Leadership Frames of College Presidents, Their Executive Cabinets, and Teams in Public and Not-for-Profit Master\u27s Institutions in West Virginia, Kentucky, Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylvania, North and South Carolina, and Florida

This study investigated leadership frames of college presidents and members of their executive cabinets (vice presidents for academic affairs, vice presidents for student affairs, and chief financial officers) to determine their predominant leadership frame(s). It also determined if the leadership frames of the presidents\u27 group and the cabinet members\u27 group diverged or converged. Public and not-for-profit master\u27s degree granting institutions, large, medium, and small, in the states of West Virginia, Kentucky, Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylvania, North and South Carolina, and Florida participated in this study. Of the 384 senior administrators that were invited to participate, 147 completed Bolman & Deal\u27s Leadership Orientation (Self) (1990) questionnaire. The survey instrument consisted of 32 items measuring the four leadership frames espoused by Bolman & Deal. The instrument was formatted electronically using SurveyMonkey and sent via electronic mail to each participant. Frequencies and descriptive statistics were used in analyzing the mean scores of leadership frames of the individual participants and as groups. Analyses of variance (ANOVA) were used between groups to determine if significant differences existed in each of the leadership frames. Tables graphically displayed the results in answering each research question. Demographic information was collected and analyzed to determine gender, administrative roles, and years in administrative role. The findings indicated that presidents often operated as multi-framed leaders with no significant differences regarding years in role and leadership frames. Additionally presidents had mean scores above 4 out of a possible 5 in the political, symbolic, and structural frames. Cabinet members saw similar results. All operated as multi-frame leaders at times, but tended to operate in the human resource, political, and structural frames with their mean scores supporting the results. In comparing leadership frames between groups, two significant differences were found. Presidents significantly more often used the political (rho = .013) and symbolic (rho= .003) frames than did their cabinet members