Can I Do It?: a Mixed Methods Study Exploring Leader Self-Efficacy During Career Transitions of United States Air Force Officers

Leadership is considered an imperative for the success of organizations, especially in increasingly dynamic and complex times (Day, 2000; Kotter, 2012). Developing leaders to enable the success of organizations has become an effort of strategic importance in many organizations. Military services have a long history of striving for leader development, and the United States Air Force is no exception. The current methods of leader development may challenge opportunities for growth in individual leader confidence, or leader self-efficacy, especially during career transition. To investigate this problem, the purpose of this mixed methods study was to explore the perceptions of U.S. Air Force officers of leader development experiences and to examine how these methods may affect leader self-efficacy, focusing on career transitioning to the civilian sector. This mixed methods study was based on a conceptual framework with three main streams: leader development, self-efficacy, and leader identity and sought to answer three main research questions to investigate leader self-efficacy of officers in transition and to explore their perceptions. 1. Using the lens of leader self-efficacy, how confident do U.S. Air Force officers describe themselves as being to lead in the civilian job market? 2. How do officers describe the value of the United States Air Force's leadership development program(s) in preparing them for civilian leadership positions? 3. How does an individual leader's self-efficacy score relate with the leader development described while serving in the U.S. Air Force? The eight-week study consisted of a quantitative portion, which was an online survey, including a 22-question Leader Efficacy Questionnaire and questions on demographics and leadership development activity completion, and a qualitative portion involving semi-structured interviews. The analysis of the quantitative portion indicated differences were not significant between (a) gender (p = .10). Differences were significant between (a) years of service (p = .03), (b) rank (p = .04), and (c) highest level of professional military education completed (p = .03). However, the differences were not significant between (a) commissioning sources (p = .57) and (b) education (p = .54). Six findings emerged from the study: (a) confidence looks different, (b) perceptions of leading in the civilian sector affect confidence, (c) formal courses are not considered significant in building confidence, (d) informal opportunities are highly valued, (e) learning from experience, and (f) leader development activities affect leader self-efficacy. Finally, the study resulted in recommendations for four populations: (a) U.S. Air Force officers, (b) U.S. Air Force educators, (c) U.S. Air Force supervisors, and (d) transition counselors.Ed.D., Educational Leadership and Management -- Drexel University, 201