013). The researcher
conducted interviews with multiple sources as participants are from all three departments within
DER. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) state, “triangulation- whether you make use of more than one
data collection method, multiple sources of data, multiple investigators, or multiple theories- is a
powerful strategy for increasing the credibility or internal validity of your research” (p. 245).

LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 79
Limitations of the Study
Data were collected at one institution; therefore, the findings regarding the shared
experiences of women leaders at PCU can be different from those at other 4-year research
universities and other departments and academic units at PCU. The data were all self-reported,
so information may not reflect reality, as observations were not conducted. As discussed in
Chapter Two, identity can change over time, and this study is not longitudinal. Therefore this
study only addressed how professional identity was shaped by perceptions and experiences prior
to this study and at the time of this study.
Summary
In conclusion, this chapter provided the methodology and rationale for this qualitative
study. To develop a deep understanding of the perceptions, experiences, and identity
negotiations that shape women leaders’ professional identity at a 4-year research university,
basic semi-structured interviews were conducted. Chapter Four presents the data and provides
an overview of the study’s findings with a focus on how the findings answered the research
questions. Chapter Five discusses the implications of the findings for practice.
Recommendations for further research are also be presented.

LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 80
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS
Chapter Four presents the findings of this study, which addresses the problem of limited
research on the intersection of leadership and identity in higher education (Chávez & Sanlo,
2013). In addition, this study sought to gain insight into how women leaders negotiate the
multiple identities that shape their professional identity. There is limited research on the
intersection of leadership and identity (Ibarra, 1999) in addition to limited research on women
leaders below the dean position in higher education and at private 4-year research institutions
(Madsen, 2008, 2012).
The perceptions and experiences of women leaders are highlighted in this chapter to
understand the barriers women face at a private 4-year research university. The investigation
entailed a deep dive into how their feelings, thoughts, and experiences shaped their higher
education leadership and professional identity development. Furthermore, how women leaders
negotiate their multiple identities to shape their professional identity within DER at PCU was
examined.
Through interviews, women leaders within DER were interviewed in a private setting to
learn more about their experiences, perceptions and identity negotiations. Josselson (1987)
provides a theoretical understanding of women’s identity development and the progression of
identity crises women experience on their way to identity achievement. The definition of an
identity crisis is a turning point or challenge to one’s sense of self (Erikson, 1968). Two research
questions drove this study:
1. What are the leadership perceptions and experiences of women leaders at a private four-
year research university?
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 81
2. How do women leaders’ negotiations of their multiple identities shape their professional
identity at a private four-year research university?
This chapter was organized in the following sections. First, a biographical snapshot of each
participant is presented. The next two sections address the two research questions. After the
conclusion of Chapter Four, the final chapter presents a discussion of the findings and the
implications for practice and further research.
Participants
All participants are highlighted here with a brief biographical description of who they are
as women leaders and how their career in higher education has evolved. The participants are
presented in alphabetical order by researcher-selected pseudonyms. All participants are in
leadership roles below the dean position and within one of the three departments of DER:
admission, financial aid and academic records. This section presents the unique experiences of
these women leaders as well as their similarities and differences. Bolman and Deal (2017)
leadership frames were used as a lens of analysis for the participants’ perceptions and
experiences.
Amelia
Within PCU, Amelia is a self-reported Latina leader in the financial aid department and
has been in her current position for 10 years. She is married and has children. Prior to Amelia’s
start in post-secondary education as a student, she did not have any career influence or guidance
by her parents or teachers to go into a particular field of study. This is not to say she did not
have support; rather, Amelia was free to explore and decide her career path.
In Amelia’s undergraduate studies, she majored in sociology and was very involved in
the university she attended, with work-study positions in admission and residential life. Due to
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 82
these experiences, Amelia sought out positions in higher education upon graduation. However,
since she attended an institution on the east coast of the United States and wanted to return to the
west coast, many of the opportunities explored were at the clerk level at community colleges and
state schools. Amelia aspired to be more than a clerk and accepted a position with a company in
the private sector. She began her career in a management position outside of higher education.
Yet, Amelia knew she wanted to return to a policy position within government or higher
education as she progressed in her career. After some time in the management position, she
applied to a graduate program in public policy. Upon completion, it was her husband’s turn to
pursue a graduate degree, and they moved back to the east coast. It was at this time that Amelia
transitioned back into higher education. The position was as a research assistant for the dean of
the department; however, it never materialized with actual research due to the dean, who was
also new to the institution. Rather, Amelia served as a deputy chief of staff for the dean,
coordinating events and visits from heads of state. After completion of her husband’s program
and some time, both longed for a warmer climate and returned to the west coast for a second
time. This led to a position within DER at PCU as a research assistant, a position she originally
believed she would be starting her career with in higher education. Amelia stated she was
conducting data analysis for the vice president of DER, similar to market research, which led to a
promotion and her current leadership position in Financial Aid at PCU.
Aria
Aria is a self-reported Middle Eastern woman leader in her second stint with PCU. She
left an academic unit in 2005 and returned to a leadership position within the admission
department of DER 5 years prior to this study. During her childhood and prior to her
undergraduate studies, Aria looked up to her older sister who is 13 years older than she is. Aria’s
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 83
sister, at that time, was on a path to become a licensed psychologist, and Aria thought that would
be a great path to emulate.
Aria pursued an undergraduate degree in psychology and a Master of Science degree in
education with a marriage and family therapy specialization, like her older sister. Aria started
working and participating in internships while in her graduate program. The internships helped
shape her career path and professional identity. After a period of identity exploration in her
internships, Aria could not see herself moving forward with a career as a therapist. However,
she was also working as an academic advisor while in her graduate program and that spurred her
interest in higher education as a career.
A colleague, who became the director of a new business program at her institution,
recruited Aria to help build an undergraduate program for an academic unit that only had
business graduate programs at the time. Aria started as an admission coordinator, charged with
building relationships with community colleges to recruit students for the new undergraduate
business program. Aria believed this position was something she would do for a few years and
then move on. However, she stayed for 22 years and advanced to the director position.
Reaching this point in her career, Aria realized she was ready to move on from this
program and role due to two reasons. One, she knew there were no real career opportunities at
this point in the program. Two, her mother had fallen ill and the travel portion of her role was
not conducive to her new responsibility of caring for a family member. Aria left the director
position and went to a smaller institution that allowed her the autonomy to build a program as
vice provost and the time to care for her mother for about two and half years. Then a colleague,
who served in an associate dean role at the institution where Aria had spent 22 years of her
career, recruited Aria to another institution where he became dean of the business school. He
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 84
wanted Aria to run the MBA program at his new institution, and Aria liked the new position due
to another opportunity to build a program. After 5 years in that role, she needed a break. Aria
took 8 months to reassess her career before her current leadership role was created within DER.
Aria “threw her hat in the ring” and has been in this admission role at PCU for 5 years.
Aubrey
Aubrey is a self-reported African-American woman leader in the academic records
department within DER and has been in her current role for 2 years. During childhood, Aubrey
aspired to be an elementary school teacher due to an older sister who is 20 years older. Aubrey
looked up to her older sister and wanted to emulate her career as a teacher. Upon entering her
undergraduate studies, Aubrey majored in communication with an emphasis in management. A
work-study position in the student union at her institution is what started Aubrey’s career in
higher education.
As a student-worker, Aubrey’s manager was released of her duties when the student
union named a new executive director, who was a woman. She called for a meeting with Aubrey
and asked where she saw herself in five to ten years. Aubrey stated in a matter of fact way, “I
see myself possibly with your job.” The executive director burst out in laughter and informed
Aubrey she was going to help her do that. Hence, Aubrey’s career in higher education
commenced. She graduated and progressively was given more and more tasks and roles within
the student union due to the loss of the full-time staff member who used to serve as Aubrey’s
supervisor.
Many of the tasks and roles that Aubrey were given were new to her, and she had no
experience in many of the areas she was now responsible for. Aubrey was preparing budgets,
writing contracts and managing units within the student union of her institution. At times,
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 85
Aubrey would go to her manger incredulously and question why she believed she could manage
all that her manager was giving her. Aubrey’s manager would reassure her and say she had
nothing to worry about because she trusted Aubrey to get the job done. In turn, she was
available to teach Aubrey everything she needed to know for the leadership position. Due to this
experience, Aubrey felt prepared to take on the next leadership role of her career by leaving her
undergraduate institution and securing a position in the Academic Records department at PCU.
Ava
Ava is a self-reported White woman leader in the admission department of DER, within
PCU and has been in her current role for over three years. She is married and has a child. Ava
grew up with no parent influence regarding her career; however, she was part of a public service
pathway in high school and was able to develop public speaking skills as a representative for that
pathway. This career path carried over in her undergraduate studies, as Ava majored in
communication and aspired to be a press secretary due to a favorite TV show at the time. As her
undergraduate career progressed, she became involved in student affairs on campus as a tour
guide, along with having participation in student organizations.
Upon completing her undergraduate degree, Ava explored the press secretary route with
an internship in Washington, DC; however, she ultimately decided that was not something she
wanted to pursue. In turn, she circled back to her experience in student affairs as a tour guide.
She became the president of the tour guide association and was approached by the director of the
visitor center when an admissions counselor position became available upon graduation.
Similarly, when another position at another institution was available, the director recommended
Ava again, as an opportunity to further her skill set and career in higher education.
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 86
It was a great opportunity for Ava as she was able to work directly with the dean of
matriculation and was responsible for all orientation operations and events in this new program
lead position. After a couple of years in this position, Ava started to apply to graduate programs.
However, at that point, she was cohabitating with her future husband and the decision making
was now a shared responsibility. Ava applied and was accepted to an institution that was her
first choice as a high school student and started working in student affairs immediately upon
graduation. Ava is now in her third position in higher education upon completion of her master’s
degree.
Hailey
Hailey is a self-reported White woman leader in the admission department within DER
and has been in her current role for 8 years. Hailey is married and has a child. During
childhood, Hailey states that she did not have parents steering her in a particular field of study;
rather, she and a sibling were asked not to go into medicine. Her father was a physician, and,
due to his experience as he progressed in his career, he felt that the career climate had changed
and what he found interesting about the field was no longer present. While Hailey did not have a
strong interest in medicine, hearing her father’s discouragement assisted her in avoiding career
exploration in pre-medicine options in college.
In her undergraduate studies, Hailey started as a math major and lost interest as she
progressed to higher levels of theoretical math. She attended a small liberal arts college and had
explored the field of sociology by taking a couple of courses and gained a real interest in the
major. Hailey liked that she was able to apply what she learned with theory to different fields
and areas of life. In addition, sociology allowed Hailey to figure out what she wanted to do by
letting her explore and do different things before settling on a job or career.
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 87
Upon graduation, Hailey’s first position was with the national office of a student
organization with a religious denomination. It was a position in development that entailed grant
writing and the implementation of funding projects across the United States at chapters of the
organization. After some time, Hailey decided she no longer wanted to work with the
organization. She decided to change fields and entered the technology sector. However, the
timing was not ideal as the industry was not stable due to economic factors, and Hailey was laid
off from marketing and project management jobs.
A colleague of Hailey’s was an admission counselor at PCU and encouraged her to apply
to an entry-level position that was open at the time. Hailey was interested, considering she had
been a tour guide and an admission intern at her undergraduate institution. She had enjoyed
speech and debate in high school and liked public speaking. Therefore, the job really appealed to
her. The referral by Hailey’s friend started her career in higher education and she has been able
to progress from that entry-level position to her current leadership role.
Hannah
Hannah is a self-reported Asian woman leader in the financial aid department within
DER and has been in her current leadership role for one year. She is married and has a child.
Hannah had made the decision prior to college that she would focus on a career as an attorney;
therefore, her undergraduate degree in political science prepared her for law school. In high
school, Hannah was on the speech and debate team, and many of her peers who had been on the
team ultimately completed law school. Hannah also knew she wanted the same career path upon
entering college and worked hard to earn a scholarship at a law school in the Midwest region of
the United States. Hannah remembers her parents were supportive of her career choice.
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 88
However her father in particular, was concerned with the cost of law school and Hannah wanted
to eliminate that concern for her parents.
Upon graduating from law school, Hannah secured employment in a large law firm
within the same geographic region as PCU. This was a very stressful time for Hannah, and she
was working grueling 80-hour work-weeks that were taking a toll on her health. Hannah needed
a change and sought out a mentor who helped her strategize and plan a way out of the firm.
According to Hannah, a probable trajectory for a law student is to seek out a law clerkship after
graduating and then go to a law firm. She was now planning on inverting that plan and leaving a
law firm for a law clerkship position to which her mentor was referring her. A good aspect about
Hannah’s plan was some judges want attorneys who have practiced in a law firm and have
experience to bring to the clerkship position.
Hannah did the clerkship for 2 years and intended on going back to the law firm,
collecting her clerkship bonus and continuing the career progression to the partner level. The
clerkship was a way out of the firm for Hannah that no one questioned. For instance, had
Hannah gone from the law firm to higher education as a career move, many would have
questioned her motive, and she would have created issues should she have wanted to go back to
practicing law at a firm. A year and a half into her clerkship, Hannah’s judge left and took
another position to be on the state court of appeals. The judge wanted Hannah to go with her;
however, Hannah decided to stay and use the 6 months to figure out her next career move.
At the time, Hannah had a colleague in the general counsel’s office at PCU; however,
they did not have any open positions in that office. In the process, Hannah discovered a position
in the financial aid department at PCU and applied to the position due to the job description and
the request for an attorney background as a substitute for experience in higher education.
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 89
Hannah considered another path in law with the state attorney general due to a connection with
that office. However, she secured the position within DER and started her career in higher
education. Hannah believes the state attorney general position would have been more of the
same experience she had up to that point. The career path in higher education, while non-
traditional for an attorney, has been an opportunity for learning, growth, and development for
Hannah. After 3 years at PCU, she was promoted to her current leadership role.
Taylor
Taylor is a self-reported White woman leader in the admission department within DER,
and she has been in her current leadership role for 3 years. During childhood, Taylor was
encouraged to go into the medical field; however, she was uncertain of the career path she
wanted to pursue. Taylor does remember wanting to become a teacher; however, she did not feel
strongly about teaching in a K-12 educational setting.
Taylor majored in English literature and knew by her junior year that she wanted to work
in higher education and possibly teach as faculty by securing a doctorate. After a period of
career exploration, she realized that might not be a wise choice, considering Taylor knew
colleagues who went in that career path and were having difficulty securing full-time, tenure
track positions.
In her senior year of undergraduate studies, Taylor started to apply to higher education
positions in residential life as staff member. This is something she had experience with as an
undergraduate student, serving as a resident assistant. However, Taylor started to realize many
of the positions she was interested in were difficult to obtain without a master’s degree. This
prompted Taylor to research graduate programs in higher education and student affairs. She
applied to a program in the Midwest and was accepted to a graduate program in higher education
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 90
student affairs. While a graduate student, Taylor completed assistantships in residential life, first
year experience and orientation programs at her graduate institution. Upon completion of her
graduate program, Taylor applied to a residential life position managing a residence hall and was
in that position for 3 years. Seeking opportunity, she applied to her current leadership role at
PCU where she manages student workers for orientation programs in the admission department
within DER.
Teagan
Teagan is a self-reported White woman leader in the admission department within DER
and has been in her current leadership role for 5 years. She is married and has children. During
childhood and prior to college, Teagan decided on three career paths; she was going to be an
actor, a horse trainer, or president. While no one steered her in a particular direction during
childhood, she was supported and completed an undergraduate degree in theater. Teagan also
trained horses while an undergraduate student. In addition, as a student-worker, Teagan secured
positions in admission and student affairs.
After graduation, Teagan continued her dual-career in acting and higher education, which
has taken her to Europe and to a Midwest state in both career fields. Teagan returned to her
undergraduate institution after being away from the west coast and directed the admission center
and campus tour program for 12 years. When Teagan and her husband decided to start a family,
she left her leadership role and worked part-time as an admissions counselor at a community
college. She continued to pursue acting roles on a part-time basis as well, due to the flexibility
of the career.
Teagan’s husband is also in the entertainment industry, and he was in the process of
establishing his career while they started a family and Teagan worked part-time. Once their
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 91
children grew older and started school, Teagan lost interest in acting due to the time it consumed
away from her family. She decided to focus on her higher education career. The leadership
position she secured was not without challenges at the start. Teagan had all her children in K-12
schools, her husband was on location shooting a film for six months, and her mother had a stroke
while summer orientation events were in session. This is how she started her current leadership
position in admission at PCU.
Research Question One
The first research question consisted of the following: What are the perceptions and
experiences of women leaders at a private, four-year research university? In order to answer this
question, it was essential to explore and understand the perceptions and experiences of this
study’s participants and their higher education careers. To accomplish this task, the researchers
conducted interviews to highlight their leadership roles at a private 4-year research university.
Frames in Higher Education Leadership
Participants had multiple perceptions and experiences pertaining to leadership in higher
education. Furthermore, their personal perceptions of gender and their leadership role were not
central to their daily leadership interactions. The well-being of the staff they supervised was one
of the most important factors in their daily tasks. In particular, all participants gave examples of
their perceptions and experiences, and through, analysis, the researcher synthesized how they led
their teams using the human resource and/or symbolic leadership frames (Bolman & Deal 2017).
However, there was a desire to lead from the structural frame, yet their current leadership roles
did not provide the autonomy to do so. In turn, they believed that the political frame serves as a
gateway frame to policymaking. Taylor stated, “I absolutely adapt for the individual and their
needs.” Taylor also believes in levels of adaptation:
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 92
There’s a variety of ways you can adapt your supervisory style to partner with people
who are in different places and need different levels of support or leadership, and to help
them rethink what that looks like and what they actually need in a professional context.
Taylor mentioned efforts beyond adapting to the staff she supervises. She listens to their needs
and provides them support. She gave the example of a student approaching her with interest to
work in higher education after graduation. Taylor stated she provided the staff member with a
perspective of what a position would look like in higher education on a daily basis as well as the
skills required to be successful in a prospective position.
In this context, Taylor is utilizing a leadership frame as a mental model for her role as a
leader. This is how she approached the challenge and opportunity of leading her staff. The
human resource frame of Bolman and Deal’s (2017) leadership model comes into view as she
builds upon the needs of her staff by developing the skills to progress in a higher education field.
Taylor talked about developing interviewing skills among staff who are interested in higher
education as a career. She believes this is a first step to transitioning from a student worker to a
higher education professional, as they may not be familiar with the interview process and the
importance of professionalism outside of student-worker positions.
Aubrey’s perception of leadership entailed the challenge of setting an example for staff
by modeling her work ethic as a means to accomplish the department’s goals and objectives.
Aubrey stated,
It sometimes can be challenging because it’s a lot of responsibility. What I’ve always
learned is that, if you lead mostly by example, then it makes it a little bit... Because if
they see me working hard, if they see me coming in early, if they see me staying in late,
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 93
then it’s easier for people to get on board with what it is that you’re trying to do or the
plan for the organization.
In this context, Aubrey is utilizing the symbolic frame (Bolman & Deal, 2017) as she leads her
staff by example. She wants to be an inspiration to the staff in her office. Aubrey develops an
office culture of strong work ethics. Aubrey also states she wants to be a hero to her staff by
championing the department’s goals and objectives. A hero and hero syndrome, also known as
“hero complex” puts the welfare of others before their own (Fortunado, 2016). She does this by
symbolizing her positive “get the job done” attitude as a reflection of her leadership.
The structural frame (Bolman & Deal, 2017) has central concepts of rules, roles, goals,
policies, technology and environment. Participants touched upon a few of these concepts,
although the most prevalent was that of policies. Most participants cited their lack of control and
power to enact change by authoring policy. Aria discussed the changes she could make
programmatically; however, policies for the department and division as a whole were not
possible. She remarked, “You know, unfortunately, I don’t think I can impact those kinds of
policies in a formal way, but what I can do is to be more flexible with the people I supervise.”
Aria cited how the structural frame is only available on a limited basis and she has an
impact on the team she leads through the human resource frame by providing support for their
well-being. Aria emphasized this is an opportunity for leaders to make a difference in the lives
of the people they supervise, citing the example of giving someone permission to leave early
without having to check an employee management system. Aria stated,
There are things that are within our control that we can do that does not violate any
policy. We’re not going to end up on the front page of the [newspaper] for being kind. I
honestly don’t…There’s nothing that at my level I feel like I can impact.”
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 94
While Aria believed in the impact she could have on the staff member, she also understood that
her impact was minimal when it came to policy authorship and implementation. Yet, other
participants believed the power that came with decision-making was not without its own
challenges and pitfalls.
Hannah discussed her leadership role, how she navigates the policies and regulation
regarding financial aid decisions, and how she reports to her supervisor on how these will affect
their work. Reflecting on her leadership role in comparison to her supervisor, the dean of the
department, Hannah knows the job requires leadership through the political frame and is not
interested in engaging in that frame on a daily basis. In that frame, Hannah believes she loses the
duties that align with the strength of her skill set. She remarked, “I would much rather be the
person that gets the work done and really gets to see the impact on students on a really
immediate level.”
Taylor also corroborated this perception of political maneuvering as a necessity in policy
decision-making. She expounded on the political frame by citing that, for a leader to gain the
autonomy to enact policy, one must navigate the political frame to obtain the leadership position
itself. Taylor remarked,
I’d like to move into upper level positions. I think the interesting thing is that how people
get there seems to be very political and you have to have someone watching out for you
or someone who believes or wants you in that role.
Taylor discussed merit in that process and the sense of entitlement that she would have if that
were her trajectory. In addition, she has seen colleagues move out of higher education or pursue
doctoral degrees to stimulate career growth due to her perception that there are a lack of “upper
level administrative positions in the university staff setting.”
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 95
The Labyrinth in Higher Education Leadership
The labyrinth concept (Eagly & Carli, 2007) for women in leadership positions is similar
to Taylor’s perception: a woman does not have a straight path to senior leadership positions.
Rather, a woman’s career could take a circuitous path. In addition, a woman may put her career
on hold or delay it for various reasons, such as caring for a family member.
All but one participant spoke about a leaving the workplace for an extended period to
care for a family member. For one participant, it was an unexpected length of time and occurred
while fulfilling the duties of her leadership role at PCU. Hailey discussed unexpected
complications with her pregnancy while on a business trip which meant she had to stay at that
location for 9 weeks prior to delivering her baby. Ultimately, Hailey was out on family leave for
6 months, which she did not plan to do.
Ava, Amelia, Hannah and Teagan also have experience with family leave to care for a
child. Teagan spoke about the various starts and stops of her career due to her acting, starting a
family and supporting her husband’s career when she remarked, “I do feel that my path has been
more haphazard. So in that sense, I think, gosh, if I had actually kind of planned out what I
wanted to do, where could I be?”
While curious, Teagan was happy with her family and career decisions when she stated,
“but I wouldn’t change anything that I’ve done.” She stated that she still had the opportunity to
work part-time while her kids were growing up and she was able to support her husband’s career.
With that, the family was able to live in various places around the world while her husband was
on location filming.
To navigate the labyrinth, participants did not only care for children. Teagan cared for
her a parent as well. Teagan stated she always had the responsibility of caring for her mother
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 96
and ensuring she was “self-sufficient.” Similarly, Aria and Aubrey also modified their careers to
care for family members. Aubrey cared for her sister and mother. Aria cared for her mother and
made a career and geographic change. The time and distance made it difficult for Aria to
manage obligations for her leadership role and the care and companionship she wanted to
provide for her mother. It was one of the reasons she left PCU in 2005. She stated the new
location “was five minutes away from my house. So, you know, no problem. I could be with my
mother at any given point in time.”
According to Eagly and Carli (2007), the demands of family life and the interruptions in a
career are the most fateful turns in the labyrinth for women as they can stall progression and
reduce lifetime earnings. Aubrey spoke about the monetary outcomes of her career choice to
leave her previous institution to start at PCU, which is closer to her family and childhood
neighborhood. She made an assumption about the PCU’s private school status and the career
opportunities available. This assumption was reinforced by the hiring manager who recruited her
to PCU, who stated she would move up in pay and title shortly after arrival. Shortly after
Aubrey started her position, the hiring manager left for another institution. Aubrey did not
progress to a manager position until 2 years prior to her interview. The decision to care for
family members and move closer to home strongly affected her lifetime earnings.
Gender, Race and Ethnicity in Higher Education Leadership
Given the labyrinth in their leadership careers, participants had a positive view of women
leaders in higher education and believed others also had the same positive perception and
acceptance of women leaders as a factor in increasing diversity within their institution. Ava
talked about the senior leadership transition at PCU and how a woman of color was appointed
interim president. Ava stated that it was great to see PCU select a woman of color. She
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 97
remarked, “It’s nice to see people of color, just people that are more representative of the student
body.” In addition, Ava believed others perceived diversity in the same light as she did: “I mean,
no one in the social circles that I run around in would be like, ‘Oh god, they put a black woman
as interim president.’”
Ava did have reservations about the interim status, however. She cited the example of
how current minority leaders’ roles can be perceived as acceptable for women and people of
color, such as those of diversity officer, director of student affairs, or a cultural center
management. Ava’s reservations are similar to the concepts of semiprofessions (Sokoloff,
1992), dean of women (Schwartz, 1997) and current middle-level roles (Nidiffer, 2010) in
student affairs which are perceived as women’s leadership domains. Gender role congruity
theory (Eagly & Carli, 2007) also applies to notion that a woman can only fill-in on an interim
basis and not attain a permanent senior leadership position as president. Ava believes the interim
status would not have affected a White man, as his gender and race are congruent with leadership
and the authority to make high-level decisions.
In spite of that perception, Ava felt it was progress and a positive step to increasing
diversity at PCU. Taylor corroborated Ava’s perception of diversity when she remarked, “I still
think that a university that reflects the diversity of its student population and society at large is
gonna be ideal.” Assigned leadership (Northouse, 2016) is step in a positive direction for
participants. The more women are assigned senior leadership roles, outside of the
semiprofessions (Sokoloff, 1992) and student affairs (Nidiffer, 2010), the more women will be
accepted and become emergent leaders (Northouse, 2016) with group acceptance based on their
behaviors and influence.
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 98
Diversity also emerged as a theme when it came to the participants’ own identities and
how they contributed to their perceptions and experiences of race and ethnicity in their
leadership roles. Race and ethnicity were not a primary focus; however, in the examination of
gender, leadership and professional identity, it became a relevant finding. Aria’s experience was
compounded by her gender and ethnicity as a Middle Eastern woman. She stated that being a
woman in a business school was a challenge at a time when most faculty were male. Aria stated
it was especially challenging for a woman who was foreign-born and had an uncommon name.
In conjunction with her ethnicity, Aria’s gender “certainly didn’t help” her as a leader in the
business school where recognition for her creativity and work was nonexistent or set up as a
standard expectation. Aria stated the feedback received from male managers was begrudgingly
said, “yeah, yeah, you’re great or that’s what you’re supposed to do.”
Amelia’s ethnicity also was factor in her leadership role. However, she used ethnicity and
her personal story to lead discussions in her office about providing financial aid to
undocumented students under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) immigration
policy. Amelia stated that, prior to her joining PCU, there was no aid for undocumented students
and there would still be none had she not been in her position. When it came to providing
feedback on this policy, Amelia’s personal experience as a Latina and daughter of an
undocumented parent helped change managers’ perspective. She remarked,
I think that, perhaps if I hadn’t challenged that a little bit more, that people who were
here who were managing probably wouldn’t have realized how the university would have
seriously been on the wrong side of history on that matter by continuing their policy on
not providing financial aid for those students.
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 99
While Aria and Amelia are similar in that they bring gender and ethnicity to their
leadership roles, one uses ethnicity as a trait leadership (Northouse, 2016) characteristic while
the other, due to context, could not.
Trait leadership (Northouse, 2016) consists of leadership characteristics of varying
degrees by conceptualizing a set of properties, depending on the person (Jago, 1982). This
includes physical factors (Bryman, 1992). The participants’ ethnicity is a physical factor that can
be examined within context in which they began their higher education careers, using time and
place. Aria started her higher education career at a different time, with different norms in society
and in the workplace. Aria started in a business environment. Although within an academic
setting, Aria stated her workplace reflected the business world and its norms between women
and men. The hierarchy of women and men placed Aria in the semiprofessions (Sokoloff, 1992)
of her office. Amelia’s career started decades later, in a similar business environment, working
in financial aid. As a middle-level woman leader, she was overrepresented in her office
(Nidiffer, 2010) hierarchy. Amelia used her ethnicity to assist her and push back on the status
quo.
Similar to Amelia, Aubrey’s experience with race in the workplace was a leadership
factor. However, she differed in how she used race as a trait leadership characteristic (Northouse,
2016) and internally processed her perceptions and experiences. Aubrey was hesitant to use race
when describing her leadership role and her perceptions and experiences. Yet, Aubrey believes
she has to be “200%” better than a male non-African-American leader due to her identity as a
woman and an African-American. At times, she has questioned whether race played a role in the
lack of resources or acknowledgement of her work. Aubrey’s perceptions and experiences
highlight how gender bias can affect emergent leadership (Northouse, 2016). She was assigned
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 100
her role as an internal candidate when the previous manager left. However, she was completing
the task and duties of the leader for her office before the promotion became official. To
everyone in the group, it may be the case that she has yet to emerge as the leader, given that she
continues to be perceived as a colleague and a non-supervisor.
Perceptions and experiences of race and ethnicity were not limited to participants who
identified with a minority group. Ava and Taylor, who self-reported their race as White, also
discussed how race affects their leadership roles. Ava reported that she is constantly aware of
being White when working with her student workers who come from backgrounds that are
different from her own, especially when providing feedback as a White, heterosexual woman.
For Ava, this is a position of power (French et al., 1959). She cited an example of giving
feedback to a student of color whom she assumed identified as homosexual. Ava was hesitant
before giving feedback to the student when she remarked, “Oh god, I hope he doesn’t think I’m
saying this thing because he identified as a gay person of color. Like, oh God.” Both Ava and
Taylor cited their positionality as White, cisgender women who came from suburban upper-
middle class families when it came to their leadership roles. They also explained that they are
overrepresented as White women in admission and orientation programs, which has been
corroborated in the literature (Nidiffer, 2010).
Due to this overrepresentation, power and authority can affect leadership. Northouse
(2016) states that, when leaders have power, they can influence and affect the beliefs, attitudes
and actions of their followers. Taylor experienced this in her role as a leader of student retreats
and as a panel member in discussions focused on diversity initiatives when she was asked to
speak to her White identity. At one panel discussion, she was asked, “Well, what do you think
your role is as a White person in this position at a university?” Taylor did not want to speak for
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 101
a wide group of people and focused on her own experiences and perspectives, which led her to
voice her opinion only on what the university should do moving forward: create inclusive
policies or campus climates for all students. Taylor had leadership power as a member of a race
that historically has been the dominant in higher education (Schwartz, 1997).
A leader has five bases of power to influence others: reward, coercive, legitimate,
referent and expert (French et al,, 1959). In addition, there are two kinds of power within an
organization: position and personal (Northouse, 2016). The perception of Taylor as a leader
could be of her positional power due to her race and role within the university. In addition,
Taylor could have personal power as person who works closely with student organizations.
Taylor has shown students her leadership philosophy through actions and experience as a student
who earned a graduate degree in higher education student affairs. Students may see her as a role
model who is knowledgeable about the issues that students and the campus may face, which
gives her expert power as well (French et al., 1959).
The Double Bind of Higher Education Leadership
Participants cited barriers in their roles centered on the perceptions of women versus
men. Aria stated, “I think if you are tough, then you are viewed very differently if you’re a
female than if you’re a male.” In turn, she also did not believe this perception is limited to
higher education:
We know that a woman can make a statement, and a man can make the exact same
statement, and it is viewed vastly differently. It’s perceived very differently. The man is,
“Wow, that’s courageous or he’s brave.” Then you know we know the labels for the
women.
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 102
Aria’s comments reflect the literature and the agentic and communal characteristics of leadership
that are associated with gender (Eagly & Karau, 2002). Aubrey cited the example of staff
members who were not replaced after they left, yet other positions were filled by permanent
staff. In addition, the men who were in her position before did not experience the same issue.
Aubrey stated,
It looks like I’m complaining versus, you know, it’s common sense if you lose three staff,
you need to replace those staff. So, I think I always feel like a man wouldn’t have to kind
of sit in there and justify certain things like that. And I do see that and get that and I’m
like, “A man wouldn’t have to deal with this.”
Teagan also believes this to be true and understands the double bind women leaders find
themselves periodically (Eagly & Carli, 2007). She believes women are perceived as “too nice.”
She also believes women are not taken seriously due to the positive demeanor some women
project in the workplace. However, Teagan believes women leaders can do it all: “be nice,” “get
things done” and have a strong personality. She went on to state, “it has a tendency to be a bit
intimidating. And, as a woman, that sometimes is looked at that I’m too forceful, and I think with
a man, it wouldn’t even be considered.”
The double-bind concept a dilemma that men do not face in leadership (Eagly & Carli,
2007). Discussed in Chapter Two, stereotypical perceptions of leadership behaviors are
classified as communal and agentic (Eagly & Carli, 2007). Parks-Stamm and Heilman (2007)
discussed the difference between descriptive and prescriptive gender stereotypes. The mismatch
of these descriptions creates a double standard and perception issue for women leaders and their
gender role.
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 103
Ava also cited a double bind scenario when discussing the interim president. Ava states
many within the campus community questioned the interim president regarding her decision-
making and the assigned leadership, or lack thereof, she received as an interim president
(Northouse, 2016). The interim president addressed a pressing issue when she called for the
resignation a popular dean within a powerful academic unit. The dean did not resign voluntarily;
therefore, the interim president terminated him. Ava questioned the outrage that came with the
decision when she remarked, “how much of that is because she’s a Black woman telling a White
man that he has to leave?” Ava also believed that no one would acknowledge that publicly;
however if the person making the decision were a White man, the decision would not have
caused outrage that it did. Ava believes the interim president had the authority to make the
decision as the interim leader of the institution, with legitimate power.
Hannah has the shortest higher education career among the participants. In addition, she
transitioned into higher education as an attorney. Hannah provided the example of women
articulating ideas and not having them accepted, yet, mentioned by a man says, they are acted
upon. Another example involves idea creation. Hanna says this happens when someone takes an
idea from a woman without attribution, especially men. This is something Hannah experienced
shortly after her start at PCU. Hannah described it “as an out of body experience” that she had
read about before, yet never experienced herself. Being new to higher education, Hannah said,
“I think it’s things like that where you haven’t been here long enough, or you don’t know how
things work around here, or if you have a good idea then someone else will take it and run with
it.” The double bind, according to Hannah, is that women do not care about the credit as much
as they do about getting the job done. However if they do not take credit, the idea will be taken
and credit will go to someone else, particularly male managers.
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 104
Summary
In summary, two leadership frames were highlighted in their perceptions and
experiences. The labyrinth is present in participants’ careers. All but one participant took a
break from their careers to care for a family member. The remaining participant discussed taking
a path out of higher education due to a lack of opportunities for growth. While not a focus of
this study, race and ethnicity became a finding when a majority of the participants referenced
their race and ethnicity in addition to their gender. In addition, they explained how race and
ethnicity affected their leadership roles. Lastly, the double bind is part of participants’
experience. All but one of the participants discussed double bind experiences where they were
held to a double standard. With this, the dominant mental model participants utilized to navigate
their perceptions and experiences was the human resource frame. See Table 12 below for
findings pertaining to the first research question.
Table 12
Findings for Research Question One
Theme Name Perception or Experience
Frames in Higher Education Leadership Perception
The Labyrinth in Higher Education
Leadership
Experience
Gender, Race and Ethnicity in Higher
Education Leadership
Perception & Experience
The Double Bind of Higher Education
Leadership
Perception

Research Question Two
The second research question consisted of the following: How do women leaders’
negotiations of their multiple identities shape their professional identity at a private four-year
research university? To answer this question, the researcher highlighted the multiple identities
the participants bring to their leadership role and examined how they negotiate these to shape
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 105
their professional identity in their daily interactions. To do this, interviews were conducted to
explore and examine participants’ multiple identities.
Childhood Identity Negotiation
The participants discussed exploration during high school that led to decisions about
careers and majors. Ava discussed the influence of a television show on her career aspirations:
“I was like, “I’m gonna become a press secretary” because the West Wing was my favorite
television show and that was on then.” Ava was also part of the public service pathway at her
high school and developed public speaking skills and remarked, “I remember being picked to do
that, so that’s like a positive reinforcement that like, “Oh, you’re a representative of public
service and you’re good at public speaking and communication.” Ava went on to major in
communication at her undergraduate institution. Hannah was also influenced by her speech and
debate team: “A lot of people from the speech and debate team ended up going on to law
school.”
When discussing her undergraduate major, Hailey stated, “I started college as a math
major, because I liked math and thought maybe that I would do something interesting with that.”
Ava and Hannah had a period of career exploration in high school and did not have a parent
influence their career path. In Hailey’s situation, a parent influenced her away from the parent’s
career choice. She states that she may have considered the pre-med path, but “hearing him sort
of discourage us from that, I think I was sort of like, ‘Okay, great. I don’t need to go explore the
pre-med stuff.’” With this, Hailey committed to majoring in math.
The participants entered college in an identity achievement status (Josselson, 1987). No
participants stated they did not have a major or were unsure of their area of study. This would
have been a status of identity diffusion (Josselson, 1987) as no exploration would have taken
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 106
place during childhood. Rather, a period of exploration commenced during childhood with a
majority of participants, referred to as an identity status of moratorium (Josselson, 1987).
Post-Secondary Education Identity Negotiation
Taylor also had a period of exploration with medicine. However, in contrary to Hailey,
Taylor was influenced to enter the medical field prior to her undergraduate studies. She was
uncertain about medicine as a career and recalled her interest in teaching. Therefore, Taylor
thought she could combine the two initially when she remarked:
You can also be an educator in the medical field and in the health field, but I found that
there were other aspects of my experience in college that appealed to me more than the
labs that I was doing.
Josselson (1987) refers to this identity status as a stage of moratorium in development.
Taylor decided to exit the medical field when she realized labs did not appeal to her and her
career aspirations. Rather, Taylor set off on a period of career exploration in residential life and,
during her senior year, decided to apply to full-time higher education positions. This exploration
stage served her well, as Taylor determined that it was difficult to obtain the leadership roles she
desired without a graduate degree.
Similar to Taylor, a status of moratorium and career exploration was a common theme
among most of the participants’ undergraduate studies. The only two who did not have
exploration were in a status of identity achievement. Hannah was on track to enter law school
and Aria was on track to enter graduate school to become a licensed therapist. Furthermore, the
participants who were in a moratorium identity status had explored careers in higher education.
Ava referenced her experience working in the admission center as a tour guide. Hailey
also worked as a tour guide at her undergraduate institution. Amelia worked in the admission
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 107
office at her institution and, like Taylor, was a residential advisor. Teagan’s experience in
student affairs as an orientation advisor also served as exploration.
Possible selves and provisional selves are two concepts of identity negotiation that
highlight the way in which people negotiate identities within themselves and others during
transitions in the workplace (Markus & Nurius, 1986; Ibarra, 1999). Many participants were
able to negotiate their career identity with exploration of whom they may become or whom they
wished to become. Ava discussed this experience after her internship in Washington, DC,
deciding not to pursue a political career. Ava’s experience in the visitor’s center at her
undergraduate institution led her to accept when she was approached by the director who said,
“Oh, there’s an admissions counselor job opening up, and you’d be great for it.”
Hailey had a similar experience in her role as a tour guide at her undergraduate
institution. Since Hailey had admission experience as a tour guide, she said, “Well, yeah, that
sounds interesting to me” when approached by a friend to consider applying to a job at in the
admission department. Hailey negotiated her professional identity by determining that she
would like to become a higher educational professional (Markus & Nurius, 1986).
Possible selves can assist with identity negotiation(Markus & Nurius, 1986); however,
the concept does not provide a process in which professional identity can evolve. Ibarra (1999)
aimed to develop the concept further by investigating how possible selves are created and tested.
In addition, Ibarra (1999) wanted to understand how possible selves are discarded and revised by
professionals as they progress during career. Aubrey had the opportunity to create and test her
new professional role when the new executive director gave her the responsibilities of a
manager. Ibarra (1999) states that there are three ways junior members adapt to new roles. First,
they observe role models. Second, experimentation with provisional selves takes place. Last,
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 108
there is evaluation of the experiments in conjunction with internal standards and external
feedback as guides.
Aubrey discussed attending meetings with the executive director and watching her
interact with “power people” as the observation phase (Ibarra, 1999). Aubrey talked about the
executive director and her attire at meetings. Aubrey stated, “she would always wear a black
suit. And I remember learning from her like this. I called it the power suit.” This was the start of
the experimentation phase for Aubrey (Ibarra, 1999). As Aubrey transitioned to her full-time
role, she experimented by stating, “I was like, ‘I gotta go buy this power suit.’ So I would then
start wearing the power suit, and I would just see how she knew her stuff.” Aubrey states that
everyone looked up to the executive director “because of the fact that she wanted to teach you.”
To Aubrey, it was more than a job due to the way the executive director made her feel.
Questions like, “How can I help you grow?” and “What can I teach you that you can take with
you somewhere else?” exemplified the experience for Aubrey. With this evaluation of her role
experimentation (Ibarra, 1999), Aubrey was able to determine what type of leader she aspired to
be, “and I was like, ‘I want to be that leader.’”
Aubrey entered the third phase of adaptation when she determined she was ready for the
next challenge: “After a while it was like, ‘Oh, I did this for a while,’ so I wanted to do
something else, and eventually I came here to PCU.” Ibarra (1999) states imitation is the most
prevalent form of experimentation, and there are two forms: wholesale and selective. Aubrey
utilized wholesale imitation (Ibarra, 1999) due to her experimentation and adoption of the black
“power suit” and emulating the leadership skills observed and learned from a single role model.
Participants were in an identity status of moratorium during their undergraduate studies
(Josselson, 1987). Some used the exploration period to capitalize on the experiences they had
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 109
and transitioned to a career in higher education. Others used the exploration period and the
experiences obtained later in their professional careers. Nonetheless, a majority of participants
were in a moratorium identity status during college (Josselson, 1987).
Work-Life Identity Negotiation
All participants had perceptions and experiences with work-life balance challenges and a
majority were due to caring for a family member while managing their career. However, other
participants struggled with setting work boundaries within their personal life. Aubrey stated,
“Sometimes I question if I have the balance.” Aubrey stated that she takes work home and
wishes to change her behavior. Aubrey stated, “I feel like I’m always looking at my email and
there’s always someone who wants to send those evening emails and you find yourself at home
responding and it’s like, ‘why?’” Given this, the question of balance arises; however, she states
that she incorporates “little things” to balance her life. Aubrey remarked,
I try to make sure that I’m taking care of my health, taking care of work, taking care of
family and trying to do whatever it takes. If it’s just me, taking an hour out of the day just
to kind of decompress, meditate or something.
For Aubrey, the difficult part of the balance is she does not feel she has the staffing resources for
the office work volume. She said, “that means somebody has to do the job.”
The balancing act of managing life inside and outside of work for participants and their
leadership role took a period of exploration as well. When asked about work-life balance, Hailey
stated, “Now that is something that’s definitely evolved over time.” Hailey stated that she
worked a lot when she transitioned to her admission role; however, she liked it and was fine with
it. Part of her role consisted of traveling and public speaking Hailey remarked, “I was okay
taking on the extra trip, or planning to travel the way that I did because I thought, ‘Well, this is
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 110
what I do. And I like it.’ It worked for me.” At this point in Hailey’s career, she had reached
identity achievement (Josselson, 1987), as strong identity commitments had been made after a
period of exploration. The work and travel schedule gave Hailey autonomy. She chose her trips
and scheduled her workdays. In this identity status, Hailey set her schedule to visit schools in
the morning and have her day end by two or three in the afternoon. In addition, she was able to
visit friends and family in the region she was traveling in. Hailey said, “Sometimes easier to be
on the road and fly out to that wedding when you were in a million weddings because you were
already in that part of the country.” The autonomy was an aspect of Hailey’s leadership role she
appreciated due to the help it provided in the balance with her first position at PCU.
Hailey served in this role and enjoyed the work, but she gave up a many weekends. As
she became more senior, she traveled less and realized “I could do less of that. That would be
okay.” The main transition came when Hailey was expecting a child and ultimately when her
son was born. This was Hailey’s identity crisis that led to status change to moratorium
(Josselson, 1987). Due to her childcare situation, Hailey stated she has to leave at the end of the
business and not a minute later. If not, she has to arrange extra childcare. The responsibility is
at home as well, and Hailey states that she is constantly in a state of exploration with her
husband as they navigate the responsibilities of work and their child’s care.
Hailey stated, “I really took a cue from our director, who catches a train, so he always
walked out at five o’clock. And so I would be mid-sentence with him, and he would be like, “I
gotta go.” Hailey appreciated this about her director because he still made himself available to
assist while via email. Due to this, Hailey states this is how she is with her staff as well. She
remarked, “I need to walk out because I’m not going to get home in time to let my nanny go
home.” Hailey states that she does not apologize for this behavior; rather, she imitates her
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 111
director and offers to be available via email during the evening hours. When asked if she
believes this experience is different with her male director, Hailey stated, “I don’t feel like
anybody is looking sideways at me about it at all.” With this, Hailey is in an identity crisis
(Erickson, 1968), transitioning from a status of achievement to moratorium (Josselson, 1987).
Due to this, Hailey had an experience with imitation experimentation (Ibarra, 1999), as she
negotiated her multiple identities within her leadership role in conjunction with her director and
his self-presentation.
Similar to Hailey, Amelia experienced identity negotiations with motherhood and her
professional identity. Amelia discussed her identity negotiation in relation to the roles she and
her husband play as parents with their children’s education. Amelia stated, “My husband is
really a very strong partner, so we definitely share the load. It’s not just like my responsibility.”
Furthermore, when it comes to Amelia’s workplace, she is guarded about displaying her
motherhood identity. The manner in which she highlights this identity and negotiates with her
professional identity is symbolism and a tool of impression management (Goffman, 1959). The
door to her office is the symbol. On the back of the door is where she posts pictures and the
schoolwork her children have completed. Amelia remarked, “I think this door is a good sort of
symbol for my motherhood at work, but you can’t see it most of the time, right, unless you close
the door. So, if you walk in, you don’t notice it.” She added, “And that’s really how I try to
maintain things where I never wanted anybody to say that I was unreliable because of my kids.”
For Amelia, her front stage in this approach is her professional identity: a carefully
crafted self-representation of reliability and strong work ethic, without distractions. The back
stage (Goffman, 1959) is her motherhood and all that comes with that identity as it pertains to
her children and the responsibilities of a mother. Her family and children are important to
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 112
Amelia. However, in the back stage, she does not need to act to please others or convey to them
that she is reliable and can be counted on to do the work she is responsible for. Rather, she can
be true to self, practice and prepare for her front stage setting (Goffman, 1959).
Professional Identity Negotiation
Literatures states that professional identity is shaped in three primary ways. First,
professional identity is the result of the socialization process where meanings are associated with
a profession (Fine, 1996; Hall, 1987). According to the literature, career transition is the second
way individuals adjust and adapt their professional identity (Ibarra, 1999). Finally, Schein
(1978) states that life and work experiences influence professional identity due to the
clarification of personal priorities and self-understanding. The first way participants negotiated
their professional identity was deciding to return to their leadership roles after giving birth. The
second was the lack of experience with the queen bee syndrome (Staines et. al., 1974). The third
way participants negotiated their professional identity was mistakenly identifying sponsorship as
mentor moments(Hewlett, 2013).
Motherhood negotiation. Before the participants could manage work-life balance in
their higher education careers, an identity crisis took place to shape their professional identity
(Erickson, 1968). Participants highlighted many aspects of their motherhood identity, yet there
were no identity commitments (Josselson, 1987) made to stay home permanently and raise their
children. For Hailey, the decision to continue with her career occurred after staying home for the
birth of her child. She stated, “I really like my job. I like working. I was never going to be a stay
at home parent.” Professional identity can be shaped in three primary ways and Hailey has used
life and professional experiences to influence professional identity (Schein, 1978). Hailey used
the life experience of staying home with her child in comparison with her professional
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 113
experience to determine that the motherhood identity did not interest her on a full-time basis.
Hailey remarked, “I think caring for a child is obviously important work, but I just couldn’t
imagine spending my whole day focused on the ins and outs of my child.”
Hannah corroborated Hailey’s sentiments on the decision to be a stay-at-home mother
stating her personality did not suit her to stay at home. However, she had different life
experiences that influenced the decision. Hannah remarked, “it’s like week four and you’re
thinking, How am I gonna come back to my job when my world is completely different being at
home versus being here?” While Hannah cited her personality would not have allowed her to
stay at home, there were financial factors in life and work experiences that influenced her
professional identity. Competing crises centered on Hannah’s bonding with her child and a
return work, which seemed impossible. Yet, the costs of day care meant she had to negotiate the
ramifications of her decision to return to work or stay at home. In the end, she returned to her
leadership role, although negotiation did not end with the cost of day care.
Hannah experienced identity crises in her home life as well, which led to moratorium as
she explored different identities that were not part of her childhood or her parents’ identities.
Hannah recalled certain domestic services her parents did not and would not pay for during her
childhood, but which she currently explores. She hired a housekeeper and gardener. Hannah
believes it is money well spent and has discarded the family values and any inclination to adopt a
foreclosure status (Josselson, 1987) by exploring an identity where she and her husband do not
have to keep responsibilities in care for the home. Hannah stated,
I love to clean. I just don’t have time. We have someone who comes in only once a
month, but she spends practically all day at my house like deep cleaning once a month.
Those are the best days, and money well spent because it buys back time.
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 114
This is something Hannah states her parents would have never done. Due to this, Hannah has
been able to negotiate the personal identities she has in her home. This negotiation has given her
time to develop her professional identity and the balance she needs at home. Hannah remarked,
“It’s things like that where I just really see it as you’re paying for time with your kids, you
know?”
Queen bee non-negotiation. The queen bee syndrome (Staines et. al., 1974) was not
prevalent among the participants. Rather, participants talked about the women who assisted
them and supported them as they advanced in their leadership roles. Aubrey’s executive director
would give her tasks and responsibilities, trained her, duties and made sure she was well
prepared. Hailey talked about a former director who assisted her when she started her higher
education career and allowed her to stay in her office when she had conversations with other
staff, and they would troubleshoot issues. She saw this as a learning opportunity: “Well, I want
to know about that also. And I want to pay attention to that. So, I feel like I learned a lot of stuff
just by hanging out, or overhearing how things get done.” Ava and Taylor also cited helpfulness
with their female colleagues and managers. Ava, in particular ,discussed the ways in which her
supervisor supports her with child care issues that arise in the morning and may delay her arrival
at the office. Amelia and Hannah also cited a culture of helping others and making sure trainings
are developed to make work procedures more efficient for all involved.
Although, this is not to say the non-negotiation is easy and without identity crises
(Erickson, 1968). Hannah cited an example she dealt with regarding of one of her staff members
after they had difficulty returning from maternity leave. In a conversation with a mentor,
Hannah said, “I know that we’re supposed to be all about helping moms be able to succeed. I am
all for that, but how do you run a business when someone’s like, ‘I only want to be here 50%.’”
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 115
Hannah found a solution: “I get it as a mom, but, as a manager, how do you negotiate that and
still get the work done? When the rubber hits the road, what do you really believe in terms of
leave policies and accommodations?”
A second way to shape professional identity is through a socialization process where
meanings are associated with a profession (Fine, 1996; Hall, 1987). In this example, Hannah
made meaning with beliefs, values, and her multiple identities. Hannah had to negotiate her
motherhood and the responsibility to get the work done. Hannah had a different experience
returning from maternity leave and could have associated that with the profession when
addressing her staff issue. Using the queen bee syndrome (Staines et. al., 1974; Derks et. al.,
2015), Hannah could have also utilized the “if I can do it without help” attitude as well. Hannah
was able to return from maternity leave and could have held that same standard for other women,
but she chose not to. Rather, she was supportive and found a solution to help her staff transition
back to the workplace.
Sponsorship negotiation. In connection with mentorship, Hannah was the only
participant who cited experience with a mentor. However, the mentor originated from her career
as an attorney and she continues to have a relationship with her today. Hannah had access to a
formal mentor at her law firm, but the relationship never developed. Research shows that
mentorship is a positive experience in higher education, especially when mentor relationships
developed in informal settings (Hill & Wheat, 2017; Ragins & Cotton, 1999). Mentorship
provides many positive benefits to women leaders when their mentor is male (Davey, 2008), but
the preference is to have a female mentor (Brown, 2005).
Other participants cited they had mentors or mentor moments (Hill & Wheat, 2017), but
what they described were sponsorship relationships with former colleagues or supervisors. In
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 116
various ways, sponsors delivered in advancing the participants’ careers. According to Hewlett
(2013), a sponsor and protégé relationship is the best path for a natural relationship. A sponsor
will advocate for a protégé’s next promotion. That is what occurred with Ava upon graduation.
Her supervisor from the visitor center informed her of a full-time opportunity in admission
counseling. That also led to her next position, when Ava’s sponsor connected her to the dean of
matriculation and an open position he had at his institution. Promoting visibility and making
connections is one way a sponsor delivers for a protégé (Hewlett, 2013).
Aubrey, Hailey, Hannah and Teagan all had similar sponsorship experiences with
colleagues and former supervisors as well. Expanding the perceptions of what a protégé thinks
they are capable of is another way a sponsor delivers in the relationship (Hewlett, 2013). Hailey,
Hannah, and Teagan also discussed colleagues and supervisors who assisted with referring them
to positions in higher education. Hailey had a friend who was currently in the admission office
and asked her to consider applying for the position. Hannah also had a colleague at PCU and,
while there was not an open position in her office, she referred her to a position in financial aid.
Teagan balanced dual careers after her undergraduate studies; however, she stated that
her acting career was a “what have you done for me lately” industry with no mentorship. Teagan
did say she had support from former supervisors in her higher education career. This is the third
way professional identity is shaped, as career transitions provide leaders a way to adapt and
adjust to new leadership roles (Ibarra, 1999). Hewlett (2013) states that positive and honest
feedback is another way a sponsor delivers for a protégé. Lastly, a sponsor delivers for a protégé
by providing advice on presentation of self (Hewlett, 2013). Hannah reached out to her sponsor
regarding the dilemma of a staff member returning from maternity leave. The sponsor provided
advice on motherhood and strategies for the workplace as Hannah needed to negotiate both
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 117
identities to develop her professional identity. See Table 13 below for findings related to the
second research question.
Table 13
Findings for Research Question Two
Theme Name Identity Status
Childhood Identity Negotiation Achievement
Post-Secondary Education Identity
Negotiation
Moratorium
Work – Life Identity Negotiation Moratorium
Professional Identity Negotiation Moratorium
Summary
The participants’ negotiations of their multiple identities shaped their professional
identity in multiple ways. First, their childhood identity negotiation led to an achievement status
as participants entered their undergraduate studies. Few participants stayed with their career
path, whereas a majority had an identity crisis during their undergraduate studies. This led to a
period of exploration and negotiation as an identity crisis led to a status of moratorium with their
career paths. As participants transitioned into their careers, work life balance gave many
multiple identities to negotiate and develop. Identity continues to evolve in this moratorium
status, depending on the present crisis, negotiation is ongoing for participants.
Lastly, participants negotiate their multiple identities to shape their professional identity
in three ways. First, life and work experiences shaped their professional identity with their
motherhood identity, as no participants made a commitment to stay at home. Second, queen bee
syndrome is not present within the participants as they make meaning with positive beliefs and
values when it comes to other women and their work experiences. Third, sponsorship, not
mentorship, is the prevalent experience for participants. Leaders adapt and adjust during career
transitions to shape professional identity, and participants used sponsors.
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 118
Conclusion
Results pertaining to the first research question highlighted the perceptions and
experiences of women leaders at a private 4 year research university. The participants utilized
Bolman and Deal’s (2017) leadership frames as mental models. The labyrinth is also a path for
participants as they navigate life events to obtain leadership roles. In addition, participants
discussed how their perceptions and experiences were affected by gender roles and congruity to
leadership (Eagly & Karau, 2007). The double bind also was present for participants.
Results for the second research question highlighted the identity negotiations and statuses
participants experienced and explored in their careers to date. Childhood identity negotiations
led to achievement during undergraduate studies (Josselson, 1987). Moratorium was prevalent in
their post-secondary studies and in their work-life experiences. A motherhood identity that
entailed staying at home to care for a child was not a consideration. The queen bee syndrome
was also a non-negotiation for participants (Staines et al., 1978). Lastly, sponsorship (Hewlett,
2013) is how participants transitioned in their higher education careers. Next, Chapter Five will
review the findings, the implications for practice, and recommendations for further research.

LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 119
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION
Currently, women earn over half of all post-secondary degrees (Sawyer & Valerio, 2017)
and started to earn more degrees than men in the mid-1990s (Pew Research Center, 2013a).
However, women do not occupy a majority of senior leadership roles in higher education
(Seltzer, 2017; Behr& Schneider, 2015), and only about 30% of college presidents are women
(Seltzer, 2017). The dean position serves as a stepping-stone to provost and chief academic
officer, considered one position below the president, yet women hold only 39% of those
positions (Behr& Schneider, 2015). Women still face barriers in the workplace and the pressure
to negotiate multiple identities to shape a professional identity (Marshall, 2009).
In addition, men are more commonly associated with success and effectiveness in
leadership (Chliwniak, 1997; Eagly & Carli, 2007; Eagly & Karau, 2002; Growe &
Montgomery, 1999; Lämsä & Sintonen, 2001; Prime et al., 2009; Uhlir, 1989). Research centers
on the communal and agentic characteristics of leadership and perceptions of leadership success,
gender and gender roles (Eagly & Karau, 2002). While men are mostly associated with agentic
characteristics and women are seen as more communal, both men and women can possess either
set of characteristics (Growe & Montgomery, 1999).
Although research shows no difference between women and men in terms of intelligence
and innovation (Pew Research Center, 2013b), women still experience a double standard in the
work place. This experience was referred to as a double bind, when women are not communal or
agentic enough in their leadership behaviors (Eagly & Carli, 2007). There are many other
leadership barriers women face, and they may experience a different and delayed path to senior
leadership roles, known as the labyrinth (Eagly & Carli, 2007).
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 120
Chapter Five provides a brief summary of the findings. Next, two recommendations for
practice are presented. The first is a recommendation for on-going training on leadership
modules to combat the barriers and gender-role incongruity perceptions discussed by the
participants. The second is for departments to train senior leaders on how to sponsor middle-
level women leaders. The chapter also presents recommendations for further research.
Discussion of Findings
Women face barriers in the workplace due to the gender stereotypes people associate
with successful and effective leadership (Eagly & Karau, 2002). This has led to various
leadership studies on the differences between women and men and to an association between
gender to agentic or communal characteristics (Growe & Montgomery, 1999; Eagly & Carli,
2002; Parks-Stamm & Heilman, 2007). Bolman and Deal’s (2017) leadership frames served as
mental models for participants to navigate their perceptions and experiences. Most frequently
cited were perceptions and experiences within the human resource and symbolic frames. The
labyrinth concept (Eagly & Carli, 2007) for women in leadership positions is the idea that a
woman does not have a straight path to senior leadership positions. Rather, a woman’s career
could be a circuitous path. In addition, a woman may put her career on hold or delay it for
various reasons.
The focus of this study was gender and leadership; however, a theme centered on
participants’ perceptions and experiences regarding race and ethnicity in addition to their gender.
Some participants had reservations regarding the type of leadership roles women and people of
color occupy in higher education. However, diversity was a positive aspect of their perceptions
and experiences. Participants believe others are also accepting of women leaders and people of
color who occupy leadership positions. Many participants were conscious of race and ethnicity
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 121
in their leadership role and how that may provide power and privilege or support to enact
change.
The double bind concept was also part of participants’ experience (Eagly & Carli, 2002).
Many cited the double standard they are held to in regards to leadership behaviors in the
workplace. Included in this finding was the power associated with decision-making and how
that also can lead to a double standard for women if that role is not congruent with their gender.
The double bind will continue to be a barrier for the participants in this study, as they will
continue to experience a double standard in the workplace that male leaders do not. Having to
navigate this barrier will only lead to a delayed or prolonged trajectory to senior leadership
positions.
However, the participants in this study discussed ways in which they navigate the double
bind experienced in the workplace and will need to continue to do so as more women progress to
senior leadership positions. More women will need to speak up regarding idea creation and
attribution for those ideas that lead to positive change in the workplace, similar to Hannah’s
experience. Furthermore, women will need to emulate Teagan’s approach of “getting things
done,” by “being nice” and a smile on their face, with no regrets. A combination of agentic and
communal leadership behaviors will assist with a positive career trajectory.
In the second research question, the findings developed a discussion on how participants
were able to shape professional identity by negotiating multiple identities. The lens utilized to
frame this research question was Josselson’s (1987) identity development model. All
participants experienced identity achievement as a career path upon entering their undergraduate
studies. This period led to exploration as their studies evolved and participation in student
activities increased. However, the period of exploration and moratorium, for some, extended
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 122
into graduate school and the first phase of their professional careers. Identity negotiation took
place in this status with the concept of provisional selves (Ibarra, 1999). Moratorium continued
when discussing work-life balance. While some participants experienced identity achievement,
life events led to crises, evolution, and change. The concept used in this status was Goffman’s
(1959) dramaturgical approach to identity negotiation.
Research says that professional identity is shaped in three ways (Fine, 1996; Hall, 1987;
Ibarra, 1999; Schein, 1978). The participants negotiated three identities to shape their
professional identity. The first was identity commitment to their career and not their motherhood
identity. This commitment was by shaped by their life and work experiences and the influence
those experiences have on professional identity. Next, participants made meaning through the
socialization process in the workplace and with other women. From this, they did not encounter
the queen bee concept. Last, participants used career transitions from their sponsorship
experiences to shape their professional identity.
Recommendations for Practice
Two major recommendations emerged from the participants’ perceptions and
experiences. First, institutions should provide employees training on leadership dynamics
similar to that employees may receive during the onboarding process. Second, senior leadership
members should be trained to develop sponsorship practices with middle-level women leaders to
eliminate barriers and provide growth opportunities.
Leadership Modules
Women are more likely to be experience barriers in the workplace than men, leading to a
delayed and circuitous path to senior leadership positions (Eagly & Carli, 2007). In addition, the
barriers can come in the form of stereotypes and prejudice (Watson & Hoffman, 2004).
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 123
Therefore, departments can give leadership training to all employees. Similar to the training new
employees receive during onboarding, this would be a training module that is continuous and
assesses learning upon completion. Departments will assess learning by engaging staff with an
online module to promote leadership awareness and the effects that gender, race, and ethnicity
can have women leaders and people of color in leadership roles.
Participants discussed the barriers women leaders face as it pertains to their leadership
roles. Many had examples of stereotypical perceptions. In addition, many had experiences of
prejudice in the workplace. As stated in the findings, women do not lead with gender; it is an
unconscious identity that is negotiated once external factors bring gender into view. Therefore,
departments should first acknowledge stereotypes and prejudices. Next, they should create an
educational leadership module similar to other workplace training that provides foundational
knowledge and assesses employee learning simultaneously. This will create awareness and a
commitment to educate staff and senior leaders to eliminate barriers for middle-level women
leaders.
Next, departments could assess the learning and knowledge obtained from the module
and have periodic staff meetings to discuss areas of improvement. Departments can conduct
follow-up training through case studies on leadership situations and best practices to help all staff
navigate particular leadership scenarios. Furthermore, role-play activities can assist to
demonstrate the barriers women face in their leadership roles. Once again, placing employees in
an engaged learning environment will bring awareness to the barriers and assist with diminishing
the stereotypes and prejudices women leaders face.

LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 124
Sponsorship Development
Research shows that mentorship provides a positive experience for leaders in higher
education (Baumgartner & Schneider, 2010; Blood et al., 2012; Cullen & Luna, 1993; Hill &
Wheat, 2017; Hunt & Michael, 1983; Kram, 1985). However, with senior leadership positions in
higher education currently occupied mostly by men, it is difficult for women to find female
mentors (Ely et al, 2011; Madsen, 2008). Women favor female mentors (Brown, 2005), but
there are positive benefits to having a male mentor (Davey, 2008). Due to this, departments
should develop and implement sponsorship relationships between their senior leaders and
middle-level leaders.
Participants discussed sponsorship experiences. Sponsorship goes beyond mentorship by
investing in a protégé, whereas a mentor gives very little to a mentee (Hewlett, 2013). In
addition, the sponsorship relationship is a high-octane relationship of support and advocacy.
Many participants described experiences with sponsors as they progressed in their careers. Due
to this, departments should establish training for senior leaders. This senior leader training
program will assist middle-level women leaders navigate the various barriers they face as they
progress to senior leadership positions. Next, aspiring middle-level women leaders should be
identified to determine their interest in senior leadership positions. After determining interest,
the sponsorship relationship can be evaluated through a diagnostic test. This will aid in
determining what value the protégé brings and what experiences the sponsor can provide. This
process should be continuous to assess and further develop the relationship. By providing
sponsorship training for senior leaders, departments will assist middle-level women leaders with
their professional identity development.

LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 125
Recommendations for Further Research
Several significant recommendations have emerged from the participants on professional
identity development. First, the financial implications of professional identity development
should be examined with further research. Second, further research should explore race,
ethnicity, and their effects on gender and leadership. Third, further insight into participants’
queen bee non-negotiation is warranted to determine if data can be substantiated with
observations.
Current research on the gender pay gap demonstrates it has narrowed over time, with
women earning roughly 82% of what men earn (Graf, Brown & Patten, 2018). In addition,
research has shown that, when variables such as education, work experience, skills, race and
geography are accounted for, pay goes down when women enter male-dominated industries in
large numbers (Levanon, England, & Allison, 2009). Yet, a need for further research emerged in
data collection regarding the financial implications of professional identity development on
middle-level women leaders starting families. While it was not prevalent enough for a finding in
this study, participants discussed their strong concerns and experiences finding affordable
childcare and the salary limitations of a higher education professional when looking for homes in
safe neighborhoods, good schools, and short commute times. Therefore, financial implications
beyond the gender pay gap should warrant additional research on how the decision to develop a
career in higher education due to salary limitations affects professional identity development.
Gender, race, and ethnicity and the affects they have on professional identity
development should be further examined using a lens more suited for analysis of those
characteristics. Research has explored the intersectionality of race and gender for African
American women, but the focus has been on leadership development with women above the
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 126
dean position (Davis & Maldonado, 2015; Davis, 2016; Gamble & Turner, 2015). Similar,
research on Mexican American, Native American, and Asian American leaders in higher
education have focused on experiences and self-efficacy at the president level (Muñoz, 2009;
Montas-Hunter, 2012; Viernes Turner, 2007). Further research should examine professional
identity development among women in roles below those levels.
This study examined the queen bee phenomenon (Staines et al., 1978) and found that the
participants did not discuss experiences with this concept. Furthermore, participants who did
have queen bee experiences actively chose to conduct their leadership roles counter to that
concept. Therefore, further research should examine the queen bee concept using observations
as another source of data to determine if this syndrome is generational or has other mitigating or
prevalence factors. Observations take place in the natural setting where the phenomenon is
occurring as a firsthand encounter for the researcher (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Experiences
can be observed as they occur to determine if the queen bee concept shapes professional identity.
Conclusion
In conclusion, this study’s first research question revealed four themes regarding the
perceptions and experiences of women leaders at a private 4-year research university. First, the
most common leadership frame used by all participants was the human resource frame. Next,
the labyrinth concept was an experience for a majority of participants. Third, race and ethnicity
were just as impactful as gender to the participant’s perceptions and experiences. Fourth, the
double bind concept was also prevalent with participants.
Pertaining to the second research question, four themes also emerged. First, identity
achievement as a status was received prior to entering college. Second, a moratorium status
emerged as exploration developed during participant’s undergraduate studies. Moratorium also
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 127
continued as participants continued to explore their multiple identities with work-life balance.
Last, professional identity was negotiated using provisional selves and impression management
to develop their motherhood identity and eliminate the queen bee and protégé identities.
A pair of recommendations emerged from the findings to inform practice. First,
departments should create learning modules for staff to create awareness regarding the barriers
women leaders face in higher education. Second, departments should develop sponsorship
training with their senior leaders.
The purpose of this qualitative study was to interview women leaders at a private 4-year
research university to hear directly from them about their perceptions and experiences in higher
education as middle-level women leaders below the dean position. In addition, this study sought
to gain insight into how women leaders negotiate the multiple identities that shape their
professional identity. Using Josselson’s (1987) identity development model to highlight the
findings from the study, this study contributes research on women leaders and identity
development. The participants provided rich and detailed perceptions of their experiences with
leadership and identity.
If implications for practice and the recommendations for further research are ignored, the
barriers middle-level women leaders will persist. Leadership gaps in higher education may
widen or remain the same, as a majority of senior leaders will continue to be White men. Senior
leaders in higher education have a responsibility to acknowledge the barriers middle-level
women leaders face and create awareness in their departments to eliminate them. Professional
identity development through sponsorship is a positive step forward for women leaders in higher
education. This study could serve as a cog in the machine as future practitioners and researchers
examine the gap in leadership and identity in higher education.
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 128

LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 129
REFERENCES
Aksan, N., Kisac, B., Aydin, M., & Demirbuken, S. (2009). Symbolic interaction theory.
Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1(1), 902–904.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.160
American Council on Education. (2012). The American college president (2012 ed.).
Washington, DC: Author.
Antal, A. B., & Izraeli, D. N. (1993). A global comparison of women in management: Women
managers in their homelands and as expatriates. In E. A. Fagenson (Ed.), Women and
work: A research and policy series, Vol. 4. Women in management: Trends, issues, and
challenges in managerial diversity (pp. 52-96). Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
Apter, T. E. (1993). Working women don’t have wives: Professional success in the 1990s. New
York, NY: St Martin’s Press.
Archer, J. (1996). Sex differences in social behavior: Are the social role and evolutionary
explanations compatible? The American Psychologist, 51(9), 909–917.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.51.9.909
Babcock, L., Laschever, S., Gelfand, M., & Small, D. (2003). Nice girls don’t ask. Harvard
Business Review, 81(10), 14–16.
Bass, B., & Stogdill, R. (1990). Bass & Stogdill’s handbook of leadership : theory, research, and
managerial applications (3rd ed.). New York: Free Press.
Baumeister, R. (1989). Masochism and the self. Hillsdale, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Baumeister, R. (2011). Self and identity: A brief overview of what they are, what they do, and
how they work. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1234(1), 48–55.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2011.06224.x
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 130
Baumgartner, M. S., & Schneider, D. E. (2010). Perceptions of women in management: A
thematic analysis of razing the glass ceiling. Journal of Career Development, 37(2), 559–
576. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894845309352242
Behr, M., & Schneider, J. (2015). Gender and the ladder to the deanship. Retrieved from
https://www.aacu.org/diversitydemocracy/2015/spring/behr
Beijaard, D., Meijer, P. C., & Verloop, N. (2004). Reconsidering research on teachers’
professional identity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(2004), 107–128.
Bess, J. L., & Dee, J. R. (2008). Understanding college and university organization: Dynamics
of the system (Vol. 2). Stylus Publishing, LLC.
Billett, S., & Pavlova, M. (2005). Learning through working life: Self and individuals’ agentic
action. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 24(3), 195–211.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02601370500134891
Bilsker, D., Schiedel, D., & Marcia, J. (1988). Sex differences in identity status. Sex Roles,18(3-
4), 231–236. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00287792
Birnbaum, R., Bensimon, E., & Neumann, A. (1989). Leadership in higher education: A multi-
dimensional approach to research. The Review of Higher Education, 12(2), 101–105.
https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.1989.0023
Blood, E. A., Ullrich, N. J., Hirshfeld-Becker, D. R., Seely, E. W., Connelly, M. T., Warfield, C.
A., & Emans, S. J. (2012). Academic women faculty: Are they finding the mentoring
they need? Journal of Women’s Health, 21(11), 1201–1208.
https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2012.3529
Bohnet, I., & Greig, F. (2007). Gender matters in workplace decisions. Negotiation, 10(4), 4–6.
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 131
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2017). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership.
Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119281856
Book, E. W. (2000). Why the best man for the job is a woman: The unique female qualities of
leadership. New York: Harper Business.
Bowles, H. R., & McGinn, K. L. (2008). Gender in job negotiations: A two‐level game.
Negotiation Journal, 24(4), 393–410. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1571-9979.2008.00194.x
Bowles, H. R., Bear, J., & Thomason, B. (2010, June). Negotiating disadvantage: An
organizational perspective on gender and negotiating for self and other. Paper presented
at the 23rd Conference of the International Association for Conflict Management,
Boston, MA.
Brenner, O. C., Tomkiewicz, J., & Schein, V. E. (1989). The relationship between sex role
stereotypes and requisite management characteristics revisited. Academy of Management
Journal, 32(3), 662–669. https://doi.org/10.5465/256439
Brescoll, V. L. (2016). Leading with their hearts? how gender stereotypes of emotion lead to
biased evaluations of female leaders. The Leadership Quarterly, 27(3), 415–428.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2016.02.005
Brescoll, V. L., & Uhlmann, E. L. (2008). Can an angry woman get ahead? Status conferral,
gender, and expression of emotion in the workplace. Psychological Science, 19(3), 268–
275. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02079.x
Briggs, A. J. (2007). Exploring professional identities: Middle leadership in further education
colleges. School Leadership & Management, 27(5), 471–485.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13632430701606152

LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 132
Brown, T. M. (2005). Mentorship and the female college president. Sex Roles, 52(9), 659-666.
Brubacher, J. S., & Rudy, W. (1997). Higher education in transition: A history of American
colleges and universities (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Bryman, A. (1992). Charisma and leadership in organizations. London, England: SAGE.
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper and Row Publishers.
Busher, H. (2005). Being a middle leader: Exploring professional identities. School Leadership
& Management, 25(2), 137–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632430500036231
Carli, L. L. (1989). Gender differences in interaction style and influence. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 56(4), 565–576. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.56.4.565
Carli, L. L., & Eagly, A. H. (2001). Gender, hierarchy, and leadership: An introduction. The
Journal of Social Issues, 57(4), 629–636. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00232
Chávez, A. F., & Sanlo, R. (2013). Identity and leadership: Informing our lives, informing our
practice. Washington, DC: National Association for Student Personnel Administrators.
Chliwniak, L. (1997). Higher education leadership: Analyzing the gender gap. Washington, DC:
ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education.
Clarke, M., Hyde, A., & Drennan, J. (2013). Professional identity in higher education. In B.
Kehm & U. Teichler (Eds.), The academic profession in Europe: New tasks and new
challenges (pp. 7–21). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4614-5_2
Clifford, G. J. (1995). “Equally in view”: The University of California, its women, and the
schools. Berkeley, CA: Center for Studies in Higher Education and Institute of
Governmental Studies.
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 133
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for
developing grounded theory. London, England: SAGE.
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452230153
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed-methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. London: Sage.
Cullen, D. L., & Luna, G. (1993). Women mentoring in academe: Addressing the gender gap in
higher education. Gender and Education, 5(2), 125–137.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0954025930050201
Davey, K. M. (2008). Women’s accounts of organizational politics as a gendering process.
Gender, Work & Organization, 15(6), 650-671.
Davis, D. R. (2016). The journey to the top: Stories on the intersection of race and gender for
African American women in academia and business. Journal of Research
Initiatives, 2(1), 4.
Davis, D. R., & Maldonado, C. (2015). Shattering the glass ceiling: The leadership development
of African American women in higher education. Advancing Women in Leadership, 35,
48-64.
Derks, B., Ellemers, N., van Laar, C., & de Groot, K. (2011). Do sexist organizational cultures
create the Queen Bee? British Journal of Social Psychology, 50(3), 519–535.
https://doi.org/10.1348/014466610X525280
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 134
Derks, B., Van Laar, C., & Ellemers, N. (2016). The queen bee phenomenon: Why women
leaders distance themselves from junior women. The Leadership Quarterly, 27(3), 456–
469.
Diekman, A. B., & Eagly, A. H. (2000). Stereotypes as dynamic constructs: Women and men of
the past, present, and future. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(10), 1171–
1188. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167200262001
Dodge, K., Gilroy, F., & Fenzel, L. (1995). Requisite management characteristics revisited: Two
decades later. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 10(6), 253–264.
Dominici, F., Fried, L. P., & Zeger, S. L. (2009). So FEW women leaders. Academe, 95(4), 25–
27.
Eagly, A., & Wood, W. (1999). The origins of sex differences in human behavior - Evolved
dispositions versus social roles. The American Psychologist, 54(6), 408–423.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.54.6.408
Eagly, A. H. (1987). Reporting sex differences. American Psychologist, 42(7), 756–757.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.42.7.755
Eagly, A. H. (1995). The science and politics of comparing women and men. American
Psychologist, 50(3), 145–158. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.50.3.145
Eagly, A. H. (2007). Female leadership advantage and disadvantage: Resolving the
contradictions. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31(1), 1–12.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.2007.00326.x
Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (2007). Through the labyrinth: The truth about how women become
leaders. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Press.
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 135
Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (2013). Women and the labyrinth of leadership. Leadership ethics.
London, England: SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446286357.n50
Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders.
Psychological Review, 109(3), 573–598. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.109.3.573
Ely, R. J. (1994). The effects of organizational demographics and social identity on relationships
among professional women. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(2), 203–238.
https://doi.org/10.2307/2393234
Ely, R. J., Ibarra, H., & Kolb, D. M. (2011). Taking gender into account: Theory and design for
women’s leadership development programs. Academy of Management Learning &
Education,10(3), 474–493. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2010.0046
Ely, R. J., & Rhode, D. L. (2010). Women and leadership. In N. Nohria & R. Khurana (Eds.),
Handbook of Leadership Theory and Practice (pp. 377–410). Boston, MA: Harvard
Business School.
Erikson, E. H. (1959). Identity and the life cycle: Selected papers. Madison, CT: International
Universities Press.
Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. New York, NY: Norton.
Evans, D. P. (2014). Aspiring to leadership… A woman’s world? Procedia - Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 148(25). 543–550. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.07.077
Faniko, K., Ellemers, N., & Derks, B. (2015, September). Creating the queen bee: How career
experiences of female professionals affect support for affirmative action policies. Paper
presented at Talk at 14th Congress of the Swiss Society of Psychology, Geneva.
Feist-Price, S. (1994). Cross-gender mentoring relationships: Critical issues. Journal of
Rehabilitation, 60(2), 13.
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 136
Fine, G. A. (1996). Justifying work: Occupational rhetorics as resources in restaurant kitchens.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(1), 90–115. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393987
Fleishman, E. A., Mumford, M. D., Zaccaro, S. J., Levin, K. Y., Korotkin, A. L., & Hein, M. B.
(1991). Taxonomic efforts in the description of leader behavior: A synthesis and
functional interpretation. The Leadership Quarterly, 2(4), 245–287.
https://doi.org/10.1016/1048-9843(91)90016-U
French, J. R., Raven, B., & Cartwright, D. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright
(Ed.), Studies in social power (pp. 150-167). Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social
Research.
Fortunado, I. T. (2016). Heroes’ dilemma and believers’ dilemma. Open Journal of
Philosophy, 6(03), 251.
Gamble, E. D., & Turner, N. J. (2015). Career ascension of African American women in
executive positions in postsecondary institutions. Journal of Organizational Culture,
Communications and Conflict, 19(1), 82.
Garcia-Retamero, R., & López-Zafra, E. (2006). Prejudice against women in male-congenial
environments: Perceptions of gender role congruity in leadership. Sex Roles, 55(1), 51–
61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-006-9068-1
Glass, C., & Cook, A. (2016). Leading at the top: Understanding women’s challenges above the
glass ceiling. The Leadership Quarterly, 27(1), 51–63.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2015.09.003
Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: Differentiating hostile and
benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(3), 491–512.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.491
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 137
Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life (Vol. 13). Garden City, NY:
Doubleday.
Graf, N., Brown, A., & Patten, E. (2018). The narrowing, but persistent, gender gap in pay. Pew
Research Center, April, 9.
Graham, P. A. (1978). Expansion and exclusion: A history of women in American higher
education. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 3(4), 759-773.
Growe, R., & Montgomery, P. (1999). Women and the leadership paradigm: Bridging the gender
gap. The Phi Kappa Phi Journal, 17E, 1-10.
Gutek, B. A., & Morasch, B. (1982). Sex‐ratios, sex‐role spillover, and sexual harassment of
women at work. The Journal of Social Issues, 38(4), 55–74.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1982.tb01910.x
Hall, D. T. (1987). Careers and socialization. Journal of Management, 13(2), 301–321.
https://doi.org/10.1177/014920638701300207
Hall, J. A., & Carter, J. D. (1999). Gender-stereotype accuracy as an individual difference.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(2), 350–359.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.77.2.350
Hannum, K. M., Muhly, S. M., Shockley-Zalabak, P. S., & White, J. S. (2015). Women leaders
within higher education in the United States: Supports, barriers, and experiences of being
a senior leader. Advancing Women in Leadership, 35, 65–75.
Heilman, M. E. (2001). Description and prescription: How gender stereotypes prevent women’s
ascent up the organizational ladder. The Journal of Social Issues, 57(4), 657–674.
https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00234
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 138
Helgensen, S. (1990). The female advantage: Women’s ways of leadership. New York, NY:
Doubleday.
Heller, T., & Van Til, J. (1982). Leadership and followership: Some summary propositions. The
Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 18(3), 405–414.
https://doi.org/10.1177/002188638201800313
Hewlett, S. (2013). Forget a mentor, find a sponsor: the new way to fast-track your career.
Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.
Hill, L. H., & Wheat, C. A. (2017). The influence of mentorship and role models on university
women leaders’ career paths to university presidency. Qualitative Report, 22(8), 2090–
2111.
Hollander, E. P. (1992). Leadership, followership, self, and others. The Leadership
Quarterly,3(1), 43–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/1048-9843(92)90005-Z
Hülsheger, U. R., & Schewe, A. F. (2011). On the costs and benefits of emotional labor: A meta-
analysis of three decades of research. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 16(3),
361–389. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022876
Hunt, D. M., & Michael, C. (1983). Mentorship: A career training and development tool.
Academy of Management Review, 8(3), 475–485.
https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1983.4284603
Hymowitz, C. (2004, November 8). Through the glass ceiling. The Wall Street Journal, 116, R1.
Hymowitz, C., & Schellhardt, T. D. (1986, March 24). The glass ceiling: Why women can’t
seem to break the invisible barrier that blocks them from the top jobs. The Wall Street
Journal, 57, D1, D4-D5.
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 139
Ibarra, H. (1999). Provisional selves: Experimenting with image and identity in professional
adaptation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(4), 764–791.
https://doi.org/10.2307/2667055
Jago, A. G. (1982). Leadership: Perspectives in theory and research. Management Science,28(3),
315–336. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.28.3.315
Jonassen, D. H., & Hernandez-Serrano, J. (2002). Case-based reasoning and instructional design:
Using stories to support problem solving. Educational Technology Research and
Development, 50(2), 65–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504994
Jones, S. J., & Palmer, E. M. (2011). Glass ceilings and catlights: Career barriers for professional
women in academia. Advancing Women in Leadership, 31, 189-198.
Josselson, R. (1987). Finding herself: Pathways to identity development in women. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Josselson, R. (2005). Identity. In M. E. Wilson & L. E. Wolf-Wendel (Eds.), ASHE reader on
college student development theory (pp. 191–199). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Kark, R., Waismel-Manor, R., & Shamir, B. (2012). Does valuing androgyny and femininity lead
to a female advantage? the relationship between gender-role, transformational leadership
and identification. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(3), 620–640.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.12.012
Kerby, A. (1991). Narrative and the self. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Kezar, A., Carducci, R., & Contreras-McGavin, M. (2006). Rethinking the “L” word in higher
education : the revolution in research on leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
King, J. E., & Gomez, G. G. (2008). On the pathway to the presidency: Characteristics of higher
education’s senior leadership. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 140
Kolb, D. M., & Kickul, J. (2006). It pays to ask: Negotiating conditions for leadership
success. CGO insights, 23, 1-8.
Kolb, D., & McGinn, K. (2009). Beyond gender and negotiation to gendered negotiations.
Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 2(1), 1–16.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-4716.2008.00024.x
Kram, K. E. (1985). Mentoring at work: Developmental relationships in organizational life.
University Press of America.
Kurtz‐Costes, B., Andrews Helmke, L., & Ülkü‐Steiner, B. (2006). Gender and doctoral studies:
The perceptions of Ph. D. students in an American university. Gender and
Education,18(2), 137–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540250500380513
Lämsä, A., & Sintonen, T. (2001). A discursive approach to understanding women leaders in
working life. Journal of Business Ethics, 34(3/4), 255-267.
Lepkowski, C. C. (2009). Gender and the career aspirations, professional assets, and personal
variables of higher education administrators. Advancing women in leadership, 29.
Levanon, A., England, P., & Allison, P. (2009). Occupational feminization and pay: Assessing
causal dynamics using 1950–2000 US census data. Social Forces, 88(2), 865-891.
Madsen, S. R. (2008). On becoming a woman leader: Learning from the experiences of
university presidents. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Madsen, S. R. (2012). Women and leadership in higher education: Current realities, challenges,
and future directions. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 14(2), 131–139.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422311436299
Marcia, J. E. (1966). Development and validation of ego-identity status. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 3(5), 551–558. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0023281
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 141
Marcia, J. E. (1976). Identity six years after: A follow-up study. Journal of Youth and
Adolescence, 5(2), 145–160. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01537490
Marcia, J. E. (1980). Identity in adolescence. In J. Adelson (Ed.), Handbook of adolescent
psychology (pp. 159–187). New York, NY: Wiley.
Markus, H., & Nurius, P. (1986). Possible selves. The American Psychologist, 41(9), 954–969.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.41.9.954
Marshall, S. M. (2009). Women higher education administrators with children: Negotiating
personal and professional lives. NASPA. Journal About Women in Higher Education,
2(1), 10. https://doi.org/10.2202/1940-7890.1031
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks: SAGE.
Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self, and society from the perspective of a social behaviorist.
Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods
sourcebook. London, England: SAGE.
Montas-Hunter, S. S. (2012). Self-efficacy and Latina leaders in higher education. Journal of
Hispanic Higher Education, 11(4), 315-335.
Morley, L. (2013). The rules of the game: Women and the leadership turn in higher education.
Gender and Education, 25(1), 116-131.
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 142
Muñoz, M. (2009). In their own words and by the numbers: A mixed-methods study of Latina
community college presidents. Community College Journal of Research and
Practice, 34(1-2), 153-174.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2003). The nation’s report card: Reading highlights,
2002. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Nidiffer, J. (2010). Overview: Women as leaders in academia. In K. O’Connor (Ed.), Gender
and women’s leadership: A reference handbook (pp. 555-564). Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE.
Northouse, P. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
Nyström, S. (2009). The dynamics of professional identity formation: Graduates’ transitions
from higher education to working life. Vocations and Learning, 2(1), 1–18.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186-008-9014-1
O’Connor, K. (Ed.). (2010). Gender and women’s leadership: A reference handbook. Los
Angeles: SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412979344
Parks-Stamm, E., & Heilman, M. E. (2007). Gender stereotypes in the workplace: Obstacles to
women’s career progress. In S. J. Correll (Ed.), Social psychology of gender (pp. 47–77).
Bingley, UK: Emerald Group. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0882-6145(07)24003-2
Patton, L. D., Renn, K. A., Guido, F. M., & Quaye, S. J. (2016). Student development in college:
Theory, research, and practice (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research and methods: Integrating theory and practice.
London, England: SAGE.
Pew Research Center. (2013a). 10 findings about women in the workplace. Retrieved from
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/12/11/10-findings-about-women-in-the-workplace/
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 143
Pew Research Center. (2013b). On pay gap, millennial women near parity – for now. Retrieved
from http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/12/11/on-pay-gap-millennial-women-near-
parity-for-now/
Prentice, D. A., & Carranza, E. (2002). What women and men should be, shouldn’t be, are
allowed to be, and don’t have to be: The contents of prescriptive gender stereotypes.
Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26(4), 269–281. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-6402.t01-
1-00066
Prime, J. L., Carter, N. M., & Welbourne, T. M. (2009). Women “take care,” men “take charge”:
Managers’ stereotypic perceptions of women and men leaders. The Psychologist
Manager Journal, 12(1), 25–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/10887150802371799
Prime, J., & Moss-Racusin, C.A. (2009), Engaging Men in Gender Initiatives: What Change
Agents Need to Know. New York, NY: Catalyst.
Ragins, B. R., & Cotton, J. L. (1999). Mentor functions and outcomes: A comparison of men and
women in formal and informal mentoring relationships. Journal of applied Psychology,
84(4), 529.
Rhoades, G. (2007). The study of the academic profession. In P. J. Gumport (Ed.), Sociology of
higher education. Contributions and their contexts (pp. 113–146). Baltimore: The Johns
Hopkins University Press.
Rhoads, K. V., & Cialdini, R. B. (2002). The business of influence: Principles that lead to
success in commercial settings. In J. P. Dillard & L. Shen (Eds.), The persuasion
handbook (pp. 513–542). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 144
Richards, J. M., & Gross, J. J. (1999). Composure at any cost? The cognitive consequences of
emotion suppression. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25(8), 1033–1044.
https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672992511010
Ridgeway, C. L. (1997). Interaction and the conservation of gender inequality: Considering
employment. American Sociological Review, 62(2), 218–235.
https://doi.org/10.2307/2657301
Rosener, J. (2011). America’s competitive secret: Women managers. New York, NY: Oxford
University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195119145.001.0001
Ryan, M. K., & Haslam, S. A. (2005). The glass cliff: Evidence that women are over‐represented
in precarious leadership positions. British Journal of management, 16(2), 81-90.
Sandberg, S. (2013). Lean in: Women, work, and the will to lead. New York, NY: Alfred A.
Knopf.
Sawyer, K., & Valerio, A. M. (2017). Making the case for male champions for gender
inclusiveness at work. Organizational Dynamics, 47(1), 1–7.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2017.06.002
Schaef, A.W. (1985). Women’s reality. Minneapolis: Winston Press.
Schein, E. H. (1978). Career dynamics: Matching individual and organizational needs (Vol.
6834). Addison Wesley Publishing Company.
Schein, V. E. (1973). The relationship between sex role stereotypes and requisite management
characteristics. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 57(2), 95–100.
https://doi.org/10.1037/h0037128
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 145
Schein, V. E. (1975). Relationships between sex role stereotypes and requisite management
characteristics among female managers. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 60(3), 340–
344. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076637
Schein, V. E. (2007). Women in management: Reflections and projections. Women in
Management Review, 22(1), 6–18. https://doi.org/10.1108/09649420710726193
Schein, V. E., Mueller, R., & Jacobson, C. (1989). The relationship between sex role stereotypes
and requisite management characteristics among college students. Sex Roles, 20(1-2),
103–110. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00288030
Schwartz, R. (1997). Reconceptualizing the leadership roles of women in higher education: A
brief history on the importance of deans of women. The Journal of Higher
Education,68(5), 502–522. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.1997.11778995
Seltzer, R. (2017). College presidents diversifying slowly and growing older, study finds.
Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/06/20/college-presidents-
diversifying-slowly-and-growing-older-study-finds
Shields, S. A. (2002). Speaking from the heart: Gender and the social meaning of emotion.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Slay, H. S., & Smith, D. A. (2011). Professional identity construction: Using narrative to
understand the negotiation of professional and stigmatized cultural identities. Human
Relations, 64(1), 85–107. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726710384290
Sokoloff, N. J. (1992). Black women and white women in the professions. NY: Routledge.
Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. L. (1979). Comparison of masculine and feminine personality
attributes and sex-role attitudes across age groups. Developmental Psychology, 15(5),
583–584. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0078091
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 146
Staines, G., Tavris, C., & Jayaratne, T. E. (1974). The queen bee syndrome. Psychology Today,
7(8), 55-60.
Strauss, A. L. (1978). Negotiations: Varieties, contexts, processes, and social order. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Taylor, P. (2008). Being an academic today. In R. Barnett & R. Di Napoli (Eds.), Changing
identities in higher education: Voicing perspectives (pp. 27–39). London, England:
Routledge.
Theodore, A. (1971). The professional woman: Trends and prospects. The professional woman,
1-35.
Uhlir, G. A. (1989). Leadership and gender. Retrieved from
http://search.credoreference.com/content/entry/sageindorga/leadership_and_gender/0
Valerio, A. M., & Sawyer, K. (2016). The men who mentor women. Retrieved from
https://hbr.org/2016/12/the-men-who-mentor-women
Viernes Turner, C. S. (2007). Pathways to the presidency: Biographical sketches of women of
color firsts. Harvard Educational Review, 77(1), 1-38.
Waterman, A. S., & Archer, S. L. (1990). A life-span perspective on identity formation:
Developments in form, function, and process. In P. B. Baltes, D. L. Featherman, & R. M.
Lerner (Eds.), Life-span development and behavior (Vol. 10, pp. 29-57). Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Watson, C., & Hoffman, L. R. (2004). The role of task-related behavior in the emergence of
leaders: The dilemma of the informed woman. Group & Organization Management,
29(6), 659–685. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601103254263
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 147
White, J. S. (2012). HERS Institutes: Curriculum for advancing women leaders in higher
education. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 14(1), 11–27.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422311429732
Winston, G. C. (1999). Subsidies, hierarchy and peers: The awkward economics of higher
education. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 13(1), 13–36.
https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.13.1.13
Wood, W., Christensen, P. N., Hebl, M. R., & Rothgerber, H. (1997). Conformity to sex-typed
norms, affect, and the self-concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(3),
523–535. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.73.3.523
Yukl, G. (1999). An evaluation of conceptual weaknesses in transformational and charismatic
leadership theories. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 285–305.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(99)00013-2

LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 148
APPENDIX A
RECRUITMENT EMAIL/LETTER

Dear [Insert name],

Hello, I am an Ed. D. candidate in the Rossier School of Education at the University of Southern
California (USC). I am currently working on my dissertation, which focuses on the leadership
and professional identity of women leaders at a 4-year researcher university. My qualitative
study will collect data from full-time women leaders in enrollment services.

I am writing now to describe my project and invite you to participate.

My study focuses on the professional identity development of women leaders. I hope to find out
what it is like to be a woman leader at your university by conducting interviews. The results of
my study should prove interesting to those in my discipline and will generate information useful
for institutions and departments in terms of policy creation, planning, and improving work
environments for women leaders. I am planning to conduct interviews with women at different
levels of leadership. The identities of participating individuals is confidential with the goal of
determining what is common across the experience for women leaders at different levels of
leadership.

Participating in my project should not require much of your time. You and I will complete one
interview approximately one hour in length. After that, I will contact you to share my
transcriptions and ask for clarification if necessary. Finally, I may share some portions of my
analysis and conclusions for your input.

If you are interested in participating in my study, please reply to this email. Once again, the
names of participating individuals is confidential during the research process and in the
presentation of the study’s findings. Participant identities will not be shared with other
participants of this study as well.

I am happy to talk in more detail about my study in-person, by phone or email. If there is any
other information you would like to help in making your decision about participation, please do
not hesitate to ask.

Best Regards,

Carlos A. Mora, Doctoral Candidate
USC: Rossier School of Education

LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 149
APPENDIX B
INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
Leadership & Professional Identity: Perceptions, Experiences and Negotiations of Women
Leaders in Higher Education

I. Introduction
Hello and thank you again for taking time out of your busy schedule to meet with me so I can ask
you questions for my pilot study. My name is Carlos A. Mora and I am here to talk with you
about the experience of being a woman leader at a 4-year research university. I know it is not
easy to take time away from your daily work responsibilities, so again, thank you for your time.

As I mentioned previously, I am a doctoral candidate in the Rossier School of Education. My
study consists of questions that pertain to women leaders and specifically looking at the
perceptions and experiences of women leaders in higher education. Furthermore, I would like to
know how women leaders in higher education exhibit mentorship behaviors and characteristics
with their female staff. You are one of three higher education managers that I am interviewing
and observing for this pilot study.

I understand we are colleagues within the university; however, I want to emphasis that I am only
a researcher during the interview and observation period. The data collected in the interview and
observation period is confidential and will only be seen and used for the purposes of this study
and will be destroyed at completion. I will not share any information with anyone inside or
outside our university. Direct quotes may be used, however never attributed to you, as only
pseudonyms will be used for participants in my pilot study.

Lastly, I like to provide my interviewees with the option of asking any questions before we get
started, so please let me know if there is anything pressing or something you would like for me
to clarify before we get started. If not, could you please give me permission to start the
interview? A digital recorder is requested so I can give my full attention to you and your
answers without having to worry about taking diligent notes. The recording is only for the
purposes of this study and will be destroyed after transcription. Do I have your consent to record
our conversation? YES/NO

II. Setting the Stage
I would like to start by asking you some demographic questions:
- Would you like to state your race/ethnicity?
- Can you provide your post-secondary degrees and majors and/or programs of study?
- How long have you been in higher education?
- How long have you been in your current leadership role?
- What was your childhood career choice?
- Did a parent steer or guide you in a particular field of study?
- What was your career path of choice when you entered college?
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 150
Lead Question:
1. Can you please briefly tell me about your career up to this point and the path to your
current position?
Possible probes, if not answered as part of the response to the main question:
a. What made you want to be a leader in higher education?
c. How satisfied are you with your career so far?

Questions:
2. Tell me about your job. What is it like?
Possible probes, if not answered as part of the response to the main question:
a. How do you feel when you are walking into work on an average day?
b. What are the opportunities and the challenges you face in your current position?
c. In your work life, what is the most important thing to you?
d. What motivates you in your work?
e. How satisfied are you with your work currently?
h. What opportunities for professional development do you receive?
i. Have you had any mentorship opportunities?
j. Do you think your workload is appropriate?

3. How would you describe your leadership style?
Possible probes, if not answered as part of the response to the main question:
a. What if you were male, how would you describe your leadership style?

4. How do you feel about working at your institution?
Possible probes, if not answered as part of the response to the main question:
a. Have your feelings about your job changed in the time you have been in this position?
b. What do you think about the policies regarding women at your institution?
c. How do you think the policies and practices here might make your experience
different from men?
d. What do you believe the perception is of women leaders in your department and at
your institution?
e. How do you think you are perceived by your colleagues?
f. Do you believe your colleagues and department value your work?
g. Can you describe your relationships with members of your department?

5. How would you describe your professional identity?
Possible probes, if not answered as part of the response to the main question:
a. What identities do you believe you bring into the workplace?
b. How do you negotiate between the multiple identities?

6. Please take a minute to think about the future of your career. ?
Possible probes, if not answered as part of the response to the main question:
a. Do you believe you will continue to process to senior leadership roles?
b. Do you anticipate a career change outside of higher education?

LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY 151
III. Closing

This concludes the questions I have today. If something comes up later, is it possible to contact
you for a follow up via email? YES/NO

In addition, do you have anything to add? Perhaps there is something I did not ask, but you
believe it is important to know or discuss about women leadership and professional identity
development.

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Women and leadership: the impact of collegiate athletics on leader identity development and attainment of leadership positions

PDF

Latina leaders in community college

PDF

A narrative inquiry: Hispanic women in leadership

PDF

The educational and professional choices of Iranian women in STEM doctoral programs

PDF

Women of color senior leaders: pathways to increasing representation in higher education

PDF

The impact of conflict and resilience on leadership: a mixed methods study of female elementary principals leading change

PDF

Women and leadership: an analysis of collegiate athletics and contributions to leadership

PDF

Student-athletes and leadership: a case study of the impact of collegiate athletics on social change behavior and leadership development

PDF

Conflict and resilience in women leaders of educational change

PDF

Raising women leaders of Christian higher education: an innovation study

PDF

Their voices: middle school girls of color and their perceptions of themselves as leaders

PDF

Teachers' perspectives on the inclusion of students with autism spectrum disorders in the general education classroom: a gap analysis

PDF

The underrepresentation of Latinas as K−12 school district superintendents: an evaluation study

PDF

Differentiated culturally relevant curriculum to affirm identity for gifted African American students

PDF

Maximizing leadership development in the U.S. Army: an evaluation study

PDF

An examination of teacher leadership in public schools

PDF

Recognizing whiteness: the journey of White educators to unpack racial identity and heighten racial consciousness

PDF

Improving the representation of women in the independent school headship

PDF

From a Doctor of Business Administration to a business leader: addressing the upward mobility gender gap in the Arabian Gulf

PDF

Building leaders: the role of core faculty in student leadership development in an undergraduate business school

Asset Metadata

Creator Mora, Carlos A. (author)

Core Title Leadership and identity: perceptions, experiences and negotiations of women leaders in higher education

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 06/19/2019

Defense Date 05/06/2019

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

Tag Higher education,identity,identity development,leadership,OAI-PMH Harvest,professional identity,women leadership

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Pensavalle, Margo Taylor (committee chair), Hasan, Angela Marie (committee member), Robles, Darline Parra (committee member)

Creator Email cmora@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-177227

Unique identifier UC11660836

Identifier etd-MoraCarlos-7507.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-177227 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-MoraCarlos-7507.pdf

Dmrecord 177227

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Mora, Carlos A.

Type texts

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

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA