A Case Study of Global Leader Development at a Military Institution of Higher Learning
Dissertation
Submitted to Northcentral University
Graduate Faculty of the School of Education
in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
by
RICHARD A. WAGNER JR.
Prescott Valley, Arizona
August 2016
ProQuest Number: 10172386
All rights reserved
INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.
ProQuest 10172386
Published by ProQuest LLC ( 2016 ). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author.
All rights reserved.
This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346
Approval Page
A Case Study of Global Leader Development at a Military Institution of Higher Learning
By
RICHARD A. WAGNER JR.
Approved by:
9/30/16
Chair: Robert George, PhD
Date
Certified by:
Dean of School: Rebecca Wardlow, Ed.D
Date
II
Abstract
A worldwide community continues to evolve resulting in economic and political inter
connections between formerly disparate cultures. Consequently, Leadership
practitioners, in particular the U.S. military, have an immediate need to develop a new
type of leader within their organizations, a global leader, that can effectively operate in
distinctly multi-cultural environments. However, researchers have only just begun to
study global leadership in general and global leadership development in particular,
remains poorly understood. The faculty leaders at one particular military institution of
higher learning (MIHL) guide a culturally diverse team of U.S. military officers, allied
foreign officers, and civilian professors. The academic success of the cadet students and
many external evaluations strongly support the conclusion that this organization
successfully and routinely develops global leaders. The purpose of this study was to
discover how the MIHL faculty leaders are developing global leaders. A qualitative,
embedded, exploratory, single case study methodology was adopted using MIHL faculty
leaders and followers as subjects. This study examined multiple units of analysis ranging
from the President’s office to the individual professors/instructors. The data collection
plan included three sources, archival records, direct observation, and interviews.
However, only one source proved to be tenable. Therefore, the primary data source was a
series of fourteen hour long interviews with civilian professors, allied foreign officers,
department heads, and deputy heads, both leaders and followers. Each interview was
digitally recorded and subsequently transcribed into computer text documents. With the
aid of computer analysis, each transcript was examined to identify data patterns that
ultimately resulted in three themes that may provide direction for future research. The
iii
first theme suggests that the establishment of a trusting relationship between the effective
global leader and their followers is a critical element. The second theme suggests that
effective and routine communication between global leaders and their followers is also
fundamental to leader success. Lastly, the most prominent theme is a possible positive
connection between the adoption by the global leader of an inspirational leadership style
and the success of that leader. The ability of a transformational leader to inspire
followers to achieve a lasting future vision of organizational success may be a key global
leader competency that is able to transcend the cultural boundaries that initially exist and
then often persist within multicultural organizations. The analysis of the research
questions leads to two observations that suggest possible explanations for the
preponderance of transformational leaders amongst the MIHL senior faculty leaders.
Recommendations are given for multicultural organizations seeking to develop global
leaders as well as researchers planning future research.
iv
Table of Contents
List of Tables ...................................................................................................................vii
List of Figures ..................................................................................................................viii
Chapter 1: Introduction ....................................................................................................1
Background ................................................................................................................2
Problem Statement .....................................................................................................8
Purpose.......................................................................................................................9
Theoretical Framework ..............................................................................................11
Research Questions ....................................................................................................14
Theoretical Propositions ............................................................................................17
Nature of the Study ....................................................................................................19
Significance of the Study ...........................................................................................21
Definitions..................................................................................................................22
Summary ....................................................................................................................25
Chapter 2: Literature Review ...........................................................................................27
The Evolution of Leadership Theory and Thought....................................................29
Transformational Leadership .....................................................................................43
The Contextual Nature of Leadership ........................................................................53
Global Leadership ......................................................................................................66
Summary ....................................................................................................................69
Chapter 3: Research Method ............................................................................................71
Research Methods and Design ...................................................................................73
Population ..................................................................................................................74
Sample........................................................................................................................75
Materials/Instruments ................................................................................................76
Data Collection, Processing, and Analysis ................................................................77
Assumptions...............................................................................................................82
Limitations .................................................................................................................83
Delimitations ..............................................................................................................83
Ethical Assurances .....................................................................................................84
Summary ....................................................................................................................85
Chapter 4: Findings ..........................................................................................................86
Results ........................................................................................................................91
Evaluation of Findings ...............................................................................................113
Summary ....................................................................................................................115
Chapter 5: Implications, Recommendations, and Conclusions .......................................117
v
Implications................................................................................................................119
Recommendations ......................................................................................................132
Conclusions ................................................................................................................136
References ........................................................................................................................138
Appendixes ......................................................................................................................147
Appendix A: ...............................................................................................................148
Demographic Survey Information .............................................................................148
Appendix B: ...............................................................................................................149
Interview Guide (Leader) ...........................................................................................149
Appendix C: ...............................................................................................................150
Interview Guide (Follower) .......................................................................................150
Appendix D: ...............................................................................................................151
Informed Consent Form .............................................................................................151
vi
List of Tables
Table 1 Number of Interview Participants by Unit of Analysis and Group...................... 88
Table 2 Coding Summary.................................................................................................. 90
Table 3 Connections Between Identified Themes and Research Questions ................... 103
vi
i
List of Figures
Figure 1. Jepson’s (2009) model of the dynamic interaction of different contexts. ......... 55
Figure 2. Graphical depiction of broad contextual interactions that lead to a specific
context. .............................................................................................................................. 58
Figure 3. Contextual interaction of two very dissimilar groups. ..................................... 59
vi
ii
1
Chapter 1: Introduction
Many empirical studies support the effectiveness of modern leadership theories
such as transformational and authentic leadership (Hernandez, Eberly, Avolio, &
Johnson, 2011). However, these theories still suffer from two general deficiencies. First,
they do not adequately address the effect of changes in situational variables (context) on
leadership behavior (Avolio, Walumbwa, & Weber, 2009). Studies have shown that
successful leaders learn to adapt their behavior in response to their particular context
(Hernandez et al., 2011; Iszatt-White, 2011). However, neither the magnitude nor the
exact nature of the adaptation is well understood (Inman, 2011; Jepson, 2009; Leong &
Fischer, 2011; Osborn & Marion, 2009; Rowold & Heinitz, 2007). The rise of
international alliances and multinational business ventures has focused attention on the
particularly challenging multicultural context, characterized by followers with
significantly different experiences, customs, and values (Holt & Seki, 2012). As the
global economy continues to grow, many government, military, and business leaders
increasingly find themselves thrust into complex, often volatile, multicultural
organizations with little or no preparation (Holt & Seki, 2012). Many falter at the task,
resulting in various degrees of organizational failure (Gill, 2012). Others persevere and
somehow adapt their leadership to become successful global leaders (Holt & Seki, 2012).
The second weakness of modern leadership theory concerns the development of
leaders themselves (Bernal, 2009; McCleskey, 2014; Silva, 2014). Humankind has
pondered the question of leader development for thousands of years (Bass & Bass, 2008;
Kutz, 2012). The most ancient belief was that great men emerged from the masses of
humanity having been born to the task of leading others (Bass & Bass, 2008). Current
2
leadership theories are better, describing in detail what the ideal leader should know and
do (general knowledge and behaviors). However, they do not describe a practical
methodology to develop these attributes in the aspiring leader (Bernal, 2009; Gill, 2012;
Holt & Seki, 2012).
Today, both leadership researchers and practitioner’s find themselves in
unfamiliar territory. Business, governmental, and military organizations are crossing
cultural boundaries at an accelerated pace. These organizations recognize the fact that
they need to develop global leaders now but are unsure how to do so. Unfortunately,
researchers have only just begun to investigate these concepts resulting in a dearth of
information in the literature (Avolio, 2014).
This chapter serves as a general introduction to the study. The first section
consists of background information concerning the general topic area followed
immediately by the problem statement. The problem statement leads directly to the
purpose of the study, which explains the basis for the study research questions. The
chapter continues with the theoretical propositions, which are an integral part of the data
analysis. The last section includes a discussion of the nature and significance of this
proposed study followed by definitions of key terms.
Background
The world is slowly becoming flat, not in the geographical sense, but rather in an
economic, political, and cultural sense (Terrell & Rosenbusch, 2013). This was not
always the case. Since humans first began to band together, natural obstacles such as
rugged mountain ranges and vast empty oceans significantly limited the ability of these
groups to interact. Consequently, humanity evolved within geographically separated
3
areas, each developing different language, customs, and values. The result was a world
comprised of a myriad of cultures (Meyer, Mudambi, & Narula, 2011). Today the
historic cultural barriers are slowly diminishing due to the rise of technology. Recent
advances in transportation and communication have metaphorically flattened the world,
reducing the historic barriers and allowing different cultures to interact on an
unprecedented scale (Terrell &Rosenbusch, 2013). However, the transition from a
culturally diverse world to a culturally mixed global society will likely be a process filled
with many challenges. Leaders, in particular, will experience difficult challenges.
Misunderstandings between cultural elements both within individual organizations and
between different organizations can eventually lead to conflict between these factions.
This situation requires the talents of a special leader, a leader that can inspire and
motivate followers with disparate backgrounds, that is culturally aware, culturally
sensitive, and culturally intelligent (Holt & Seki, 2012; Winn, 2013).
Business organizations were among the first to recognize this change. Businesses
began a major expansion of their markets and manufacturing facilities across the globe
after World War II (Meyer, et al., 2011). These emerging Multi-National Enterprises
(MNE) have experienced mixed success. Some enterprises failed while others prospered
(Gill, 2012). While there are many possible reasons, cultural ignorance due to cultural
insensitivity is often a major contributing factor for failure. The converse is also true.
Leaders of successful MNEs are keenly aware of the cultural differences within their
organization (Winn, 2013). Further, they recognize the resultant issues, and deliberately
work to minimize any possible conflict. At the same time, they embrace cultural
diversity as a source of innovation and originality (Holt & Seki, 2012).
4
Many organizations, to include governmental and military, are just beginning to
address the challenges of leading in a culturally diverse context, finding themselves
unprepared for this new challenge (Chang, Chen, & Tsai, 2011; Gill, 2012; Holt & Seki,
2012). Compounding the problem, leadership researchers have only just begun to
recognize and study this important issue. Therefore, the general problem that this study
addresses is the lack of a clear explanation in the literature of how organizations can
develop global leaders who can effectively operate in a multicultural context (Holt &
Seki, 2012).
Failure to meet this challenge will result in more costly blunders such as the 1999
Mitsubishi – Daimler Chrysler merger that quickly failed resulting in massive losses for
shareholders (Gill, 2012). Gill (2012) attributed that failure to the inability of corporate
leaders to adapt to an unfamiliar multicultural context. Gill recommended more research
on the effects of national cultural contexts and their effect on leadership.
Holt and Seki (2012) attributed much of the problem to the fragmented nature of
global leadership research noting that the majority of studies tended to favor only the
Western perspective. They called for the creation of global leadership models and
associated training tools. Winn (2013) believed that there exists a shortage of culturally
intelligent global leaders throughout the world simply because the development process
is unknown. Lastly, Pless, Maak, and Stahl (2011) stated that the current global
leadership models and training programs have little to no basis on empirical research.
The world’s military organizations have also begun to recognize the need to
develop global leaders within their organizations, which is the particular focus of this
proposed research. World Wars I and II were geographically large-scale conflicts
5
between two huge, allied, multicultural, military organizations. At the highest level of
command, senior military leaders commanded soldiers from across the globe while
operating on unfamiliar terrain, thousands of miles from their native soil (Bass, 1998).
Some mid twentieth century military alliances still exist having evolved into
modern day organizations such as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Currently, the
primary focus of these organizations is the ongoing Global War on Terror, which has
deep roots in one of the more fundamental cultural dimensions, religion (Wolf & Arrow,
2013). A logical first step towards a better understanding of global leader development
in the military would be to investigate successful military global leaders, past and
present, focusing on their development. Towards that end, one might logically first
consider investigating historic military leaders such as the WWII Theater Commanders
Eisenhower and Nimitz. These men are good examples of leaders of military
organizations that are multicultural in an international sense (Dibella, 2013). However,
there exist currently military organizations that are multicultural in a different sense. One
of the largest of these organizations is the U.S. Department of Defense, which has always
possessed a distinct military/civilian multicultural nature (Strom, Gavian, Possis,
Loughlin, Bui, Linardatos, Leskela, & Siegel, 2012).
The United States Department of Defense (DOD) reported in December 2014 that
there are 1,091,507 uniformed military personnel serving on active duty throughout the
world and in the continental United States (United States Department of Defense,
Defense Manpower Data Center, 2014). This fact is not surprising given the challenges
of the current war on terrorism. However, many Americans do not realize that supporting
those uniformed soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines are over 782,000 civilian
6
employees of the DOD (United States Government Accountability Office, 2014). A
quick calculation yields the fact that the total United States military organization is
comprised of nearly 42% civilian employees. While these civilian men and women do
not normally directly engage in combat operations, they do provide critical support
operations and most importantly, leadership. Indeed, the U.S. Constitution contains
specific provisions to insure the civilian control of all the military services. Foremost
among those provisions is the appointment of the President as the Commander and Chief
of all military forces. Thus, the leadership of the U.S. military has always been a mixture
of two distinct cultures, one civilian, and one military.
However, such a mixture does not exist without its problems. Different values,
language, and customs make misunderstandings and subsequent conflict almost
inevitable. From the very beginnings of U.S. history, this clash of cultures has been
evident. The Second Continental Congress, seemingly unaware of the challenges facing
General George Washington, constantly attempted to dictate strategy and tactics while
seldom providing crucial material support for the Continental Army (Ferling, 2007).
Against all odds and despite this neglect, the infant American Army persevered and won
its war of rebellion. Today, the American military is highly regarded throughout the
world and this civil/military relationship endures. Therefore, despite the difficulties
presented by the military/civilian multicultural environment, many senior U.S. military
leaders are essentially successful global leaders. This delicate relationship within the
U.S. DOD provides the leadership scholar a good opportunity to explore global
leadership development. However, an internationally respected military institution of
higher learning, (hereafter referred to as “the MIHL”), has been developing successful
7
leaders in a complicated multicultural environment for over 200 years.
Congressional lawmakers ordered the establishment of the MIHL very soon after
the fledgling American nation had earned its independence from England. They
recognized the dire need to train professional Army officers to fight the nation’s wars.
As part of that mission, the MIHL has earned a reputation as one of the best higher
education organizations in the country. In 2009, and again in 2013, Forbes Magazine
selected the MIHL as the best public college in the United States (Howard, 2013). The
outstanding faculty is the primary reason that the MIHL has earned this notable
distinction. From its inception over 200 years ago, the MIHL's staff and faculty has been
comprised of a mixture of civilian professors, civilian staff, foreign officers, and officers
from all branches of the U.S. military. Currently, fully 20% of the faculty members are
civilian professors who come to the MIHL from civilian colleges and universities (The
MIHL, Center for Faculty Excellence, 2013). Together, every professor, military and
civilian, must demonstrate leadership daily as they lead cadets towards the twin
objectives of knowledge and understanding. Most of the civilian and foreign professors
arrive at the MIHL with distinctly different values and norms, many never having had
any previous association with military members. Despite these challenges, the MIHL’s
President, the Commanding Officer, the Dean of the Academic Board, his Department
Heads, and their Deputy Heads, together lead a highly professional and effective
organization. The success of the academic program is a strong indicator that the MIHL is
developing effective global leaders. Therefore, an investigation of the MIHL
organization may uncover general ideas or concepts that are valuable to both practitioners
and theorists.
8
Problem Statement
As the world becomes more interconnected, organizations need culturally
sensitive, effective, leaders as they increasingly operate in complex multicultural
environments. Leadership researchers have only begun to address this issue. Therefore,
the general problem that this study addresses is the lack of a clear explanation in the
literature of how organizations can develop global leaders who can effectively operate in
a multicultural context (Gill, 2012; Holt & Seki, 2012; Meyer et al., 2011). The
consequences are significant. Wolfe and Arrow (2013) found U.S. military leaders in
Iraq and Afghanistan to be ineffective in their attempts to influence the indigenous
populations due to a lack of cultural sensitivity. Similarly, Mahmood et al. (2013)
concluded that U.S. Forces suffered from strained relationships with the local populations
due to ignorance of local culture and customs. Laurence (2011) suggested that these
recent events have taught senior U.S. military leaders that military control of the ground
does not equate to victory. Wolfe and Arrow (2013) concluded that U.S. led coalition
forces have been relatively ineffective by controlling only what is in range of their
weapon systems. The implications are suggestive of failure. Laurence (2011) maintains
that after years of conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan, the absence of culturally sensitive
leadership has resulted in thousands of casualties, but no clear victory.
Military confrontations in the future will be increasingly multicultural in nature
thereby increasing the need to develop military global leaders. Fallesen, Keller-Glaze,
and Curnow (2011) caution that current U.S. Army leader development programs are not
sufficient to prepare leaders for combat in a varied operational environment. Lastly, in
the 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review, senior U.S. military leaders called for the
9
development of culturally sensitive leaders adept at developing cooperative relationships
and partnerships (Laurence, 2011). Unfortunately, the requisite methodologies remain
undetermined (Fallesen, et al., 2011).
Purpose
The purpose of this qualitative case study is to explore how the U.S. military can
develop global leaders by studying the success of the faculty leaders at the MIHL. These
soldiers face challenges similar to those of many newly formed multinational
organizations. Specifically, inspiring a diverse mixture of followers who do not share a
common language, customs, or values is often extremely difficult (Holt & Seki, 2012).
Therefore, any theoretical developments that may result from an analysis of the MIHL’s
success at developing global leaders can be generalized to apply to similar organizations
(analytic generalization) thereby advancing theory development (Yin, 2013). This will
be an embedded single case study with multiple units of analysis. The subject of this
case study will be the MIHL, an organization that has been developing effective global
leaders for many decades. The first and broadest unit of analysis is the office of the
President, who is the top leader at the MIHL. The next two units of analysis will be the
offices of the Dean of the Academic Board and the Commanding Officer of Cadets, both
of whom work directly for the President. The next two units of analysis will be the heads
of the 13 Academic Departments and the heads of the two Military Departments, as well
as their deputy heads, who fall under the Dean and the Commanding Officer respectively.
Current theoretical thinking maintains that leadership is a function of both leader and
follower (Hernandez et al., 2011). Therefore, the final unit of analysis will be the foreign
military officers and civilian professors who significantly contribute to the multicultural
10
context at the MIHL. The qualitative data collection methods include a) document
review, b) direct observation, and c) interviews. Document sources include the MIHL
Library Archives, departmental records (such as policies, faculty assessments, and yearly
reports), and documents related to two MIHL research centers, The Center for the
Advancement of Leader Development and Organizational Learning and The Leadership
Center. This will include any document that pertains to faculty development and
training. Of particular interest is documentation of the advancement through the
professor ranks culminating in the selection process for Head of Department. The
primary direct observation opportunity is the New Instructor Training conducted by each
department, usually during the summer months between academic years. The focus here
is to discover if this training prepares new military instructors for their upcoming cultural
interaction with the civilian and foreign faculty. Lastly, open-ended interviews with
study subjects at all units of analysis levels will provide valuable experiential data. From
a population size of 600 faculty members (The MIHL, Public Affairs Office, 2011), the
leaders targeted for the 12 planned interviews are the President (1), Dean (1), selected
department heads (6), civilian professors (3), and foreign faculty (1). The President and
the Dean are the two senior leaders with the broadest perspectives. During the interview,
the researcher will attempt to determine (a) the senior leader's concern relative to global
leader development, (b) whether global leadership development is a deliberate or an ad
hoc process at the academy, and (c) personal observations or actions related to global
leader development. The department heads are the principle global leaders of interest in
this study. They are the leaders that must daily operate in the multicultural environments
that exist within their departments. During their interviews, the researcher will attempt to
11
draw out their personal experiences of becoming a global leader. The interviews with the
civilian and foreign faculty will allow the researcher to gage the complexity of the
multicultural environment at the MIHL and to gain some sense of the leadership's success
or failure. This proposed research may potentially influence organizational leadership
theory in the following ways. First, it may provide a better understanding of leadership
development in general and global leader development specifically. Secondly, any
successful practices and methodologies identified in this case study may spark further
research in order to gain a more comprehensive understanding of global leadership
development.
Theoretical Framework
This case study of the global leader development at the MIHL relies on the Full
Range Leadership Theory (FRLT) as an over-arching theory of leadership to include the
evaluation of a faculty leader’s effectiveness. Contextual leadership theory and leader
development theory are fundamental when considering the transformational leader as
described by the FRLT (Avolio& Bass, 2004). Global leadership theory is a special case
of contextual leadership theory that is becoming increasing important in the global
economy.
The FRLT is an established theory that combines the research on transformational
leadership, transactional leadership, and passive/avoidant behavior over the past three
decades into a comprehensive theory (Antonakis et al., 2003; Wang et al. 2011). The
FRLT has become a very popular theoretical guide for practitioners (Hargis et al., 2012).
This popularity is primarily due to the positive association of transformational leadership
with desirable organizational outcomes such as productivity and profit (Hargis et al.,
12
2012). Further, the three leadership styles that are central to the theory can be reliably
measured using a simple questionnaire, the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ)
(Antonakis et al., 2003). This study will explore the development of effective global
leaders. The FRLT provides a theoretical reference by which to identify and verify the
effectiveness of the MIHL global leaders. Essentially, the effective leader will
demonstrate evidence of frequent transformational leadership behavior with the
occasional appropriate use of transactional leadership.
Despite its popularity, the FRLT suffers from the same deficiency as global
leadership theory. It does not specifically address the issue of leader development. The
primary authors of the FRLT, Avolio and Bass (2004), consider genetics to be a
significant determinant in the emergence of transformational leaders and offer no
practical methodology to train aspiring transformational leaders. Some researchers and
many practitioners are attempting to define methodologies that would allow organizations
to develop the effective leaders within their own organization (Nirmala & Krishnagopal,
2011). However, these development models currently lack detail and propose universal
concepts that may not be applicable to a particular context (Hotho & Dowling, 2010).
As international and multicultural organizations have increased in number so has
the need for effective leadership in a multicultural or cross-cultural context. A multiphase, international, research project, the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior
Effectiveness (GLOBE) initiative validated the suspicions of many scholars that
successful leadership in one cultural context does not insure success in another (Avolio et
al., 2009; Hernandez et al., 2011). The GLOBE study identified the need for and the
challenges facing global leaders. However, it did not describe how organizations could
13
develop global leaders. The literature only complicates this matter with two, nearly
opposite developmental approaches (Avolio et al., 2009). One advocates international
experience within the specific cultures or countries in question while the other maintains
that the possession of certain innate character traits is the main prerequisite for effective
global leadership (Avolio et al., 2009). Further, the predominance of studies on global
leadership are lacking a multicultural view themselves, presenting a distinctly western
point of view, and neglecting other cultural viewpoints (Holt & Seki, 2012).
Consequently, there exists a great need for more research on the development of global
leaders (Avolio et al., 2009; Holt & Seki, 2012; Pless et al., 2011).
Global leaders operate in a specialized context that is multicultural in nature.
Thus global leadership theory is essentially a subset of the broader theory of contextual
leadership. Researchers have studied context (situational variables) and its effect on
leadership since the 1960s (Rowley, Hossain, & Barry, 2010). Potential sources of
context are environmental variables such as available time, follower attributes, and task
criticality or personal variables to include gender and hierarchical level within the
organization (Cole, Bruch, & Shamir, 2009; Jepson, 2009). However, contextual
leadership models supported by empirical studies have only begun to appear in the
literature within the past decade (Antonakis et al., 2003; Jepson, 2009). In particular,
Jepson’s 2009 three-dimensional contextual influence model is one of the central
concepts in this study. Jepson considered the specific context in which any single leader
operates to be an intersection of three general contextual dimensions, (a) the social
context, (b) the cultural context, and (c) the institutional context. Applying this model to
the MIHL faculty, the greatest cultural differences are found between the new rotating
14
military instructors and the new visiting and permanent civilian professors who come
together at the MIHL from distinctly different environments. All three contextual
dimensions, influenced by a lifetime of experiences, are significantly different resulting
in two distinct cultural contexts.
While confident that context is a significant factor in the leadership equation,
researchers are finding the study of context to be a daunting task due to the sheer number
of possible contexts (Iszatt-White, 2011). Despite this difficulty, a thorough
understanding of the effect of context remains a critical aspect of a comprehensive
leadership theory (Jepson, 2009).
In summary, the principle theories connected to this proposed study of global
leadership are not well developed. While there exists a significant body of literature
concerning global leadership, theoretical thought remains fragmented, split between traits
and experience proponents. Moreover, empirical research is lacking and what little exists
is biased by western cultural perspectives (Holt & Seki, 2011). Contextual leadership
theory is older and thus more developed. However, it also remains fragmented as
researchers struggle with the many situational variables that can give rise to a multitude
of contexts. Neither theory provides a reliable answer to the critical question of how to
develop effective leaders. Thus, global leadership theory requires significantly more
empirical study before a basic framework is developed.
Research Questions
A popular leadership theory that appears consistently in the recent literature is
transformational leadership. Researchers have studied the theory extensively for more
than 30 years resulting in a strong association between transformational leadership and
15
positive organizational outcomes such as productivity and employee retention (Warrick,
2011). This fact makes transformational leadership theory also very popular among
practitioners (Hargis et al., 2012). However, as already mentioned above, the theory’s
success often suffers when practiced in a multicultural context (Jepson, 2009).
Researchers have only recently begun to explore the issue and it requires more study
(Jepson, 2009). An excellent case for such research is the MIHL faculty. According to
that organization (MIHL, Center for Faculty Excellence, 2013), the bulk of the faculty
members are Army officers who not only teach cadets, but also serve as role models
insuring that the military culture remains dominant. Most of the military professors
rotate in and out every 3 years, reinvigorating and refreshing the military climate. The
civilian faculty members come to the MIHL from many different civilian colleges,
universities, and occasionally a Department of Defense scientific laboratory. They bring
with them the values and cultural norms of American academia. Similar to the rotating
military faculty, every 2 to 3 years, a small number of rotating visiting civilian professors
arrive at the MIHL and reinvigorate the civilian academia cultural climate. Complicating
the context even further is the presence of a dozen allied foreign officer faculty members.
The above demographic data certainly describe a multicultural context that must
be challenging for the MIHL leadership. It is possible that the dedication, motivation,
and discipline of the cadets and military faculty at the MIHL results in a unique context
that dominants all other contexts and quickly transforms newcomers. Further, the civilian
professor selection process may favor candidates that fit into the dominant military
culture. Thus, the first research question concerns the nature of the multicultural context.
16
Q1. What is the nature of the multicultural context at the MIHL, as indicated
by the different leadership styles employed by the faculty leaders? The case study
organization is a highly respected and successful institution of higher learning. For
instance, the MIHL stands behind only Harvard, Princeton, and Yale in the number of
Rhodes scholars it has produced (Office of the American Secretary: The Rhodes Trust,
2014). The obvious conclusion that cadets receive a superior education at the MIHL
implies that it has developed effective leader–follower relationships within the staff and
faculty. Specifically, the classroom instructors and professors who actually do the
teaching (the followers) are apparently being effectively led by the various Department
Heads, the Dean, and the President (the leaders). Given that the motivation levels,
observations, and opinions of followers are significant indicators of the effective
leadership (Avolio& Bass, 2004), the second research question tests that assumption by
seeking the followers to assess their leaders.
Q2. How do followers perceive the MIHL's academic leadership? The other
weakness of transformational leadership theory is that it does not provide adequate
direction on leader development (Nirmala & Krishnagopal, 2011). The five
transformational factors serve as ideal leader attributes. However, there is little specific
guidance concerning how an individual or an organization goes about developing these
attributes. For instance, the transformational leader creates an enduring future vision for
the organization then inspires their followers to obtain that vision. The aspiring leader
must ponder exactly how to create and inspire a vision for themselves. This deficiency is
also present in other popular leadership theories such as authentic leadership. Authentic
leaders must be honest and true to themselves in all their actions or risk losing the trust of
17
their followers (Avolio et al., 2009). However, again there is no distinct methodology for
developing these character attributes. Yet, the MIHL appears to be developing global
leaders who are successfully leading in a multicultural context. Therefore, the most
important research question may well be the third.
Q3. What behaviors, specific actions, and personal attributes of the MIHL
faculty leaders do multicultural followers perceive as effective leadership?
Leadership is ultimately an individual effort where each leader eventually adopts an
individual manner or style that is effective in a given context (Avolio & Bass, 2004).
However, there may be commonalities across the spectrum of global leaders at the MIHL
that can help aspiring global leaders in general.
Q4. What are the guiding principles used at the MIHL for the development
of global leaders?
All of the above research questions serve to provide details that support the
overarching final question.
Q5. How does the MIHL organization develop global leaders in the
multicultural context?
Theoretical Propositions
The general research strategy of this proposed study will be the theoretical
propositions strategy. As such, propositions, based on theory, will guide the data
analysis and will eventually be either supported or unconfirmed by the data. A
fundamental assumption for this study is that cultural contexts exist within the MIHL
faculty. Thus, the first proposition seeks to confirm that assumption.
18
P1. Significant leadership context differences exist between the majority U.S.
military officer faculty and the civilian/foreign faculty.
Consideration of Jepson’s (2009) three-dimensional model of contextual
leadership is the basis for the second proposition. Jepson theorizes that three different
contextual dimensions continuously interact with each other, resulting in a unique context
at any point in time. At the MIHL, the military context may be so strong that it quickly
dominates all other contexts introduced by the civilian and foreign faculty. This
theoretical consideration gives rise to the second proposition.
P2. Contextual differences among the MIHL's faculty diminish with time as
the intense military context strongly influences all other contexts and becomes
dominant.
Further propositions result from consideration of the current state of global
leadership theory. Two basic schools of thought concerning global leadership
development exist. The first maintains that particular innate traits or competencies such
as integrity, authenticity, and forbearance are of primary importance (Hernandez et al.,
2011). These essential global leader traits are very similar to many of the attributes that
describe the ideal military officer. If the traits and competencies theorists are correct, the
success of the MIHL's faculty leaders may be attributable to the same character traits that
enabled their successful military careers. This consideration results in proposition three.
P3. The MIHL’s faculty leaders are successful global leaders due to basic
character traits that have also facilitated their success as military leaders.
The second theoretical school of thought focuses on the educational experience of
19
personal inter-cultural interactions (Avolio et al., 2009). These theorists maintain that a
process of completely immersing the leader in the follower culture, typically a year or
more, whereby the leader gains a lasting appreciation for foreign society is the best
method to develop global leaders (Pless, Maak, and Stahl, 2011). If this theoretical view
is correct, the extensive academic experiences of the faculty leadership, which they hold
in common with the civilian professors, may be fundamental to their development as
successful global leaders. Consideration of this theoretical perspective leads to the fourth
proposition.
P4. The MIHL’s faculty leaders are successful global leaders due to their
academic background and training.
The last proposition stems from the fact that global leadership is not a wellestablished theory either in the scholarly literature or in practice (Avolio et al., 2009;
Hernandez et al., 2011; Holt & Seki, 2011; Pless et al., 2011). The above-mentioned two
schools of thought are very general in nature, lacking in detail and are therefore not
formal theories. Consequently, a study of the MIHL’s global leadership may ultimately
reveal reasons for their success that is neither trait related or experientially oriented.
P5. The process of developing successful global faculty leaders at the MIHL
is due to a combination of other previously unknown factors.
Nature of the Study
In this proposed qualitative study, a single case study of the MIHL’s staff and
faculty may result in a better understanding of the development process for global
leaders. A qualitative methodology is appropriate in this exploratory case since the
literature contains relatively little firm information concerning global leadership (Holt
20
&Seki, 2012; Winn, 2013). Currently, researchers lack the theoretical foundation on
which they might deductively predict quantitative experimental investigations (Holt &
Seki). Therefore, a qualitative design, using inductive techniques, is appropriate in order
to identify possible trends, associations, and relationships that later quantitative methods
may verify.
This proposed case study will utilize multiple units of analysis in an effort to
improve validity by triangulating findings between the different units (Yin, 2013). This
proposed case study will utilize multiple units of analysis in an effort to improve validity
by triangulating findings between the different units (Yin, 2013). The units of analysis
will include both leaders and followers from the office of the President, through the
Academic Department Heads, down to the civilian and foreign faculty members. The use
of several sources of data to include document reviews, direct observation, and interviews
will add additional triangulation possibilities further improving validity (Yin, 2013).
The case study method is appropriate for this study due to the nature of the
research questions, which seek to discover how and why the members of the MIHL's
senior leadership have become effective global leaders. Yin (2013) emphasized that the
case study methodology is particularly suited to investigating these how type
investigations. He went further to note that the preferred method for studying
phenomenon within the setting of complex real-life contexts is the case study (Yin,
2013). The MIHL’s multicultural environment, where the faculty consists of allied
foreign officers, civilian professors, and U.S. military officers is certainly one such
context. A single case study design is appropriate when the case under investigation
exemplifies a singular or unique set of circumstances (Yin, 2013). The faculty
21
experience at the MIHL is indeed singular. The singular nature is most evident in the
mix of military officers and civilian professors. The duties and daily activities of the
military academy faculty, which vary significantly from a normal U.S. college, are also
indicative of the unique nature. At the MIHL, professors devote nearly all their time to
cadet instruction and serve as role models for the cadets (MIHL, Center for Faculty
Excellence, 2013). Last, but still significant, the small contingent of allied foreign
officers add appreciably to the distinctiveness. When considering this unique nature, it is
important to note that analytic generalization is still applicable in this case. The MIHL's
leaders still face the same fundamental challenges that characterize most multicultural
organizations. Specifically, all global leaders ultimately must learn to motivate and
inspire followers that possess differing values, customs, and experiences (Holt & Seki,
2012).
Significance of the Study
As the global economy continues to grow, organizations are facing the challenge
of leadership in a multicultural environment. Scholars call this new dimension of
leadership global leadership and have only just begun to study it. Consequently, both
scholars and practitioners do not understand global leadership to include answers to the
questions how does one practice global leadership and in particular how to develop
global leaders (Holt & Seki, 2012). The consequences of this ignorance are potentially
huge. Large multinational companies have failed causing stockholders to lose billions of
dollars in their investment portfolios. In addition, many scholars believe that the
stagnation of the Global War on Terror requires the development of global leaders within
allied military organizations (Wolfe & Arrow, 2013)
22
This study directly addresses this deficiency by studying the global leaders at the
MIHL that have routinely, yet effectively lead a multicultural organization for many
years. Given the relative lack of research in this area, the proposed qualitative case study
is exploratory in nature. The study questions seek to answer two general lines of inquiry.
First, how do the MIHL's staff and faculty develop global leaders and secondly, why are
they effective. The data analysis from this proposed study may yield possible theoretical
concepts or identify topics for future research that later qualitative studies can build upon.
Definitions
Trait Theory. Trait theory was an early leadership theory popular in the 1930s
and 1940s that linked the character traits of the individual to their ability to lead. Trait
theory held that exceptional leaders were born with the required traits such as
intelligence, intuition, foresight and persuasiveness (Hernandez et al., 2011). This theory
dominated leadership thought for thousands of years (Antonakis, Day, & Schyns, 2012).
Global Leadership. Global leadership is a relatively new concept in the field of
organizational leadership. Typically, global leaders head organizations comprised of
followers from many different cultures (Holt & Seki, 2011). The diverse mixture of
customs, values, languages, and experiences make important leader functions such as
team building and motivating followers particularly challenging.
Contextual Leadership. This theory contends that the environment and the
circumstances under which the leader operates significantly influence leadership
behavior. Therefore, the context in which a leader operates influences, in part, how the
leader behaves (Jepson, 2009).
The terms described above constitute a mini-time line of leadership theory and
23
thought. Initially, trait theory dominated where the firm belief was that leaders were born
and not made. After many decades of research starting after World War II,
transformational leadership became the most successful leadership theory in practice
(Hernandez et al., 2011). Avolio and Bass (2004) combined transformational leadership
with the associated theories of transactional and passive/avoidant leadership to form the
Full Range Leadership Theory (FRLT). While still a very successful theory in practice,
researchers now realize that context greatly affects the practical application of any
leadership theory (Avolio et al., 2009).
The Full Range Leadership Theory (FRLT). This theory holds that leaders
commonly exhibit behavior consistent with one of three different leadership styles.
These styles range from transformational leadership behavior through transactional
leadership behavior to passive/avoidant behavior. Further, while many scholars and
practitioners consider transformational leadership to be the most effective style, the
optimal leader recognizes that transactional leadership is sometimes appropriate
depending upon the situation (Hargis et al., 2012). A simple questionnaire instrument
can measure nine distinct leader attributes and behaviors called factors that typify each of
these three distinctly different styles of leadership (Greiman, 2009). The following nine
entries describe these factors in more detail.
Transformational Leadership. Transformational leadership is the process of
influencing followers by building commitment for the organization's objectives and
goals. The result is a highly effective organization where members transcend their own
personal interests in favor of the organization's (Antonakis, Avolio, & Sivasubramaniam,
2003).
24
Transactional Leadership. Transactional leadership is a process of influencing
followers by using a system of transactions or exchanges between the leader and the
follower. The leader exchanges good performance for rewards and poor performance for
punishments (Antonakis et al., 2003).
Passive/Avoidant Leadership. Passive/avoidant leadership is a very hands-off
style of leadership where the leader only acts once problems have become so significant
that they can no longer be ignored (Stadelmann, 2010). Laissez Faire behavior is
included in this category.
Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ). The MLQ is a popular survey
instrument developed by Avolio and Bass (2004) designed to measure an individual’s
preferred leadership style. Two different forms may be selected, the Leader Form and the
Rater Form. The actual leader completes the Leader Form resulting in an assessment of
their self-perceived leadership style. The preferred method is to have followers rate the
leader in question using the Rater Form, resulting in a more reliable indicator of the
leader’s style (Avolio& Bass, 2004). The MIHL is one of the oldest American institutes
of higher learning. Its mission is to train leaders of character for service in the U.S.
Army. Noted for its rigorous physical fitness training and rigid discipline, it is primarily
a military training institution. It is also a fully accredited and highly respected four-year
college (Albert, 2009; Howard, 2013). Cadets graduate after four years of military,
academic, and physical training with a bachelor’s degree and a commission as an Army
Second Lieutenant. The President of the MIHL is a Special Command in the U.S. Army
filled by a Lieutenant General (three stars). This officer is responsible for all training of
cadets (military, academic, and physical fitness). His primary direct subordinates are two
25
Brigadier Generals, the Dean of the Academic Board, and the Commanding Officer of
Cadets.
Dean of the Academic Board. The Dean’s responsibilities are nearly identical to
those of a civilian college or university Dean. The Dean oversees 13 academic
departments that are similar to those found in a good liberal arts college.
Commanding Officer of Cadets. The Commanding Officer is responsible for
the physical fitness and military training of the cadets. Two military teaching
departments fall under the Commanding Officer, the Department of Physical Education,
and the Department of Military Instruction. The later provides military instruction year
round to include intensive summer training programs for each class.
Heads of Departments. As the name implies, an Army Colonel with special
active duty status granted by Congress leads each academic and military department.
Whereas normal active duty officers are required to retire at 30 years of service (typically
age 52), the department heads are allowed to continue on active duty until they reach the
age of 64. Additionally, on the day of their retirement the Army promotes them to
Brigadier General. The department heads are responsible for the administration of their
department, curriculum development, and instructor/professor development.
Summary
As the inevitable march of technology results in further advances in
communication and transportation, the world will only continue to flatten. As the historic
obstacles to cultural mixing diminish, many organizations will become more
multicultural in nature. The history of the rise of multinational enterprises and
international military alliances contains many examples of failure and success. The
26
failures indicate the need for better understanding of a new dimension of leadership.
Scholars call this new dimension global leadership. Many articles appear in the literature
calling for a better understanding of the concept. However, very few empirical studies
exist. Consequently, a monumental worldwide transformation is taking place, which will
likely prove to be a monumental challenge to leaders across the globe. Yet, given our
scant knowledge, many organizations are unprepared for the immediate future. This
proposed qualitative case study proposes to address that need by studying the global
leaders at the MIHL.
27
Chapter 2: Literature Review
Leadership researchers have largely shifted from studying predominantly
transactional models, based on exchanges between leaders and followers, to models that
emphasize inspiration and the common pursuit of an organizational vision (Avolio et al.,
2009). In particular, transformational leadership theory started as a fresh new idea over
three decades ago and has grown to be a robust, effective, and widely practiced theory of
leadership (Warrick, 2011). However, despite its apparent effectiveness and popularity,
scholars still do not fully understand transformational leadership theory. Specifically,
more research is required to understand how transformational leaders must adapt their
leadership behavior they experience a significant change in context (Avolio et al., 2009;
Hernandez et al., 2011; Leong & Fischer, 2011). A mixed cultural context, such as those
found in multinational corporations, international military alliances, and global charitable
relief organizations is particularly challenging and is currently receiving significant
attention in the literature (Holt & Seki, 2012). Consequently, many researchers have
identified the urgent need to develop global transformational leaders that can effectively
operate in these challenging contexts. However, only recently have they begun to
consider the challenge of transformational leader development. Global transformational
leader development represents an even greater challenge.
This literature review appears in four parts: (a) the evolution of leadership theory,
(b) contemporary leadership theories, (c) contextual leadership theory, and (d) global
leadership. Part one of this literature review begins with an exploration of the difficulty
scholars are experiencing with the very basic and fundamental task of defining the
concept of leadership. Next, is a short discussion of the still unresolved question: Are
28
leadership and management similar or different concepts? The discussion then turns to
the evolution of leadership theory and thought from the 1800s to the present day by
reviewing trait theory, behavioral theory, and contingency theory sequentially.
Part two reviews literature concerning contemporary issues in organizational
leadership research. It begins by reviewing two popular leadership theories that Avolio,
Walumbwa, and Weber (2009) call new-genre leadership, transformational leadership,
and authentic leadership. Transformational leadership theory is the older of the two.
Given its proven record of effectiveness, it is currently the more popular theory with both
practitioners and researchers (Hernandez et al., 2011). The review then turns to the Full
Range Leadership Theory (FRLT), which incorporates older theories with
transformational leadership theory (Huang & Liao, 2011). Part two concludes with a
discussion of the FRLT’s measurement instrument, the Multi-Factor Leadership
Questionnaire (MLQ).
Contextual leadership, which is a central concept in this study, is the subject of
the third part of this literature review. It begins with a general review of contextual
issues concerning the application and measurement of leadership followed by a
comparison of contextual leadership definitions that exist in the literature. Next, several
studies are reviewed that illustrate the need for a better understanding of the contextual
nature of leadership. The review then turns to a general discussion of the difficulty
associated with studying the effects of context on leadership. Lastly, part three focuses
on recent research exploring the contexts relevant to this study. Specifically, the
discussion focuses on higher education, military, and civilian contexts, which are all
present within the MIHL’s faculty.
29
The fourth and final part explores the relatively recent literature concerning the
specialized context of the global leader, which will highlight the need to explore how the
MIHL develops global leaders.
This review consists of primarily empirical studies conducted within the last five
years. However, some older material is included primarily to provide a historical
background. The Northcentral University Library internet database was the source for
nearly all the literature reviewed here. Specifically, searches of the ProQuest,
EBSCOHost, ScienceDirect, and SAGE online databases identified relevant articles and
studies from peer-reviewed, scholarly journals. Ebrary provided secondary source
material used for historical and background information. The most common keywords
used in the search were: trait theory, behavioral theory, contingency theory,
transformational leadership, effectiveness of transformational leadership, full range
leadership theory, multifactor leadership questionnaire, authentic leadership,
management vs. leadership, definition of leadership, ethical leadership, trust, contextual
leadership, military leadership, higher education and leadership, global leadership, and
global leadership development.
The Evolution of Leadership Theory and Thought
Leaders have emerged throughout history to lead humanity through times of crisis
and change. Society’s resultant great esteem for effective leadership is clearly evident in
recorded history. The historical literature is replete with accounts of heroic leaders who
saved their people in time of crisis or, conversely, flawed leaders who led their people to
disaster. Given its importance, scholars have studied leadership for thousands of years in
an attempt to understand the subject better (Pires da Cruz, Nunes, & Pinheiro, 2011).
30
However, it is only within the last half-century that serious empirical studies have
produced detailed theories of leadership that have had practical, measurable, and positive
effects in the workplace (Pires da Cruz et al., 2011). Prior to that time, the great man
theory dominated scholarly thought concerning leadership (Hernandez et al., 2011).
Despite all the interest, leadership remains an elusive concept. Even to this day, scholars
are finding it difficult to agree on a common definition of leadership (Hernandez et al.,
2011). The following discussion of the evolution of leadership theory begins with a
review of the literature concerning the very fundamental difficulty of defining the
concept of leadership. It then turns to a brief review of leadership theory as it has
developed from the late 1800s to the present day.
Leadership defined. The need for effective leadership in a world that has become
immensely complex and interconnected has never been greater (Terrell &Rosenbusch,
2013). A logical starting point for the student of leadership is the definition. What
exactly is leadership? However, leadership is apparently a difficult concept to define.
After thousands of years of study, scholars today cannot yet agree on a single, basic
definition of leadership (Hernandez et al., 2011; Kutz, 2012). However, the lack of a
base definition has not hampered research and the resultant theories. Over the past
several decades, scholars have produced a multitude of leadership theories, many
complete with their own definition of leadership (Avolio et al., 2009). For example, over
twenty years ago, Rost (1993) identified 221 different definitions of leadership appearing
in the literature. Two decades later, Hernandez, Eberly, Avolio, and Johnson (2011)
developed a leadership theory taxonomy in an effort to organize and classify the many
theories that currently appear in the literature. Ultimately, they hoped that their efforts
31
would facilitate the development of a universally accepted definition of leadership. Their
taxonomy resulted in the classification of 28 different, active, leadership theories, many
with an associated definition (Hernandez et al., 2011). Hernandez et al.’s work
represents a significant improvement. Leadership scholars appear to be slowly
converging towards an integrated theory, although they still cannot agree on a single
definition of leadership (Hernandez et al., 2011). A base definition would serve as a base
for an integrated theory of leadership, which in turn would allow organizations to
formulate effective leadership development programs. Effective leader development is
the prime interest of practitioners competing in a global economy (Terrell & Rosenbusch,
2013). The current abundance of theories only confuses practitioners as they continue to
ask a fundamental question: What is leadership and how do we develop it within our
organizations (Terrell & Rosenbusch, 2013)?
Some scholars have offered a general definition of leadership. Rost (1993)
studied all the leadership definitions appearing in the literature and synthesized them into
one summarized version. Rost concludes, “Leadership is an influence relationship
among leaders and followers who intend real changes that reflect their mutual purposes”
(p.102). Using a similar approach, Northouse (2007) identified four common
components that appear in nearly all leadership definitions, (a) process, (b) influence, (c)
group context, and (d) goal attainment. Considering all four components, Northouse
defined leadership as “a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals
to achieve a common goal” (p. 3). If we compare Rost and Northouse definitions, we
find similarities between them. Both definitions speak of the leader influencing others to
achieve mutual purposes or common goals. Both definitions are simple enough that any
32
practitioner can both comprehend it and use it.
Volckmann (2012) took a different approach by arguing that the field of
leadership is simply too complex to ever arrive at a single definition that integrates all
leadership theories. The complexity he refers to is due to the varying situational contexts
that often challenge a leader. Instead, Volckmann suggests that it is better to understand
the distinctions between various aspects of leadership and various contexts. For instance,
Volckmann believes that leaders, leading, and leadership are three related but different
concepts that change depending upon the context. By understanding the distinction
between the three for a given context, the leader gains insight into how they should lead.
Therefore, Volckmann maintains that there is no need to define leadership in order to
effectively practice it. Instead, leaders need to understand how context changes the
distinction between (a) the leader, a person who has relationships with other people, (b)
leading, a series of actions that influence other people, and (c) leadership, the particular
combination of the leader, leading, and the context (Volckmann, 2012).
Management versus leadership. Leadership and management scholars have
debated for decades the question of management versus leadership (Toor, 2011). Many
authors have used the two terms interchangeably, inferring that they embody the same
concept (Lopez, 2014). However, in the late 20th century scholars began to differentiate
between the two terms maintaining that management and leadership are related, yet
significantly different concepts (Kutz, 2012; Lopez, 2014; Musgrave, 2014; Tobin, 2014;
Toor, 2011; Warrick, 2011; Vacar, 2014). Kutz (2012) associated leadership behavior
brings with change within an organization while management activities are principally
associated with maintaining the status quo. Tobin (2014) commented that leaders focus
33
on people within an organization in an effort to maximize their productivity, while
managers focus on task. The aforementioned viewpoints imply that leaders and
managers exist individually within an organization typically with leaders occupying the
top positions and managers populating the lower positions.
Empirical research did not support the idea that leadership and management are
separate but related concepts until recently (Toor, 2011). Toor (2011) conducted a
qualitative study of 49 construction industry leaders and executives working in
Singapore. His qualitative methodology consisted of interviews with the participants
where he asked them open-ended questions about leadership, management, their
similarities, and differences. Toor’s analysis resulted in several themes, three of which
he considered most significant. First, leaders are agents of change while managers strive
to maintain the status quo. Second, leaders develop relationships with others thereby
gaining authority with which they influence the organization while managers rely on the
authority formally vested in them by the organization. Lastly, leadership involves
empowering followers to act, whereas management uses authority (Toor, 2011). Toor
makes one final important point. Any person in an organizational position of authority
must both manage and lead to be effective (Toor, 2011). Toor sums up his findings by
concluding that management and leadership are two distinct entities yet their various
functions overlap considerably.
While some recent research supports the distinctness of leadership and
management, there exists a trend within the literature where authors treat management
and leadership as integrated concepts (Lopez, 2014). Specifically, these authors maintain
that empirical research has shown the two concepts to be complimentary of each other
34
and not mutually exclusive. If leadership and management prove to be complimentary,
then they may simply be differing degrees of the same construct. Thus, leadership may
be management behavior augmented by additional leader behavior making the overall
effect more effective. A recent empirical study supports that concept. Vacar (2014)
explored the relationship between leadership and project management by studying the
employees of a large Romanian on-line marketing company. Vacar administered a
survey instrument designed to identify the effectiveness and frequency of the activities
and behaviors exhibited by company managers. The data analysis revealed a distinct
mixture of both management and leadership tasks. In particular, when asked if leadership
can have a positive effect on effective project management, an overwhelming 94% of the
participants responded in the affirmative. Vacar concluded that leadership is a key
ingredient in successful project management.
Great man theory. For thousands of years, humankind believed that leaders
simply emerged from the great mass of humanity by virtue of certain innate attributes that
differentiated them from others (Hernandez et al., 2011). Researchers originally believed
that these attributes were predetermined, resulting in the common belief that leaders were
born and not made (Kutz, 2012). As humankind came to embrace the scientific method,
scholars sought to better understand leadership by identifying specific personality traits
that were associated with effective leaders (Pires da Cruz et al., 2011). The discovery of
these traits held the promise of identifying potential leaders through personality testing.
Thus, trait theory was born.
Trait theory. As an extension of the great man theory, trait theory is the oldest
leadership theory dating back to the golden age of Greece (Antonakis, Day, & Schyns,
35
2012). The theory maintains that certain individual personality traits predispose an
individual to excel at leading others (Colbert, Judge, Choi, & Wang, 2012). Personal
attributes such as intelligence, courage, and charisma entirely determine the leadership
potential of any individual (Dinh Lord, 2012). Thus, its focus is entirely on the
individual leader and completely neglects any attributes or actions on the part of the
follower. Therefore, differences among followers will theoretically have no impact on
leader effectiveness.
Until the mid-20th century, trait theory was the only leadership theory.
Consequently, early research revolved around the search for a universal set of leadership
traits. At its height, the search included 43 separate personality characteristics (Colbert et
al., 2012). However, researchers lacked a framework around which to organize this large
number of traits such as the Five-Factor Model of Personality (Colbert et al.). This lack
of an organizing framework caused trait theory research to yield inconsistent results.
Later research would reveal that two issues could explain the inconsistencies. First,
researchers failed to consider the interaction between the follower and leader (Pires da
Cruz et al., 2011). Second, trait theory could not clearly explain observed situational
variance of leader behavior (Zaccaro, 2007). Finally, researchers in the late 1940s
concluded that analysis of empirical data could find no discernible differences in traits
between leaders and followers (Hernandez et al., 2011). Thus, beginning in the second
half of the 20th century, leadership researchers abandoned trait theory in favor of two new
leadership theories, first behavior theory and then contingency theory (Pires da Cruz et
al., 2011).
Having slipped from favor, trait theory is once again the subject of scholarly
36
research. Several recent researchers, using improved meta-analysis techniques, have
found measurable trait differences between leaders and followers disproving the earlier
1940s research (Colbert et al., 2012). Colbert, Judge, Choi, and Wang (2012) recently
studied 178 U.S. graduate students by first administering a Big Five personality test and
then observing them in a leadership exercise. The researchers then randomly assigned
each participant to a small group, which was responsible for developing a solution to a
fabricated problem. They then subjectively observed and rated each group member on
their leadership contribution to the team effort. Colbert et al. found a positive correlation
between some personality traits (extroversion, openness) and demonstrated leadership.
Thus, having nearly vanished from the literature, trait theory is again the subject of
scholarly research. Given its longevity, it will likely survive in some form in an
integrated leadership theory (Antonakis et al., 2012).
Current research into process theories of leadership has highlighted the
importance of leader traits. For instance, transformational leadership theory, one of the
more popular process theories, inherently contains elements of trait theory (Wang et al.,
2011). For example, the centerpiece of transformational leadership theory is the
development and promotion of an inspirational organizational vision. In order to inspire
others to pursue the common vision, the transformational leader must be ethical (to foster
trust), intelligent (to develop the vision), and articulate (to communicate the vision)
(Hargis et al., 2012). Apparently, certain traits are required of the transformational
leader. Zaccaro (2007) agrees, arguing that proximal attributes such as professional
knowledge, problem solving, and social appraisal skills contribute measurably to success
as a leader. Unlike, universal distal traits (intelligence, values, and personality) the
37
proximal traits can be improved through training and experience (Zaccaro, 2007).
In summary, as leadership research became more sophisticated in the mid-1900s,
researchers realized that trait theory could not by itself explain certain aspects of
observed empirical data (Hernandez et al., 2011). Specifically, researchers could not
explain the variance in observed leader effectiveness using trait theory (Pires da Cruz et
al., 2011). Secondly, traits could not account for the known situational (contextual)
dependence of leadership (Zaccaro, 2007). Consequently, the popularity of trait theory
has diminished as researchers have begun considering other leadership theories.
However, it seems clear that a universal leadership theory will likely contain some aspect
related to leader personality traits.
Behavioral theory. A new era of theoretical leadership research began with the
decline of trait theory and the rise of the behavioral theories of leadership. Interest turned
to the interaction of the leader with followers, focusing on identifying the specific
behaviors that caused certain leaders to rise above the rest (Hernandez et al., 2011). The
term leadership style soon came into use; the first three identified being the well-known
authoritarian, democratic, and laissez-faire leadership styles (Hernandez et al., 2011).
The initial serious research on behavioral theories began in 1945 with the well-known
Ohio State University studies where researchers explored how leaders acted when they
were leading a group of people. The research consisted primarily of asking each follower
to complete a questionnaire rating their leader’s behaviors (Northouse, 2007). This
instrument became the first leadership questionnaire that quantified and measured leader
effectiveness (Hernandez et al., 2011). The revised form of that original Leader Behavior
Description Questionnaire (LBDQ) is still in use today (Derue, Nahrgang, Wellman,
38
&Humphrey, 2011). After analyzing hundreds of questionnaires from a variety of
industries and institutions, the Ohio State researchers concluded that they could reliably
categorize leader behaviors into two different dimensions, consideration, and initiating
structure (Derue et al., 2011). Thus, the basic dichotomy of leader behavior that endures
to today was established. Consideration refers to behavior that nurtures, develops, and
protects the leader’s followers or subordinates. Initiating structure behaviors are
essentially task behaviors that move the organization towards achievement of its goals
and objectives (Northouse, 2007). The terms consideration and initiating structure
eventually evolved into the present day lexicon of task–oriented leaders and relationshiporiented leader behavior (Hernandez at al., 2011). The Ohio State researchers considered
these two dimensions to be independent of each other and not arranged along a common
continuum (Northouse, 2007). Consequently, a leader could exhibit any combination of
the two dimensions simultaneously.
As behavioral theory research progressed, researchers quickly came to realize that
effective leaders displayed a wide variety of interactive leader/follower behaviors or
leadership styles. Although, they all displayed the same two-dimensional nature (task vs.
relationship) as in the Ohio State Studies (Hernandez et al., 2011). A graphical
representation of the two dimensions of leader behavior called the Managerial Grid was
postulated (Hernandez et al., 2011). Each axis represented nine increasing levels of the
same two Ohio State Studies leadership behavior dimensions. However, researchers now
renamed the dimensions concern for people (relationship) and concern for production
(task).Thus, the 81 squares in the Managerial Grid represented a continuum of possible
leadership styles. Grid 1-1 identified the Impoverished Manager, who cares little for
39
followers or the mission, while, the Team Manager, who excels in both dimensions, sat at
the opposite corner in grid 9-9 (Northouse, 2007). Since the early 1960s, the Managerial
Grid has been immensely popular with both practitioners and management consultants. It
remains a popular concept today (Northouse, 2007).
One of the most significant drawbacks of trait theory is the inability of any
individual leader to improve. Under trait theory, an individual cannot develop leadership
ability since it is a function of their traits. Here, the process view of leadership held great
promise as behavioral theory grew in popularity from the 1950s through the early 1970s
(Pires da Cruz et al., 2011). At that time, practitioners and scholars alike considered
traits as fixed attributes and therefore difficult if not impossible to change (Derue et al.,
2011). However, under behavior theory, aspiring leaders could learn positive leadership
behaviors thereby theoretically allowing any organization to develop their leadership in
house (Derue et al., 2011).
By the early 1970s, researchers realized that behavioral theory was not able to
adequately explain all of the empirical data. It became apparent that researchers were
missing something. Similar to trait theorists, behavioral researchers had focused
exclusively on the leader, completely neglecting the myriad of leader/follower
interactions (Hernandez et al., 2011). Secondly, early behavioral researchers were
searching for one universal leadership style that marked the successful leader, who
excelled in every situation and with every follower (Pires da Cruz et al., 2011). The
failure of behavioral theory ultimately prompted researchers to abandon the one best way
approach and instead explore the situational nature of leadership.
Contingency and situational theory. Scholars and researchers did not altogether
40
abandon leadership styles. It had become apparent the one style did not fit all situations.
Researchers observed that situational factors such as time and leader-follower relations
affected leader effectiveness (Hernandez et al., 2011). Contingency theories are also
known as situational theories due to this dependence on situational variables (Pires Da
Cruz et al., 2011). Fiedler was one of the first to propose a contingency theory of
leadership in the mid-1960s (Fiedler, 1964). Borrowing from the behavioral theorists,
Fiedler developed the Least Preferred Co-Worker (LPC) scale, which measured a leader’s
propensity for relationship or task orientated leadership behavior (Pires Da Cruz et al.,
2011). He proposed that if the situation were either favorable or unfavorable, taskoriented leaders would excel. Conversely, relationship-oriented leaders would excel in
moderately favorable situations (Fiedler, 1964). Fiedler defined a favorable situation as
one in which leader-follower relations are high, the task is well defined, and the leader
has high organizational power (Fiedler, 1964). Thus, Fiedler departed from the one best
way thinking of the trait and behavioral theorists and instead acknowledged that any
leadership style’s effectiveness depended upon the situation. However, while Fiedler
believed that different leaders could be effective using different styles, he also maintained
that a leader should not attempt to change their style. Instead, when faced with an
unfavorable situation they should attempt to change the situational conditions to suit their
leadership style (Pires Da Cruz et al., 2011). Thus, the behavioral theorists’ one best way
for every leader philosophy evolved into the one best way for the individual leader.
Later contingency theorists turned Fiedler’s viewpoint around and proposed that
the effective leader should modify their behavior to match the situation, adopting one of
many different leadership styles (Pires Da Cruz et al., 2011). Hersey and Blanchard
41
proposed such a theory in 1977 (Yukl, 2012) suggesting that leaders should adopt
behaviors that matched the maturity level of their followers (Hernandez et al., 2011).
Specifically, when dealing with inexperienced followers the leader should use a very
authoritative and directive style by telling immature followers exactly how to perform
their duties. As the follower’s maturity and knowledge increase, the leader can progress
through a series of leadership styles that Hersey and Blanchard called telling, selling,
participating, and delegating (Hernandez et al., 2011). Once again, we see evidence of
the basic dichotomy of task behaviors and relationship behaviors first identified by the
Ohio State studies. Except here, the dichotomy has evolved into a spectrum of behaviors.
Immature followers require the leader to focus primarily on task behavior. As follower
maturity progresses, the leader task behaviors diminish in stages as the leader-follower,
relationship matures to the point where the leader is comfortable delegating authority to
the follower.
At this point, in the evolution of leadership theory, it is the mid-1970s and most
theorists have abandoned the search for the one best way to lead. Instead, there is a
growing consensus that effective leaders must adjust their behavior to suit the current
situation (Colbert et al., 2012). Followers and their relationship with the leader were the
most obvious situational variables and therefore became the first objects of study. Thus,
by the mid-1970s theorists began to focus on the dyadic relationship between the leader
and follower and its effect on leadership. The focus on the dyadic relationship between
the leader and each follower foretells the emergence of the New Genre Leadership
Theories such as Transformational and Authentic Leadership that are the focus of much
of the current research (Yukl, 2012).
42
One of the more prominent early dyadic theories to emerge during this period was
Leader–Member Exchange (LMX) theory (Hernandez et al., 2011). The central concept
behind LMX theory is that different relationships will inevitably form between followers
and the leader and the quality of that relationship dictates the leader’s effectiveness (Li,
Bai, & Xi, 2011). These different dyadic relationships progress to the point where there
exist two groups of followers in an organization, an in-group and an out-group (Kutz,
2012). The members of the in-group enjoy a stronger and deeper relationship with the
leader and thus have more latitude and the ability to negotiate with the leader. The outgroup members have a contractual relationship with the leader, serve in predefined roles,
and primarily follow orders. Both groups adequately accomplish their work tasks and
achieve their goals. However, the in-group’s performance is noticeably better than the
out-group’s (Hernandez et al., 2011).
While LMX theory has survived nearly 40 years of scrutiny in the literature, it is
not without criticism. In particular, critics question the many instruments developed over
the decades to measure the leader-follower relationship calling them ad-hoc with no basis
for changes made (Avolio et al., 2009). With the growing awareness of the contextual
nature of leadership, critics argue that LMX Theory focuses exclusively on the dyadic
relationship, ignoring other contextual influences such as group dynamics and gender
(Avolio et al., 2009). Researchers continue to study contingency theories of leadership
today, in particular LMX theory (Avolio et al., 2009).
By the late-1970s, the study of leadership thought had progressed significantly.
The original great man concept had evolved into several different theories.
Unfortunately, practitioners found the situation confusing as they applied different
43
theories aiming to improve organizational effectiveness (Kutz, 2012). Additionally,
researchers were finding it difficult to explain their observed data using any leadership
theory (Hernandez et al., 2011). Leadership research seemed to provide only more
questions and few answers. Researchers began to question the basic construct of
leadership itself having seen it move from a leader-centric view to a leader-follower dyad
view, neither of which provided acceptable explanations of the empirical data (Hernandez
et al., 2011). By the early 1980s, the focus of leadership thought had moved full
spectrum from the original emphasis on the leader, through the leader-follower
interaction to the advent of follower-centric theories. These theories emphasized the
follower and postulated that the leader had little to no effect on organizational
effectiveness (Hernandez et al., 2011).
Transformational Leadership
Leaders have emerged throughout human history to lead humanity through times
of crisis and change. Further, human society’s great esteem for effective leadership is
clearly evident in recorded history. The historical literature is replete with accounts of
heroic leaders who saved their people in time of crisis or, conversely, flawed leaders who
led their people to disaster. Given its importance, scholars have long sought to
understand leadership better. Consequently, in an attempt to better understand it,
scholars have studied the subject of leadership for thousands of years (Pires da Cruz et
al., 2011). However, it is only within the last half century that serious empirical studies
have produced detailed theories of leadership that have had practical, measurable, and
positive effects in the workplace (Pires da Cruz et al., 2011).
The concept of transformational leadership first appeared in the literature in 1978.
44
It marked a watershed event in the study of leadership in that it moved the scholarly
discussion and research away from predominately-transactional models of leadership
(Avolio et al., 2009). Transactional leadership models involve the exchange of rewards
and punishment between the leader and follower as the means to motivate subordinates
(Warrick, 2011). Transformational leaders seek to inspire their followers to achieve a
mutually held positive vision of the organization’s future resulting in a highly motivated
and successful organization (Hargis et al., 2012). Since Burns first introduced it,
transformational leadership theory has become one of the dominant theories in the
organizational leadership field (Wang et al., 2011). This popularity has resulted in an
abundance of literature on the subject over the past 30 years by authors such as Burns,
Avolio, Walumbwa and many others (Avolio et al., 2009; Hernandez et al., 2011, Huang
& Liao, 2011).
The effectiveness of transformational leadership. Transformational leadership
theory’s popularity is primarily due to its documented positive association with the
achievement of organizational goals and objectives. The findings of numerous workplace
studies support the theory’s effectiveness (Al-Tarawneh, Alhamadani, & Mohammad,
2012; Gundersen et al., 2012; Hargis et al., 2012; Wang et al., 2011). A single definition
of the term “effectiveness” is absent in the literature. Consequently, the researchers
reviewed here all studied different aspects of organizational effectiveness. Al-Tarawneh,
Alhamadani, and Mohammad (2012) found that the use of transformational leadership
strongly correlated to higher marketing effectiveness in commercial banking. Gundersen,
Hellesøy, and Raeder (2012) studied multinational project teams and found a positive
relationship between transformational leadership and team performance. Hargis, Watt,
45
and Piotrowski (2012) found that transformational leadership behaviors were critically
important to both team cohesion and team potency. Lastly, Wang, Oh, Courtright, and
Colbert (2011) conducted a more recent meta-analysis of 113 studies and found that
transformational leadership led to increased performance at the team and organization
levels.
The literature concerning the effectiveness of transformational leadership is not
universally positive. To the contrary, some researchers concluded that they could find no
discernible positive influence of transformational leader behavior. Eres (2011) studied
the effect of transformational leadership by Turkish school principals as perceived by the
faculty. Specifically, they measured the motivational levels of teachers and found no
correlation between it and the transformational leadership behaviors of the principals.
Authentic Leadership. As noted earlier, both practitioners and researchers have
been very successful using transformational leadership theory over the past 20 years.
However, at the turn of the 21st century, a series of corporate scandals caused some
scholars to question the practicality of transformational leadership theory as a stand-alone
theory (Peus, Wesche, Streicher, Braun, & Frey, 2012). The scandals revealed unethical
and illegal behavior by many high level executives. Scholars who studied the scandals
described the corporate executives responsible as pseudo-transformational leaders and
not authentic-transformational leaders (Avolio et al., 2009). In keeping with
transformational leadership theory, these pseudo-transformational leaders did indeed
inspire their followers to achieve a future vision. However, their actions were not
authentic attempts to lead the organization to a better future. Rather, each of these
pseudo-transformational leaders displayed a distinct lack of ethical moral character,
46
eventually leading their companies and shareholders to ruin (Hernandez et al., 2011).
Thus, leadership scholars came to realize that despite the success of transformational
leadership theory, an effective organization required more than just a leader with an
inspirational future vision. Effective leaders also needed to be authentic, leading by
example, and thus earning the trust of their followers (Avolio et al., 2009).
The current theoretical thought concerning authentic leadership defines four
components of authentic leadership, a) balanced processing, b) internalized moral
perspective, c) relational transparency, and d) self-awareness (Avolio et al., 2009). First,
balanced processing is the ability to discipline oneself to act in accordance with one’s
moral perspective. Next, the authentic leader maintains an internalized moral perspective
to include confidence, optimism, hope, and resiliency. Essentially, the authentic leader
knows what is right and must always act in accordance with that moral compass. Further,
by cultivating these personal attributes within themselves, the authentic leaders inspire
emulation by others within the organization. Relational transparency requires the
authentic leader to always be genuine in their interactions with others to include
appropriate displays of emotions. Lastly, the authentic leader possesses a heightened
sense of leader self-awareness. Self-awareness requires the authentic leader to
understand and accept their talents, strengths and weaknesses, and core values. An
awareness of these fundamental personal attributes results in leader actions that are
congruent and compatible (Avolio et al., 2009). On the contrary, a distinct lack of
awareness increases the chances of acting in an unauthentic manner that followers can
immediately sense (Gill, 2012).
Gill (2012) applied these four authentic leadership factors when he studied two
47
large international corporate business mergers, one a success, one a failure, at the turn of
the 21st century. He attributed the principle cause of the success or failure entirely to the
leadership styles of each organization’s chief executive. Gill describes in detail how the
successful executive embraced all four authentic leadership factors, while the other
embodied none. Overall, Gill paints a compelling picture of the need for authentic
leadership in a global economy.
Together, authentic leadership and transformational leadership comprise a
complete, modern leadership development system (Hernandez et al, 2011).Despite the
current enthusiasm, researchers still caution that authentic leadership remains an
unproven concept, unsupported by empirical evidence. Avolio, Walumbwa, and Weber
(2009) comment that work on defining and measuring authentic leadership requires
significantly more study. Authentic leadership’s second greatest weakness is the lack of
a proven measurement instrument that is both reliable and valid. In response, the
Authentic Leadership Questionnaire (ALQ) came into use around 2008 (Peus et al.,
2012). As with and new instrument, its validity needed to be empirically tested.
Moriano, Molero, & Lévy Mangin (2011) studied 600 Spanish employees to specifically
validate the ALQ and concluded that it possessed high reliability. Further, they noted
that the ALQ validly predicted positive leadership outcomes such as perceived
effectiveness of the leader, follower extra effort, and follower satisfaction with the leader.
However, this new measurement instrument requires further study and confirmation
(Avolio et al., 2009).
The final criticism of authentic leadership theory is a common one, shared by
most modern leadership theories. As research continues, more and more scholars are
48
pondering the effect of context on leadership (Peus et al., 2012). Like many of the older
theories, authentic leadership does not directly address this issue and its significance
remains unknown (Avolio et al., 2009). Presuming that context will somehow influence
their data, Peus et al. (2012) conducted two studies, each in different contexts. They first
studied 301 individuals from several different business organizations in Germany using
the ALQ to measure the four factors of the organization leadership and other survey
instruments to measure various leadership outcomes. Peus et al. used the same
methodology in a second study set in a different context, which involved 105 employees
of the same research organization. They found similar results in both contexts, which
was an encouraging result for the universality of authentic leadership theory. However,
the researchers note that more research is required to fully understand the impact of
context on authentic leadership theory. In particular, Peus et al. call for research to
investigate the effects of different cultural contexts on authentic leadership theory.
The Full Range Leadership Theory. The full range leadership theory (FRLT),
developed by Avolio and Bass, is a specific theoretical application of the more general
theory of transformational leadership initially developed by Burns (Hernandez et al.,
2011). The fundamental theoretical concept is the description of three different
leadership styles, which an effective leader understands and uses depending on the
situation. Accordingly, effective leaders must routinely vary their leadership style,
switching from one to another, to best suit the individual follower and the current
situation, hence the term full range (Hargis et al., 2012). The theory describes three
leadership styles: transformational leadership, transactional leadership, and
passive/avoidant leadership. Research supports the claim that the transformational style
49
is the most effective of the three while transactional leadership is generally less effective
and thus less desirable. However, it is often the most appropriate choice for a particular
situation and therefore, commonly found in the workplace (Antonakis, & House, 2014).
The term passive/avoidant leadership is really a misnomer. Passive/avoidant behavior is
a better term since the passive/avoidant leader displays a distinct lack of any behavior
that positively affects the organization (Hargis et al., 2012). Indeed, Hargis, Watt, and
Piotrowski (2012) proclaimed passive/avoidant behavior to be non-leadership due to its
distinct lack of any interaction with followers. Consequently, the passive/avoidant leader
is out-of-touch with the organization and thus unaware of organizational problems and
issues until eventually they build to crisis proportions (Hargis et al., 2012).
While transactional leadership behavior is generally less effective than
transformational leadership (Al-Tarawneh et al., 2012; Gundersen et al., 2012; Wang et
al., 2011), transactional behavior is still a useful and sometimes necessary leadership
option (Hargis et al., 2012). Hargis, Watt, and Piotrowski (2012) concluded that the
transactional leader could be very effective in a routine task performance environment.
Similarly, Hamstra, Van Yperen, Wisse, and Sassenberg’s (2011) research implied that
transactional leadership is highly effective in organizations that are primarily concerned
with maintaining the status quo. Some researchers have concluded that transactional
leadership behavior augments transformational leadership and is therefore necessary in
many organizations (Hargis et al., 2012; Hamstra, Van Yperen, Wisse, & Sassenberg,
2011). Hargis, Watt, and Piotrowski (2012) concluded that effective leaders should
utilize the full spectrum of leader behaviors ranging from the transactional leader’s
rewards and punishments to the inspirational actions of the transformational leader.
50
Therefore, transactional leadership remains a viable option for many organizations as a
time-proven and useful methodology.
In an attempt to quantify the full range of leader behavior, the FRLT includes nine
leadership factors that represent behaviors indicative of each of the three leadership
styles. A leader's style may vary, displaying a mixture of the nine factors, depending
upon the situation. The first five factors all describe the transformational leader while
transactional leadership and passive/avoidant leadership have two factors each (Hargis et
al., 2012). Much of the criticism associated with the FRLT focuses on these nine factors.
Rowold and Heinitz (2007) questioned the validity of the nine-factor model when they
found that the five transformational factors were empirically indistinguishable from each
other. Further, they also found high correlations between the transformational and
transactional factors. However, they ultimately concluded that the FRLT leadership
factor structure provided a valid measure of a leadership that was superior to other
competing models. More recently, Leong and Fischer (2014) conducted a meta-analysis
of the nine-factor model across several different cultural contexts. They found significant
variability in MLQ scores based on culture and recommended more research concerning
the effect of cultural values on the FRLT. Despite heavy scrutiny and some significant
criticism, the FRLT factor structure remains an extremely popular leadership theory with
both researchers and business practitioners (Hargis et al., 2012).
Measuring transformational leadership. As researchers and practitioners apply
theories to real organizations and their leaders, they find that need to somehow quantify
or measure its basic tenants. In the case of transformational leadership theory,
researchers and practitioners required some means of measuring the nine FRLT factors.
51
Researchers eventually developed the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire or MLQ to
fill that need. The MLQ is a Likert style survey instrument designed to measure the
relative magnitudes of the nine factors thereby providing a gauge of an individual’s
leadership style preference (Leong & Fischer, 2011).
The widespread use of the MLQ has caused some researchers to question the
validity of the MLQ (Rowold & Heinitz, 2007).Initially, the inability of the MLQ to
definitively distinguish between the five transformational factors was the principle
complaint (Krüger, Rowold, Borgmann, Staufenbiel, & Heinitz, 2011; Rowold & Heinitz,
2007). Additionally, many studies have found significant correlations between the
transformational factors and the transactional factors (Antonakis & House, 2014).
Conversely, the literature is also replete with studies that have validated both the MLQ’s
structure and effectiveness (Peus et al., 2012). Consequently, the MLQ remains as the
best quantitative instrument available to measure transformational leadership and the
associated transactional and passive/avoidant leadership styles (Al-Tarawneh et al.,
2012). Today, primarily due to its ability to predict organizational success, the MLQ
remains a popular instrument (Leong & Fischer, 2011).
Clearly, the questions surrounding the MLQ require more research. However, the
literature supports the ability of the MLQ to measure transformational leadership
behavior that is positively associated to organizational effectiveness. Therefore, the
MLQ remains a valuable instrument for leadership research.
Transformational leader development. The success of transformational
leadership theory and the FRLT in terms of positive organizational outcomes has led
many practitioners to seek a methodology by which they can develop transformational
52
leaders within their organizations (Bernal, 2009). Unfortunately, the literature is
significantly lacking in that regard. Some researchers have begun to investigate the
possibility that an individual’s transformational leadership ability might be largely
genetically predetermined (Avolio, 2014; Lee, Senior, & Butler, 2012). Thus, leadership
theory may be turning full circle back to a modern version of the great man theory,
although based on empirical investigation. In summary, lacking any clear guidance from
the scholarly literature, leadership practitioners who aspire to become transformational
leaders in their organizations, must forge their own path to transformational prowess.
The literature paints a clear picture of the end-state, while providing very little
information concerning how to get there (Avolio, 2014). However, two articles propose
promising models.
Bernal (2009), recognizing a need for a more distinct methodology to develop
transformational leaders, has applied the trans-theoretical model of change to the task.
The result is his five-phase model for leadership development where the leadership
student experiences in order five developmental stages, intention, preparation,
implementation, maintenance, and termination. This process necessarily takes place over
several months and even years rather than the typical few days or weeks practiced by
many organizations (Bernal, 2009). Further, it is not classroom oriented. Instead, it is
experiential in nature and guided by a competent mentor. Bernal offered no empirical
data to support his model. Nirmala and Krishnagopal (2011) proposed a six-step process
to develop transformational leaders that relied fundamentally on formal training classes
and workshops, individual coaching, and mentoring programs. Again, the authors
presented no data to support their model.
53
Lastly, Avolio (2014) comments that the science of leadership development has
become more complex over the past several decades as researchers continually discover
more variables that affect the leadership equation. Unfortunately, that complexity has not
made leader development in general more comprehensible. Rather, it has had the
opposite effect resulting in a state where researchers cannot even agree on a definition of
leadership (Avolio, 2014). In a 2014 commentary, Avolio called for researchers to adopt
a different mindset and recommended that leadership researchers engage in the mental
process called intellectual stimulation. He defined that term as a process of challenging
the “tried-and-true assumptions, models, and frameworks, encouraging the consideration
of different points of view to explain the phenomenon you typically research” (Avolio,
214, p.289). As recent research continues to add more and more apparent complexity,
Avolio suggests that the science of leadership borrow ideas from the other sciences,
illustrating his point with examples from psychology, thermodynamics, and chemistry.
The Contextual Nature of Leadership
The contextual nature of leadership is central to this study. Therefore, the second
part of this literature review is devoted to studies that have explored the contextual nature
of transformational leadership. Researchers have discussed in the literature for many
decades the idea that the situations or contexts in which leaders operate significantly
affect leader behavior (Avolio et al., 2009; Hernandez et al., 2011; Iszatt-White, 2011;
Jepson, 2009; Peus, Braun, & Frey, 2013; Yukl, 2012). The central idea is that
leadership exercised under different contexts may result in corresponding changes in the
FRLT factors (Jepson, 2009).
54
Leadership context defined. Context is a very broad term. There are many
examples in the literature of studies involving various leadership contexts such as gender
and social culture (Jepson, 2009). However, very few authors have attempted to define
the concept. Hernandez, Eberly, Avolio, and Johnson (2011) provided a good definition
as part of their leadership model that included context as a central factor. They defined
context as "situational opportunities and constraints that affect the occurrence and
meaning of organizational behavior" (Hernandez et al., 2011, p. 1167). They
acknowledged that this definition is very broad and allowed different contexts to exist at
the individual, group, organization, and societal levels (Hernandez et al., 2011). It
therefore complicated the picture rather than simplifying it.
Jepson (2009) developed her own model (Figure 1) of contextual leadership as
part of her study of German and British companies. Her model included three different
contextual spheres that when considered together defined a specific leadership context for
that given situation. These spheres were (a) the immediate social context, (b) the broader
cultural context, and (c) the historical institutional context. The intersection of these
three spheres determined the specific context (Jepson, 2009).
55
Figure 1. Jepson’s (2009) model of the dynamic interaction of different contexts.
Applied to the MIHL's faculty, Jepson's model would result in significantly
different leadership contexts for the military, civilian, and faculty members. While the
institutional context would be essentially the same for all groups, the cultural and social
spheres would be significantly different.
The need to study leadership context. The literature concerning
transformational leadership has primarily focused on its effectiveness for the past 20
years (Avolio et al., 2009). However, both practitioners and researchers need a better
understanding of the contextual nature of leadership since context may affect both the
organizational outcomes of practitioners and the research conclusions of researchers.
Consequently, there have been many calls in the literature for a better understanding of
this concept (Avolio et al., 2009; Hernandez et al., 2011; Iszatt-White, 2011; Jepson,
2009; Peus, Braun, & Frey, 2013; Yukl, 2012). Avolio, Walumbwa, and Weber (2009)
wrote a comprehensive review of the current state of leadership research. In that review,
56
they called for a better understanding of contextual variables that may moderate or
mediate the effects of transformational leadership on followers. Avolio et al. also
observed that the majority of past transformational leadership research has focused
predominately on western cultures. Recognizing this as a limitation, they therefore called
for more cross-cultural research. Avolio et al. expressed these two points separately
while they are actually related. Many scholars consider social culture to be yet another
leadership context (Jepson, 2009). Thus, culture may ultimately prove to be one of
Avolio et al.’s boundary conditions imposed upon transformational leadership theory.
Jepson (2009) studied German and British chemical companies looking for
differences in applied leadership between various organizational departments (e.g.,
production, marketing, and senior management). Jepson conducted 105 qualitative
employee interviews in both countries focusing on the different contexts, such as cultural,
institutional, and historical differences. Jepson found significant differences in leadership
behavior between departments in both countries. However, she warned that the
immediate social context, meaning the different organizational departments, influenced
leadership behavior the most. Still, the broader contexts such as education, occupation,
and national citizenship were also important (Jepson, 2009).
Both Hernandez et al. (2011) and Iszatt-White (2011) go a step further than
simply including context as another variable in an already complex leadership equation.
Hernandez et al. included context as one of their Loci of Leadership implying that leaders
must always consider the context in which they are operating and how it will influence
their behavior. They complicated Jepson’s model even further by noting that the context
necessarily includes follower-follower interactions as well as leader-follower
57
interactions. Iszatt-White warns practitioners that context is not merely another
consideration that a leader must consider. Rather, she warns that "the practice of
leadership as an inherently contextual performance" (Iszatt-White, 2011, p.119). Recent
empirical data supports Iszatt-White’s assertion. Leong and Fischer (2011) conducted a
meta-analysis specifically to examine the effects of culture on transformational
leadership. The criteria for selection as a source of data were a) empirical study, b)
appeared in peer-reviewed journal, and c) used the MLQ as an instrument to measure the
leadership styles of participants in accordance with the FRLT. Going back 25 years in
the literature, Leon and Fischer ultimately analyzed the average MLQ factor scores from
54 independent samples gathered from 40 articles, which consisted of 20,073 participants
from 18 nations. Using a mixed effects regression analysis, they sought to explain the
variance in the factor means. Leong and Fischer eventually found that the MLQ means
covaried with cultural values. In their conclusion, they advise that researchers need to
seriously consider culture when studying leadership in a global or multicultural context.
The difficulty in studying context. Jepson’s (2009) model of contextual
leadership (Figure 2) serves to illustrate the difficulty in studying the effects of context on
the practice of leadership. Jepson’s model depicts three different types of contextual
influences on the leader. They all interact with each other in complex ways, making it
very difficult for a researcher to discern the ultimate product of all the interactions, the
specific context (Jepson, 2009).
58
Figure 2. Graphical depiction of broad contextual interactions that lead to a specific
context.
Further, the three different context types interact differently with each other and
the relative magnitudes of each interaction may change in time (Cole et al., 2009; Jepson,
2009). Considered all together, the contextual leadership researcher faces a daunting
challenge of sorting out a very complex model with many different interacting variables.
Thus, the contextual researcher must consider a great number of interactions in an
attempt to define the effect or influence of any given contextual situation. Consider a
notional contextual leadership study where the researchers compare Leader A operating
in Context A to Leader B operating in Context B. Figure 3 graphically portrays the
situation. Each major contextual theme in Jepson’s (2009) model has a notional, random
value assigned to it as an indicator of the relative differences in context.
59
Figure 3. Contextual interaction of two very dissimilar groups. (Notional values serve to
indicate dissimilarities.)
If an observer were to find a significant difference in leadership between the two,
it would be difficult to attribute the difference to context due to the sheer multitude of all
the contextual interactions. All contextual leadership studies cited in this literature
review suffer from this fundamental limitation.
Higher education. The proposed study context of the MIHL’s faculty is a
mixture of civilian and military cultures. In an effort to maintain high academic
standards, the military academy actively recruits experienced, civilian professors from
institutions of higher education throughout the U.S. Their former cultural context (U.S.
higher education institutions) will have heavily influenced the leadership behaviors that
these civilian faculty members bring to the MIHL. This study proposes to investigate the
interaction between this civilian higher education context and the dominant military
context of the MIHL. What is the nature of the U.S. academia context? Do academicians
60
prefer transactional or transformational leadership behavior? Is the academia context
different in other cultures? In an attempt to explore these questions this review now turns
to a discussion of research that specifically targeted the faculty and administration of
institutions of higher learning.
Inman (2011) studied the leadership development of 18 mid-level academic
leaders from highly rated colleges and universities in the United Kingdom. Inman was
interested in how academic leaders became leaders. In particular, she wanted to identify
the stages or phases that a college professor must progress through in order to become a
successful academic leader. Inman’s chosen methodology was a qualitative survey
conducted via in-person interviews. After soliciting 34 mid-level academic leaders,
typically heads of departments, 18 agreed to be the subject of Inman’s semi-structured
life history interviews. After completing the interviews, Inman looked for trends in her
data. She found that her study subjects had similar experiences as they raised to their
current leadership positions prompting her to develop her own model of academic
leadership development. However, her model is simply a summarized description of the
lifelong experiences of her subjects, as they became academic leaders. Consequently, her
model does not offer much actionable, practical information for the academician aspiring
to lead in a university or college. In summary, Inman concludes that academic leaders
acquire only a very small portion of their leadership knowledge through formal
professional experience. Indeed, the academic leaders in her study had no formal
development experience amongst them. Instead, each acquired the majority of their
leadership ability through the trial and error of their life experiences. Inman’s
conclusions sound very much like the original great man and trait theories of leadership
61
development where academic leaders simply rise above the rest. Inman’s research
implies a great challenge for the global leaders at the MIHL. Newly arrived visiting
professors and older civilian permanent professors will find an institution of higher
learning whose explicit mission is to develop leaders. Lastly, Inman’s study illustrates
the lack of a general understanding of leader development and reinforces the need to
understand it better.
Citing the literature that described the many benefits of transformational
leadership behavior, Onorato (2013) set out to measure the leadership styles education
leaders in New York State. He therefore administered the MLQ, self-evaluation form,
along with a short demographic survey to 45 education leaders scattered throughout New
York. His analysis was straightforward yet still revealing. Onorato does not share his
MLQ scoring methodology. However, based on the MLQ data he concludes that the
overwhelming majority of education leaders (69%) prefer the transformational leadership
style while 22% prefer the transactional style. The remaining 9% scored as
passive/avoidance non-leaders. These are encouraging results inferring that education
leaders in New York State are endeavoring to inspire their fellow educators and students
to excel. However, Onorato used the MLQ Leader Form where the leader rates
themselves. A better methodology would be to use the Rater Form where followers rate
the leader’s behavior. Still, Onorato’s work provides some insight into the general nature
of educational leadership. Given that the popular image of the U.S. military leadership
culture, is very transactional, Onorato’s finding infer a clashing of cultures for new
MIHL civilian faculty members.
Basham (2012) also studied the transformational leadership styles of education
62
leaders. However, his study population was much broader encompassing the entire U.S.
Basham focused on university presidents and eventually received permission to study 52
individuals. Instead of using a standardized survey instrument such as the MLQ, Basham
developed a customized, qualitative survey instrument consisting of three rounds of
questions. A panel of researchers analyzed the data from each round with the results
influencing the content of the next survey. For instance, the first round survey asked the
university presidents to rank order various activities. The activity descriptions marked
them as either transactional or transformational in nature. After three surveys and three
rounds of analysis, Basham made several conclusions. His main conclusion was that the
distinction between transformational and transactional leadership in higher education
institutions all across the U.S. might be muddled and will require more research to
completely understand. Basham’s most significant conclusion was that university
presidents want to be transformational leaders that inspire attainment of a vision of
excellence. However, they are very unsure how to become that type of leader. This
recent study highlights the urgency of this proposed study’s problem statement.
Researchers and practitioners can describe effective leadership behavior,
transformational, global, or otherwise. However, no one can describe the processes for
developing effective leaders.
In summary, the recent literature does provide some insight into the academia
cultural context. Of particular concern in this study are the leadership preferences of
higher education professionals. The literature supports the conclusion that leaders of
U.S. institutions of higher learning (U.S. academia context) understand the advantages of
the transformational leadership, in particular, a combination of transformational and
63
transactional leadership behavior. The literature also indicates that this leadership style
preference is associated with improved organizational performance. However, despite
the awareness of the advantages and the desire to become transformational, academia has
not discovered how to develop transformational leaders.
The military/civilian context. Clearly, the relationship between transformational
leadership and the context within which the leader operates requires more study.
However, a search of the literature did not find any studies that dealt specifically with
transformational leadership within a mixed military/civilian context. Therefore, the best
alternative was to separately search for transformational leadership in military
organizations as well as civilian academic environments.
The popular impression of military leadership throughout recorded history is that
martial leaders are highly autocratic or transactional. Membership in an effective
military organization often requires strict discipline and adherence to lawful orders,
especially in combat. Yet, history is replete with examples of military leaders who
appear to have very transformational leadership styles. Alexander the Great, George
Washington, Napoleon, and Omar Bradley certainly all exhibited many transformational
behaviors that inspired their soldiers to strive beyond their individual goals and concerns.
Therefore, a search of the literature should first determine if scientific research supports
the popular transactional perception or the transformational view.
A recent example of research that directly measured the transformational and
transactional preferences of military personnel is Di Schiena, Letens, Van Aken, &
Farris’s 2013 study. The current global war on terrorism is an unfamiliar form of combat
for most modern national military organizations (Laurence, 2011). Therefore, Di Schiena
64
et al. theorized that western military organizations would be more successful if they were
to embrace the characteristics of a learning organization. Theorizing even further, they
predicted that transformational leaders would more likely lead military learning
organizations. Recognizing that transactional leader behavior is often appropriate, they
also hypothesized that transactional leaders would also be associated to learning
organizations, but to a lesser extent. Lastly, the researchers predicted a negative
correlation with passive/avoidant leaders. To test their hypotheses, Di Schiena et al.
studied 17 officers from the Belgian Armed Forces who had commanded military units
engaged in irregular warfare in Afghanistan, Lebanon, and Libya. They used the MLQ
survey to determine the individual preferred leadership styles (transformational or
transactional) of the participants and the Learning Organization Questionnaire (LOQ) to
measure the characteristics of a learning organization. Their average transformational
leadership score was 3.1 of a possible 4.0 while their average transactional leadership
score was lower at 2.6. These scores indicate strong use of both leadership styles by
these military personnel with a slight preference for transformational leadership.
Bangari (2014) took a very different approach when he conducted a qualitative
study of combat veterans from the elite Indian parachute regiments. He gathered his data
in two forms. His first source was comprised of informal, impromptu discussions with
experienced soldiers of all ranks that he recalled from his own life experience (23 years
with the parachute regiments). His second source of data was 12 formal group meetings
with officers totaling approximately 250 officers. Using the FRLT as a basis, Bangari
applied all of his observations, discussions, and notes, accumulated over decades, and
created a new framework for effective leadership called Transformational Grassroots
65
Military Leadership. It contains nine characteristics of the effective leader (as opposed to
the five associated with transformational leadership). Bangari provided detailed
descriptions of each characteristic followed by an in depth discussion. After reading each
discussion, it becomes clear that Bangari’s framework is an extension or refinement of
the FRLT. However, it suffers from the same deficiency as other contemporary
leadership theories. The most difficult question remains unanswered. How does an
organization develop transformational grassroots military leaders?
Does the empirical evidence support a different conclusion regarding the
leadership preferences of civilian subjects? Hamstra, Van Yperen, Wisse, &
Sassenberg’s (2011) recent study of 104 U.S. college psychology students resulted in
significantly different conclusions concerning civilian leadership style preferences. Their
data analysis resulted in significantly high average MLQ scores (3.29 for
transformational, 3.32 for transactional). Further, their subjects actually preferred
transactional behavior to transformational behavior. In a final comparison, military
leaders indicate a consistent, strong preference for both transformational and
transactional leadership behaviors. However, while civilian leaders display a significant
preference for transformational behavior, the use of transactional leadership varies
considerably.
Researchers conducted the studies mentioned above in exclusively military or
civilian settings. After comparing the results, it is difficult to draw definitive conclusions
from this type of research. The relative magnitudes of the various MLQ scores may not
be meaningful due to unreported or unknown moderating variables. Thus, the mixed
contextual environment of the MIHL's faculty, where leaders with distinctly different
66
cultural backgrounds must exercise leadership in the same environment under the same
conditions, provides an excellent opportunity to study global leadership.
While the military is a subculture of the greater civilian society, it contains within
itself further subcultures (Coll, Weiss, Yarvis, 2011; Strom et al., 2012). The Navy is
distinctly different from the Army in many regards. This fact further complicates the
picture. Strom, Gavian, Possis, Loughlin, Bui, Linardatos, Leskela, and Siegel (2012)
described the U.S. military culture and its subcultures in detail and emphasized that the
military veteran’s unique experiences, language, values, and beliefs created a
complicated and challenging context that leaders must consider and ultimately
understand.
Global Leadership
The rise of international commerce has resulted in the proliferation of
multinational corporations where leaders routinely operate in a particularly challenging
context. As such, global leadership becomes a special case of contextual leadership. For
example, multi-national business mergers and long-term international military alliances
produce organizations whose leaders and followers possess distinctly different languages,
customs, and values. The transformational leader seeking to inspire and lead all members
of such a diverse organization faces a great challenge due to this diverse nature (Holt &
Seki, 2012).
Leadership development and context. The discussion above highlights the need
to develop transformational leaders that are keenly aware of the significant effect that
context has on their effectiveness. The literature does not directly address this subject.
However, it follows that any leader development program should include a deliberate
67
assessment of the immediate context and subsequent adaptations of leadership behaviors
in consideration of that context.
Recognition of the problem. The development of effective transformational
global leaders remains largely unexplained in the literature although interest is increasing
at a fast pace. Hernandez et al. (2011) identified culture as one of their loci of leadership
from which implicit theories of leadership arise. Therefore, they argued that the effective
leader must develop behaviors that are compatible with those implicit theories. However,
they did not describe specifically how to accomplish that important task. Avolio et al.
(2009) remarked that scholars could not agree on a single definition of culture causing
them to conceptualize global leadership differently. Thus, Avolio et al. recommended the
adoption of a universal definition of culture as a research priority. Again, they did not
offer a definition themselves. Gill (2012) writing from the perspective of the practitioner,
noted that the literature presents mixed guidance concerning the importance of culture on
organizational performance. Some studies maintained that culture is unimportant while
others concluded the opposite. By way of illustrating the importance of the cultural
context, Gill described, in detail, the results of two recent corporate mergers, one
successful and the other a failure. The inevitable conclusion was that effective leaders
must pay close attention to a mixed cultural context and should be deliberately prepared
to lead in such a context. The need for global leaders will grow significantly in the
coming decades as the world continues to flatten and organizations become inherently
more multicultural (Meyer et al., 2011).
Some initial models of global leadership. A handful of researchers have very
recently offered models or theories of global leadership. Pless et al. (2011) noted that
68
many researchers have proposed various characteristics or traits of the global leader
without suggesting a methodology to develop these characteristics. They also stressed
the fact that the existing leader development programs of many international businesses
and non-governmental relief organizations lacked any basis on empirical evidence.
Therefore, Pless et al. chose to study the global leader development process, administered
by Price-Waterhouse-Cooper’s Global Talent Development Unit, the Ulysses Project.
The principle feature of this program was the immersion of the developing global leader
in a working foreign context for a period of at least two months, often with a
nongovernmental charitable organization. Pless et al. studied 23 project teams (three
years’ worth of project participants) as they progressed through the Ulysses training.
Additionally, they interviewed all 70 individual participants twice, once immediately
after their immersion experience and again two years later. Pless et al. concluded that
Ulysses participants exhibited significant learning gains in six areas: responsible mindset, ethical literacy, cultural intelligence, global mind-set, self-development, and
community building. Reasoning that any aspiring global leader would benefit from the
enrichment of these enhanced learning areas, the researchers recommended that cultural
immersion should be part of any global leader development program.
Holt and Seki (2012) argued that rapid pace of international commerce is forcing
scholars to develop a common mindset about global leadership. They defined a global
leader as “anyone who operates in a context of multicultural, paradoxical complexity to
achieve results in our world” (Holt & Seki, 2012, p. 199). Without the support of any
empirical data, they suggested that industrial-organizational psychologists adopt several
fundamental shifts in theoretical thought concerning the development of global leaders.
69
The most important being the development of multi-cultural awareness by means of
personal experiences in other cultural contexts. Thus, Holt and Seki echoed Pless et al.’s
(2012) main recommendation.
Terrell and Rosenbusch (2013) also advocated the development of global leaders
by immersion in foreign cultural contexts. They studied the global leaders of six large
multinational corporations with the intent of understanding how these successful
organizations developed effective global leaders. The results of their research again
supported the concept of immersion in a foreign cultural context. Terrell and Rosenbusch
found that the main benefit of these immersion experiences was the development of a
sense of multicultural sensitivity similar to Holt and Seki’s (2012) multi-cultural
awareness. Further, a sense of curiosity and a desire to learn about the foreign culture
characterized successful global leaders.
Summary
The literature reviewed here provided initial background information on the
evolution of leadership theory, the current state of the full range leadership theory, the
effects of context on leadership theory, and the current state of thought on global
leadership. Transformational leadership theory has steadily evolved from its beginning in
the early1980s as an alternative to the exchange theories of leadership (Warrick, 2011).
Scholars found the new idea appealing since transformational leaders infuse their
followers with a spirit of a future vision, which motivates them to perform beyond
expectations (Wang et al., 2011). The result was a plethora of studies that attested to the
effectiveness of transformational leaders over transactional exchange leaders (AlTarawneh et al., 2012; Gundersen et al., 2012; Wang et al., 2011).
70
The full range leadership theory includes nine leadership factors that describe a
full range of leadership behaviors. These nine factors span from transformational
leadership at the preferred end of the scale, through transactional leadership, to the low
end of passive/avoidant behavior (Wang et al., 2011). The development of the
Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) enabled researchers and practitioners to
measure leadership behavior and correlate it in accordance with the FRLT. Early in the
new millennium, researchers began to notice that MLQ data varied if the sample was not
homogeneous suggesting a link between leadership and context (Rowold & Heinitz,
2007). Consequently, scholars began to call for research on the contextual nature of
leadership (Avolio et al., 2009; Hardy et al., 2010; Iszatt-White, 2011; Jepson, 2009;
Leong & Fischer, 2011; Rowold & Heinitz, 2007).
Today, transformational leadership remains a central theory in the field of
organizational leadership. However, the special context facing the global leader is
becoming increasingly more important to researchers and particularly to practitioners. In
particular, the need for transformational leaders who are effective in a multicultural
context has highlighted the need for developing global leaders with a heightened sense of
multicultural awareness. However, the details of that development process remain
largely unknown, a gap in the literature that this proposed research directly addresses.
71
Chapter 3: Research Method
The general problem that this study addresses is the lack of a clear explanation in
the literature of how organizations can develop global leaders who can effectively operate
in a multicultural context (Holt & Seki, 2012). The U.S. military is facing this same
problem as they continue to operate globally to counter the rise of international terrorism
(Laurence, 2011). Therefore, this study focused on the lack of a specific methodology to
develop global leaders within of the U.S. military today.
The purpose of this qualitative case study is to explore how the U.S. military can
develop global leaders by studying the success of the faculty leaders at the MIHL. These
soldiers face challenges similar to those of many newly formed multinational
organizations. Specifically, inspiring a diverse mixture of followers who do not share a
common language, customs, or values is often extremely difficult (Holt & Seki, 2012).
Therefore, any theoretical developments that may result from an analysis of the MIHL’s
success at developing global leaders can be generalized to apply to similar organizations
(analytic generalization) thereby advancing theory development (Yin, 2013). This was
an embedded single case study with multiple units of analysis. The subject of this case
study was the MIHL, an organization that has been developing effective global leaders
for many decades. The first and broadest unit of analysis was the office of the President
of the MIHL, who is the organization’s top leader. The next two units of analysis were
the offices of the Dean of the Academic Board and the Commanding Officer of Cadets
both of whom work directly for the President. The next two units of analysis were the
heads of the 13 Academic Departments and the heads of the two Military Departments, as
well as their deputy heads, who fall under the Dean and the Commanding Officer
72
respectively. Current theoretical thinking maintains that leadership is a function of both
leader and follower (Hernandez et al., 2011). Therefore, the final unit of analysis was the
foreign military officers and civilian professors who significantly contribute to the
multicultural context at the MIHL.
This chapter consists of six parts, which describe the research methodology in
detail. The first part discusses the overall general design of the proposed research,
specifically the selection of a qualitative case study methodology. The second part
introduces the study participants from the MIHL's staff and faculty. The next two
sections are devoted to an explanation of the data collection methods and instruments
followed by a review of the study assumptions, limitations, and delimitations. The
chapter concludes with a discussion of the ethical and statutory considerations associated
with the proposed research.
The following five research questions, introduced in Chapter 1, provide the focus
for the research design and therefore guide the methodology.
Q1. What is the nature of the multicultural context at the MIHL, as
indicated by the different leadership styles employed by the faculty leaders?
Q2. How do followers perceive the MIHL's academic leadership?
Q3. What behaviors, specific actions, and personal attributes of the MIHL's
faculty leaders do multicultural followers perceive as effective leadership?
Q4. What are the guiding principles used at the MIHL for the development
of global leaders?
Q5. How does the MIHL organization develop global leaders in the
multicultural context?
73
Research Methods and Design
A qualitative single case study of the MIHL’s faculty may result in better
understanding of the development process of global leaders. A qualitative methodology
is appropriate in this exploratory case since the literature contains relatively little firm
information concerning global leadership. Therefore, any data collected at this stage
needs to undergo an initial inductive reasoning analysis in order to identify possible
trends, associations, and relationships that later quantitative methods can verify. The
Office of the Dean maintains oversight responsibility for the vast majority of the research
conducted at the MIHL. That office granted preliminary permission to conduct this case.
The case study method is appropriate for this study due to the nature of the research
questions, which seek to discover how and why the MIHL’s senior leadership became
effective global leaders. Yin (2013) emphasized that the case study methodology is
particularly suited to investigating these how type investigations. He went further to note
that the preferred method for studying phenomenon within the setting of complex reallife contexts is the case study (Yin, 2013). The MIHL’s multicultural environment,
where the faculty consists of allied foreign officers, civilian professors, and U.S. military
officers is certainly one such context. A single case study design is appropriate when the
case under investigation exemplifies a singular or unique set of circumstances (Yin,
2013). The faculty experience at the MIHL is indeed singular. The singular nature is
most evident in the mix of military officers and civilian professors. The duties and daily
activities of the MIHL faculty, which vary significantly from a normal U.S. college, are
also indicative of the unique nature. At the MIHL, professors devote nearly all their time
to cadet instruction and serve as role models for the cadets (The MIHL, Center for
74
Faculty Excellence, 2013). Last, but still significant, the small contingent of allied
foreign officers add appreciably to the distinctiveness. When considering this unique
nature, it is important to note that analytic generalization is still applicable in this case.
The MIHL's leaders still face the same fundamental challenges that characterize most
multicultural organizations. Specifically, all global leaders ultimately must learn to
motivate and inspire followers that possess differing values, customs, and experiences
(Holt & Seki, 2012).
Population
The population in this study was the MIHL's faculty. The approximately 600
members of the MIHL's faculty are composed of a mixture of roughly 75% military
officers and 25% civilian professors (The MIHL, Public Affairs Office, 2011). The
majority (just over 50%) of the faculty members are rotating active duty Army officers,
assigned for three years as instructors. These young officers serve an important
additional role as mentors and role models for the cadets (The MIHL, Center for Faculty
Excellence, 2013). There are a small number of allied foreign officers on the faculty as
well. Their number varies from year to year, but remains currently at approximately 2%
of the total. The permanently assigned senior military leaders are the primary
participants of this case study as the subjects for the interviews. They constitute 18% of
the total faculty and populate the top tiers of leadership (The MIHL, Public Affairs
Office). These officers typically spend their early years following a normal Army career
progression with a mixture of assignments with troop units and various military staffs.
At approximately the 12-15 year mark, they earn a PhD degree in their selected specialty
and become permanent faculty members (The MIHL, 2005). The upper echelons of this
75
group are the Heads of Departments and Deputy Heads; they act essentially as global
leaders at the MIHL, leading a multicultural body of military, civilian, and foreign
instructors and professors. Since this case study’s purpose is to investigate the
development of these global leaders, mostly senior Army Colonels, constituted the study
sample.
Sample
This case study included in-depth interviews of the MIHL faculty as a prime
source of data. Therefore, time constraints of the participants limited the number of
interviews to 14 in number. The population consisted of several different levels of
responsibility and authority. In order to gain insights from the entire population, the case
study’s different levels or Units of Analysis determined the selection of participants (Yin
2013). The highest-level unit of analysis was the Office of the President. Presidents do
not serve at the MIHL for particularly long periods, typically 3-5 years. Additionally,
interview time was limited at this organizational level. Consequently, the use of openended questions was minimized and the interview focused on the need for global leaders
in the Army. Access to the President was difficult to obtain due to his busy schedule.
Consequently the President’s chief assistant, the MIHL Chief of Staff was available and
proved to be a suitable alternative. He was able to provide the desired perspectives of the
president’s office as well as guidance from national level military leaders.
The Dean of the Academic Board was the best choice for an interview at the next
level unit of analysis. The Dean is typically a former department head and normally has
25 to 30 years of service on the MIHL’s Faculty. This officer was likely to have the best
insights perspectives on the development of global leaders on the faculty of the MIHL.
76
The third level of unit analysis included selected heads of department and deputy
heads with a target of six interviews. Departments with the highest percentages of
foreign officers and civilian professors received priority. However, these departments
tended to be representative of the humanities subject areas. Therefore, special effort was
made to include science, math, and engineering participants in the research in order to
remain representative of the population.
The final unit of analysis was the group of civilian professors and foreign faculty
that provide the multi-cultural environment at the MIHL. Thus, they were the intended
subjects for the remaining four interviews. Again, this methodology called for openended interviews. The subject of the questioning remained the global leadership abilities
of the faculty leadership, although the perspective necessarily changed to that of the
follower. Additionally, the intention here was to verify the assumption that the
department heads are indeed, effective global leaders by asking the interviewee to
comment on the effectiveness of their department head leadership. Therefore, the
interview questions for this unit of analysis focused on (a) the interviewee’s opinion of
the effectiveness of their Department Head’s leadership and, (b) the follower’s perception
of why that leader is an effective leader.
Materials/Instruments
The only instrument was the short demographic survey that appears at Appendix
A. The researcher completed the survey in the presence of the interview participant. It
provided basic background information such as job position, years of service at the
MIHL, age, and cultural category (military, civilian, allied, permanent, or rotating
assignment). This information was collected on the chance that it might become useful
77
during data analysis. Specifically, these data became the basis for various patterns when
coupled with other data, in particular viewpoints and remarks that were made by all
civilian participants.
Data Collection, Processing, and Analysis
This case study utilized multiple units of analysis in an effort to improve validity
by triangulating findings between the different units (Yin, 2013). The use of several
sources of data was intended to add additional triangulation possibilities further
improving validity (Yin, 2013).
Document sources. As an academic institution of higher learning and the host
organization for many Army research centers, the MIHL maintains many sources of
documents. The main document source is the MIHL's library archives which preserves
important academy documents that date back nearly to the inception of the academy in
1802. The academy’s mission is to produce officers of character to serve in the active
army. Accordingly, nearly all activity at the MIHL focuses on cadet leadership
development resulting in an abundance of archive material on that subject. Nevertheless,
archival data concerning staff and faculty development likely exists due to the importance
of the subject. For instance, the U.S. military considers leadership to be the most critical
factor determining success on the modern battlefield (Wong, Bleise, & McGurk, 2003).
Consequently, since the close of the Second World War, the development of effective
leaders has been a major priority for the Army (Bass, 1998). Therefore, it is possible that
the development of the MIHL’s faculty leaders has been a deliberate process formalized
in a written plan or official guidance document. If such a document exists, the MIHL's
library is the likely source. The initial line of documental inquiry directly addressed the
78
fifth research question by seeking documented evidence of official development plans for
the position of Full Professor. Additionally, the position of Professor would also provide
valuable information since it is the stepping-stone to the Department Head and Deputy
Department Head positions. The development of these officers was of particular interest
since they are likely the most global of the MIHL's leaders.
The two MIHL research centers, The Center for the Advancement of Leader
Development and Organizational Learning, and The Leadership Center were also
potential excellent sources of data. These academic research centers specialize in
leadership studies and particularly on leadership development. However, their focus is
primarily on leadership in the greater Army outside the gates of the MIHL.
Direct observation. Newly assigned military officer instructors undergo a brief
period of training during the summer months prior to the beginning of the academic year,
which is conducted by the individual academic departments. New officer instructors
receive a brief course in pedagogy presented by experienced professors. The duration
varies by department but is typically one to two weeks. This training concludes with the
new instructors presenting a complete classroom presentation (The MIHL, Center for
Faculty Excellence, 2013). Civilian professors often grade or otherwise participate in this
training. Thus, this training offered an opportunity to view the initial interaction of the
experienced civilian and new military faculty members. The purpose here was to observe
the nature and frequency of their interactions with the following questions in mind. Do
the cultures clash initially or does academic camaraderie bridge any gaps? What is the
nature and frequency of inter-cultural group communication? Do the faculty members
79
that conduct the training do anything overtly to facilitate the mixing of the civilian and
military cultures?
Interviews. The most promising source of data was the opportunity to conduct
interviews with faculty members. This data collection method directly questioned the
MIHL’s global leaders and their followers with the purpose of allowing the prime
participants to share their experiences and viewpoints concerning their own global
leadership experience. The open-ended interview strategy required a focus on exploring
(a) their perception of the multi-cultural context in which they lead, (b) the modifications,
if any, that they have made in their leadership behavior and style due to the MIHL’s
specific context, and (c) their perception of how they became a global leader. Faculty
member interviews included participants from all four units of analysis levels for a
planned total of 12, hour-long interviews. An initial introduction by the researcher
explained the purpose of the study and the rationale for the interviewee's participation.
The initial questioning was quick-answer demographic and background in nature such as
the length of the participant's service at the MIHL. The researcher completed the short
demographic survey (Appendix A) at this time. Then the discussion typically turned to
open-ended questioning in the sense that the interviewee had to reflect on their leadership
experience an how the multicultural nature affected that experience. The goal here was
to get the participant to talk freely and openly.
Data analysis. This case study relied on the data analysis strategy of theoretical
propositions (Yin, 2013) where specific theoretical propositions (discussed earlier)
guided the analysis. The study research questions and current leadership theory formed
the basis for the development of the study theoretical propositions. Plausible, rival
80
theoretical propositions were also included. Essentially, data analysis became a process
of uncovering evidence that either confirmed or denied these propositions. When the
analysis was completed, the theoretical propositions that the data supported formed the
basis for the study conclusions. Propositions 3 and 4, as described above, are rival
explanations. Analysis of rival explanations may increase the study validity if the data
supports only one of the rival explanations (Yin, 2013).
Analytic technique. The confirmation or denial of propositions relied on the
basic analytical technique of simple pattern matching and rival explanations as patterns
(Yin, 2013). If a particular theoretical proposition is true, various patterns of responses
should appear in the data. Therefore, the analysis process became a task of first
considering each proposition in light of current theoretical thinking and then suggesting
or predicting data patterns. Lastly, the data was searched to find matches between actual
data patterns and the theoretically predicted patterns.
Computer-aided analysis. The use of computers with specialized software
significantly aided the analysis task. However, computer-aided analysis also required
that the data be in the form of computer text files. Creation of these text files was a
multi-step process. First, after gaining the written consent the study participant, an
electronic recording device recorded the interview conversation. Next, speech to text
software transformed the recordings into computer text files suitable for computer
programs such as the Qualitative Content Analysis Map (QCAmap) (Qualitative Content
Analysis, 2014) or R Package for Qualitative Data Analysis (RQDA) (Huang, 2012).
The next step required the configuration of the analysis programs to enable proper
identification of data patterns. Possible data patterns (codes) emerged from a
81
consideration of each research question in context with each theoretical proposition. The
researcher searched the text files manually looking for verbiage that related to the various
codes. For example, if a participant commented that they were constantly being ordered
about and threatened with punishment for noncompliance, that section of text could be
highlighted as an instance of transactional leadership behavior. Lastly, the computer
software was used to search for exact matches of words or phrases, theoretically
predicted patterns of words that might be embedded in the data text files (Yin 2009).
Proposition confirmation. Confirmation of a proposition occurs when a
preponderance of these patterns become evident in the data. Definitive confirmation of
one or more propositions was the preferred result. However, confirmation is a judgment
call in the sense of defining a preponderance of matches. In this exploratory case study,
confirmation, while desirable, was not necessarily required. Any patterns identified in
the data can provide direction for possible future research.
Data triangulation. This study proposed to collect data at several different units
of analysis. These units of analysis are sources of data that is representative of different
groups of people. These different groups of people may have different perspectives on
the development of global leaders at the MIHL. For instance, the commanding general,
the superintendent, may examine issues very differently than a faculty professor. Where
the professor is primarily concerned with the academic growth of cadets, the President
has much broader responsibilities related to the moral, physical, and professional
development of cadets in addition to the academic. Different sources of data enhance an
investigation providing a broader view of reality. Thus, when more than one source of
data supports the theoretical propositions, the validity of the research is increased (Yin,
82
2013). Denzin (1984) calls this data source triangulation. The multi-unit of analysis
structure of this case study significantly increased the chances of achieving data source
triangulation and thus improves validity.
Assumptions
The first assumption of this research was that the participants will answered
truthfully. This risk associated with this assumption is low based on the nature of the
participants, most of whom are career Army officers. Honesty and integrity are values
that are vital to the Army organization where ongoing combat operations emphasize the
absolute necessity to always be truthful. Similar to the first assumption, the researcher
assumed that the participants were willing to discuss the concept of global leader
development and understood the nuances of the subject. While the study population is
necessarily highly educated, as noted in the literature review, the concept of leadership
remains poorly defined and poorly understood concept (Avolio, 2014). An additional
assumption is that the MIHL's faculty is a multi-cultural environment dominated by the
U.S. military culture. It is possible that the reverse is true, that the culture of academia is
significantly stronger than the military culture. However, the constant influx of rotating
active duty Army officers, heavily steeped in the military culture supports this
assumption. Lastly, the major assumption of this proposed study is that the development
of global leaders at the MIHL is a deliberate and carefully considered process, in the
sense that the MIHL’s leadership could reflect and recall relevant, useful information.
Similarly, if it is indeed a deliberate effort, then the documental records should have
evidence of that effort.
83
Limitations
The first limitation of this study was the small size of the population and sample,
which limits the transferability of any conclusions to larger populations. However, this
case study was exploratory in nature. The objective of exploratory research is to reduce
the number of possible explanations of a particular phenomenon or problem (Yin, 2013)
thereby allowing follow-on researchers to narrow their focus. The second limitation is
common in case study design. Case studies are inherently subjective in nature and
therefore their validity relies heavily on the subjectivity of the researcher (Yin, 2013).
Unfortunately, the third limitation amplifies the second. Specifically, the researcher is a
retired, career, Army officer, graduate of the MIHL, and a former assistant professor of
physics at the MIHL. As such, he shares similar backgrounds, values, and ideologies
with most of the participants. This was a concern because much of the analysis was
interpretive in nature, which allowed the researcher to potentially unconsciously interject
preconceived opinions (Yin, 2013). Therefore, the researcher took special care to insure
that he did not introduce his personal bias during the data analysis phase of the study. As
a mitigating measure, the use of computer software to help identify patterns in the data
significantly reduced the risk of personal bias interjection.
Delimitations
The main delimitation of this study was the selection of participants. Ideally, the
list of interviewees would include all relevant faculty members to include all civilian and
foreign members as well as any faculty member in a leadership position. However, that
number of interviews would require an enormous amount of time and effort to collect and
analyze (Yin, 2013). Consequently, the researcher conducted in-depth interviews with
84
fourteen selected participants. A second significant delimitation is the unique nature of
the MIHL. The case study conclusions may only be applicable to environments that are
similar to the MIHL, which are few in number. Therefore, the data analysis attempted to
identify variables and relationships that are more generalizable to larger populations.
Ethical Assurances
Authorization to conduct this study was required from the Northcentral IRB, the
MIHL's IRB, and the Office of the Dean. The Dean's Office granted initial conceptual
approval to conduct this study prior to the development of this dissertation proposal.
Ultimately, all required approvals were obtained prior to the start of data collection.
Protection from harm. There were no risks of physical harm to either
participants or nonparticipants. Participant activities were completely sedentary in nature
such as answering interview questions in the comfort of the participant’s office. There
was a possibility that a participant may provide a contentious opinion or fact that could
potentially have a negative career impact. In that case, the informed consent and right to
privacy measures that follow should protect the participant.
Informed consent. The researcher fully informed all participants concerning the
nature and intent of the study. He answered all questions and resolved all issues prior to
the collection of data. In accordance with federal rules and Northcentral University
policy, all participants completed an informed consent form (Appendix D).
Right to privacy. The following measures will insure participant confidentiality.
A locked cabinet secured all electronic data to include interview recordings, computer
data files, and paper notes. Actual names or specific titles (e.g., Head of the Department
of Physics) were not associated with any data.
85
Summary
This study explored the MIHL Faculty in order to gain insights into the
development of global leaders. This qualitative single case study examined several
different units of analysis and sources of data focusing on the effectiveness and
development of the faculty leaders, primarily the department heads. The primary source
of data was the recorded interviews with the faculty leadership, allied foreign officers,
and the civilian faculty members. Data analysis consisted of transcribing recorded data
into text form as required and then processing the resulting text data through computer
programs that aided the identification of themes and patterns. This research addresses a
void in the research concerning the development of global leaders and may help
practitioners as they seek success in an ever growing, interconnected, and truly global
society.
86
Chapter 4: Findings
The purpose of this qualitative case study is to explore how the U.S. military can
develop global leaders by studying the success of the faculty leaders at the Military
Institute of Higher Learning (MIHL). This chapter presents the results of the data
collection and the subsequent analysis of that data. The findings are discussed within the
framework of the research questions and theoretical propositions. The findings support
the purpose of this qualitative case study, which is to explore how the U.S. military can
develop global leaders by studying the success of the faculty leaders at the MIHL. This
chapter begins with a brief discussion of the sources of data. The process of coding the
recorded interviews for relevant data is then described in some detail. The results of the
coding and analysis process are presented in the Results section in two parts. First, the
theoretical hypotheses are each examined in detail with a final determination of their
validity. That analysis forms the basis for the second part, which is the final discussion
of the study research questions.
The MIHL has earned a worldwide reputation as an outstanding center of higher
learning and leadership development. It is reasonable to assume that this sustained
success is the result of careful and deliberate planning to include the development of the
faculty, particularly the senior leadership. If such a plan existed, either currently or in the
past, it would be recorded and archived in the MIHL Library Archives. However, the
researcher’s investigation of the archives yielded no evidence of a centrally planned
MIHL mandated training program for new faculty members. More importantly,
considering the purpose of this study, there is no record of a formal development program
for Senior MIHL faculty leaders. Later in the data collection phase of the study, the
87
researcher confirmed this conclusion. Both the Chief of the MIHL Staff (1st unit of
analysis) and the Dean of the Academic Board (2nd unit of analysis) indicated that a
deliberate development plan for senior faculty leaders does not exist.
New members of the MIHL faculty are sometimes required to participate in new
instructor training before they assume their teaching duties. This training typically
involves a current faculty member coaching newly arrived military instructors in the
pedagogical methods peculiar to that academic department. The intent was to observe the
interaction between the newly arrived military instructor and a civilian faculty member.
Unfortunately, an appropriate opportunity was not available during the short (2-3 weeks)
summer training period.
Fourteen interviews of MIHL personnel were conducted requiring from 45 to 70
minutes each to complete. The first unit of analysis is the Office of the MIHL President.
Unfortunately, the President was not available for an interview. However, the MIHL
Chief of Staff was available and his views and perspectives are representative of that
level of leadership. The second unit of analysis is the Office of the Dean of the
Academic Board who was able to conduct an interview. The third unit of analysis is the
Department Head level. Eight faculty members were interviewed from this group to
include two civilians who were appointed as Acting Deputy Head of the Department.
Finally, the fourth unit of analysis was represented by interviews with four professors or
instructors, two of which were allied foreign officers. This group of interviewees
provided a good mixture of all units of analysis and cultural groups present in the MIHL
multicultural environment. Table 1 details the composition of the entire group of study
participants.
88
Table 1
Number of Interview Participants by Unit of Analysis and Group
Unit of Analysis (UoA)
Military
1st - Office of the President
1
2nd - Office of the Dean of the Academic Board
1
3rd - Head of Department and Deputies
6
4th - Professor and Instructor
Civilian
Allies
4
2
The researcher conducted 14 individual interviews, each approximately one hour
in duration. Each interview was electronically recorded onto a smart phone and the
recording sound file later transferred to a personal computer. In addition to the electronic
recordings, a written summary was produced from notes taken during and immediately
following each interview. As the interviews progressed, the written notes suggested that
some common themes could be found in the data. These theme notes proved to be the
basis for much of the later coding work.
The recorded sound files were then each transcribed into text documents using an
Internet based transcription service. The computer program RQDA (R-Based Qualitative
Data Analysis) was used to identify and mark codes within each text file. Text files were
first loaded into RQDA where the researcher reviewed the text searching for statements
by the participant that were in some way related to global leadership. A remark that was
related to the general topics of leadership, culture, language, or motivation was marked
and associated with a specific code. Codes were added and refined as the coding process
proceeded resulting in a total of 32 individual codes. Many of the codes were related to
each other and therefore could be grouped together in a Code Category. For instance the
89
codes Inspire and Trust are concepts associated with the Full Range Leadership Theory
Code Category.
Once each transcription was coded, the RQDA program was used to perform a
simple descriptive analysis of the coding results. The first step was a simple tabulation of
the frequency of each code. Instances of certain codes became more prevalent during the
coding process. Eventually, commonalities and patterns could be discerned in the data.
These patterns lead to the creation of additional codes and the coding process expanded
becoming an iterative process.
It soon became evident that many codes were related to each other and could be
grouped together as a category of codes. These code categories in turn suggested the
presence of basic themes. Some themes suggested the presence of other codes. For
instance, with the identification of a transformational leadership theme, one would
expect the word “inspire” to appear in the data. Ultimately four of these single word
codes were identified. These were a) trust, b) inspire, c) communication or communicate,
and d) language. The auto-coding feature of RQDA easily identified and highlighted
these single word codes in the transcript data. The researcher’s text data was excluded
from the auto-coding search. A summary table of the code categories, associated codes,
the frequency (number of occurrences overall) of each code, and the number of
transcripts that include the code appears below as Table 2.
90
Table 2
Coding Summary
Code Category
Code
Frequency
Participants
Communicatea
Languagea
Language Proficiency
15
128
4
7
11
3
Faculty Development Careful Selection
Civilians Become Militarized
Civilians Do Not Become Militarized
Civilians Should Rate Military Faculty
No Formal Development Plan
Senior Faculty Must Develop the Faculty
Cultural Differences Exist within the Faculty
18
12
4
5
7
7
31
7
7
4
4
5
4
7
Full Range
Leadership Theory
Emotional Intelligence
Inspirea
Leaders are Change Agents
Leadership and Motivation
Minimal Transactional Leadership
Situational Leadership
Transformational Leadership
Trusta (in the Leader)
Trust is Critical
Win the Hearts and Minds
9
62
2
5
2
4
37
41
15
4
4
10
2
3
2
3
13
7
7
4
General Leadership
Development of Cadet Character
Mentoring
Military Political Relationships
Take Care of Your Followers
12
11
3
3
6
8
2
3
Global Leader
Development
Cultural Immersion
Cultural Proficiency
Cultural Sensitivity
Diversity
Equal Treatment
Human Decency
Know Your Subordinates
Learn One Foreign Language
Nonverbal Communication
24
12
25
22
15
6
19
7
3
8
7
8
12
9
3
8
5
1
Communication
Notea These codes were identified by using the auto-coding feature of RQDA to
automatically mark a single word as a code in all the transcript files.
91
Results
As stated in Chapters 2 & 3, this study uses theoretical propositions as a basis for
analyzing the data. The interview questions and the coding methodology were both
guided by these propositions. Further, their validity or invalidity forms the basis for
answering the study questions (Yin, 2012). Therefore, the analysis now turns to
determining if the data supports each proposition.
Theoretical Proposition 1: Significant leadership context differences exist
between the majority U.S. military officer faculty and the civilian/foreign faculty.
The code Cultural Differences Exist within the Faculty directly addresses this
proposition. Table 2 indicates that this code appeared 31 times in seven different
transcripts indicating that half of the participants expressed one or more thoughts that
could be interpreted as support for this proposition. Consideration must be given to the
higher frequency of this code, ranking it as the fourth highest in Table 2. Further, no
converse code or theme was identified that suggested there are no cultural differences.
Lastly, while only half of the participants directly addressed this proposition, their
comments were typically strongly expressed. For example, when asked about differences
between the military and civilian faculty members, one participant replied:
I think most of the leadership struggles with this. We're one faculty. We all have
the same mission. We are all doing the same thing. That is true to a point, but
there are very distinct legal differences and there are very distinct ... There are
some distinct cultural differences. (Participant Eleven – Civilian Professor – UoA
4)
92
Many participants are keenly aware of these cultural differences that exist
between the military and civilian faculty groups. Fortunately, these differences are not
straining the relationships between individuals from each of the two cultural groups.
Participants never expressed a concern about the suitability, academic credentials, or
character of their colleagues. However, the differences are still palatable and distinct.
The most common distinction between the two cultural groups is that military faculty
members accept direction from superiors without questioning the underlying reason for
the action. In contrast, civilian faculty members immediately ask “why” when given a
task. They prefer to know the reasons behind a particular course of action before they
execute that task. Participant Eleven explains her perspective. “I will do whatever job I
am told to do, but I'll complain about it a lot more if I don't know, if I can't figure out
why I am doing it” (Participant Eleven – Civilian Professor – UoA 4).
All of the civilian professors interviewed talked of having some initial difficulty
fitting into MIHL culture. The requirement to ask for time-off, the expectation to work
through the summer months, the military jargon, all caused these professors to feel out of
place and unfamiliar at first. With time the cultural differences appear to dissipate to a
degree, but a distinct difference between the two cultures remains even for the most
senior faculty members.
The data appears to support the first proposition when comparing civilians to U.S.
military personnel. However, the interview data leads to a very different conclusion
when the allied foreign officers are considered. During the interviews with the two allied
foreign officers, neither of them expressed any concern about significant cultural
differences between themselves and their U.S. officer contemporaries. Neither made a
93
single comment that might indicate a cultural difference. Their main concerns involved
their mastery of the English language in the sense of being able to effectively
communicate with their U.S. allies. Both allied foreign officers worked for one academic
department. One was a little surprised, but very proud of the level of responsibility
entrusted to him by the department leadership. “It means to me [that] you trust my job,
the department here, trusts my job” (Participant Four – Allied Instructor – UoA 4). Both
allied officers talked as if they were fully accepted members of the department's U.S.
military culture. One officer expressed it simply by saying “I feel real comfortable here,
working here. I feel a lot of… I'm free to do my job” (Participant Four). The military
Head of the Department and the acting civilian deputy head were also interviewed.
Neither participant voiced a single concern or described any difficulty associated with the
allied officers. However, they did spend considerable time discussing the challenges of
the civilian faculty. Participant Three describes one particular challenge.
When I put out a message to the department I need to tailor that message to
address the different groups of department. So whereas certain things will
resonate with the military, mainly being, I'm the Colonel you're the captain, you
do what I say, that same, that sort of approach isn't going to work with a [civilian]
Professor of Portuguese. (Participant Three – Department Head – UoA 3)
The interview data partially supports Theoretical Proposition 1. Specifically,
cultural differences do exist between the majority military faculty members and the
civilian faculty members. However, the data does not support the idea that significant
cultural differences exist between the allied foreign officers and their American hosts. To
the contrary, foreign officers appear to integrate very quickly into the MIHL military
94
culture. They bring with them a similar value set, military jargon, and general world
view. Language is the biggest obstacle that usually diminishes very quickly as the allied
officer quickly improves his language proficiency.
Theoretical Proposition 2: Contextual differences among the MIHL's faculty
diminish with time as the intense military context strongly influences all other
contexts and becomes dominant. The term to become militarized is defined to as the
process of adopting the values and normative behaviors associated with contemporary
U.S. military culture (Strom et al., 2012). The direct result is a gradual diminishing of
the contextual and cultural differences between the two groups. Two codes, which are
converse concepts, provide direct insight into the validity of this proposition. They are
Civilians Become Militarized and Civilians Do Not Become Militarized.
Table 2 indicates that the code Civilians Do Not Become Militarized was
identified only four times in the interview data, each time for a different participant, only
one who is a civilian. Notably, that same civilian participant also made remarks that
were coded as being supportive of the converse code. Similarly, another participant’s
transcript was coded once in support of this code and twice for the converse code.
Therefore, half of the participants who were coded as holding this viewpoint seemed to
be ambivalent at best.
Turning to the converse code, Civilians Become Militarized, it was identified a
total of 12 times in seven different interview transcripts. Two participants are
particularly illustrative of this code. The first case involves a civilian professor who
initially was very adamant that the military culture had not caused her to adopt the
cultural values, norms, and beliefs of the military personnel in her department. When
95
first asked if she had become militarized during her tenure at the MIHL, her response
was, "Oh my God, I could never do that. Or have somebody tell me what to do, because
they have higher rank” (Participant Seven – Civilian Professor – UoA 4). She went on to
describe her role and responsibilities in words that clearly revealed a self-image of the
professional scholar whose priority was research. Yet, as the interview progressed, the
dialog began to indicate that this civilian professor's actual priorities lay within the
classroom and the education of the cadets. At that point in the interview the participant
paused for a few moments and reflected on what she had just been saying. The
conversation that followed was a general discourse that confirmed a significant change of
priorities in this professor from research to training cadets. Thinking back, she recalls the
moment when she realized that she had changed her priorities.
I became a full Professor in August of … I forget what year, and I remember
saying it was as if I had become a different person, but nobody told me. All of a
sudden, I was involved in everything and I really wasn't fully aware that it was
going to change that much. (Participant Seven – Civilian Professor – UoA 4)
Another participant's cultural transformation is also particularly noteworthy. This
civilian professor arrived at the MIHL intending to follow a traditional career in
academia of research and publication. He had no desire for leadership himself or to train
others to lead. He comments on his attitude towards leadership and leader development
during his first year, “Everybody else thinks about leadership all the time and studies
leadership, and is all about leadership. The truth is, I have never spent one minute of my
entire life contemplating myself as a leader, what my leadership style was” (Participant
Twelve – Civilian Professor – UoA 4). He then goes on to describe his experiences over
96
the next four to five years where he learns to fully embrace the MIHL mission. Today,
this professor integrates cadet character development exercises into all his engineering
classes because he firmly believes that “if you want to develop leaders, it can't be a part
time undertaking. We have to be on that task 100% of the time” (Participant Twelve).
The data supports Theoretical Proposition 2. All four civilian participants
expressed similar sentiments about how difficult it was to initially adjust to the military
culture. Their military colleagues and superiors all spoke the familiar American English.
But there was a new military vocabulary to learn. They initially came to the MIHL to be
scholars and conduct research. But over many years of immersion in the dominant
military culture, they came to adopt selected values of their military superiors and
contemporaries. As one participant phrased it, “I just come to realize this in the past
couple of years [that] I've been in this position. I’m really interested in a shared culture”
(Participant Ten – Civilian Professor – UoA 4). For all four civilian participants, that
shared culture is a strong commitment to the mission of the MIHL, to train future leaders
of the U.S. armed forces.
It is not a complete transformation. The evolution proceeds to a certain point and
stops. The best example is the focus on research. The senior military faculty leaders
recognize the need for continued research and publication, mainly for accreditation
purposes. Consequently, they have improved the research facilities and created more
opportunities to conduct research. As a result, the MIHL is conducting more research
now than ever before in its history. However, it is important to note that research remains
a high priority for the civilian faculty and a low or nonexistent priority for the military
faculty and leadership.
97
Theoretical Proposition 3: The MIHL’s faculty leaders are successful global
leaders due to basic character traits that have also facilitated their success as
military leaders. The analysis of the interview data identified several themes. The
strongest was the prevalence and effectiveness of Transformational Leadership behavior
by the senior faculty leadership. Every follower participant spoke of inspirational leaders
at some point in time in their MIHL careers that influenced them in significant ways.
Every leader participant spoke similarly of their transformational behavior while leading
the faculty. In all but one case, the participants were unaware that the leadership
behavior they were describing had a name and was extensively studied by leadership
scholars throughout the world. The head of the one department was well aware of his
transformational leader behavior.
The use of the Transactional Leadership style is only mentioned twice in the data
indicating scant usage. When that style was used, it was as a last resort. One participant
summed up his occasional use of transactional reward and punishment techniques when
he stated “I try to make sure that whatever I do short-term is playing into what I'd like to
achieve long-term. I might do something transactional, but it's fitting into a
transformational agenda” (Participant Thirteen – Department Head – UoA 3).
Conversely, interview verbiage that suggests the presence of Transformational
Leaders throughout the academic departments appears in 13 of the 14 transcripts for a
total of 37 instances. Many participants described their preferred leadership style in
terms that easily identified them as transformational leaders. For instance, this
participant uses a “land” metaphor as he talks about how he inspires followers to achieve
the future vision of his organization.
98
People sense that, they feel better inside when they understand what's in that
culture, there's that shared culture and they actually see their contributions bearing
fruit. I think people get motivated to work better. People that were probably dead
in the water for a long time will all of a sudden start paddling again because they
say, “You know what? I think I see land here someplace”. (Participant Ten –
Civilian Professor – UoA 4)
Some participants talked about how they recruit faculty members. They seek
candidates that possess the same traits and attributes as are found in transformational
leaders. As evidence, consider this senior faculty leader describing the ideal faculty
candidate.
We want somebody who has the personality that other people want to be around,
that personality that is going to inspire others to do well. That person who is just
dedicated to the mission and wants to get things done. (Participant Six – Deputy
Department Head – UoA 3).
Other identified data codes support the idea that a high prevalence of
transformational leaders is a significant contributing factor to the success of the MIHL
faculty. For example, follower’s trust in the leader is an absolute requirement of the
transformational leader enabling them to inspire followers to achieve the goals of the
organization (Hargis et al., 2012). The single word trust was used 41 times by seven
participants during the interviews. Those seven participants also made 15 additional
references to the code trust is critical by expressing the idea that follower trust in the
leader is one of the key elements of global leadership. Combined these two codes
99
accounted for 56 occurrences in the data, the third highest behind inspiration and
language. Therefore Trust in the leader was identified as a theme for the study.
Inspiration is a key component of transformational leadership theory. Interviews
with follower participants eventually progressed towards a discussion of a leader in the
follower's supervisory chain that inspires them. The following passage is typical:
All around me at West Point are these people who are examples of the servant
leader, the inclusive leader, these very personally strong people who are
considering every action and making space for me within their sphere, right?
These are people who are outward looking not inward looking…Everybody
around me here wants me to succeed. They want me to grow as a leader. They
want me to be better. (Participant Twelve – Civilian Professor – UoA 4)
Leader interviews also often turned to a discussion of transformational leadership
concepts, particularly the need for inspirational leaders. This senior leader describes why
he recruits inspired instructors.
The inspiration part is… definitely key too. If you… have somebody… who is
smart, who is maybe technically competent, but doesn't inspire people… [they]
will not be the kind of person you aspire to be like. (Participant Six – Deputy
Department Head – UoA 3)
The single-word code “inspire” was identified in 10 transcripts a total of 62 times
making it the second largest of all the codes. Additionally, 10 of 14 participants spoke of
inspiration in some form, whether it was inspiring others or being inspired by someone
else.
100
Communication skills are also important to the transformational leader (Avolio&
Bass, 2004). Several codes that emerged from the data are related to effective
communication. The code communicate including the related word communication was
identified 15 times by seven participants. All seven interviewees were senior leaders
describing the communication of their future vision. Also, many of the senior leaders
deemed it critically important for the leader to get to know the needs, desires, concerns,
and future aspirations of their followers. This requires effective communication skills.
Another communication code, Know Your Subordinates, appears 19 times in 8
transcripts. Senior MIHL leaders found that it was critical “get to know your people” to
include both the military and the civilian faculty and staff members. In general, their
discussion revolved around the need to have good communication skills. “Getting to
know someone” requires identifying that person’s individual sources of motivation
thereby enabling the leader to effectively motivate that follower. A senior faculty leader
describes her reasons below.
I think a lot of it is getting to know the people, the person as an individual, and
really being interested in the person as an individual. Once you do that and you
know what they like, you know a little bit about their family, you connect in some
ways at a personal level to maybe motivate something done. (Participant Eight –
Department Head –UoA 3)
The prevalence of codes related to communication and the importance of effective
communication to the transformational leader resulted in the designation of the third
theme, effective communications.
101
The interview data indicates that many MIHL senior faculty leaders exhibit
behaviors that are associated with transformational leaders. These behaviors include
communication skills that allow the transformational leader to convey the inspirational
future vision of the organization (Avolio & Bass, 2004). These transformational leaders
all started their careers in a similar manner. Prior to their permanent assignment to the
MIHL, they all served for many years in military units stationed all over the globe. It is
likely that those leadership experiences contributed significantly to the development of
the transformation leadership skills that are evident today. The Dean of the Academic
Board states that “we require… the military senior leaders here to have had a broad base
of experience both in the military environment and in civilian academe” (Participant Two
–Dean – UoA 2). When considered as a whole, the above analysis of the data supports
Theoretical Proposition 3.
Theoretical Proposition 4: The MIHL’s faculty leaders are successful global
leaders due to their academic background and training. Two participants, one a
Department Head, the other a Deputy Head, are President and Senior Vice President of
well-known international engineering professional organizations. They were elected to
these positions based on their research work and field project experience. The transcript
data includes discussions about their global leadership responsibilities with these
professional organizations. However, no other participant talked about their research
activities or publications. When asked to explain their success as global leaders at the
MIHL, no mention was ever made of research activity, publication in scholarly journals,
or their experience in academia when they earned their Masters and PhD degrees. During
102
all fourteen interviews no comment was made by any participant that could be construed
as supporting this proposition.
Theoretical Proposition 5: The process of developing successful global faculty
leaders at the MIHL is due to a combination of other previously unknown factors.
The coding process did not identify any unknown factors that can account for the success
of the senior faculty leaders in the MIHL multicultural environment. The identified
themes of Transformational Leadership, follower trust in the leader, and effective
communication are common topics in the literature. These themes are supported by the
data while no unknown factors were identified during the course of the study.
The analysis of the theoretical propositions identified three themes that appear to
be connected to the success of the faculty as global leaders. They are in order or
importance, Theme 1: Inspirational Leadership, Theme 2: Trust in the Leader, and
Theme 3: Excellent Communication. The first theme revealed the prevalence of
inspirational transformational leaders at work on the MIHL faculty. The second theme
identified the critical need for followers in a multicultural environment to trust their
leaders. The last theme harkens to the previous two. In order to build trust and inspire
followers in any organization, the leader needs to be an effective communicator.
However, the purpose of this study is to explore how the U.S. military can
develop global leaders by studying the success of the faculty leaders at the MIHL. The
study questions directly address that purpose and therefore need to be examined in the
light of the three identified themes. The following analysis of the research questions
includes indications of links to the themes that were identified during the evaluation of
the theoretical propositions.
103
Table 3 below presents a summary of that examination showing the degree to
which each of the identified themes aided the evaluation of the research question.
Table 3
Strength of Connections Between Identified Themes and Research Questions
Theme
Research Questions
1- Inspirational 2- Trust in the
Leadership
Leader
3- Excellent
Communication
1- Nature of MIHL Context
Moderate
Moderate
Weak
2- Follower Perceptions of Leaders
Strong
None
None
3- Effective Leader Behavior
Strong
Strong
Moderate
4- Guiding Principlesa
Strong
Strong
Strong
5- Global Leader Development
None
None
Strong
Notea The guiding principles are essentially the three identified themes.
What is the nature of the multicultural context at the MIHL, as indicated by
the different leadership styles employed by the faculty leaders? Four different groups
comprise the MIHL faculty. They are a) U.S. military personnel that are permanently
assigned, b) U.S. military personnel that are assigned for only three years, c) allied
foreign military personnel that are assigned for only three years, and d) civilian faculty
members. The military culture is comprised of both the U.S. and allied foreign officers
and accounts for approximately 75% of the total faculty. Of the 75%, 10% are
permanently assigned U.S. military officers. The remaining 65% are assigned as
instructors for only three years and then reassigned to other jobs in the U.S. Armed
Forces. That 65% includes the Allied foreign officers who account for 2% of the total
faculty. The remaining 25% are the civilian faculty members.
104
After some initial hesitation associated with becoming fluent in English, the allied
officers quickly learn to partner with their U.S. allies and the dominant U.S. military
culture. The rotating faculty members are typically younger, U.S. military officers who
are several grades junior to the permanent faculty members. As junior officers they
contribute to the military culture by strengthening it, allowing the senior permanent
military faculty members to define the cultural parameters.
The result is a multicultural context that consists of two parts, the military culture
and the civilian academia culture. The senior-ranking, permanently assigned U.S.
officers define the military culture. They define the cultural values and practice the
cultural procedures and customs. The interview data contains many examples of the U.S.
military values and customs that are central concepts in this culture. The MIHL Chief of
Staff offered the following description of the cultural indoctrination that starts on the first
day of cadet life, R-Day (Reception Day). “Within 72 hours, you come in here on R-Day,
we start to immerse them in the values of LEADERSHIP,… Duty,… Respect,… Selfless
Service,… Honor,… Integrity,… Personal courage. LEADERSHIP is the acronym”
(Participant Fourteen – MIHL Chief of Staff – UoA 1). One of the more prevalent
customs is the Cadet Sponsorship Program. Families of MIHL staff and the faculty
sponsor cadets on a social basis. Usually, the sponsorship entails inviting cadets over to
the sponsor’s home for entertainment purposes. The intent of the program is equally
twofold. First, the program serves to introduce the cadets to military social customs and
protocols. Equally important is the mentor relationship that usually develops between the
sponsored cadets and an experienced officer or NCO. Nearly every military faculty
member, to include the two allied foreign officers, sponsored cadets on a regular basis.
105
The sponsorship program starts in the cadet’s freshman year allowing ample time to
develop a trusting relationship between the mentor and the cadet (Theme 2).
There are many indicators as discussed above that the military culture has adopted
the Full Range Leadership Model as their base leadership style as described by Theme 1.
The preference for transformational leadership techniques is remarkably widespread and
effectively used by the majority of senior leaders. As a result, followers are reporting
inspirational environments where everyone is pulling in the same direction, working
towards a common goal. Transactional leadership techniques such as traditional reward
and punishment are seldom needed although will be quickly used if needed.
MIHL civilian faculty members are routinely promoted and are being appointed
to high responsibility positions. Several departments have appointed civilian faculty
members temporarily to the position of Acting Deputy Head of Department in the past.
Currently two of thirteen academic departments have appointed civilians to be acting
deputy department heads in the temporary absence of the actual military officer. There is
no tenure system although the civilian professors are said to have “De Facto Tenure”. It
is not formal tenure as seen at any civilian academic institution. However, once a civilian
is promoted to the rank of Assistant Professor, it is very difficult to administratively
remove them.
The civilian faculty members are learning to become effective leaders under the
influence of their military mentor's transformational leadership. However, the transition
from academia to a military school is a challenge for many. During their entire academic
careers prior to arriving at the MIHL, their primary focus was usually research and the
search for truth. The MIHL emphasizes the development of military leaders of character
106
who will win the nation’s wars. These are very different expectations, which require very
different leaders. Consequently, the transition from academia to the MIHL is difficult for
some new civilian faculty members. For example, one civilian faculty member recalls
struggling with the concept of senior faculty mentoring junior faculty members.
In the academic world, once you're out of grad school, once you have your PhD,
there's really very little formal mentorship that goes on. The idea that senior
faculty are responsible for mentoring junior faculty is not usually institutionally
recognized. That's not to say that it doesn't happen, but at a lot of institutions it
doesn't happen. Most of the people who were my friends in grad school, when I
would talk about things, about people mentoring me, they found that offensive.
(Participant Eleven - Civilian Professor – UoA 4)
Participant Eleven provides insight into the preferred leadership style of the new
civilian faculty member. Participant Eleven did not anticipate a need to exercise
leadership as part of her duties. Consequently, early in her career, she adopted a “handsoff” leadership style that closely resembles the laissez faire approach as described in the
Full Range Leadership Theory. Many years have passed and she has developed strong
leadership skills and earned the respect of both the military and academic cultures. This
great respect has resulted in her selection to key leadership positions within important
MIHL governance organizations, both civilian and military. She is a strong advocate of
developing trusted mentoring relationships (Theme 1) and serves as an inspirational role
model for younger civilian professors (Theme 2).
The civilian academia faculty members typically start their careers at the MIHL
feeling out of place and a little uncomfortable. Working during the summer, the
107
requirement to ask for time-off, the military jargon, the idea of working during off-duty
hours with no compensation are all foreign ideas. It takes several years for them to get
accustomed to these new concepts. Their prime values initially are integrity, academic
research, and the search for truth. But over time selfless service grows, becoming more
prominent each year. Their initial priorities are to teach cadets an academic subject and
do research. However, over decades of time the priorities shift significantly. Teaching
and research remain a priority but cadet leadership development becomes equally
important for many. Some of the very senior civilian faculty members are as focused on
cadet leadership development as any military member (Theme 1). However, research and
publication remain as high priorities for nearly all civilian professors.
How do followers perceive the MIHL's academic leadership? Each participant
at each unit of analysis appeared to be genuinely inspired by the MIHL Vision of Future
Excellence (Theme 1). They did not associate the leadership climate with
Transformational Leadership theory since all but one participant was unaware of the
concept. Each participant had their own methods to inspire their followers. The
methodology varies from person to person, department to department. Participant Nine
explains his methodology to get everyone to support his operational plans.
You want buy-in from everybody. Everybody does not think like you think. If
somebody brings you a recommendation or an issue, you have an obligation to
address that. Say, "I either agree with that. I disagree with that. I will take this
and modify it." It is a very inefficient process but when you are done, everybody
has had their voice. Everybody has been heard. Everybody to a certain degree
buys into that. (Participant Nine – Department Head – UoA 3)
108
The inspiration is present across the entire multi-cultural organization. Military and
civilian faculty members alike readily offered their approval of the leadership climate
(Theme 1).
There were very few negative responses when participants were asked to describe
the leadership climate in their department during the interviews. However, there was one
very old (>20 years) case of Pseudo Transformational leadership described during an
interview and some examples of common laissez fare behavior. But the deficient
individual leaders concerned were not in senior leadership positions. They also left the
MIHL within a year or two.
What behaviors, specific actions, and personal attributes of the MIHL
faculty leaders do multicultural followers perceive as effective leadership? The most
significant finding is the widespread and enthusiastic adoption of transformational
leadership behavior by personnel in all four units of analysis. The practice of this
leadership style by the senior faculty leaders energized and empowered many of the
civilian participants. All of the civilian participants appeared to be partially if not fully
transformed into effective and motivated champions of the MIHL mission (Theme 1).
Trust is the glue that holds the entire multicultural organization together. When
the civilian participants first began their MIHL experience they were immersed in an
unfamiliar and hence uncomfortable environment. Many civilian participants spoke of
having severe misgivings and doubts at that stage of their careers. These participants also
report that they remained simply because they trusted their new leaders (Theme 2).
Participant Six describes the need for trust.
109
If you don't build that initial trust, you, you're never going to go anywhere. You
know they have to, they have to sense that, that you are genuine, you are sincere.
And they have to develop that one-on-one trust before they're going to do
anything else with you. And that doesn't happen quickly. (Participant Six –
Deputy Department Head – UoA 3)
Lastly, the leader in a multicultural environment must be able to communicate
effectively. That skill enables them to effectively convey their inspiring vision of the
organization’s successful future. However, there must first be thoughtful dialogues with
followers. It is important to note that the communication must be two-way. The global
leader must be especially attentive to listening to his followers for several reasons. First,
listen in order to learn what motivates and what de-motivates his multi-cultural followers.
They may not be the same. Secondly, listen to learn their needs and concerns. Finally,
listen to their ideas concerning solutions to the organization’s challenges. Participant
One advises the global leader (Theme 3).
What you need to do is listen. Listen. Then ask. Listen to what they're saying.
Okay, you can make a [water] well, do they want the well? Is that important to
the community? You know, you have two ears and one mouth. Use them in that
proportion. See the world through their eyes, understand their struggle.
(Participant One – Department Head – UoA 3)
What are the guiding principles used at the MIHL for the development of
global leaders? The guiding principles include development of the personal attributes
discussed in Research Question 3. The identification of these principles is a good first
step towards the development of effective global leaders. However, answering the “what
110
question” is the easy first step. More research is required to answer the more difficult
“how questions”. How does one develop each of these attributes and realize each guiding
principle?
Guiding Principle 1. Adopt and practice the Transformational Leadership style
as exemplified by the Full Range Leadership Theory.
Guiding Principle 2. The global leader values highly and never compromises
their personal honor and integrity. They always act in an ethical and honorable manner
earning them trustworthiness in the eyes of their multicultural followers.
Guiding Principle 3. Develop expert communication skills that ideally include
language skills. But more importantly the communications skills must include the ability
to listen, to hear what followers need and desire. This allows the global leader to
effectively motivate followers leading ultimately to the communication of an enduring
and inspiring vision of future organizational success.
How does the MIHL organization develop global leaders in the multicultural
context? There is no formal MIHL program for the development of the senior faculty
members, which includes Department Heads, Deputy Department Heads, the Dean, and
the President. There is also no formal development program for the permanent professors
and instructors, civilian or military. Permanent faculty members are assigned to the
faculty after selection by an appointed search committee. The search committee
evaluates all qualified candidates, interviews the most promising, and determines the best
applicant, who is finally offered the position. This is an unusual procedure for an
organization within the U.S. Department of Defense organization. Every branch of
military service has a detailed career development program for their commissioned
111
officer and noncommissioned officer corps. These plans typically require the officer to
complete a series of formal schools at different times throughout their careers requiring
several months to a year to complete. This extensive, formal training program insures
that the officers are thoroughly prepared for their new assignments. Therefore, the lack
of an extensive, formal, training program is both unusual and out of character for the U.S.
military. Nevertheless, this situation was verified by the Dean, the MIHL Chief of Staff,
and a futile search of the MIHL Archives.
The lack of a formal plan does not mean that global leaders are not being
developed at the MIHL. The senior leaders of the MIHL faculty are indeed global
leaders that use the guiding principles discussed above to effectively lead the
multicultural faculty. However, there is another global leader development program at
the MIHL that is deliberate and may eventually prove to be very successful. Although
they are not the focus of this study the cadets at the MIHL are being deliberately prepared
to be global leaders.
In 2008 the Department of Defense decided that the graduates of the MIHL
needed to be more culturally aware and culturally sensitive in order to be more effective
in fighting the global war on terror. As a first step, the MIHL was funded to expand their
languages program in an effort to prepare graduates to be better global leaders. A brief
discussion of the MIHL Global Leader Development Program follows.
An inspection of Table 2 reveals several codes under the Global Leader
Development Code Category. These codes were generated from discussions with the
faculty that were focused at first on faculty development and then diverged to the cadet
program. Notice the frequent reference to diversity and cultural sensitivity. Over two
112
thirds of the participants made one or more references to diversity during the course of
the interview. The MIHL faculty firmly believes that diversity is a good thing, that
diversity fosters innovative solutions to problems.
Notice also in Table 2 that the largest score belongs to the code language. That
fact can be partially attributed to the fact that five of the fourteen participants were
faculty members in the Foreign Languages Department. However, six other faculty
members also discussed language differences as a key challenge for the global leader
(Theme 3). Recognizing this fact, the MIHL cadet plan focuses on two sub-programs: a)
Improvement of the foreign language proficiency for all cadets, and b) The Cadet Abroad
and Cadet Exchange Program.
Since 2008 the number of hours of mandatory foreign language training received
by each cadet has more than doubled. Cadets have gone from one year of foreign
language courses meeting twice a week in 2008 to two years of course meeting three
times each week. Many cadets are required to take the more difficult language courses
such as Russian, Chinese, Arabic, and Persian.
Twenty years ago the opportunity for a cadet to experience cultural immersion
was limited to the yearlong Cadet Exchange Program. Perhaps three or four cadets
participated each year. Today there are more opportunities. The exchange program
continues along with dozens of summer internships and 158 (this year) Semester Abroad
opportunities. During these cultural immersion opportunities, the cadet lives 24 hours a
day for at least six months with a host family or student group. They quickly learn the
language, customs, beliefs, values, and idiosyncrasies of the host nation.
113
In summary, the MIHL develops global leaders both formally and informally.
The senior faculty leaders have informally developed leadership skills that are serving
them well as more civilian faculty members are brought into the MIHL organization.
The formal method is the Cadet Global Leader Development Plan. It is a deliberate,
written, official plan designed to prepare cadets to meet the leadership challenges of
modern global warfare. The purpose of the program is to improve the Global Leadership
abilities of each cadet by a) increasing their language proficiency, b) improving their
Cultural Awareness and hence c) improve their Cultural Sensitivity. It should be noted
that these same cadets are receiving additional training that includes Guiding Principles
One and Two from the preceding section. First, they live strictly under the Cadet Honor
Code, a very high standard of honor and personal integrity in accordance with Guiding
Principle Two. Secondly, they are influenced daily in the classroom by the very same
transformational leaders that are the subject of this study. Emulation of these successful
global leaders will serve them well in their future global leader challenges.
Evaluation of Findings
The findings from the interview data are consistent with the literature concerning
global leadership development (Forsyth & Maranga, 2015; Ghasabeh, Soosay, &
Reaiche, 2015; Zwingmann, Wegge, Wolf, Rudolf, Schmidt, & Richter, 2014). There
appears to be universal agreement that business and government leaders throughout the
world need to be more global in their thinking and actions (Canals, 2014). Unfortunately,
both practitioners and theorists are still uncertain how to go about developing these
competencies (Forsyth & Maranga, 2015).
114
The main finding of this study is a strong indication that global leadership is
positively linked to transformational leadership behavior. The adoption of an enduring
future vision of organization success may be a unifying factor in a multicultural
organization that serves to motivate all members. Eight of the fourteen participants are
senior leaders within the top three units of analysis. All are successful leaders in a
multicultural environment. All are transformational leaders within their realm of
authority and influence, some more so than others. But all are considered to be highly
successful teachers of their student cadets and mentors of their faculty members. What is
uncertain here is the question of cause and effect. Is it just coincidental that these officers
are good global leaders and transformational leaders? Is their application of the Full
Range Leadership Theory to their multicultural context contributing to their success as
global leaders or is the cause some other unknown factor? Canals (2014) would suggest
that each global leadership situation is a unique blend of people, circumstances and site
specific conditions. Therefore, a global leader development plan would only work at that
unique combination of location, work conditions, and personalities. Canals believes that
universal theory of global leadership is an unattainable concept. Forsyth and Maranga
(2015) might agree. After an extensive review of the current literature, they conclude
that the search for global leader competencies is jumbled and uncertain.
In this study the interview discussions tended to revolve around the question of
motivation. Many of the senior faculty leaders were focused on the challenges of
motivating the many different groups in their professional world. Participant One asks...
How do you keep their motivation up? And then you know you have your fellow
department heads and then at that point you start looking above you. So there's so
115
many different groups on different levels each with a different sort of life, or you
could say employment or service outcomes, that every time you interact with
them, at least on the surface, you might have to approach them in a different way.
(Participant One – Department Head – UoA 3)
He is speaking about the challenges associated with motivating his followers.
Nearly all of the participants (13 of 14) are challenged by the same motivational issues.
They made 37 comments about how they motivated their diverse organizations. These
comments, which described how they endeavored to inspire their followers to achieve a
future vision of success, were all coded as transformational leadership behavior. Therein
lays the universal appeal of a transformational leader; they find a way to inspire all.
Current studies support the idea that transformational leadership is connected to
effective global leadership. Ghasabeh, Soosay, and Reaiche (2015) agree that
transformational leadership has a universal and cross cultural appeal. They propose
transformational leadership as the ideal theoretical platform for a global leadership
model. Zwingmann, Wegge, Wolf, Rudolf, Schmidt, and Richter, (2014) conducted an
empirical study of 16 countries and concluded that transformational leadership was
positively associated with the improved health of followers.
Summary
The findings of this study are based on data obtained during 14 interviews with
MIHL faculty and staff members. Electronic recordings of the interviews were
transcribed to computer text files which were then computer analyzed. The computer
analysis resulted in the identification of text that supported a certain idea, activity, or
opinion (codes). Theoretical propositions were used as a lens through which to view the
116
data. Each proposition was evaluated using the frequency at which a code appeared and
the type of code. This analysis of the theoretical propositions provided the basis for
answering the research questions.
The most important result of this analysis was the identification of three themes.
Trust in the Leader was the first of these themes to be identified. The general topic of
trust was identified frequently in the interview data. Many participants considered it to
be a critical factor in a multicultural environment. Without trust there is no leaderfollower exchange. It is particularly challenging to establish in a global environment due
to the difficulties associated with communication and increased chance of
misunderstanding cultural norms.
Effective Communication between the global leader and followers was the second
theme identified. Effective communication from the leader to the follower becomes
important because of the increased chance of misunderstanding due to language
differences. Effective listening by the leader also becomes critical. The global leader
needs to understand the needs and concerns of the follower in order to develop effective
motivational strategies.
The last theme identified is perhaps the most important. There may be a positive
association between global leadership and Transformational Leadership. The success of
global leaders at the MIHL may be in part due to the widespread and effective use of the
transformational leadership style. Global leaders at the MIHL recognized that motivating
followers is both the most important and most challenging aspect of leadership.
Consequently, the inspirational nature of transformational leaders may be instrumental in
unifying a multicultural organization.
117
Chapter 5: Implications, Recommendations, and Conclusions
As organizations around the world become more interconnected by technology,
the need for culturally sensitive, effective, global leaders is growing quickly.
Unfortunately, the literature lacks a clear explanation of how organizations should go
about developing leaders who can effectively operate in a multicultural context (Gill,
2012; Holt & Seki, 2012; Meyer et al., 2011). This problem is particularly important to
senior U.S. military leaders as they execute a global war on terrorism (Wolfe & Arrow,
2013). These military operations are increasingly fought on foreign soil amongst an
indigenous population with unfamiliar customs and cultural values (Laurence, 2011).
This problem is exacerbated by the lack of information in the literature of leadership
development in general (Avolio, 2014). The purpose of this qualitative case study was to
explore how the U.S. military can develop global leaders by studying the success of the
faculty leaders at the MIHL. These leaders operate very effectively in a unique militarycivilian academia multicultural environment.
The researcher interviewed fourteen MIHL faculty members and leaders using an
unstructured format. The interviews were unstructured in the sense that a standard,
formal set of questions was not used. Specific interview questions (Appendices B & C)
were used to spark the conversation and were intended to elicit a broad range of
information that might ultimately provide answers to the research questions. Therefore,
the participants were allowed to speak freely with only the occasional need to be
refocused by a directed question by the researcher. Insights gained from early interviews
were used to focus the discussion in later interviews. The electronic recordings were
transcribed into computer text files subsequent to each interview. These text files were in
118
turn entered into the RQDA computer program for analysis in the form of identifying
codes or recurrent themes that were expressed by the participants. The theoretical
propositions were used as the basis for code generation. Any text that seemed to either
support or defend one of the theoretical propositions was highlighted and given a name
that associated it to that particular proposition. The resultant code list and their frequency
of occurrence in the data were then used to evaluate the validity of each theoretical
proposition. Lastly, each research question was reviewed in light of the previous
analysis. Each question was answered to the extent that was supported by the data.
The qualitative case study methodology has been criticized as being a less
rigorous process than quantitative experiments or surveys (Yin, 2013). However, Yin
(2013) argues that the case study is an excellent methodology, especially as an early
exploratory instrument. In order to minimize misinterpreting the data, the researcher
must first be aware of their personal biases and then take care to suppress their influence
while analyzing the data (Yin). Perhaps the most significant limitation of this research is
the small sample size limited to only one institution. However, as an exploratory tool it is
perhaps better than most other methodologies given its ability to explore many different
possible causes of the phenomenon in question. Still, the findings and conclusions
derived from only fourteen participants would require validation by a larger sample of
people encompassing several different organizations. Related to the small sample size is
the singularity of the participants. Lastly, despite the best efforts of the researcher, he
may have unknowingly interjected long held biases due to the common background and
experience base that he shares with many of the participants.
119
Prior to any collection of data, this study was reviewed and approved by the NCU
IRB. Each participant signed a consent form prior to the start of the interview in
accordance with the NCU IRB approved protocol. They also signed a separate clause on
the release form giving their permission to electronically record the interview. All study
records were kept in secure locations and on password protected computers. No real
names of the participants or the school appear in this manuscript or any public document
associated with this research. Instead, participants were simply referred to by their
interview order, Participant One through Participant Fourteen.
The chapter starts off with a discussion of the implications of this study on future
research in the field of global leadership development. Immediately following are
recommendations for future research based on the findings of this study. Lastly, the
chapter and the manuscript conclude with a summary of this chapter.
Implications
The advance of technology, in particular communication technology, has
significantly increased the number of multicultural organizations throughout the globe.
These organizations may be business, governmental, or military in nature and are
particularly challenging to lead due to the presence of different languages, customs, and
beliefs (Meyer et al., 2011). Communication with, and the motivation of followers are
significant leader challenges under the best of circumstances (Holt & Seki, 2012). These
challenges can become so intense within a multicultural organization that they eventually
cause the organization to fail (Gill, 2012). Today, many organizations are either unaware
of the need or are finding it difficult to develop leaders that can effectively operate in a
120
global context (Terrell & Rosenbusch, 2013). Unfortunately, the literature does not
provide a ready answer (Gill, 2012).
The basic premise of this study is that the senior MIHL staff and faculty leaders
are successful global leaders whose attitudes, beliefs, experience, and leadership behavior
may serve as a model for effective global leader development. The study research
questions were specifically developed to evaluate the validity of this basic premise. The
first question is designed to establish the existence or absence of a multicultural context
at the MIHL. The second question seeks out evidence of successful leadership within
that context. The third and fourth research questions are intended to identify the core
values, character traits, and trainable leader behaviors of effective global leaders with the
creation of a viable leader development program in mind. The last research question
assumes significant support for the previous questions and is essentially a synthesis of all
four.
Q1. What is the nature of the multicultural context at the MIHL, as
indicated by the different leadership styles employed by the faculty leaders? The
focus and intent of this research question was to first establish if a multicultural context
does exist within the MIHL organization. The multicultural nature of any given
leadership environment is a variable and the associated leadership challenge will vary in
proportion to the magnitude of the cultural differences (Gill, 2012). Therefore, it is
important to also evaluate the magnitude of the cultural differences that define the
multicultural environment of the MIHL staff and faculty. The MIHL faculty consists of
three main demographic groups. First are the majority U.S. military officers, consisting
of approximately 73% of the whole. The remaining 27% is split between civilian
121
professors and instructors (25%) and foreign allied officers (2%). The cultural context
for the U.S. faculty members and the allied faculty members were surprisingly similar.
Foreign faculty members reported difficulties in communication early in their MIHL
experience, which required them to exert more time and energy on their English
proficiency. However, they were included into the dominant U.S. military culture very
quickly. They described feeling very much at ease at the MIHL almost immediately.
They also experienced unexpected high levels of trust with their U.S. chain-of-command
immediately upon their arrival. Concerns about language proficiency and an inability to
effectively communicate with allies is a major concern for the U.S. Department of
Defense (United States Government Accountability Office, 2001). Yet these allied
foreign officers, one of which was still experiencing some challenges with the English
language, felt very comfortable and at ease working with their U.S. allies. This suggests
that language proficiency, while significant and desirable, may not be a critical factor in
the development of global leaders. This idea is consistent with the literature where
sensitivity to local customs and behaviors is more important than language proficiency
(Laurence, 2011; Pless, et. al, 2011; Terrell & Rosenbusch, 2013). Thus, the presence of
allied foreign officers did not appear to significantly affect the multicultural context.
Strong military cultural values such as selfless service to one’s nation that are common
across the globe may serve to reduce other geographical, political, and religious cultural
differences.
The cultural differences between the civilian and military members of the faculty
and staff are significant and persist regardless of the length of service at the MIHL.
Many of the civilian faculty members expressed difficulty adjusting to the dominant U.S.
122
military culture during their early years of service. For instance, half of the civilian
faculty members interviewed made the same comment about their early years of MIHL
service. They did not feel obligated to work on holidays or weekends simply because
their supervisor deemed it necessary. Additionally, scholarly research and publication
remained a strong value with the civilians throughout their years of service while it was
never a priority for the military members. These differences appear to be greatest for the
civilians in the first year of their MIHL service and then it gradually diminish over 10 to
20 years of service. This movement appears to be mostly attributable to the civilian
faculty members. All of the civilian participants reported slow shifts in their values,
vocabulary, and mannerisms over decades of service. None of the military participants
reported a similar experience. However, it is important to note that each of the civilian
participants indicated that during their MIHL careers (average of greater than 20 years)
the two cultures has not melded into a single hybrid culture. Considered as a whole,
significant and noticeable differences persist, resulting in a challenging multicultural
environment at the MIHL.
It must be noted that while every participant agreed that they were operating in a
multicultural environment, some mention should be made of the magnitude of that
environment. All participants expressed the opinion that the cultural context at the MIHL
was indeed challenging as both a leader and a follower. No one considered it to be an
insurmountable challenge and certainly not as difficult as those the U.S. military is now
facing in many parts of the globe. However, the question of magnitude does not
necessarily invalidate any conclusions based on the study of the MIHL.
123
The discussion above supports the existence of a significant U.S. military/U.S.
civilian academia multicultural context within the MIHL faculty. Every senior U.S.
military leader agreed that the context existed. Two of the eight senior leaders
acknowledged that they had modified their leadership behavior in recognition of the
cultural differences. In both cases the change in behavior was a need to explain orders,
plans, and directives to the civilian faculty in more detail and using different verbiage
than they used with the military faculty members. However, all eight senior leaders were
asked question 2 from Appendix B. “Do you lead your (civilian/allied) followers
differently than your military personnel?” They all insisted that they had not changed
their leadership behavior and that they consistently and diligently treated everyone
equally. This evidence does not necessarily invalidate the basic premise. However, it
does imply that the global leadership behavior of the senior MIHL leaders is not based on
a modification of leadership behavior developed over many years of U.S. military
service. A possible alternative explanation is that senior MIHL leaders are practicing a
form of leadership that is effective in more than one cultural context.
Q2. How do followers perceive the MIHL's academic leadership? The
perception among the participants of this study was almost universally positive. All
participants were inspired, motivated, and expressed satisfaction in their daily
responsibilities and future aspirations. Inspiration was a common topic among all
participants. The current supervisory chain, to include the Dean and the President,
received 100% positive comments. The interview data strongly indicates that all of the
participants were being inspired to achieve the goals and objectives of the organization.
Further, all four civilian participants reported that their priorities had changed over their
124
years of MIHL service ranging from five to twenty years. The MIHL mission had
become very important to them. The transformation of professional priorities is strong
evidence of effective leadership in particular transformational leadership (Warrick,
2011).
There was only one participant discussion that contained negative comments
about the MIHL faculty leadership. It involved two military professors, one a course
director and the other a department head. The first officer was described as
condescending and disingenuous in his offers to help Participant Eleven, a newly arrived
female, civilian professor. She attributed his poor behavior primarily to his recent
notification that he was being forced to retire early from the military service. The same
participant also described a very negative experience with a former department head that
was unlike the other U.S. military leaders. Her description of his leadership behavior
marked him as a consistent transactional leader who motivated his subordinates by
threatening punishment. The negative, transactional leadership behavior is part of the
Full Range Leadership Theory and one would expect to see that behavior on a limited
basis in a healthy organization (Avolio & Bass, 2004). Therefore, the presence of these
two transactional leaders in the midst of so many transformational leaders is not
surprising or alarming. In fact, it is normal and to be expected (Hargis et. al, 2011). It is
important to note that these two aberrations did not go unnoticed by the MIHL senior
leaders at the 1st and 2nd units of analysis. The first officer described above was forced to
retire early as has been previously noted. The department head was eventually relieved
of his departmental duties, received a severe administrative punishment, and was forced
to quietly retire early.
125
Q3. What behaviors, specific actions, and personal attributes of the MIHL
faculty leaders do multicultural followers perceive as effective leadership? All
participants attributed much or all of their success, and the success of the MIHL as a
whole, to the inspirational atmosphere that permeates the MIHL organization. The
prevalence of inspirational experiences suggests that many MIHL leaders have adopted
the Full Range Leadership Theory which emphasizes the use of transformational
leadership. Two participants, the MIHL Chief of Staff and the head of one academic
department were familiar with the Full Range Leadership Theory. They specifically
attributed their success as MIHL leaders to their deliberate efforts to lead their
organizations as transformational leaders. The other 12 participants were not familiar
with the theory. Yet they attributed leader behavior that could be described as
transformational as the primary reason for their success. When the Full Range
Leadership Theory was briefly explained to them, they all immediately agreed that they
were surrounded and inspired by transformational leaders and strove to lead their
followers in the same manner.
The effective behavior of the MIHL leadership as described by both the leaders
themselves and their followers during the interviews conformed to three of the four
distinct transformational leadership behavior categories. First, the senior leaders
frequently talked of their deliberate efforts to learn the capabilities, concerns, and
limitations of each of their subordinates (individualized consideration). Secondly, they
were supportive of their faculty members needs and desires for continued study and
research (intellectual stimulation). Finally, the inspirational atmosphere of the MIHL
126
was a frequent comment of all participants during the interviews (inspirational
motivation).
The positive comments, high enthusiasm, and ardent talk of “buying into the
organization’s mission statement” describe the successful outcomes attributed to a
transformational leader (Hargis et. al, 2012). The success of transformational leadership
is well documented in the literature (Al-Tarawneh, Alhamadani, & Mohammad, 2012;
Gundersen et al., 2012; Hargis et al., 2012; Wang et al., 2011, Zwingmann, Wegge, Wolf,
Rudolf, Schmidt, & Richter, 2014). The analysis of the data strongly suggests that
transformational leadership behavior is very effective in the MIHL multicultural
environment and may be an important element in the development of global leaders.
The second most common topic found during the analysis of the interview data
was the importance of good communication skills. The discussions on communication
focused primarily on verbal skills. The ability to communicate an enduring vision of
future greatness intended to inspire followers is a key ability for the transformational
leader (Hernandez et al., 2011). It is important to note that while written communication
skills are important, the MIHL leaders emphasized verbal skills and the ability to
articulate their vision whenever an opportunity presented itself. This poses a double
challenge for the global leader who often must operate in a foreign environment with an
unfamiliar language. The issue of language proficiency requires some discussion. A
basic proficiency in the local language will significantly facilitate communications with
the local population. However, it often is not achievable, especially early in a mission.
The MIHL allied officers offered two points for consideration. First, interpreters are
acceptable as long as leaders learn to use simple basic phrases such as Please, Thank You,
127
and You’re Welcome. The indigenous people will greatly appreciate genuine attempts to
communicate in their native language. Secondly, nonverbal communications are as
important as spoken or written words. An innocent gesture can send an unintentional
negative message resulting in significant undesirable consequences. These observations
are supported by the literature. Laurence (2010) made similar observations reviewing the
most recent U.S. military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Trust is a critical component of any successful organization. Followers simply
will not follow a leader who they believe is not trustworthy, who is not working to obtain
the goals and objectives of the organization (Avolio et al., 2009; Hernandez et al., 2011;
Toor, 2011). Such is the case with the MIHL faculty. Nearly every participant
mentioned trust during their interview and emphasized the need to establish and maintain
a basic modicum of trust between leader and follower. The loss of the followers trust in
the leader is a catastrophic event in a military organization. Due to the extreme
consequences that result from the loss of trust in a military leader while operating in a
combat environment, the MIHL has adopted an honor code that applies to both cadets
and the staff and faculty.
Q4. What are the guiding principles used at the MIHL for the development
of global leaders? The guiding principles are articulated in Chapter 4. They can be
summarized as follows: a) Strive to be a transformational leader as originally postulated
by Bass (1976) and later refined to become the Full Range Leadership Theory (Avolio &
Bass, 2004). b) Adopt a strict personal sense of honor. Never lie, cheat, or steal nor
tolerate others that do so in the organization. c) Continually strive to improve
128
communication skills, in particular verbal skills to maximize the constant flow of ideas
both within and outside the organization.
Q5. How does the MIHL organization develop global leaders in the
multicultural context? This research question directly addresses the purpose of this
study. How does one deliberately develop the skills, attributes, and abilities that enable a
leader to be effective in a multicultural environment? The Guiding Principles
immediately above provide a basic framework to answer this question.
Communication Guiding Principle. The development plan for an effective
global leader should include development of both verbal and written communication
skills with an emphasis on verbal skills and further emphasis on listening. Language
proficiency is an obvious priority when operating in a foreign setting. However, a basic
understanding of the culture’s values, taboos, and basic courtesy phrases is the minimum
standard. Communication skills can be improved through training and therefore may be
an essential component of a global leader development program.
Trust and Honor Guiding Principle. The effective global leader always acts in
accordance with a strict personal code of honor. The consistent adherence to a high
standard of personal integrity establishes and then strengthens a bond of trust with all
followers that transcend cultural differences. The Trust and Honor Guiding Principle
requires a high standard of honor based on deeply held values that typically are
internalized early in life (Walumbwa et al., 2008; Hernandez et al., 2011). Therefore, it
may prove to be difficult or even impractical to develop older, aspiring, global leaders
whose value systems are firmly established and therefore resistant to change. In any
129
case, a global leader development program should include honor education and adherence
to a strict code of honor.
Inspirational Leadership Guiding Principle. The analysis of the data suggests
that inspirational leadership is a key element that helps transcend cultural differences.
Therefore, the adoption of an inspirational leadership style such as transformational
leadership or authentic leadership will aid the aspiring global leader. The literature
abounds with studies describing the advantages and effectiveness of transformational
leaders. However, a practical training methodology that can cause a transactional leader
to become more transformational is still lacking. Such is the case here. However, the
data supports two observations that may be merit further research.
Observation One. All four civilian participants were specifically recommended
to be interviewed by their military superiors because they were established, well
respected, faculty leaders. However, the interviews established that three of the four
participants had never experienced formal leadership training either during or prior to
their MIHL experience. All three reported difficulty adjusting to the military environment
during their early years of service. Despite these circumstances, these individuals
ultimately assumed important leadership positions at the departmental and the
institutional levels. Their current favorable status implies that they all evolved into
successful leaders within a multicultural environment. How did these global leaders
develop within the MIHL environment without any formal training? The experiences of
Participant Twelve illustrate a possible explanation. Early in his MIHL career,
Participant Twelve became highly dedicated to the MIHL mission of training cadets to be
future leaders in the U.S. military. Consequently, he expanded his official academic
130
teaching role to include teaching informal ethics and leadership classes often during his
off-duty time. His story included descriptions of several military mentors. However, one
mentor was mentioned repeatedly. Participant Twelve attributes much of his early
understanding of his new working environment to the advice and explanations given by
his mentor. This narrative suggests that Participant Twelve developed his inspirational
leadership behavior by simply emulating his trusted mentor’s behavior. This singular
example suggests that in the absence of a formal development plan, junior faculty
members throughout the MIHL organization must rely on the simple expedient of
learning though the example of other more experienced faculty members. An experienced
leader/mentor inspiring others to be inspirational leaders through their personal example
deserves further scholarly investigation.
Observation Two. Another possible transformational leader development
mechanism at the MIHL may be the selection process for both the military and civilian
permanent faculty. In Table 2, under the Code Category “Faculty Development”, the first
code listed is “Careful Selection”. Five of the eight U.S. military senior leader
participants indicated that the permanent military faculty members are “carefully
selected”. One would expect any selection process to be conducted “carefully”.
However, all five participants, to include the Dean, spent considerable time and effort
explaining that they were very careful to insure that new permanent faculty members
would fit into the MIHL culture. Therefore, the normal questions concerning the extent
and nature of the candidate’s academic credentials were augmented with leadership
related questions. These questions usually took the form of probing questions about the
candidate’s leadership style. Participant Six, after explaining that undergraduate grades
131
were a secondary condition, summed up their search strategy for permanent faculty
members as follows: “We want somebody who has the personality that other people
want to be around, that personality that is going to inspire others to do well” (Participant
Six – Deputy Department Head – UoA 3). These words describe a transformational or
inspirational leader. The data provides support for the contention that the MIHL recruits
and favors permanent faculty members who exhibit a preference for transformational
leadership. That is not to say that they are officially favoring or requiring evidence of a
transformational leadership style as a condition of employment. It simply is a
consequence of selection committees looking for candidates that fit into the dominant
leadership style.
The combination of the two observations immediately above with the
preponderance of the transformational leadership style amongst the faculty produces the
interesting following result. A selection process that favors the selection of like-minded
candidates to fill faculty vacancies coupled with an ongoing mentorship process where
senior faculty members serve as role models for junior faculty members can ultimately
produce a homogeneous leadership climate within the organization. If this is indeed the
case at the MIHL, then the question of how global leaders are developed becomes easier
to understand. A notional but possible framework is:
Notional MIHL Global Leader Framework.
1. Teach verbal and written communication skills with an emphasis on verbal
listening.
2. Instill a lasting value of uncompromising honor and integrity by requiring strict
adherence to a code of honor for an extended period of several years.
132
3. Foster an inspirational leadership climate by:
a. Requiring formal instruction in the Full Range Leadership Theory or
Authentic Leadership Theory.
b. Screening new organization members carefully, attempting to evaluate their
level of personal integrity and honor.
c. Instituting a formal mentorship program where experienced leaders act as role
models for inexperienced members.
Recommendations
The purpose of this study was to explore how U.S. military organizations can
develop global leaders by studying the success of the faculty leaders at the MIHL. The
results of the study suggest that the development of global leaders may be related to three
identified themes, a) the adoption of an inspirational leadership style, b) honorable
behavior that instills trust in the leader, and c) exceptional communication skills. The
following sections offer suggestions for leaders of multicultural organizations seeking
success and excellence in the current global environment and finally recommendations
for future research.
Applications to the field. The results of this study have not uncovered any new
leadership theories or conceptualized any new leadership traits or concepts. The three
themes identified during this research as beneficial to the development of global leaders
are all established leadership concepts that are common subjects within the literature.
The significant conclusion to be realized here is the distinct possibility that the traits and
behaviors that serve a leader well within a familiar, comfortable, homogeneous, cultural
environment are the very same that lead to success in a multicultural environment.
133
There are numerous studies over several decades of research that demonstrate the
effectiveness of transformational leadership behavior (Al-Tarawnehet al., 2009;
Alhamadani, & Mohammad, 2012; Gundersen et al., 2012; Hargis et al., 2012; Wang et
al., 2011). Past research has primarily focused on culturally homogeneous (or nearly
homogeneous) organizations (Avolio et al., 2009). This study suggests that a
transformational leader can also be effective inspiring followers to operational excellence
in a multi-cultural environment. It may well be a much harder environment to work in.
The leadership may require some additional training and skill development. Language
training would be a priority since it also promotes the third theme exceptional
communication skills. Therefore, it is recommended that global companies provide an
inspirational leadership climate within their organizations by promoting the research by,
the recruitment of, and empowerment of transformational leaders within their
organizations.
The second theme suggests that the global leader must insure that he earns and
keeps the trust of every follower in a multicultural organization. Again, the importance
and the benefits of a strong commitment to be honorable and trustworthy are well
established in the literature (Avolio et al., 2009; Hernandez et al., 2011). This is
especially true for someone aspiring to be an inspirational leader such as the
transformational leader (Walumbwa et al., 2008). Therefore, adoption of the first theme
requires adoption of the second theme as well. This becomes problematic for the
practitioner if honesty, trustworthiness, and fairness are not strongly held values. This
situation is partly responsible for the return of trait theory to the scholarly discussion of
leadership (Avolio et al., 2009). The development of global leaders may require an
134
evaluation of traits such as honorable behavior, trustworthiness, and personal integrity
which in turn may limit the evaluation of candidates to persons of known character. It is
recommended that candidates for global leader development be carefully assessed for
their trustworthiness and commitment to the values of personal integrity and honorable
behavior.
The last theme involves communication skills. Many practitioners’ initial
response here might be to select personnel who speak and write well. Those skills
become important to the transformational leader who constantly strives to communicate
the organizations future vision of excellence. However, there is more required of the
global transformational leader. The unusual, foreign nature of the culture in which the
global leader operates, requires them to spend more time and effort, at least initially, to
stop and actively listen to what their followers have to say. Their concerns, peculiarities,
strengths, weaknesses, and desires will be valuable clues to find the best method to
motivate followers of other cultures.
Recommendations for further research. This exploratory case study is limited
by the small sample size of only 14 participants. In fact, none of the findings were based
on an observation that was common to all 14 participants although several were nearly
universal. Therefore, it is recommended that the findings and implications described here
require quantitative examination using a much larger sample size. This may prove to be
problematic due to the somewhat unique nature of the MIHL.
The MIHL is one of only five similar institutions in the U.S., leaving four other
possibilities. Two are similar in size and mission while the other two are considerably
smaller. A better alternative may be the U.S. Department of Defense or a portion thereof
135
such as the Pentagon. There are thousands of civilian U.S. DOD employees and well as
thousands of U.S. military commissioned and noncommissioned officers working in that
one building alone. Additionally, based on the interest at the MIHL and the continuing
War on Terror, the Pentagon may be interested in further research on global leader
development.
A mixed methods study conducted in two phases is recommended as an ideal
methodology for future research. The first phase would be quantitative in nature using a
survey instrument to measure the leadership environment within the MIHL faculty. The
survey could possibly measure several variables that would give statistical indications of
the leadership behavior of the organization leaders. The recommended survey instrument
is the Multi Factor Leadership Questionnaire originally developed by Avolio and Bass
(2004). This instrument has proven high validity and can be administered to both
followers and leaders in order to assess global leader effectiveness from both
perspectives. A survey plan using the MLQ could measure several variables that would
verify or deny the findings of this study. Using transformational behavior as the standard
of desirable leader behavior and transactional as well as laissez faire as the standard for
undesirable behavior, the MLQ can measure the effectiveness of the MIHL leadership.
Thus, preponderance of transformational leadership behavior within the MIHL faculty
that appears to very strong in this study can be quantitatively verified. The MLQ will
also measure the four distinct transformational leadership behavior categories. The
quantitative survey would provide an abundance of leader and follower data with high
validity that would be the basis for the second phase of the study.
136
The second qualitative phase of a future mixed methods study would consist of a
series of interviews similar to this research. Armed with accurate quantitative data the
researcher could then query the organization leaders and followers in similar fashion to
this study to ascertain a more complete answer to the question of how are
transformational leaders developed?
Conclusions
The MIHL faculty is a multicultural environment due to the mixture of two
distinct U.S. subcultures, the dominant U.S. military culture and the much smaller U.S.
civilian academia. These two cultures work together well with virtually no conflict or
complaints. However, both civilian academicians and military leaders are required to
make adjustments to their normal work behavior and leader behavior in order to operate
effectively in the multicultural environment. Overall, the combination works well as
evidenced by reports of positive job satisfaction, favorable verbal ratings of the
leadership, and successful students (based on external print media reports).
The leadership environment is challenging qualifying the MIHL senior leadership
to be called global leaders. The most prevalent aspect of the leadership environment is
the inspirational atmosphere that permeates throughout the MIHL. Every faculty member
is highly motivated to achieve the goals and objective of the organization.
Three themes emerged from the interview data. Most prominent was the nearly
universal adoption of a transformational leadership style as described by Avolio and Bass
(2004). This includes the civilian faculty members who all have adopted
transformational leadership styles themselves. The faculty as a group and individually do
not consider this profusion of transformational leadership behavior as unusual. To the
137
contrary, they consider it the norm. The second common theme was the importance of
trust and honorable behavior in maintaining the inspirational leadership climate. MIHL
leaders made very deliberate efforts to maintain their own personal high standard of
integrity and honor which resulted in high levels of trust within their organizations. The
third theme was the importance of effective and frequent communication both written and
verbal between the cultural factions. Effective communication facilitates understanding
cultural differences and finding common ground. Emphasis is given to the ability to
listen and receive information as an effective means to understand cultural differences
and to find common ground.
The purpose of the study was to better understand how the MIHL produces global
leaders. This study did not discover a definitive answer to that question. However, the
data analysis did produce two observations that warrant further research. First, the MIHL
leadership may not be developing transformational leaders in the strict sense of
development. Instead they may be simply selecting candidates for empty faculty
positions that have already developed a preference for that leadership style. The second
observation is that junior faculty, both civilian and military may be adding to the
transformational leadership climate by simply emulating more senior mentors on the
faculty who have internalized the transformational leadership style earlier in their careers.
As a qualitative exploratory case study this research has identified several
plausible ideas that may help multicultural organizations produce global leaders that can
successfully overcome the challenges of the future. However, these ideas require
validation in the form of further quantitative research using a sample size large enough to
insure statistical significance.
138
References
Albert, H. R. (2009, August). America's Best Colleges 2009: How West Point beats the
Ivy League. Forbes Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/forbes
/2009/0824/colleges-09-education-west-point-america-best-college.html.
Al-Tarawneh, K., Alhamadani, S., & Mohammad, A. (2012).Transformational leadership
and marketing effectiveness in commercial banks in Jordan. European Journal of
Economics, Finance & Administrative Sciences, 46, 71-87.
Antonakis, J., Avolio, B. J., &Sivasubramaniam, N. (2003).Context and leadership: An
examination of the nine-factor full-range leadership theory using the Multifactor
Leadership Questionnaire. The Leadership Quarterly, 14(3), 261-295.
doi:10.1016/S1048-9843(03)00030-4
Antonakis, J., Day, D. V., &Schyns, B. (2012). Leadership and individual differences: At
the cusp of a renaissance. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(4), 643-650.
doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2012.05.002
Antonakis, J., & House, R. J. (2014). Instrumental leadership: Measurement and
extension of transformational–transactional leadership theory. The Leadership
Quarterly 25, 746–771.
Avolio, B. J. (2014). Examining leadership and organizational behavior across the
boundaries of science. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research,
66(4), 288–292.doi:10.1037/cpb0000017.
Avolio, B. J., & Bass, B. M. (2004). Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire manual and
sample set (3rd ed.). Menlo Park, CA: Mind Garden.
Avolio, B. J., Walumbwa, F. O., & Weber, T. J. (2009). Leadership: Current theories,
research, and future directions. Annual Review of Psychology, 60(1), 421-449.
DOI:10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163621.
Bangari, R. S. (2014). Establishing a framework of transformational grassroots military
leadership: Lessons from high-intensity, high-risk operational environments.
Vikalpa: The Journal for Decision Makers, 39(3), 13-34.
Bass, B. M. (1998). Leading in the Army after next. Military Review 78(2), 46-58.
Bass, B. M., & Bass, R. (2008). The Bass handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and
managerial applications. New York, NY: The Free Press.
Bernal, E. (2009). Designing transformational leadership development programmes.
Business Leadership Review 6(4), 1-17.
139
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. Oxford, England: Harper & Row.
Canals, J. (2014). Global leadership development, strategic alignment and
CEOscommitment. Journal of Management Development, 33(5), 487-502. doi:
10.1108/JMD-02-2014-0014
Chang, Y. H., Chen, M. C., & Tsai, Y. F. (2011). Leadership practices case study:
Development of cross-cultural transformative learning model. Review of
Management Innovation & Creativity, 4(10), 34-45.
Colbert, A. E., Judge, T. A., Choi, D., & Wang, G. (2012). Assessing the trait theory of
leadership using self and observer ratings of personality: The mediating role of
contributions to group success. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(4), 670–685.
Cole, M. S., Bruch, H., & Shamir, B. (2009). Social distance as a moderator of the effects
of transformational leadership: Both neutralizer and enhancer. Human
Relations.62(11), 1697-1733. doi:10.1177/0018726709346377.
Coll, J. E., Weiss, E. L., Yarvis, J. S. (2011). No one leaves unchanged: Insights for
civilian mental health care professionals into the military experience and culture.
Social Work in Health Care, 50, 487–500. doi:10.1080/00981389.2010.528727.
Denzin, N. (1984). The research act. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Derue, D. S., Nahrgang, J. D., Wellman, N., & Humphrey, S. E. (2011). Trait and
behavioral theories of leadership: An integration and meta-analytic test of their
relative validity. Personnel Psychology 64, 7–52.
DiBella, A. J. (2013). Military leaders and global leaders: Contrasts, contradictions, and
opportunities. Prism 4(3), 29-37.
Di Schiena, R., Letens, G., Van Aken, E., & Farris, J. (2013). Relationship between
leadership and characteristics of learning organizations in deployed military units:
An exploratory study. Administrative Sciences 3, 143-165.
doi:10.3390/admsci3030143.
Dinh, J. E., & Lord, R. G. (2012). Implications of dispositional and process views of
traits for individual difference research in leadership. The Leadership Quarterly
23, 651–669. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2012.03.003.
Eres, F. (2011).Relationship between teacher motivation and transformational leadership
characteristics of school principals. International Journal of Education, 3(2), 117. doi:10.5296/ije.v3i2.798.
140
Fallesen, J. J., Keller-Glaze, H., & Curnow, C. K. (2011).A selective review of leadership
studies in the U.S. Army. Military Psychology, 23, 462–478. doi:
10.1080/08995605.2011.600181.
Ferling, J. (2007). Almost a miracle: The American victory in the war of independence.
Cary, NC, USA: Oxford University Press.
Fiedler, F. E. (1964). A contingency model of leadership effectiveness. In L. Berkowitz
(Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology. New York: Academic Press.
Forsyth, B. &Maranga, K. (2015). Global Leadership Competencies and Training.
Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics, 12 (5), 76-83.
Gardner, W. L., Lowe, K. B., Moss, T. W., Mahoney, K. T., & Cogliser, C. C. (2010).
Scholarly leadership of the study of leadership: A review of The Leadership
Quarterly's second decade, 2000–2009.Leadership Quarterly, 21(6), 922-958.
doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2010.10.003.
Ghasabeh, M. S., Soosay, C., &Reaiche, C. (2015). The emerging role of
transformational leadership. The Journal of Developing Areas. 49 (6), 459-467.
Gill, C. (2012). The role of leadership in successful international mergers and
acquisitions: Why Renault-Nissan succeeded and Daimler Chrysler-Mitsubishi
failed. Human Resource Management, Human Resource Management, 51(3),
433–456. doi:10.1002/hrm.21475.
Greiman, B. C. (2009). Transformational leadership research in agricultural education: A
synthesis of the literature. Journal of Agricultural Education,50(4), 50–62. doi:
10.5032/jae.2009.04050.
Gumusluoglu, L., & Ilsev, A. (2009).Transformational leadership, creativity, and
organizational innovation. Journal of Business Research, 62(4), 461-473.
doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.07.032.
Gundersen, G., Hellesøy, B., & Raeder, S. (2012). Leading international project teams:
The effectiveness of transformational leadership in dynamic work environments.
Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 19(1), 46-57.
doi:10.1177/1548051811429573.
Hamstra, M. R., Van Yperen, N. W., Wisse, &Sassenberg, K. (2011). Transformational transactional leadership styles and followers’ regulatory focus. Journal of
Personnel Psychology, 10(4), 182–186. doi: 10.1027/1866-5888/a000043.
Hardy, L., Arthur, C. A., Jones, G., Shariff, A., Munnoch, K., Isaacs, I., & Allsopp, A. J.
(2010).The relationship between transformational leadership behaviors,
psychological, and training outcomes in elite military recruits.
141
Leadership Quarterly, 21(1), 20-32. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.10.002.
Hargis, M. B., Watt, J. D., &Piotrowski, G. (2012). Developing leaders: Examining the
role of transactional and transformational leadership across business contexts.
Organization Development Journal, 29(3), 51-66. Retrieved from
http://www.odinstitute.org.
Heinitz, K., Liepmann, D., & Felfe, J. (2005). Examining the factor structure of the
MLQ: Recommendation for a reduced set of factors. European Journal of
Psychological Assessment,21(3), 182–190. doi 10.1027/1015-5759.21.3.182.
Hernandez, M., Eberly, M. B., Avolio, B. J., & Johnson, M. D. (2011). The loci and
mechanisms of leadership: Exploring a more comprehensive view of leadership
theory. Leadership Quarterly, 22(6), 1165–1185.
Holt, K., & Seki, K. (2012). Global Leadership: A developmental shift for everyone.
Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 5, 196–215.
Hotho, S., & Dowling, M. (2010).Revisiting leadership development: The participant
perspective. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 31(7), 609-629.
doi: 10.1108/01437731011079655.
Howard, C. (2013). Top 25 Best Public Colleges 2013. Retrieved from
http://www.forbes.com/sites/specialfeatures/2013/07/24/top-25-best-publiccolleges-2013/.
Huang, R. (2014). RQDA: R-based Qualitative Data Analysis. R package version 0.2-7.
Retrieved from http://rqda.r-forge.r-project.org/.
Huang, Y. C., & Liao, L. C. (2011). A college leader’s transformational leadership.
Journal of Management Research 3(2), 1-22. doi:10.5296/jmr.v3i2.646.
Inman, M. (2011). The journey to leadership for academics in higher education.
Educational Management Administration & Leadership 39(2), 228–241. doi:
10.1177/1741143210390055.
Iszatt-White, M. (2011). Methodological crises and contextual solutions: An
ethnomethodologically informed approach to understanding leadership.
Leadership, 7(2) 119–135. doi: 10.1177/1742715010394734.
Ivey, G. W., & Kline, T. B. (2010). Transformational and active transactional leadership
in the Canadian military. Leadership & Organization Development Journal,
31(3), 246-262. doi:10.1108/01437731011039352.
Jenkins, D. (2012). Educating global leaders with critical leadership competencies.
Journal of Leadership Studies, 6(2), 95-101. doi:10.1002/jls.21241.
142
Jepson, D. (2009). Leadership context: The importance of departments. Leadership
&Organization Development Journal, 30(1), 36-52.
Judge, T. A., & Piccolo, R. F. (2004). Transformational and transactional leadership: A
meta-analytic test of their relative validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5),
755-768. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.89.5.755.
Krüger, C., Rowold, J., Borgmann, L., Staufenbiel, K., Heinitz, K. (2011). The
discriminant validity of transformational and transactional leadership: A
multitrait-multimethod analysis of and norms for the German Transformational
Leadership Inventory (TLI). Journal of Personnel Psychology, 10(2). 49–60.
doi:10.1027/1866-5888/a000032.Kutz, M. R. (2012). A review and conceptual
framework for integrating leadership into clinical practice. Athletic Training
Education Journal, 7(1), 18-29. doi: 10.5608/070118.
Landis, E. A., Hill, D., & Harvey, M. R. (2014). A synthesis of leadership theories and
styles. Journal of Management Policy and Practice, 15(2), 97-100.
Laurence, J. H. (2011). Military leadership and the complexity of combat and culture.
Military Psychology, 23, 489–501. doi: 10.1080/08995605.2011.600143.
Lee, N., Senior, C., & Butler, M. (2012). Leadership research and cognitive
neuroscience: The state of this union. The Leadership Quarterly, 23, 213–218.
Leong, L., & Fischer, R. (2011). Is transformational leadership universal? A metaanalytical investigation of multifactor leadership questionnaire means across
cultures. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 18(2), 164-174.
doi:10.1177/1548051810385003.
Li, P. P., Bai, Y., & Xi, Y., (2011). The contextual antecedents of organizational trust: A
multidimensional cross-level analysis. Management and Organization Review,
8(2), 371–396. doi: 10.1111/j.1740-8784.2011.00219.x.
Lopez, R. (2014). The relationship between leadership and management: Instructional
approaches and its connections to organizational growth. Journal of Business
Studies Quarterly 6(1), 98-112.
Mahmood, M., Alameri, A. H., Jawad, S., Alani, Y., Zuerlein, S., Nakano, G., Anderson,
W., & Beadling, C. (2013). Cross-cultural communication capabilities of U.S.
military trainers: Host nation perspective. Military Medicine, 178(6), 631-637.
Mannheim, B., & Halamish, H. (2008).Transformational leadership as related to team
outcomes and contextual moderation. Leadership & Organization Development
Journal, 29(7), 617-630. doi 10.1108/01437730810906353.
McCleskey, J. (2014). Situational, transformational, and transactional leadership and
143
leadership development. Journal Of Business Studies Quarterly, 5(4), 117-130.
Meyer, K. E., Mudambi, R., &Narula, R. (2011). Multinational enterprises and local
contexts: The opportunities and challenges of multiple embeddedness. Journal of
Management Studies, 48(2), 235 – 252. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2010.00968.x
Moriano, J. A., Molero, F., & Lévy Mangin, J. (2011). Authentic leadership. Concept
and validation of the ALQ in Spain. Psicothema, 23(2), 336-34.
Musgrave, A. W. (2014). Management vs. leadership in the public sector. The Public
Manager, Fall, 56-59.
Nirmala, R., &Krishnagopal, R. (2011, May). Transformational leader development.
Paper presented at the 1st International Conference on Business, Strategy and
Management, Kolcata, India.
Northouse, P.G. (2007). Leadership: Theory and Practice (4thed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications.
Osborn, R. N., & Marion, R. (2009). Contextual leadership, transformational leadership
and the performance of international innovation seeking alliances. The
Leadership Quarterly, 20(2), 191–206.
Office of the American Secretary: The Rhodes Trust. (2014) Rhodes Scholarships:
Number of Winners by Institution: U.S. Rhodes Scholars 1903-2013. Retrieved
from http://www.rhodesscholar.org/assets/uploads/Rhodes%20
Scholarships_Winning%20Institutions_Count_11_25_13.pdf.
Peus, P., Wesche, J. S., Streicher, B., Braun, S., & Frey, D. (2012). Authentic
Leadership: An empirical test of its antecedents, consequences, and mediating
mechanisms. Journal of Business Ethics, 107, 331-348. doi: 10.1007/s10551011-1042-3.
Peus, P., Braun, S., & Frey, D. (2013). Situation-based measurement of the full range of
leadership model - Development and validation of a situational judgment test.
The Leadership Quarterly 24 (2013) 777–795. doi.10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.07.006.
Pires da Cruz, M., Nunes, A., &Pinheiro, P. (2011). Fiedler's contingency theory:
Practical application of the Least Preferred Coworker (LPC) scale. IUP Journal
of Organizational Behavior, 10(4), 7-26.
Pless, N. M., Maak, T., & Stahl, G. K. (2011). Developing responsible global leaders
through international service-learning programs: The Ulysses Experience.
Academy of Management Learning & Education, 10(2), 237–260.
Qualitative Content Analysis. (2014). QCAmap // a software for Qualitative Content
144
Analysis. Retrieved from http://www.qcamap.org.
Rowley, S., Hossain, F., & Barry, P. (2010). Leadership through a gender lens: How
cultural environments and theoretical perspectives interact with gender.
International Journal of Public Administration, 33, 81–87. doi:
10.1080/01900690903241757.
Rost, J. C. (1993). Leadership development in the new millennium. Journal of
Leadership Studies, 1(1), 91–110.
Rowold, J., &Heinitz, K. (2007). Transformational and charismatic leadership:
Assessing the convergent, divergent and criterion validity of the MLQ and the
CKS. Leadership Quarterly, 18(1), 121-133. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2007.01.003.
Schriesheim, C. A., Wu, J. B., & Scandura, T. A. (2009). A meso measure? Examination
of the levels of analysis of the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ). The
Leadership Quarterly, 20(4), 604–616. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.04.005.
Scott, C. J. (2010). Perceptions of leadership under conditions of environmental
uncertainty. The Journal of American Academy of Business. 16(1), 30-35.
Silva, A. (2014). What Do We Really Know About Leadership? Journal Of Business
Studies Quarterly, 5(4), 1-4.
Stadelmann, C. (2010). Swiss armed forces militia system: Effect of transformational
leadership on subordinates’ extra effort and the moderating role of command
structure. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 69(2), 83–93.
Strom, T. Q., Gavian, M. E., Possis, E., Loughlin, J., Bui, T., Linardatos, E., Leskela, J.,
& Siegel, W. (2012). Cultural and ethical considerations when working with
military personnel and veterans: A primer for VA training programs. Training
and Education in Professional Psychology, 6(2), 67-75. doi: 10.1037/a0028275.
Terrell, S. & Rosenbusch, K. (2013). Global leadership development: What global
organizations can do to reduce leadership risk, increase speed to competence, and
build global leadership muscle. HR People & Strategy, 36(1), 40-46.
Thoroughgood, C. N., Hunter, S. T., & Sawyer, K. B. (2010). Bad apples, bad barrels,
and broken followers? An empirical examination of contextual influences on
follower perceptions and reactions to aversive leadership. Journal of Business
Ethics, 100, 647–672. doi: 10.1007/s10551-010-0702-z.
Tobin, J. (2014). Management and leadership issues for school building leaders.
International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 9(1), 1-13.
Toor, S. (2011). Differentiating leadership from management: An empirical investigation
145
of leaders and managers. Leadership and Management in Engineering, Oct, 310320.
United States Department of Defense, Defense Manpower Data Center. (2014). DoD
Personnel, Workforce Reports & Publications. Retrieved from
https://www.dmdc.osd.mil/appj/dwp/dwp_reports.jsp.
United States Government Accountability Office. (2001). Human Capital: Major Human
Capital Challenges at the Departments of Defense and State. Retrieved from
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GAOREPORTS-GAO-0165T/html/GAOREPORTS-GAO-01-565T.htm.
United States Government Accountability Office. (2014). Report to Congressional
Committees: Human Capital. Retrieved from http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/
664697.pdf.
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GAOREPORTS-GAO-01-565T/html/GAOREPORTSGAO-01-565T.htm
United States Military Academy. (2005). USMA Faculty Manual. Retrieved from
http://www.usma.edu/cfe/SiteAssets/SitePages/WP/Faculty_Manual_Signed.pdf
United States Military Academy, Center for Faculty Excellence. (2013). New Instructor
Info: About the Faculty. Retrieved from
http://www.usma.edu/cfe/SitePages/WP_Faculty.aspx.
United States Military Academy, Public Affairs Office. (2011). Fact Sheet: West Point
Faculty. Retrieved from http://www.usma.edu/news/SitePages/Faculty%
20Sheet.aspx
Vacar, A. (2014). Leadership – A necessity in projects. Studies in Business and
Economics, 1-7.
Volckmann, R. (2012). Integral leadership and diversity: Definitions, distinctions and
implications. Integral Leadership Review, 14, 1-21.
Walumbwa, F. O., Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Wernsing T. S., Peterson, S. J. (2008).
Authentic Leadership: Development and validation of a theory-based measure.
Journal of Management, 34(1), 89-126.doi: 10.1177/0149206307308913.
Wang, G., Oh, I., Courtright, S. H, & Colbert, A. E. (2011). Transformational leadership
and performance across criteria and levels: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of
research. Group and Organization Management, 36(2), 233-270. doi:
10.1177/1059601111401 017.
Warrick, D. D. (2011). The urgent need for skilled transformational leaders: Integrating
146
transformational leadership and organization development. Journal of
Leadership, Accountability and Ethics, 8(5), 11-26.
Winn, B. (2013). Learning to lead with cultural intelligence (CQ): When do global
leaders learn best? People and Strategy, 10-15.
Winston, B. E., & Patterson, K. (2006).An integrative definition of leadership.
International Journal of Leadership Studies, 1(2), 6-66.
Wolf, A. L., & Arrow, H. (2013). Military influence tactics: Lessons learned in Iraq and
Afghanistan. Military Psychology 25(5), 428–437. doi: 10.1037/mil0000009.
Wong, L., Bleise, P., &McGurk, D. (2003). Military leadership: A context specific
review. The Leadership Quarterly 14, 657-692.
doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2003.08.001
Yin, R. K. (2013). Case study research: Design and methods (5th Edition). Thousand
Oaks, California: Sage Publications Inc.
Yukl, G. (2012). Effective leadership behavior: What we know and what questions need
more attention. Academy of Management Perspectives, Oct, 66-85.
doi:10.5465/amp.2012.0088.
Zaccaro, S.J. (2007). Trait-based perspectives of leadership. American Psychologist
62(1), 6–16. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.62.1.6.
Zwingmann, I., Wegge, J., Wolf, S., Rudolf, M., Schmidt, M., &Richter, P. (2014). Is
transformational leadership healthy for employees? A multilevel analysis in 16
nations. Zeitschrift für Personalforschung, 28 (1-2), 24-51. doi: 10.1688/ZfP2014-01-Zwingmann.
147
Appendixes
148
Appendix A:
Demographic Survey Information
Date of Interview: _____________________________________
Rank of Participant: ______________________________________
Job Title: _________________________________________________
Years of Service in Current Occupation: ____________
Years of Service at the USMA: ___________
Location of Interview: _____________________________________
149
Appendix B:
Interview Guide (Leader)
1. What are your particular leadership challenges?
2. Do you lead your (civilian/allied) followers differently than your military personnel?
a) If so, how?
3. How has your leadership behavior changed since you became a leader at West Point?
4. When you assumed your current leadership position, did you feel that you were
adequately prepared?
a) If so, how?
b) If so, by whom?
5. How did you develop the leadership skills required for your current position?
6. In a very general sense, how does USMA prepare senior, permanently assigned
leaders to lead the multicultural academic faculty?
150
Appendix C:
Interview Guide (Follower)
1. Reflect upon your department leaders. In your opinion:
a) Please comment on the overall effectiveness of your leaders.
b) Please comment on how your leaders motivate you and your comrades to
excel.
2. Please describe your departmental culture.
3. Please describe your contribution to the West Point culture?
4. What advice would you give the senior USMA leaders concerning the effective
integration of nonmilitary staff and faculty members?
151
Appendix D:
Informed Consent Form
Introduction:
My name is Rich Wagner. I am a doctoral student at Northcentral University in Arizona.
I am conducting a research study aimed at better understanding how West Point develops
global leaders. The Army needs more leaders that are effective in a multi-cultural
environment. I am completing this research as part of my doctoral degree. I invite you
to participate.
Activities:
If you participate in this research, the researcher will interview you. The interview
should last about 60 minutes. I hope to learn about the leadership challenges at West
Point and the development of senior leaders.
Audiotaping:
I would like to use a voice recorder to record your responses. You can still participate if
you do not wish to be recorded.
Please sign here if I can record you: __________________________________________
Eligibility:
You are eligible to participate in this research if you are:

an Academic Department Head

a Deputy Academic Department Head

a foreign officer

a civilian professor
I hope to include twelve participants in this research.
Risks:
There are minimal risks in this study. The primary risk is the possibility that someone
may guess your identity from the data.
To decrease the impact of this risk, you can stop this interview at any time or choose not
to answer any question.
152
Benefits:
If you participate, there are no direct benefits to you. However, this research may lead to
global leader development programs in the Army.
Confidentiality:
The information you provide will be kept confidential to the extent allowable by law.
Some steps that I will take to keep your identity confidential are:
1.
I will use a number to identify you.
2.
I will keep your name separate from your answers.
3.
Your identifying information (name, USMA department, location) will only be
recorded in the study notes.
4.
Your name, USMA department, geographic location or any identifying data will
not appear in a public document.
5.
Neither the location of West Point nor the institution name of USMA will ever
appear in a public document.
Only myself, and my dissertation chair will have access to your information.
I will secure your information by locking papers in a desk and locking computer files
with a password.
I will keep your data for 7 years. Then, I will delete electronic data and destroy the paper
data.
Contact Information:
If you have questions for me, you can contact me at: R.WagnerJr1190@email.ncu.edu or
610-213-6963.
My dissertation chair’s name is Dr. Robert George. He works at Northcentral University
and is supervising me on the research. You can contact him at: rgeorge@ncu.edu or 304650-5067.
If you have questions about your rights in the research, or if a problem has occurred, or if
you are injured during your participation, please contact the Institutional Review Board
at: irb@ncu.edu or 1-888-327-2877 ext 8014.
153
Voluntary Participation:
Your participation is voluntary. If you decide not to participate, or you stop after you
start, there is no penalty.
Signatures:
A signature indicates your understanding of this consent form. You will be given a copy
of the form for your information.
Participant Signature
Printed Name
Date
Researcher Signature
Printed Name
Date