Perceived and Preferred Institutional Goals and Leadership Behavior Among Selected Groups at East Tennessee State University
- Publication Year:
- Repository URL:
- https://dc.etsu.edu/etd/2647; https://dc.etsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4038&context=etd
- Education; School administration; Educational Administration and Supervision
The problem of this study was to determine if significant differences existed between groups from selected segments of the university community in their expressions of "is" (actual) and "should be" institutional goals and of "real" and "ideal" leadership behavior and to determine if significant relationships existed between their expressions of "is" (actual) institutional goals and "real" leadership behavior and "should be" institutional goals and "ideal" leadership behavior. The sample was composed of the Board of Regents, the university President and his Cabinet, the Faculty Senate, the Graduate Council, the Student Government Association officers and delegates, and thirty randomly selected Faculty. The Institutional Goals Inventory (IGI) was used to assess "is" (actual) and "should be" institutional goals and the Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire (LBDQ) Real and Ideal instruments were used to determine "real" and "ideal" university leadership behavior. When "should be" institutional goals were compared with "is" (actual) institutional goals, significant differences were found on the goal dimensions of Academic Development, Intellectual Orientation, Individual Personal Development, Traditional Religiousness, Advanced Training, Meeting Local Needs, Democratic Governance, Community, Intellectual/Aesthetic Environment, and Innovation. The Board of Regents' responses were significantly lower than the other five groups when the "real" Initiating Structure dimension of university leadership behavior was compared with the "real" Consideration dimension of university leadership behavior. Significant relationships were found on all twenty of the "is" (actual) institutional goal dimensions when the "real" Initiating Structure and Consideration dimensions of university leadership behavior were compared. Significant relationships were not found for each group on every dimension but there was at least one significant relationship by a group on each of the twenty goal dimensions. Significant relationships were found on eighteen of the twenty "should be" institutional goal dimensions when the "ideal" Initiating Structure and Consideration dimensions of university leadership behavior were compared. Only on the Democratic Governance and Community goal dimensions was there a failure to find significant relationships. Again, significant relationships were not found by each group on the eighteen dimensions in which significance was shown. However, there was at least one significant relationshp by a group on each of the eighteen goal dimensions.