PREPARING THE NEXT GENERATION TO LEAD: A PHENOMENOLOGICAL

STUDY OF RESILIENCE AMONG COLLEGE WOMEN PRESIDENTS

A dissertation submitted

by

Heather Louise Bigard

to

Benedictine University

in partial fulfillmentof the requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Educationin

Higher Education and Organizational Change

Benedictine University

September 2016

Copyright by Heather Louise Bigard, 2016All rights reserved

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

There are several people to whom I owe a debt of gratitude for their support and

encouragement throughout this process.

My husband, Phil, who has always been my rock of support and inspired me

to dream and achieve that which I did not always believe was possible.

My daughter, Alexis, for her creative assistance in illustrating the

phenomenon of resilience.

My family, who has motivated me to keep going and celebrated with me along

the way.

Antonina Lukenchuk, who helped me to share the stories of my participants

through the beauty of phenomenology. Her wisdom and guidance have been

invaluable.

Mim Pride, who has been a mentor and friend and inspired me to learn more

about my identity as a woman and taught me about true servant leadership.

My dissertation committee members, Sr. Marilyn Jean Runkel and Gary

Davis, for their perspectives and collaboration.

My participants, for sharing their personal stories of resilience.

iii

DEDICATION

To my loving husband, Phil, my amazing daughter, Alexis,

and my charismatic son, Dylan.

I will forever be grateful for your patience, love, and unwavering support.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.............................................................................................iii

LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................................x

LIST OF FIGURES..........................................................................................................xi

ABSTRACT....................................................................................................................xii

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION...............................................................................1

Thinking Biographically....................................................................................................1

Rationale and Statement of the Problem...........................................................................3

Research Purposes and Questions.....................................................................................6

Inquiry Process..................................................................................................................7

Significance of the Study...................................................................................................7

CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE.....................................................9

Introduction.......................................................................................................................9

Pathways to the Presidency...............................................................................................9

Barriers to Women’s Advancement in Higher Education Leadership............................13

Lack of Mentoring....................................................................................................14

Good Old Boy Network...........................................................................................15

Gender Bias..............................................................................................................15

Cultural Barriers.......................................................................................................18

Family Obligations...................................................................................................21

Women as Leaders: Aspirations and Factors Contributing to Success...........................22

Aspirations for Leadership.......................................................................................22

Mentoring.................................................................................................................24

v

Leadership Styles.....................................................................................................29

Theories of Resilience.....................................................................................................31

Summary..........................................................................................................................37

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY........................................................................40

Thinking Interpretively....................................................................................................40

Thinking Phenomenologically.........................................................................................41

Selfhood...................................................................................................................43

Sociality....................................................................................................................43

Embodiment.............................................................................................................43

Temporality..............................................................................................................44

Spaciality..................................................................................................................44

Project.......................................................................................................................45

Discourse..................................................................................................................45

Resilience as a Theoretical Lens.....................................................................................46

Phenomenology as Research Design...............................................................................47

Participants...............................................................................................................47

Data Collection.........................................................................................................48

Phenomenological Data Analysis.............................................................................49

Phenomenological reduction.............................................................................49

Bracketing..................................................................................................49

Horizonalization.........................................................................................50

Clustering horizons into themes.................................................................50

Organizing horizons and themes into a coherent textural

vi

description..................................................................................................50

Imaginative variation........................................................................................51

Synthesis of essence..........................................................................................51

Validation Criteria...........................................................................................................51

Researcher’s Self-Reflection...........................................................................................53

CHAPTER FOUR: DATA ANALYSIS.........................................................................55

Introduction.....................................................................................................................55

Introducing the Participants.............................................................................................55

Ann...........................................................................................................................57

Jenni.........................................................................................................................57

Carol.........................................................................................................................58

Nicole.......................................................................................................................59

Margaret...................................................................................................................59

Sharon.......................................................................................................................60

Linda.........................................................................................................................61

Data Analysis Process.....................................................................................................62

Bracketing................................................................................................................62

Horizonalization.......................................................................................................62

Clustering for Meaning............................................................................................63

Imaginative Variation and Synthesis of Meaning....................................................63

Resilience: Thematic Analysis........................................................................................64

Resilience as Response to Adversity........................................................................64

Overcoming barriers to professional advancement...........................................65

vii

Recognizing gender bias...................................................................................69

Career advancement..........................................................................................72

Responding to adversity....................................................................................73

Sources of support.............................................................................................74

Work-life balance..............................................................................................77

Resilience Shaping Identity and the Capacity for Personal and Professional

Success.....................................................................................................................78

Emotional intelligence......................................................................................79

Self-actualization..............................................................................................80

Qualities of a leader..........................................................................................81

Personal attributes.............................................................................................82

Image and identity.............................................................................................84

Resilience Enhancing Meaning and Purpose: Being a President

Is Meaningful...........................................................................................................85

Summary of the Findings................................................................................................86

CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION, DISCUSSION OF THE FINDINGS, AND

REFLECTIONS..............................................................................................................89

Discussion of the Findings..............................................................................................89

Response to Adversity..............................................................................................90

Identity.....................................................................................................................94

Selfhood............................................................................................................94

Sociality............................................................................................................95

Embodiment......................................................................................................95

viii

Temporality.......................................................................................................96

Spaciality...........................................................................................................96

Purpose.....................................................................................................................97

Project...............................................................................................................97

Discourse...........................................................................................................97

Recommendations for Future Research...........................................................................98

Final Reflections..............................................................................................................99

REFERENCES..............................................................................................................102

APPENDIX A: Consent Form.......................................................................................110

APPENDIX B: Interview Guide...................................................................................113

APPENDIX C: Codes Relevant to Research Questions................................................116

APPENDIX D: Themes Relevant to Research Questions.............................................119

ix

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1. Three Waves of Resiliency Inquiry.........................................................................35

2. Participant Characteristics.......................................................................................56

x

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1. Resilience as a response to adversity.............................................................................64

2. Resilience shaping identity and the capacity for personal and professional

success....................................................................................................................79

3. Subthemes and their relevance to the research questions........................................87

4. Representation of the phenomenon of resilience.....................................................88

xi

ABSTRACT

Colleges and universities are facing unprecedented challenges related to access and

accountability, while its leadership pipeline is weakening. Although females outnumber

males, in terms of student enrollment, the majority of college presidents are men. Gender

inequity among college presidents, combined with the number of impending retirements,

creates an opportunity for more women to advance to the presidency. Preparing them to

effectively overcome potential barriers and achieve professional success can strengthen

the pipeline of leaders.

The purpose of this phenomenological study was to investigate the ways in which

female leaders experience their presidencies and perceive resiliency as a construct and

lived experience conducive to their success as higher education professionals. This study

was guided by three research questions. How do female college leaders perceive and

experience resilience on their paths to the presidency? What does professional

advancement mean to these women? What are their perceptions of themselves as

successful and resilient leaders?

Using an interpretive lens, new meaning was constructed from the ways in which

these women described their experiences and perceived resilience as an influence in their

own leadership development. The research revealed three dimensions of resilience that

constitute the essence of the phenomenon as experienced by the seven participants in this

study: (a) resilience as a response to adversity, (b) resilience shaping identity and the

xii

capacity for personal and professional success, and (c) resilience enhancing the meaning

and purpose of the participants’ personal and professional lives.

xiii

Wonder is the beginning of wisdom.

— Socrates

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

Thinking Biographically

My career in higher education began long before I appreciated the role of higher

education in our society and aspired to join the leadership ranks of an institution. I was a

first generation college student with little means to fund an education and little guidance

to embark upon the journey that changed my future. I began as a student worker in the

financial aid office of a small, private, religious institution without any experience or

knowledge about financial assistance programs. In addition to being provided the

opportunity of a college education, I was also provided the opportunity to learn a skill set.

I quickly became immersed in financial aid, admissions, business operations, and student

services. Within a few months, I found myself supervising other students and

coordinating the work-study program for the entire institution. It was then that I became

a leader and began my journey into the profession of higher education.

Throughout my journey, I have been blessed with numerous leaders, mentors,

sponsors, and colleagues who have taken an active interest in my personal and

professional development. These influential men and women have come and gone, as

intended, gracefully imparting their wisdom and challenging me to grow. I have been a

willing participant in my leadership development, although admittedly, I have sometimes

1

failed to see the potential in myself that others have seen in me. In the early days, I was

completely unaware of my gender as a barrier to my professional advancement.

Promotions came quickly, regardless of whether my immediate supervisor was a man or a

woman, and I felt empowered. I naively assumed that if I treated my colleagues with

dignity and respect, I would be afforded the same treatment. After several years of

advancement and success, I became the object of gender discrimination when a man was

hired over me for a position I was more qualified and prepared to assume. At the time, I

denied that gender was a factor and instead I blamed academic politics. The experience

was painful and nearly drove me out of higher education, but given my relentless

determination to transcend all barriers in my path, I persevered. I left the institution for a

vice presidency at another college and welcomed this new opportunity to further develop

my leadership capacity. Nearly a decade later, after years of self-reflection and learning

and experiencing gender bias, I have finally come to accept that my gender has indeed

been a barrier to my success, including that initial event so many years ago. What makes

a person overcome adversity, bounce back, or persevere? Resilience.

Resilience is a transformative process that enables an individual to overcome

adversity by adapting to social, emotional, or physical situations. I have experienced

resilience throughout my entire career and have expanded my capacity to overcome

adversity. That does not mean that certain events or circumstances are less painful or that

failure is easier to accept. Building the capacity to overcome adversity provides the

knowledge from which to respond advantageously and garner the strength to persevere.

Resilience has shaped my identity as a leader and has forged my path through the ranks

of higher education administration. As a woman aspiring to become a college president, I

2

wonder how other women have experienced resilience in their leadership development

and how they perceive resilience to have been a factor in their success as a female

president. This study explores how female college presidents have experienced their

presidencies so as to create a model for other women who aspire to assume similar

leadership roles in higher education.

Rationale and Statement of the Problem

Colleges and universities are facing unprecedented challenges in providing access

to and maintaining accountability for the education that will provide future leaders with

the necessary skills to compete in a changing, competitive, global economy. According

to a report generated by the U.S. Department of Education (2006) titled A Test of

Leadership: Charting the Future of U.S. Higher Education, “as higher education evolves

in unexpected ways, this new landscape demands innovation and flexibility from the

institutions that serve the nation’s learners (p. xi). The report goes on to describe higher

education as a “mature enterprise” that has failed to adequately prepare a workforce that

meets employer demands. Employers also report that graduates do not possess the

necessary problem solving and critical thinking skills that are required in today’s

workplace (Association of American Colleges and Universities [AACU], 2007; U.S.

Department of Education, 2006). Higher education is critical to the success of our

national and global economy as well as the social and economic viability of our society.

Colleges and universities must adapt to the new demands to develop skills and

competencies in the current and future generation of students that will prepare the nation

for an increasingly competitive global future.

The primary responsibility for the changes that must occur within higher

3

education is placed upon the executive leadership. Next to the governing board, the

presidency is the top leadership position at the institution, representing the faculty, staff,

students, alumni, donors, board of trustees, and the community in which the institution is

located and serves. As a public figure, the president is expected to embody the mission

and values of the institution at all times. The president is also accountable to a full range

of constituencies, including local, state, and federal regulatory agencies that have an

interest in the institution. In this capacity, the president serves as the chief executive

officer (CEO) and maintains responsibility for the overall health and performance of the

organization. The president should also reflect the diversity that exists in present society

and have a fundamental commitment to social responsibility. Furthermore, future leaders

of these institutions must be skilled in leading organizational change efforts in order to

effectively meet the educational demands of today and provide a vision for the future.

The makeup of student enrollment in the United States has also changed. Females

outnumber male enrollment at 57% to 43%, respectively, and between 1990 and 2009,

racial and ethnic minority student enrollment has grown from 20% to 34% (Cook, 2012).

Despite the changes in the diversity of student enrollment, the race and gender profile of

college presidents has remained constant over the last 25 years. The majority of college

presidents are White males over the age of 60. Females continue to be underrepresented

at the top of the leadership hierarchy, holding just 26% of college and university

presidencies, compared to 74% held by their male counterparts. Although the number of

presidencies held by women has grown since 1986 when it was just 10%, progress

toward achieving gender equity at the presidential level remains slow (Cook, 2012). In

4

terms of ethnic representation, the overall racial diversity makeup of college presidents

has actually declined from 14% in 2006 to 13% in 2011.

The majority of female presidents serve community colleges, 33% compared to

22.9% at baccalaureate institutions (Cook, 2012). Other positions in higher education

fare better with 49% of women holding chief diversity officer positions, 41% as chief

academic officers, 72% as chiefs of staff, and 36% as executive vice presidents (Cook,

2012). Overall, only 25% of academic leadership positions, including presidencies, are

held by women (Lennon, 2013). Equally disappointing, at four-year institutions women

consistently earn an average of 20% less than their male counterparts (Lennon, 2013).

Although the number of females holding professional positions in academia is increasing,

barriers to access, including education, lack of academic teaching and leadership

experience, lack of mentoring and support, gender bias, and family responsibilities

continue to restrict the pipeline for women to persist to the presidency.

The pathway to the presidency remains unchanged. One-third of current

presidents previously served as a chief academic officer (CAO), 70% served as a full-

time faculty member, and nearly all spent their entire career in higher education. Fifty-

two percent of women presidents have served as a provost, compared to 42% of male

presidents, further illustrating that the academic path is the most successful route for

women to reach the presidency (Cook, 2012). Although the path to the presidency from

the position of provost or CAO has served as a strong pipeline, A Study of Chief

Academic Officers of Independent Colleges and Universities found less than one-fourth

plan to seek a presidency (Hartley & Godin, 2010). Further, nearly half of sitting

presidents are looking toward retirement in the next five years. The lack of interest from

5

the traditional ranks of academic leadership and the significant number of impending

vacancies creates an opportunity for more women to be considered for leadership. This

also serves as an opportunity to achieve a gender balance that is more reflective of

college student enrollment. As Kim and Cook (2013) asserted, an increase in female

leaders will only address gender inequity and will not necessarily improve the three

percent of ethnic diversity that currently exists among women presidents.

Gender inequity among college presidents, combined with the number of

impending retirements, creates an opportunity for more women to advance to the

presidency. Preparing women to effectively overcome potential barriers and achieve

professional success can strengthen the pipeline of leaders. Therefore, studies such as

this can shed light on the individual, organizational, and cultural changes that are still

necessary to support the advancement of women into leadership roles.

Research Purposes and Questions

The purpose of this phenomenological study was to investigate the ways in which

female leaders experience their presidencies and perceive resiliency as a construct and

lived experience conducive to their success as higher education professionals.

Additionally, this study inquired into the identity construction of these female leaders as

they described their lived experiences.

The following research questions guided this study:

How do female college leaders perceive and experience resilience on their

paths to the presidency?

What does professional advancement mean to these women?

What are their perceptions of themselves as successful and resilient leaders?

6

Inquiry Process

Research on the underrepresentation of women in higher education and their

leadership development is abundant. Significant research also exists on the barriers that

women face in achieving leadership positions in higher education. However, far fewer

studies explore how individual women experience the phenomena of adversity and

success as they aspire to a college presidency. In this regard, the theories of resilience

can have particular relevance to studies such as this. Although the largest body of

research on resilience theory is found in studies of childhood development, resilience also

underpins several leadership styles, including those most closely associated with women:

authentic, transformational, and adaptive.

The phenomenon of resilience is a perceived experience that can only be

explained through conscious interpretation. Therefore, a phenomenological research

design was chosen for this study so as to capture the essence of the lived experiences of

female college presidents and provide those experiences with meaning. Using an

interpretive lens, new meaning: the meaning constructed by the participants of this study,

reflected the ways was constructed from the ways in which these women described their

experiences and perceived resilience as an influence in their identity construction and

leadership development. This qualitative approach was selected in an effort to access the

rich descriptions of conscious experience that cannot otherwise be accessed using

quantitative research methods.

Significance of the Study

Higher education has received a “call to action” from the president of the United

States, the U.S. Department of Education, legislators, employers, students, parents, and

7

the general public. Successfully meeting the new expectations for the outcomes that

higher education is expected to deliver will require a new skill set to lead these

organizations. According the Altbach, Berdahl, and Gumport (2011),

40 years ago . . . the characteristics noted for effective presidents were also often

considered typical masculine traits, such as risk taking, task orientation,

confidence, and the ability to work alone. Contemporary views . . . focus more on

relationship building, collaboration, and a quest of input, characteristics often

associated with women and reflective of more contemporary social customs. (p.

295)

Although women seem to possess the character traits and assume the adaptive and

transformational leadership styles needed to support change efforts in higher education

(Eagly & Carli, 2007) women are not successfully advancing to the position of president

at the same rate as men (Cook, 2012). Sufficient research has been conducted regarding

the pathways to the presidency, the barriers that prevent women from advancement, and

the tactical strategies that women have used to advance to the presidency. However,

women continue to face adversity in the pursuit of becoming a college president, and

little research exists on the strategies for overcoming adversity in terms of developing

leaders in higher education. Resilience is “the process of coping with adversity, change,

or opportunity in a manner that results in the identification, fortification, and enrichment

of resilient qualities or protective factors” (Richardson, 2002, p. 308). Exploring the

phenomenon of resilience through the individual lived experience of successful female

college presidents adds to the body of leadership development research on women in

higher education.

8

The important thing is not to stop questioning.

Curiosity has its own reason for existing.

— Albert Einstein

CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Introduction

The pathways to the presidency have remained relatively unchanged in academia,

with the majority of presidents coming from the academic ranks. Generally, the barriers

are the same obstacles that women have faced since entering the workforce in the 1960s

and even though women have shattered the glass ceiling that once held them back, a more

ominous and relatively subconscious set of gender bias have has taken root, further

discouraging women from seeking professional advancement (Eagly & Carli, 2007;

Ballenger, 2010). Women who choose to take the journey toward presidential leadership

and face the myriad of obstacles that greet them on their paths, confront barriers with

grace and resilience. The direction of this study is framed by a review of literature

regarding the pathways to the presidency, the barriers that women face in advancing to

the presidency, leadership development for women, and the theories of resiliency.

Pathways to the Presidency

The American Council on Education (ACE), the Council of Independent Colleges

and Universities (CIC), and the Association of Governing Boards (AGB) conduct regular

national studies on the collegiate presidency, including the pathways, the search process,

9

and the changing nature of the job duties. Although female representation has grown to

49% of chief diversity officers, 41% of chief academic officers, 72% of chiefs of staff,

28% of deans, and 36% of executive vice presidents, female presidents still lag behind as

only representing 26% of all college presidencies (Jones, 2014). The majority of

presidents come from the academic ranks, 70% having served as full-time faculty

members at some time during their career, and one-third having served as chief academic

officers (Cook, 2012).

A 2013 study conducted by ACE revealed that the pipeline was weakening, with

traditional interest from the academic ranks retreating, forcing search committees to look

for other, non-academic, candidates for the presidency (Cook, 2012), and potentially

changing the traditional pathway. Most of the CIC presidents also came from academic

positions, but an increasing number were coming from outside of higher education and

were met with trepidation by internal constituencies: faculty, staff, and students. A 2011

CIC study found that 85% of independent college presidents came from other positions

within higher education, attracting the remaining 15% from outside of academe (Song &

Hartley, 2012). Women presidents are more likely to have served as chief academic

officers, 38% compared to 26% of men, before becoming a president, and more CIC male

presidents are serving in subsequent presidential positions, 21% compared to 12% of the

female presidents (Song & Hartley, 2012). This suggests that women are more

successful at achieving a presidency after serving in an academic role, but serve in fewer

presidential posts than men. The academic experience directly validates their candidacy

because faculty members often believe that the senior leader should be a reflection of the

core academic mission. However, this is an outdated view of the essential qualifications

10

of a president who now spends most of his or her time managing the budget, fundraising,

lobbying, and fostering community relations. There are some differences in presidential

duties, depending on institutional type. For example, presidents of independent, tuition-

driven institutions spend 31% of their time on enrollment management, whereas their

counterparts at public institutions spend a greater amount of their time on community and

government relations (Song & Hartley, 2012). Regardless of institution type, the

president remains primarily focused externally and, therefore, relies on the chief

academic officer to manage the internal academic and personnel matters.

Beyond the presidency, a third study conducted in 2015 by the AGB surfaced

another area of leadership growth for women in higher education. AGB found an

increase in the number of women serving on governing boards at public institutions,

31.5% compared to 28.4% in 2010, and 31.7% compared to 30.2% in 2010 at private

institutions. Although the number of women serving as presidents and on boards is

increasing, the pace is still very slow and significantly disproportionate to the number of

females who represent the majority of college students, 57% in the United States

(Johnston, 2015). Johnston (2015), an AGB executive vice president and chief operating

officer, contended that “women on boards serve as role models for students. They also

bring valuably different ways of working and thinking” (p. 2), which further supports the

argument that more women are needed to fill leadership positions in higher education and

serve as catalysts for change.

Finally, Madsen (2008) explored the experiences of 10 women presidents from a

variety of institutional types and found that their career pathways were very different.

According to Madsen’s research, eight of the 10 women began their careers in education,

11

nine taught at the college level before moving into administration, and three served as

special assistants to the president. Prior to their presidential appointments, five were in

chief academic officer roles, two were vice presidents of administration and finance, one

was a vice president of university relations, one was from a government agency, and one

had already been a president at another institution (Madsen, 2008). Interestingly, none of

the women had specific presidential aspirations for the majority of their careers, thus

explaining their indirect or nonlinear career pathways. According to Madsen (2008),

successful women leaders (unlike many men leaders) did not intentionally look

for leadership positions. Instead, they emerged by working hard, performing to

the best of their abilities, responding to encouragement by others to apply for new

positions, and accepting offers of increased responsibilities and promotions. (p.

143)

Madsen’s findings have multiple implications. First, while the women in her study did

not intentionally seek a presidency, they demonstrated that they were capable in multiple

positions and ultimately found their way to the top. They have, therefore, indirectly

created new pathways for future women leaders. Second, the women in Madsen’s study

indicated that they learned the necessary leadership competencies through other

experiences and not necessarily for the purpose of becoming a president. Given the

underrepresentation of women presidents, providing access to more intentional career

development programs will strengthen the pipeline of future leaders and inspire more

women to seek a presidency.

All four studies (Johnston, 2015; Jones, 2014; Madsen, 2008; Song & Hartley,

2012) recommended further emphasis on preparing women for leadership roles. Given

12

the present state of higher education with its increasing demands for productivity and

accountability combined with diminishing resources, the pool of future leaders must be

focused and prepared to lead organizations through transformative change, the kind of

change more women tend to lead (Eagly & Carli, 2007). They must also be adaptable to

their current realities so as to appropriately address the unique regional and local

challenges that institutions face. Selingo (2013) conducted a series of interviews and

found that “the attributes of future presidents will be more specific to individual

institutions, as tomorrow’s leaders confront challenges that are unique to their sector,

state, region, or mission” (para. 7). This will require a new skill set for higher education

leaders that transcends protecting the status quo and managing outdated modes of

operation. It will require leaders to inspire innovation and manage rapid change for the

sake of survival.

Barriers to Women’s Advancement in Higher Education Leadership

While the study from ACE is insightful in understanding the typical career

pathways that often lead to the presidency, it still “fails to address ways to increase the

number of women ascending to the presidency” (Ballenger, 2010, p. 2). Ballenger’s

research described a number of cultural and structural barriers for women in higher

education leadership: “This glass ceiling appears to be a form of discrimination affecting

women in higher education and is an important area of study identifying women’s lack of

access to power and leadership status in higher education administration” (Ballenger,

2010, p. 3). Eagly and Carli (2007) suggested that the “glass ceiling” metaphor is

outdated, and instead suggested a “labyrinth” as a better metaphor “that captures the

varied challenges confronting women as they travel, often indirect paths . . . on their way

13

to leadership” (p. 1). Women may have indeed shattered the glass ceiling, but the

pathways to the top leadership positions are not direct and often require a certain

navigational savvy that incorporates emotional intelligence and political strategy. Above

all, the journey requires an abundance of strength and endurance to confront and conquer

each challenge that emerges along the path.

Ballenger’s (2010) research consisted of a quantitative study of 35 women in

administrative or executive leadership positions, and three themes emerged as common

barriers for women who seek to achieve their leadership goals: lack of mentoring, good

old boy network, and gender inequities. The culture of academia regarding leadership,

tenure, and promotion, also exists as a barrier to advancement for women, along with

family obligations. Madsen’s (2008) research of 10 female presidents revealed that

gender was also a barrier, but did not prevent them from advancing in their careers. The

difference in perspectives may be justified, in part, as a result of the difference between

the women in Madsen’s (2008) study who found unintended success in achieving a

presidency, and those who had eagerly sought leadership positions, but had not

experienced the same success.

Lack of Mentoring

Duff (1999) asserted that “women need women as mentors because only women

can truly empathize with the experience of being a woman” (p. 4). Duff also contended

that a truly authentic female-to-female relationship fosters growth in confidence and

strength, which supports the full realization of one’s potential. Although there has been

some improvement, there are simply fewer women available to be mentors, thereby

limiting access for women to benefit from these relationships.

14

Good Old Boy Network

Although formal networks exist to support the advancement of women, generally,

these groups are not strong enough to combat the longstanding “good old boy network”

that is a barrier to women (Ballenger, 2010) on college campuses. Byrne (1971) (as cited

in Ballenger, 2010) found that “most men managers tended to sponsor other men because

they were attracted to and tended to prefer those similar to themselves” (p. 12). The

women in Byrne’s study reported that they were often left out of conversations because

they lacked the common interests in “going out for drinks, golfing, hunting, fishing” (p.

12), during which, important information was shared and discussed. Although these

behaviors are not necessarily meant to exclude women, they still serve as barriers to their

advancement because they limit women’s access to the opportunities for networking and

social sponsorship.

While the good old boy network most often serves as a barrier to women, it is

important to acknowledge that most women credit men as their primary mentors and role

models, despite Duff’s (1999) assertion that only women can empathize with women. It

follows then that men tend to use their networks to support the advancement of the

women for whom they served as mentors or sponsors. Therefore, while women may not

have direct access to the same networks as men, they can access them through the

relationships they develop with men.

Gender Bias

Gender is most often cited as the primary barrier to the advancement of women in

higher education and in the broader corporate economy. Root (2010) posited that

“gender is a belief system which is taught, and that individuals can choose to believe that

15

gender is a barrier or obstacle to their career goals, successes, or to their value as an

individual” (p. 1). If this is so, individuals can choose to believe that gender is not a

barrier and thereby, deny their gender identity as having an influence on their leadership

development.

The root of gender bias is found in the stereotypes that have been created for the

societal roles that each gender has traditionally played. The traditional role of a woman

was to be a mother and care for the home and children. The traditional role of the man

was to lead, protect, and provide for the family. Unfortunately, traditional roles have

persisted into stereotypes for women and men in the workplace as well, even though

large numbers of women have been in the workforce since the 1960s. Women are

expected to nurture, support, and compromise, making them good managers. Men are

expected to plan, direct, and evaluate, making them good leaders and thus entrenching the

divide between genders. Eagly and Carli (2007) defined these differences as communal

and for women and agentic for men. Communal behaviors are those that are considered

sympathetic, affectionate, helpful, gentle, friendly, and reward-oriented, and are more

often associated with women. Agentic behaviors are aggressive, ambitious, dominant,

self-confident, individualistic, and are most often associated with men. As women yield

to these stereotypes, they may be deterred from “assertively claiming leadership” (Eagly

& Carli, 2007, p. 87), thus further contributing to the labyrinth that impedes women’s

progression into leadership roles.

Gender also persisted as a barrier in Ballenger’s (2010) study wherein 14% of the

women cited gender bias as a barrier to their success. However, this was actually an

improvement over past years and suggested a shift from the traditional view of gender

16

bias to a “second generation” bias that is “the powerful, yet often invisible barriers to

women’s advancement that arise from the cultural beliefs about gender, as well as

workplace structures, practices, and patterns of interaction that inadvertently favor men”

(Ely, Ibarra, & Kolb, 2011, p. 4). In order for women to advance, their male and female

counterparts must perceive them as capable and prepared for the tasks at hand, which

extends beyond gender identity.

The experiences of the women presidents in Madsen’s (2008) study were

consistent with the second-generation bias. Although the women all admitted that gender

was a barrier, they identified other barriers as being more significant, such as the divide

between faculty and administration, which hinders effective working relationships. In

terms of gender alone, the women shared stories of interactions that were not overtly

biased but still reflected the strongly engrained socialized behavior that reflects outdated

assumptions about women and their roles in society. Instead of confronting the biased

behavior, the women found other ways to redirect conversations or simply ignored the

offensive statements. One president said: “My strategy has been to just try to ignore what

I can and then confront what is not appropriate to ignore” (Madsen, 2008, p. 145), thus

perpetuating the gender bias that is alive and well in higher education and society.

The Women’s Leadership Academy (WLA), a program at the University of San

Diego, affirms that “gender bias, attitudinal prejudices, and discrimination . . . still

exits . . . and often creates a difficult climate for women to take up their authority, own

their power, advance . . . and exercise leadership” (Longman & Madsen, 2014, p. 102).

Instead of feeling victimized or ignoring the presence of gender bias, participants are

encouraged to understand it as a way to make sense of their own experiences and thereby,

17

become better prepared to face future challenges of a similar nature. Women must come

to understand how they are perceived and accept the differences between the ways in

which they are judged compared to their male counterparts. When women express

confidence or behave assertively, they are perceived as arrogant or abrasive, but when

men behave the same way, they are encouraged and often promoted. Conversely, when

women express kindness and gratitude, they become likeable, but are not respected.

Therefore, women are either perceived as competent or likeable, but not both (Longman

& Madsen, 2014). The WLA believes that by accepting this reality women are given

“the permission to express the struggles they have historically faced [and] begin to move

forward in their leadership practice” (Longman & Madsen, 2014, p. 103). Fulmer (2010)

described this level of gender bias as “conscious competence,” whereby individuals

accept that they have gender-biased beliefs and are motivated to change. When gender is

dismissed as a real barrier to the advancement of women, which Fulmer (2010) described

as “unconscious incompetence,” meaningful progress on the socialization of new gender

norms is compromised and gendered stereotypes persist. Organizations such as ACE,

Higher Education Resource Services (HERS), and the WLA seek to educate women

about the realities of their leadership potential and create networks to support their

success.

Cultural Barriers

When describing culture as a barrier to the advancement of women in academe, it

is helpful to begin by acknowledging that very few women, outside of women’s colleges,

held positions of authority in the academy before the 20th century (Longman & Madsen,

2014). It has only been within the last 64 years that women have emerged as

18

authoritative figures across all sectors of higher education, which is relatively new

considering higher education dates back 379 years. Thus, men have dominated the

leadership ranks for centuries, underpinning traditional forms of leadership and naturally

shaping the culture that still exits in higher education today. For women, the higher

education culture itself has served as a distinct barrier to their advancement and success.

“Bullying” is one such cultural behavior that “is an increasingly common phenomenon

that negatively affects organizational climate” (Sedivy-Benton, Strohschen, Cavazos, &

Boden-McGill, 2014, p. 35). The Sedivy-Benton et al. (2014) study revealed six themes

related to bullying. The first, positionality, refers to the false expectation that rank will

protect the individual from bullying. In fact, in the study, professional status, even

tenure, failed to prevent the bullying behavior. The second theme, differences, such as

gender, age, race, religion, and national origin, created a level of isolation from the larger

group and, therefore, contributed to the bullying even though an act of harassment was

not present. The third theme, jealousy, also created a premise for bullying in opposition

to others’ success. Clandestine decision-making was the fourth theme, referring to ways

in which others exert their influence to control a specific outcome. The fifth theme was a

lack of accountability for bullying behavior, thereby reinforcing the behavior as a cultural

norm. The sixth and final theme was placing blame on the victim of the bullying

behavior to demonstrate a lack of “fit” with the institutional culture (Sedivy-Benton et al.,

2014). These harmful behaviors suppress women from aspiring to leadership positions

and reaching their full potential. Even worse, these behaviors often go unnoticed or

acknowledged by upper administration and, therefore, persist within the culture of the

institution, maintaining the “status quo.”

19

Dominici, Fried, and Zeger (2009) discussed the findings of a study conducted at

Johns Hopkins University in 2002 where 27 senior women were interviewed about “the

root causes of the underrepresentation of women in leadership positions” (p. 25). The

study found that women were not recruited to academic leadership roles as often as men,

thereby blocking their ability to progress through the traditional hierarchy (department

chair, division chair, dean, administration) and limiting their access to academic

administrative positions. The study also found that women who progress to leadership

positions through other paths, such as chairing committees and leading programs, are

“not as well recognized as men or appropriately rewarded within their institutions . . .

[and] appear to be less respected as leaders . . . because most do not have designated

leadership positions” (p. 26).

Culture plays a critical role in shaping the identity of leaders, more so than gender

alone. It is the culture that dictates attitudes, behavior, and perspectives, which, in turn,

are expressed as values. Leaders are most effective when their personal values are in

alignment with specific institutional goals, or for presidents, the institutional mission,

both of which are firmly rooted in the organizational culture. This alignment creates a

sense of purpose or “leadership identity” through which individuals are perceived as

either capable or incapable of leading. Ely et al. (2013) posited that “second-generation

bias” can obstruct this leadership identity development in women thereby, resulting in a

cultural perception that women are not capable of leading projects, departments, or

institutions. The creation of a leadership identity happens as women begin to see

themselves as leaders. The culture in which they work can either facilitate or suppress

the identity work that needs to happen for women if they are to see themselves as capable

20

and effective. Ely et al. (2013) further suggested three ways to support women’s access

to leadership positions: (a) educate men and women in the organization about second-

generation bias; (b) create safe “identity workspaces” such as support groups or specific

developmental programs for women; and (c) focus on helping women develop their sense

of purpose, instead of how there are perceived (p. 63). As a result of providing the

necessary education, support systems, and development, opportunities, attitudes,

behaviors, and perspectives will change, creating a culture shift for institutions to move

beyond the old male-dominated governance models and create new models for leadership

that reflect the shared values of the institution.

Family Obligations

In addition to the lack of mentors and networks, gender bias, and the culture of

academe, women also face challenges in managing family obligations. Women continue

to carry a disproportionate level of responsibility for raising children and caring for the

home, despite the considerable progress that men have made in assuming these traditional

roles (Longman & Madsen, 2014). The time demands of an institutional leadership

position are not conducive to managing home and family responsibilities, making it even

more difficult for women to choose to advance through the ranks. Many women are

choosing not to pursue leadership positions so that they can spend time with their family,

thus exercising their domestic rights in contrast to the pioneer women that have come

before and forged a path outside of the home and into business (Parker, 2015). The

expectations, some of which are self-imposed, for women in senior leadership roles to

manage work, home, and family are simply not the same as the expectations for men

(Longman & Madsen, 2014).

21

All too often, the demands of the job affect the personal lives of career-driven

female professionals, as evidenced by the marital statistics of male and female presidents.

While in 2006, 89% of male presidents were married, only 63% of the women were

married. In addition, 19% of women were divorced, separated, or widowed, compared to

only 5% of their male counterparts (American Council on Education [ACE], 2007). This

suggests that women presidents do not experience the same degree of partner support as

men and have elected to forge their paths independently.

Women as Leaders: Aspirations and Factors Contributing to Success

Aspirations for Leadership

In Why Do We Need More Women Leaders in Higher Education? Madsen (2015)

pointed out the benefits of empowering women such as improved financial performance,

stronger organizational climate, increased social responsibility, effective talent

management, and enhanced innovation (p. 1), all of which are desperately needed in

higher education today. According to Madsen, “Women also bring beneficial

competencies and skills to teams. One field study experiment in Amsterdam found that

mixed-gender teams had a higher team performance. Performance peaked when student

teams were composed of about 55% women” (p. 3). Research also indicated that not all

women aspire to leadership positions (e.g., Ballenger, 2010; Longman & Madsen, 2014;

Madsen, 2008), making leadership development programming even more important.

Those women who do become leaders share a passion for helping others and pursuing

lifelong learning and development. The women presidents in Madsen’s study revealed

nine motivations for leading, all of which accentuate the complexity and underscore the

value of female leaders.

22

1. To accomplish and achieve.

2. To make a difference, contribution, or impact.

3. To be involved in meaningful and important work.

4. To have challenges and complexity.

5. To have fun and enjoyment.

6. To do work that I knew I could do.

7. To enable others to develop and succeed.

8. To have power and influence.

9. To serve. (Madsen, 2008, pp. 242–245)

Nannerl Keohane conducted a study regarding the ambitions of young females at

Princeton University in 2010 to compare the nature of their involvement in

extracurricular activities to past Princeton alumnae. According to Longman and Madsen

(2014), Keohane found that although a significant number of young women participated

in clubs and organizations, some preferred to lead “behind the scenes,” serving as vice

presidents instead of presidents, and those who sought primary leadership positions did

so with organizations that were a good match to the causes for which they cared most.

Keohane (2010) concluded that “female students sought ‘high-impact’ rather than ‘high-

profile’ jobs” (Longman & Madsen, 2014, p. 47). This was a dramatic shift from the

women who intentionally sought primary leadership positions 40 years earlier, during a

time when women were striving to prove their legitimacy as students and leaders in

higher education.

The differences between the two studies of Madsen (2015) and Keohane (2010)

(Longman & Madsen, 2014) indicate that female aspirations for leadership may be

23

retreating at a time when more female leaders are desperately needed to foster

collaborative relationships and serve as catalysts for change in higher education

(Longman & Madsen, 2014). Paramount to the future of higher education is the

development of more women who will choose to move into leadership positions.

Mentoring

Mentoring and sponsorship can certainly help woman advance in their careers. It

is through these relationships that leaders gain insight and perspective on how to

successfully overcome obstacles and persist toward their goals. Scanlon (1997) (as cited

in Ballenger, 2010) found that “women administrators in higher education who had

several mentors found their experience valuable in facilitating their movement up the

career ladder” (p. 8). Given the disparity of women in executive leadership roles, women

often either lack sufficient mentor relationships or must look to men to fill this gap.

Conversely, and specific to college presidencies, there are more male college presidents;

therefore, men have more opportunities to be sponsored and promoted into those roles.

Duff (1999) underscored the value of women as mentors to other women, explaining that

“with a woman you can open a dialogue that includes all aspects of your lives. She will

empathize with the difficulty and the goal because she will have faced similar choices”

(p. 4). Still, others perceive the need to ask for help as a sign of weakness and a

deficiency in their leadership preparation, thus leaving them unopened to influence and

further slowing the advancement of women into executive leadership roles.

Madsen explored the degree to which women were open to influence and found

five critical conditions in which “positive influence” can manifest. First, the presidents in

Madsen’s (2008) study were prepared by way of their “age, knowledge level, or career

24

experience” (p. 154) and, therefore, were ready to accept the influence that others were

prepared to offer. Second, opportunities existed for the influence to happen by way of

interactions with others that occurred with regularity. These interactions included their

peers, colleagues, and supervisors. Third, the influences were “enhanced by systems,

structures, and settings” (Madsen, 2008, p. 154), such as reporting relationships or the

locations in which participants were situated in the organization. Fourth, the purpose of

the interactions with others determined the degree of influence. The presidents were

aware of who and how specific individuals could influence their development and,

therefore, their interactions were more meaningful. Finally, the structure of the

relationships was important, whether formal or informal. Incidentally, the informal

relationships were the ones that the presidents in Madsen’s (2008) study found to be most

advantageous. The most effective leaders are those who create a network of formal and

informal relationships that support them in their leadership development.

Although mentors are identified as key relationships for women to develop in

preparation for leadership roles, there are a number of other relationships that women

may have with persons of influence to support their career development. Madsen (2008)

described eleven different “roles” or relationships that can be influential: advisor, coach,

counselor, developer, encourager, executive coach, mentor, role model, sponsor,

supporter, and tutor. The women in Madsen’s (2008) study described various types of

relationships, some of which changed as they grew, that influenced their leadership

development and created opportunities for their career growth. Therefore, the concept of

a “mentor” should be expanded to include a much larger network of individuals who,

under the right conditions for openness, facilitate leadership growth and development.

25

Many of these relationships are developed within the primary work environment.

However, over the last several decades, formalized leadership development programs

have also been created to provide opportunities for women to expand their networks. The

first of its kind was through the ACE, which began focusing on women’s issues in 1951

and later established the Commission on Women. The Commission was eliminated as a

cost-saving measure in 1962, but was revived as the Office of Women in Higher

Education (OWHE) in 1972 and began focusing more broadly on the advancement of

women in higher education through the ACE Women’s Network (Longman & Madsen,

2014). ACE has also maintained an agenda on diversity. In 2011, ACE merged into one

group, the OWHE and the Center for the Advancement of Racial and Ethnic Equity; this

new entity is called the Inclusive Excellence Group (IEG), which is now centered on

three primary areas: (a) the ACE Women’s Network, (b) regional and national

development conferences, and (c) the Moving the Needle initiative (Longman & Madsen,

2014). State networks must subscribe to and adopt the IDEALS set forth by the

Women’s Network Executive Council (WNEC) to support women in higher education,

both nationally and internationally. The acronym “IDEALS” stands for, “Identify

women leaders, Develop their leadership abilities, Encourage the use of those abilities,

Advance women’s careers, Link them to other women and mentors, and Support women

in mid- and executive-level positions throughout their careers” (Longman & Madsen,

2014, p. 64). This acronym clearly articulates the necessary career progression for

women leaders.

The Moving the Needle initiative is a movement to “raise national awareness

about the importance of parity in higher education leadership and to create a sense of

26

urgency and suggested practices and models for achieving gender parity through

deliberate action by higher education decision and policymakers” (Longman & Madsen,

2014, p. 66). The movement began in the spring of 2010 as a roundtable discussion

between the ACE President, Molly Corbett Broad, and 26 university presidents and other

higher education association leaders about the stalled pipeline of women advancing into

leadership positions. Two subsequent roundtables were held in 2012 and 2013 and

culminated in the following set of recommendations to increase women’s representation

to 50% of senior-level positions in higher education by 2030.

1. Generate a national sense of urgency elevating the need for advancing women

in higher education.

2. Encourage governing boards and other higher education decision and

policymaking bodies to consider practices for recruiting and hiring women to

chief executive offices.

3. Achieve women’s advancement to mid-level and senior-level positions in

higher education administration by building capacities in women and in

institutions.

4. Suggest practices and models that recognize success in advancing women in

higher education. (Longman & Madsen, 2014, pp. 72–73)

The effect of the WNEC’s recommendations remains to be seen, but given ACE’s long-

standing reputation for keeping women’s issues at the forefront of the leadership

development agenda, their influence is likely to be far-reaching and impactful, potentially

igniting a movement in higher education to support the advancement of women into more

leadership positions.

27

The Higher Education Resource Services (HERS) organization, created in 1976,

is “dedicated to creating and sustaining a community of women leaders through

leadership development programs and other strategies with a special focus on gender

equity within the broader commitment to achieving equality and excellence in higher

education” (Higher Education Resource Services [HERS], 2015, para. 1). HERS started

as a grant-funded project to identify and support women who aspired to leadership

positions in higher education. It began as a month-long residential leadership program

hosted on the Bryn Mawr College campus. The curriculum focused on building women’s

capacity to manage the various functions and constituencies of the institution, including

planning, management, budget, finance, and governance (Longman & Madsen, 2014).

The curriculum has evolved and changed to meet the new challenges that leaders must

face in higher education leadership, including “understanding the new environment for

higher education, planning and leading change in the academy, managing and investing

strategic resources, engaging individual and institutional diversity, and mapping your

leadership development” (Longman & Madsen, 2014, p. 83). The structure of the

program also changed to include a two-week summer institute at Bryn Mawr College or

the University of Denver, or a year-long institute at Wellesley College.

Similar to the Moving the Needle initiative of the ACE Women’s Network, HERS

held a summit in 2012 for both women presidents and chancellors to discuss the

conditions under which women were still working in higher education and to create an

action agenda to “shape directions of change rather [than] merely responding to a

continuing crisis” (Longman & Madsen, 2014, p. 85). Four major shifts were identified

as transformational priorities for the future: “restructure institutions and systems,

28

reengage multiple constituencies, reinvest our own resources and seek more public

support, and redefine/redesign our leadership models” (White, 2012, as cited in Longman

& Madsen, 2014, p. 85). The priorities identified by the HERS participants are a

reflection of the broader national and global expectations for change in higher education

related to access, affordability, and accountability. The work of the HERS organization

continues to empower women to lead transformative change efforts within institutions of

higher education.

Other state and regional organizations offer ongoing professional development

opportunities for woman at their annual meetings and conferences. These programs

provide critical networking opportunities and access to mentors, role models, and

sponsors who identify talent and support the advancement of women in the profession of

higher education. Women who do not have access to mentors or development

programming do not have the benefit of these resources and support networks and,

therefore, face barriers to their career advancement.

Leadership Styles

Higher education is facing insurmountable challenges and requires leadership that

can change and adapt to the new environment. The most effective leaders are rarely

limited to one leadership style. Instead, they adapt to whatever is necessary to

successfully navigate through the present challenges. Women demonstrate adaptable,

authentic, and transformational leadership styles (Eagly, Johannesen-Schmidt, & Van

Engen, 2003; Madsen, 2008), enhancing their effectiveness in managing change.

According to Heifetz, Grashow, and Linsky (2009), “adaptable leadership is the practice

of mobilizing people to tackle tough challenges and thrive” (p. 14). Adaptive leadership

29

transcends beyond problem solving, and instead, uses challenges to create changes in

beliefs and behavior that ultimately move the organization forward (Heifetz et al., 2009).

Adaptive leadership is active, meaning that it is dynamic in nature and synchronous with

the change that higher education is presently confounded by. Adaptable leadership can

also be referred to as situation leadership, which the presidents in Madsen’s (2008) study

described as “not only helpful but also necessary in higher education administration

today” (p. 249).

Authentic leadership is defined as:

a pattern of leader behavior that draws upon and promotes both positive

psychological capacities and a positive ethical climate, to foster greater self-

awareness, an internalized moral perspective, balanced processing of information,

and relational transparency on the part of leaders working with followers,

fostering positive self-development. (Walumbwa, Avolio, Gardner, Wernsing, &

Peterson, 2008, p. 94)

Authentic leaders are guided by their own values that, when aligned with similar

organizational values, naturally thrive at engaging others to follow. They are also

perceived as caring, genuine, and ethical, which builds relational trust between the leader

and the follower. Higher education institutions are built upon a model of shared

governance that requires a collaborative work style and trust. Institutions need

collaborative leaders who can work within the organization to promote change, and lead

with authenticity to build trust, thereby moving the whole organization forward.

Transformational leadership was first introduced by James MacGregor Burns

(1978) as a process in which “leaders and followers help each other to advance to a

30

higher level of morale and motivation” (Creative Commons, n.d., p. 1). Transformational

leadership is closely related to authentic leadership, but is expanded to include five

components: attributed charisma, idealized influence, inspirational motivation,

intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration (Avolio, 1999; Bass, 1998 as

cited in Walumba et al., p. 103). Higher education is in need of transformational change

to effectively respond to the new social and economic environment. Female leaders most

often demonstrate transformational leadership behaviors, including mentoring and

positive motivation (Eagly & Carli, 2007), so it follows that women are well suited for

the new leadership that is necessary for higher education to also be transformed.

Theories of Resilience

As women advance as leaders, they must work to overcome often overwhelming

barriers along the way in order to develop their own leadership identities. Luthar,

Cicchetti, and Becker (2007) stated that “resilience is a dynamic process encompassing

positive adaptation within the context of significant adversity” (p. 1). The focus on

“process” indicates that resilience is not simply a personality trait; rather, it is a

developmental experience whereby the individual adapts to certain social, emotional, or

physical circumstances. Reivich and Shatte (2002) described resilience as “the ability to

overcome, steer through, and bounce back when adversity strikes” (p. 3) and as “a

mindset that enables you to seek out new experiences and to view your life as a work in

progress” (p. 26). The major body of resilience work has been documented in childhood

development studies within the context of adversity related to the personal attributes of

the children, their family circumstances, and their wider social environments. Similarly,

the ways in which female leaders experience resilience can be studied within the context

31

of their personal characteristics, support structures, and the environments in which they

work.

The barriers to success for women are well documented in the literature, but few

studies have been conducted to explore the experiences of women who succeed. In the

research study, Discovering Middle Space: Distinctions of Sex and Gender in Resilient

Leadership, conducted by Christman and McClellan (2012), “women persisted and

resisted, despite considerable barriers, both in educational leadership and their lives” (p.

649). The persistence to successfully overcome adversity can also be defined as

resilience. “Most scholars view resiliency as something that permits individuals to

develop patience, tolerance, responsibility, compassion, determination, and risk-taking”

(Christman & McClellan, 2012, p. 650). Grotberg (2003) (as cited in Christman &

McClellan, 2012) described resiliency as “transformative . . . more than enduring

adversity, one changes his or her personality to better persevere through future

encounters with hardship” (pp. 650–651). Resiliency requires “intense self-reflection”

(Whatley, 1998 as cited in Chrisman & McClellan, 2012, p. 651), which leads to personal

growth. The way in which an individual experiences resilience, therefore, shapes her or

his identity as a leader.

Luthar et al. (2000) recognized the scholarly debate between the terms

“resilience” and “resiliency,” clarifying that the term “resiliency” should be used only

when referring to the personality trait of “ego-resiliency.” Luthar et al. (2000)

maintained:

In future research efforts, it is imperative that investigators exercise caution in

their use of terminology, with clear indication when their work is focused on a

32

process and not a personality trait. We concur with and underscore Masten's

(1994) recommendation that competence despite adversity be referred to by the

term “resilience” and never “resiliency,” which carries the misleading connotation

of a discrete personal attribute. (p. 5)

Christman and McClellan (2008) conducted a study using the Dephi technique to

explore what contributed to the resilience of women administrators in educational

leadership positions and the extent to which their chosen style of leadership was

characterized as “feminine.” Christman and McClellan (2008) identified the following

markers of resiliency and further categorized each as either feminine or masculine, based

upon the literature regarding these “gendered norms.”

Masculine Feminine

Having a Type “A” Personality Appreciating Relationships/Valuing

People

Perseverance Role Model for Others

Sense of Having to Succeed over Failure Support from families, partners,

husbands

Optimism Optimism

Tenure Voice for Minority Women

Excited about Responsibility Excited about Responsibility

Feeling of Success with Teaching Feeling of Success with Teaching

Christman and McClelland (2008) found that among the factors that contributed

to their resiliency, the participants did not depend on any single factor that could define

their leadership style as either feminine or masculine. Instead, the participants

33

experienced resilience by moving fluidly between the feminine and masculine norms.

Women, therefore, adapted to the circumstances and modeled a behavior that was best

suited for the given situation, an expression of adaptable or situational leadership. This

adaptability is echoed in Helgesen’s (1990) work, The Female Advantage: Women’s

Ways of Leadership, in the description of women as “reinventing themselves to

accommodate a wider focus, to foster creativity and nurture new ideas—simply in order

to survive” (p. 39). Women have an innate desire to collaborate and a maternal instinct to

foster creativity, giving them the strength to embrace obstacles and emerge victorious.

Richardson (2002) further explored resiliency as three waves of inquiry (see

Table 1). In the first wave, resiliency is defined within the context of a paradigm shift

from a focus on risk factors associated with psychological problems to strengths that

manifest as qualities such as happiness, subjective well-being, optimism, faith, self-

determination, wisdom, excellence, and creativity (Richardson, 2002). The second wave

of resiliency is related to how these traits are acquired. This phase describes the process

of “coping” with a disruption and the opportunity to emerge with greater strength and

self-awareness. In 1990, Richardson, Neiger, Jensen, and Kumpfer developed the

“resiliency model,” which is based upon the law of disruption and reintegration (Flach,

1988, 1997 as cited in Richardson, 2002). “The resiliency model is a means whereby

people, through planned disruptions or reacting to life events, have the opportunity to

choose consciously or unconsciously the outcome of disruptions” (Richardson, 2002, p.

310). The third stage of resiliency addresses the source of energy that provides the

motivation to overcome adversity. Richardson (2002) was careful to acknowledge the

34

potential for skepticism with this stage because the third wave has multiple dimensions

that include spirituality.

Table 1

Three Waves of Resiliency Inquiry

Wave Description

First Wave:Resilient Qualities

Phenomenological descriptions of resilient qualities of individuals and support systems that predict social and personal success.

Second Wave:The Resiliency Process

Resiliency is the process of coping with stressors, adversity, change, or opportunity in a manner that results in the identification, fortification, and enrichment of protective factors.

Third Wave:Innate Resilience

Postmodern multidisciplinary identification of motivational forces within individuals and groups and the creation of experiences that foster the activation and utilization of the forces.

Note: This table was adapted from Richardson, 2002, p. 308.

Resilience theory, therefore, is a “force within everyone that drives them to seek self-

actualization, altruism, wisdom, and to be in harmony with a spiritual source of strength”

(Richardson, 2002, p. 313). Resilience can also be thought of as the method by which

one regains a sense of emotional balance. This is particularly important for women

because “great importance is attached to the necessity for emotional control for the

effective and efficient functioning of organizations” (Sachs & Blackmore, 1998, p. 5). It

follows then, for women, maintaining a sense of control is the act of being professional

and a demonstration of their leadership capacity.

35

Greene, Galambos, and Lee (2003) also explored the theoretical assumptions of

resiliency as it relates to overcoming life stress. They found that there are both internal

and external factors that contribute to resilience. The internal factors, in varying degrees,

include attitude, intelligence, problem-solving skills, a sense of mastery, a survival

instinct, and spirituality. The external factors include family, school, and community.

Sonnenfeld (2001) wrote about heroic leadership and described resilience as being

“critical in the lives of creative figures such as leaders and artists” (p. 190). Sonnenfeld

(2001) further explained that it is “wrong to consider adversity a diversion off one’s path

toward greatness . . . resilience from calamities has been revealed as vital to the character

formation and differentiation of heroic figures” (p. 191). Sonnenfeld described

leadership as a series of critical failures that shape one’s potential for greatness. Leaders

derive meaning from failures and turn failures into opportunities for growth and renewal.

In The Resilience Factor, Reivich and Shatte (2002) described the nature of

resilience as having four primary uses: (a) to overcome obstacles from childhood, such as

a broken home, poverty, neglect, or abuse; (b) to steer through everyday adversities; (c)

to bounce back and move forward; and (d) to reach out and achieve ones potential (p. 15).

Reivich and Shatte (2002) also identified seven abilities: “emotional regulation, impulse

control, empathy, optimism, causal analysis, self-efficacy, and reaching out” that can be,

“measured, taught, and improved” (p. 33). Reivich and Shatte (2002) further developed

the Resilience Quotient, an instrument that measures individual competency for each of

the seven abilities, and further described ways to improve each, thereby enhancing one’s

capacity for resilience. The seven abilities are all characteristics that can be found in

adaptable, authentic, and transformational leadership behaviors, which were discussed

36

previously as common characteristic among women leaders. More importantly, the

abilities that are not found intrinsically can be learned and developed, creating an

opportunity for the replication of effective leadership.

Finally, Gail Wagnild created The Resilience Center and an additional scale

instrument for assessing one’s capacity for improving resilience. Wagnild concluded that

there are five essential characteristics that serve as the core to resilience: purpose,

perseverance, self-reliance, equanimity, and authenticity (The Resilience Center, 2015).

Purpose is that which gives meaning to life and is consistent with what Ely et al. (2013)

believed is necessary for women to effectively develop leadership identity.

“Perseverance is the determination to keep going despite difficulties, discouragement,

and disappointment” (The Resilience Center, 2015, “Perseverance”) and is the source of

energy to confront adversity. “Self-reliance is believing in yourself, with a clear

understanding of your capabilities and limitations” (The Resilience Center, 2015, “Self-

reliance”) and drawing upon past experiences to address current challenges, similar to the

internal factors that Greene et al. (2003) identified as contributing to resilience.

Equanimity is the (emotional) balance that Sachs & Blackmore (1998) described as

critical to the success of leaders. Finally, authenticity is accepting yourself for who you

are and, when properly aligned with similar institutional morals and values, creates an

opportunity for leaders to truly “live the mission” of the organization.

Summary

The literature review reveals that women continue to be underrepresented in top

leadership positions in the academy and corporate America and very little has changed in

terms of their pathways to advancement. There are still significant individual,

37

organizational, and cultural barriers impeding women’s success, all rooted in their gender

identity. The literature also reveals that women are successful leaders and demonstrate

their effectiveness through positive business performance (Masden, 2015). While there

are more women enrolled in college, higher education has not successfully promoted a

sufficient number of women to achieve leadership parity. Both the gender representation

and leadership of higher education need to change to meet the global demands of a

competitive workforce.

Higher education is in need of transformational change, the very leadership style

that is found to be a strength for women. Women are collaborators, negotiators, and

caretakers, all of which are critical leadership skills. Given these qualities and the

passion they have for inspiring creativity and innovation, women are poised to assume

greater leadership roles within the academy and to confront the challenges that lie ahead.

Yet, not all women aspire to lead; some are satisfied with societal roles that have been

defined by years of gender bias. This implores exploration into the leadership identity

construction of women who have successfully achieved a presidency. Their experiences

can offer new perspectives to other women that may otherwise retreat into outdated

gendered roles in which their leadership potential may not be realized. Their experiences

may also provide new insight for women on how to access resilience in support of their

advancement. The adversities they have faced and the ways in which they have

experienced resilience are meaningful and continue to shape the history of women’s

leadership development.

The phenomenon of resilience has been studied extensively in children; however,

few studies have explored how female presidents have experienced resilience within the

38

context of advancement in higher education leadership. Several definitions of resilience

have been offered in this chapter that describe the experience in several ways:

overcoming adversity, a process, bouncing-back, persistence, risk taking, determination,

self-reflection, a paradigm shift, coping, a force, reaching out, and perseverance

(Christman & McClellan, 2012; Luthar et al., 2007; Reivich & Shatte, 2002; Richardson,

2002; Wagnild, 2015; Whatley, 1998 as cited in Christman & McClellan, 2012). A

phenomenological research design was selected for this study because it allowed me to

approach the phenomenon of resilience with “fresh eyes” by viewing it as it had been

experienced by the participants in this study, thus creating new renditions of what it

means for a college president to be resilient. By studying the experiences of this study’s

participants, other women can be better prepared to confront the social, emotional,

cultural, and political barriers that exist in higher education and to lead the

transformational change that is necessary for institutions to survive into the future.

39

Every discourse, even a poetic or oracular sentence, carries with it a system for

producing analogous things and thus an outline of methodology.

— Jacques Derrida

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY

Thinking Interpretively

Higher education is facing insurmountable challenges to effectively prepare its

citizenry for global economic prosperity, requiring a completely new approach to

executive leadership. At the same time, the majority of college presidents are nearing

retirement and the traditional ranks of higher education leadership are retreating in favor

of conventional academic positions. The convergence of these realities creates an

opportunity for more women to assume new roles and lead the transformation that is

necessary for higher education’s survival.

The purpose of this study was to explore ways in which female leaders experience

their presidencies and perceive resilience as a construct for their success as higher

education professionals. This study also inquired into the identity construction of these

female leaders as they describe their lived experiences. The following research questions

guided this study:

How do female college leaders perceive and experience resilience on their

paths to the presidency?

What does professional advancement mean to these women?

40

What are their perceptions of themselves as successful and resilient leaders?

This study invites the readers to think of these questions interpretively (Saldaña, 2015),

that is, in a manner that “prods you into extending beyond [this] particular research study

toward more general applications [and] motivates thinking toward conceptual, abstract,

and theoretical domains” (p. 157).

The interpretive paradigm is a naturalistic approach to understanding social reality

and its multiple and diverse phenomena from the human experience (Cohen, Manion, &

Morrison, 2008). The interpretive paradigm shapes the direction of this study in order to

understand and uncover the meaning of resilience from the lived experiences of the

female college president participants and the ways in which they perceived themselves as

leaders and persons.

Thinking Phenomenologically

Phenomenology is a qualitative research approach that seeks to capture “the

essences and essentials of experiential states, natures of being, and personally significant

meanings of concepts” (Saldaña, 2015, p. 73). The philosophers to whom the

development of phenomenology is most attributed are Husserl, Schutz, Heidegger, Sartre,

Merleau-Ponty, and Freire (Ulysse & Lukenchuck, 2013). On the one hand, this study

can benefit from the transcendental phenomenology as a “philosophical system rooted in

subjective openness” (Moustakas, 1994, p. 24). Transcendental phenomenology

advocates “knowledge as it appears to consciousness, the science of describing what one

perceives, senses, and knows in one’s immediate awareness and experience” (Moustakas,

1994, p. 25). Knowledge is, therefore, what one creates from her or his experience of

consciousness. Within the traditional, Husserlian strand of phenomenology, the concept

41

of intentionality deserves particular attention; it refers to a direct relationship between

conscious (self) and the object or subject matter under observation, giving way to

perception. In this regard, it was important, for my conscious self, to stay focused on the

object of my investigation throughout the study, thereby analyzing the participants’

experiences.

A phenomenological research design was chosen for this study to understand the

way female presidents experience resilience in their leadership development. “The basic

purpose of phenomenology is to reduce individual experiences with a phenomenon to a

description of the universal essence” (Creswell, 2006, p. 58). Similarly, Saldaña (2015)

affirmed that “thinking phenomenologically [means] peel[ing] away the complexity and

unnecessary details to get at the core meanings” (p. 75). The way in which individuals

interpret their experience becomes a part of their conscious internalization of it. Thus,

resilience is both a conscious and subconscious experience.

I chose phenomenology to access not only what is known (conscious), but also

what is not yet known (subconscious) to capture the very essence of the experience for

the participants. Ulysse and Lukenchuk (2013) concluded that “the task of

phenomenological inquiry is, therefore, to describe the phenomena as they appear to our

consciousness and to endow it with meaning” (p. 24). What it means to be a female

president (to the participants) and the way that these presidents experience the

phenomena of resilience were drawn from the lived experiences of the participants.

Lived experience is understood as “lifeworld” (Husserl’s original term) by many

phenomenologists (Lawthom & Tindall, 2011). The lifeworld “refers to an essential

structure fundamental to human experience . . . evidenced locally and temporarily by the

42

co-presence of particular individuals” (Ashworth, 2003, p. 146). The lifeworld includes

seven fragments or themes of human experience that shape the essence of phenomena:

selfhood, sociality, embodiment, temporality, spaciality, project, and discourse.

Although these fragments do not provide a full description of the experience, they do

provide a framework from which to conduct a phenomenological study.

Selfhood

Identity is shaped by interactions with others and defined by individual

perceptions of those experiences. “The person’s sense of agency, and their feeling of

their own presence and voice in the situation” (Ashworth, 2003, p. 148) is selfhood.

“Self,” in phenomenological research is not the internal self; rather, it is the self that

becomes known through the interactions with others in the lifeworld. We confirm our

identity and give meaning to our thoughts, feelings, and behaviors through social

experience (Ashworth, 2003).

Sociality

In phenomenological research, the lifeworld of sociality is concerned with the

significance of relationships with other people (Ashworth, 2016). Just as identity is

shaped by experience, so too are the relationships that become central to selfhood.

Sociality is, therefore, concerned with how lived experiences affect interpersonal

relationships and reciprocally shape identity in the lifeworld.

Embodiment

The body is present in the lifeworld and “it is through our bodies . . . or the

subjective meanings of the lived experience of the body that we communicate with and

come to know and understand our world” (Lawthom & Tindall, 2011, p. 15).

43

Embodiment refers to how a situation relates to, feelings about [one’s] own body,

including gender . . . emotions . . . [and] ‘disabilities’” (Ashworth, 2003, p. 149).

Another application of embodiment is in leader-follower relationships, as

conceptualized by the French phenomenologist Maurice Merleau-Ponty (Ladkin, 2012).

In leader-follower relationships, embodiment “is fundamental to perception and is thus

highly implicated in the creation of relational dynamics” (Ladkin, 2012, p. 2). What a

leader says and what a leader does affects the way in which she or he is perceived.

Embodiment gives way to the true meaning and transcends beyond spoken words to

reveal leadership authenticity.

Temporality

Experiences have a relationship with time, although not necessarily bound by a

starting and ending point. Temporality is “an awareness of finiteness of life, of lived

time, and time left to live” (Lawthom & Tindall, 2011, p. 15). The perception of a

present situation is shaped by the nature of past experience that, in turn, influences how

future events will be experienced, similar to the notion of the past dictating the future. In

phenomenological research, the lifeworld of temporality is important because the

culmination of past experiences influences current perceptions and future behavior.

Ashworth (2016) related the background of experience to that of a career for further

application to leadership development.

Spaciality

The “space” in which we live, including the people and objects within that space,

shapes our perspectives of events. This subjective view of the lifeworld is described as

“how [a person’s] picture of the geography of the places they need to go to and act . . .

44

[will be] affected by the situation” (Ashworth, 2003, p. 149). For example, will they be

confident, excited, frustrated, or scared? Spaciality frames our view of events and

provides unique meaning to our experience and, therefore, adds another important

dimension to phenomenological research.

Project

The purpose we define for ourselves gives life meaning and is, therefore, another

fragment of the lifeworld that must be explored as it relates to a phenomenon. Ashworth

(2016) asserted that all things in the lifeworld are related to one’s project. It is, therefore,

necessary to inquire about how the situation relates to the ability of people “to carry out

the activities they are committed to and which they regard as central to their life”

(Ashworth, 2003, p. 150). Certain events and situations will have unique meaning as it

relates to one’s life purpose that will not have the same meaning for others. This deeper

sense of obligation is transformative as the project is realized and further contributes to

identity development.

Discourse

Discourse is the final fragment of the lifeworld and is composed of the words

used to describe a situation. Ashworth (2016) posited the following:

Qualitative psychology does not reveal a lived world or even a system of personal

constructs which relate the individual to reality, but charts a matrix of meaning

elements, each receiving its meaning purely and simply from its position within

system of elements as a whole. (p. 14)

Therefore, although words alone cannot capture the full meaning of a phenomenon, they

provide a basis from which to describe elements of the experience. The combination of

45

words within the context of a matrix and as a fragment of the whole provides an enriched

meaning of the phenomenon.

Resilience as a Theoretical Lens

Another way in which to conceive of my research “phenomenologically” is by

“adopting different lenses, filters, and angles as we view social life so as to discover new

perceptions and cognitions” (Saldaña, 2015, p. 4). Resilience is the lens through which

the experiences of the participants in this study were viewed to access new perceptions of

how they see themselves as leaders.

Resilience is a transformational experience in response to many different forms of

adversity. Scholars have used various terms to describe resilience, such as persistence

(Christman & McClellan, 2012), intense self-reflection (Whatley, 1998 as cited in

Christman & McClellan, 2012), and a driving force (Richardson, 2002), that include the

qualities of purpose, perseverance, self-reliance, equanimity, and authenticity (The

Resilience Center, 2015). As an application, Sonnenfeld (2001) asserted that resilience is

critical to leadership development and Greene et al. (2003) described resilience as that

which overcomes life stress. Reivich and Shatte (2002) posited that the capacity to

experience resilience can be developed by strengthening one’s emotional regulation,

impulse control, empathy, optimism, causal analysis, self-efficacy, and ability to reach

out. Therefore, it follows that resilience is experienced in varying degrees and merits

exploration as an influence on identity and leadership development.

46

Phenomenology as Research Design

Participants

Phenomenological research is focused on understanding the subjective, that which

is not clearly defined and, therefore, requires the researcher to draw meaning from the

descriptions that the participants provide. The first step in gathering data is selecting the

participants. Englander (2012) explained that “qualitative methods . . . must adopt

different data gathering and analytic strategies than quantitative” (p. 20). Small samples

are suitable for qualitative research so as to allow for the effective exploration of a deeper

understanding (Hesse-Biber, 2011). Creswell (2012) explained that samples can be as

small as 1 or 2, or as large as 30 or 40; “the intent is not to generalize to a population, but

to develop an in-depth exploration of a central phenomenon” (p. 206). Creswell also

provided some general guidelines on sample size, stating that “it is typical in qualitative

research to study a few individuals or a few cases. This is because the overall ability of a

researcher to provide an in-depth picture diminishes with the addition of each new

individual or site” (Creswell, 2012, p. 209). Englander (2012) stated simply that the

sample size “is irrelevant due to the fact that the research is qualitative” (p. 20).

The selection process of participants in qualitative research is purposeful and

intentional and, therefore, I made decisions regarding the sample based on the established

research goals (Creswell, 2012, p. 206). The major selection criteria included: gender,

position, institutional type, and regional location. Twenty-four female college presidents

from the Midwest and Southwestern U.S. were invited to participate, out of which, seven

agreed. The participants differed in age, marital status, years of experience as a

president, and career development because these factors have all been attributed to

47

having an impact on the advancement of women to the presidency and subsequent

presidencies.

Data Collection

In-depth semi-structured interviews provided the main data for analysis in this

study. “Data” is the word used to describe actions, emotions, opinions, perceptions, and

behaviors (Roberts, 2010), thus the purpose for transcribing the interviews. In-depth

interviews are “a meaning-making endeavor embarked on as a partnership between the

interviewer and his or her respondent” (Hesse-Biber, 2011, p. 94). In semi-structured

phenomenological interviews, the researcher’s goal is to “encounter the phenomenon via

that person’s description” (Englander, 2012, p. 25). Although I used an interview guide

to focus on the research topic, I also provided flexibility for the participants to share lived

experiences they found to be of particular interest. This enhanced the opportunity to

create meaning from experiences that may not have been initially considered in the

interview guide. During the interview process, I was “present to the research participant

as someone who reports having lived the phenomenon under investigation” and was

attuned to the phenomenon as the “object of investigation” (Englander, 2012, p. 25).

The interview guide (see Appendix B) served as the basis from which to have a

structured conversation with each participant to “obtain descriptions with respect to

interpretations of the meaning of what is described” (Kvale, 1996, p. 1) as her experience

as a female college president. Kvale (1996) emphasized that the interview is a

conversation between the researcher and the participant, requiring a heightened level of

engagement on the part of the researcher to direct the conversation by asking several

types of questions that will elicit from the participant the true meaning of the

48

phenomenon being studied. Prior to the interview, the participants received a consent

form (see Appendix A) that informed them about the study and ethics of conducting

qualitative research. Each participant signed the form in advance of the interview.

The interviews lasted between one and two hours and were audio recorded.

Transcripts were created to document each interview. In addition, I wrote memos after

each interview capturing the details of the process and reflecting on the experience,

thereby addressing the involvement of my conscious self in the process. Memos

enhanced my own self-reflection and assisted in the interpretation of the data.

Phenomenological Data Analysis

Phenomenology is a unique qualitative research design and necessitates particular

steps of data analysis. While coding and themes identification are part and parcel of

phenomenology, the following specific steps distinguish it from other designs:

phenomenological reduction, imaginative variation, and synthesis of essence.

Phenomenological reduction. The process of phenomenological reduction

requires deep reflection, whereby the researcher reviews the data several times gleaming

different perspectives with each review. It is not merely a thoughtful conjugation of

themes; it is a corrective process that results in a superior level of clarity. The process

includes bracketing, horizonalization, clustering horizons into themes, and organizing

horizons and themes into a coherent textural description.

Bracketing. Edmund Husserl (1859–1938), regarded as the founder of

phenomenology, created the method of epoche, or “bracketing” the researcher’s

preconceived perceptions of social reality to allow that which the subject (participant)

reveals to be seen (Cohen et al., 2008). This refers, again, to the conscious experience

49

that the participant describes, but allows the researcher to “see” the world from the

participant’s view by being released from his or her own bias. Moustakas (1994) referred

to this as “purified consciousness” (p. 84), which allows the researcher to view the

phenomenon in its own purity. I share certain characteristics with the participants in this

study: I am female, my career is in higher education, I aspire to be a college president,

and I have experienced the phenomenon of resilience. However, my experiences are not

the same as the females in this study and were removed to achieve the full revelation of

the phenomenon from the participant perspective.

Horizonalization. Horizons are the ways experience connects to consciousness.

They provide grounding for the phenomenon by way of the perception that is created at

the time of the experience. Horizons are unlimited and change as new experiences create

a new conscious reality. In phenomenological research, horizons are the individual

characteristics that are drawn from the textual descriptions to form themes. The

interview transcripts were reviewed to identify horizons within the data. Each horizon

was coded to create clusters of meaning.

Clustering horizons into themes. Horizons were then grouped into similar

clusters based on their relative connectivity and became themes of experience related to

the phenomenon. The codes were created to identify horizons and were used to cluster

the horizons into themes so as to create new meaning derived from the collective

experiences of the participants.

Organizing horizons and themes into a coherent textural description. Finally,

themes were further developed into textural descriptions of the phenomenon and

compared and contrasted to the theoretical assumptions relevant to the study.

50

Imaginative variation. Phenomenological reduction provides a set of themes

from which to imagine possible meanings. The purpose of imaginative variation is to

reveal “how” the experience came to “be,” using a structural description (Moustakas,

1994). The structures are the conditions under which something can appear to the

conscious and are integrated to become the essence of the phenomenon. Moustakas

(1994) further described four steps of imaginative variation: (a) consider various

structural meanings that create the textural meaning; (b) recognize underlying themes that

support the phenomenon; (c) consider universal structures that may relate to the

phenomenon, such as time, space, materiality, causality, and relationships; and (d)

develop a structural description of the phenomenon.

Synthesis of essence. The final integration of the structural descriptions of each

theme becomes the essence of the phenomenon, the meaning derived from the detailed

descriptions of how each participant perceived her experience. Subsequently, my goal in

this study was to bring forth a composite description of the phenomenon of resilience as

experienced by the participants, thus uncovering its essence and meaning. This was

achieved by using, “imaginative variations and the phenomenological human scientific

reduction in order to achieve nomothetic, descriptive results, that is, the invariant

meaning-structure for the phenomenon” (Englander, 2012, p. 22) of resilience.

Validation Criteria

Research findings in qualitative research are validated using methods such as

trustworthiness, authenticity, member checking, and reflexivity, among some others.

Trustworthiness is the substantiation of “rigor” using “credibility, transferability,

dependability, and confirmability” (Morse, 2015, p. 1212). Credibility provides internal

51

validity through “prolonged engagement, persistent observation” (Morse, 2015, p. 1212).

The degree to which the research findings represent the phenomenon determines the

relative strength of internal validity. Credibility is strengthened by the length of time the

researcher spends on data collection to obtain “thick and rich data” (Morse, 2015, p.

1214), which is determined by both the number of participants in the study and the length

of time spent with each participant. The sample size of seven and the lengthy interviews

support the credibility of this study. The interview guide was shaped to explore the

phenomenon of resilience for the participants, which were independent accounts of lived

experience. However, taken as a whole, the phenomenon was generalized at some level

to apply to other individuals that experience adversity. A clearly defined codebook was

created to analyze the results of this study.

Authenticity refers to how truly and accurately the researcher describes the lived

experiences of the participants. Creswell (2012) also described member checking as a

way for researchers to check their findings. In addition to the accuracy of the transcript,

member checking allows the researcher to ask the participants “if the themes are accurate,

and if the interpretations are fair and representative” (Creswell, 2012, p. 259). The

participants in this study were asked to review their interview transcripts to validate the

data, in addition to the dissertation committee director who reviewed the data and coding,

thereby enhancing the authenticity of the findings.

Reflexivity and positionality were also used to further validate the findings in this

study. According to Johnson and Christensen (2008), reflexivity is a process that allows

the researcher to engage in critical self-reflection to identify his or her potential bias and

predispositions and is “the key strategy that is used to understand researcher bias” (p.

52

259). As a researcher, I engaged in reflexivity throughout the research process by

maintaining a journal of my own thoughts, feelings, and perceptions. This allowed me to

bracket my biases from the experiences of the participants and strengthen my own

objectively.

Finally, it was also necessary for me to be aware of my relative positionality to

the research project. Holmes (2014) described positionality as the researcher’s pre-

existing views regarding the research topic and the participants, which can impact all

aspects of the study. The journal of memos and notes that I maintained for reflexivity

informed my positionality and was a source of ongoing reflection regarding my own

views, values, and beliefs about the research topic and the context in which it was being

studied. I also collaborated with my dissertation director to ensure that my biases,

perceptions, and viewpoints did not inappropriately frame the study.

Researcher’s Self-Reflections

Phenomenology is a highly self-reflective and self-exploratory process that

enhances the knowing of the researcher’s self and her position in the world. I chose this

line of inquiry to inform others about the power of resilience and illuminate the realities

of the barriers women continue to face in their career advancement. Throughout the

research process, I too experienced growth through ongoing self-reflection and reflection

on my participants’ experiences.

My path to leadership in higher education began unintentionally, but has

continued to enrich my life intellectually, professionally, and socially. The adversity I

have faced has often given me pause to consider if the struggle merits the outcome;

however, each time I have drawn from an internal force to bear through the difficulty and

53

have emerged successful, although not necessarily unharmed. It is resilience that has

given me the power to overcome adversity and advance in my career. With each

challenge, I have learned more about myself and the nature of human behavior, leading

me to wonder about how other women experience resilience and the degree to which they

recognize this phenomenon as a part of their identities and success.

My intention was to learn from the experiences of others who have successfully

navigated the labyrinth and ascended to the executive office. Their experiences provided

an emotional and logistical pathway for me and other women to consider as we advance

in our careers.

54

Research is creating new knowledge.

— Neil Armstrong

CHAPTER FOUR: DATA ANALYSIS

Introduction

Resilience is a personal experience that is shared by those who successfully

overcome adversity. The participants in this study revealed the ways in which they have

experienced resilience through the stories of their personal journeys to the presidential

office. This chapter introduces the participants and captures their experiences with

adversity, advancement, and identity development. It further provides a detailed

description and analysis of the essential structures of resilience collectively experienced

by all participants. A synthesis of the findings related to the phenomenon of resilience

revealed a multi-dimensional lived experience that has shaped the identity of the

participants as leaders who have found meaning and purpose as women presidents.

Introducing the Participants

Twenty-four women presidents were invited to participate in the study. Nine

accepted the invitation, but two subsequently declined because of their schedules. The

remaining seven participants were interviewed over the course of two months, one in

person and the remainder by phone. Each interview lasted between 50 and 90 minutes

and were recorded using an audio recording device. Throughout the interview process, I

remained mindful of my own background as an aspiring college president and a woman

55

and practiced reflexivity as a qualitative researcher through introspective memo-writing

and self-reflective journaling. What follows is a brief introduction of the participants’

profiles. Their basic demographic information is provided in Table 2.

Table 2

Participant Characteristics

# Pseudonym Age Race/Ethnicity

Marital

Status

Title of Position Held Prior to Current Position

of President

Type of Institution

1 Ann 65 White Married President Small,

Private

2 Jenni 59 White Married Provost Small,

Private

3 Carol 63 Hispanic Married President Small,

Private

4 Nicole 51 White Married Provost Small,

Private

5 Margaret 67 White Divorced Vice President for

Administration

Small,

Private

6 Sharon 53 White Married Provost Small,

Private

7 Linda 58 White Divorced Provost Small,

Private

56

Ann

Ann was 65 years old, married, with children, and had been a president at two

different institutions. As our interview began, I immediately recognized how well she

spoke, with a kind and polished tone of voice that sounded sincere and thoughtful. She

described multiple moves during her childhood that were required in support of her

father’s career as a corporate executive, noting how those experiences taught her how to

adapt to new circumstances and value her relationships with family and friends. Ann

further described herself as “a poster child for the liberal arts,” highlighting her

accomplishments as a student leader in college, ultimately launching her career into

student affairs. She went on to find her passion in development work and external

relations and was later recruited for a presidency. As I listened to her story, I had a sense

of her being very detailed in describing how she turned obstacles into opportunities and

overcame serious encounters with gender bias and outright sexism. Her faith, family, and

the support of her husband had been sources of strength and encouragement throughout

her career. In addition, she attributed her career advancement to participation in

professional development programs, networking, and several male mentors who created

opportunities for her to broaden her perspective and gain new experience. To Ann, being

a president was a meaningful and rewarding career, allowing her to use her talents and

skills to have a positive impact on students, faculty, and staff.

Jenni

As my interview began with Jenni, I quickly realized how fortunate I was to have

her accept my invitation to participate. At 59 years old, Jenni was not only an

accomplished women president, wife, and mother, but she was also deaf. As a child,

57

Jenni was raised by her deaf mother and hearing father and was surrounded by four

hearing and partially hearing brothers. She attended public schools during a time when

accommodations were not available for disabilities; yet, she still found a way to achieve

her educational goals, including earning a doctorate. It was through these experiences

that Jenni developed confidence and humility, along with a passion for addressing issues

of social justice. Her career in higher education began as a director of an American Sign

Language program, which launched her into a career of pioneering educational programs

to support students with hearing impairments. She became well known as an effective

administrator and social advocate for the deaf. However, this was not enough for her to

fully identity with the deaf community. I felt a deep sense of pain when Jenni shared her

story of how she was publicly rejected by the community she dedicated her life to

support. Although she was deaf, she was not “deaf enough” to be the president of an

institution with a primarily deaf student population and, only months after assuming her

presidential role, she gracefully stepped down.

The sense of pride that she expressed when describing her own success in

overcoming the barriers she faced, paled in comparison to the joy she shared when she

spoke of her two children’s educational and professional accomplishments. Although I

was in awe of her strength and endurance as a professional, she seemed most proud of her

achievements as a mother.

Carol

Serving as a college president for the second time, Carol was 63 and married, with

two children. She entered the higher education profession to continue her work as a

teacher and progressed through the ranks from adjunct, to tenured professor, dean, vice

58

president for academic affairs, provost, and finally president. Carol captivated me from

the moment our interview began, and I could immediately envision how her personality

could fill an entire room. She sounded friendly and funny, yet completely in touch with

the current challenges, including the gender bias that exists for women in positions of

leadership in higher education. Carol was very active within a number of professional

development organizations and spoke on the topic of leadership on a regular basis. It was

clear to me that her experience in both large public and small private institutions had

shaped her perspective as a leader, and more importantly, how she was using her

experience to guide and mentor other women who aspire to leadership roles.

Nicole

At 51 years old, married, with two children, Nicole was serving as a president for

the first time after climbing the traditional ranks as a professor and provost. She emerged

early in her career as a faculty leader and quickly moved into administration where she

found a natural fit with her skills and talents. I could sense the energy and enthusiasm

she had for her work and the genuine appreciation she had for the opportunity to be a

college president. Throughout the interview, Nicole made several references to gender,

which illuminated the work that she had done, both personally and professionally, to

understand the role of the gender in identity. She believed strongly that women have a

special set of intuitive skills that make them good leaders and felt a personal sense of

obligation to mentor and guide other women who aspire to positions of leadership.

Margaret

Margaret was the only participant with whom I was previously acquainted and

had the opportunity to observe as a college president. However, during the interview, I

59

made every effort to suspend all my prior knowledge of her and approach the subject of

my investigation with “fresh eyes,” as phenomenology demands. Sixty-seven and now

retired, Margaret served as a college president for 23 years after beginning her career in

student affairs. Her father died at a young age, leaving her mother to raise her and her

sisters alone. Although those times were difficult, she attributed much of her

compassion, strength, and independence to her experiences as an adolescent. Throughout

her life, Margaret had gone wherever she was needed, often taking assignments that were

likely to fail, or carrying the burdens others could not lift. As such, barriers, including

gender discrimination, had been a constant in Margaret’s life. She detailed several

situations where she faced significant challenges, often alone, with courage, moral

conviction, and compassion. She also recognized her own tenacity as a source of some of

the difficulty she faced, but maintained a sense of pride for standing her ground and being

a voice of reason. Although she did not aspire to become a college president, she

graciously accepted the position to revive a dying institution and unite a community

around a common mission. She felt it was her calling and as a true servant leader, found

fulfillment through the success of others.

Sharon

Sharon was 53, married with two children, and serving as a president for the first

time. Her path to the presidency was traditional, meaning that she began her higher

education career as a faculty member, advanced to the position of provost, and then

became president. However, before she started her career in higher education, she was a

public accountant and she believes that experience gave her a professional advantage. As

Sharon described her career progression, I was immediately struck by her humility.

60

Although she mentioned how quickly she was promoted within the organizations for

which she worked, she was reluctant to credit her own talent as the basis for her success.

Advancement happened gracefully for Sharon, with few of the traditional obstacles for

women such as gender discrimination, family obligations, and lack of support systems.

When I asked about gender barriers, she could not recall any experiences that slowed her

progress as a female. As she further described her management style as thoughtful and

collaborative, emphasizing the value of consensus, I began to realize that Sharon’s

strength was in working with people, and that she was, therefore, likely to be embraced

by others instead of challenged.

Linda

Serving as a president for the first time, Linda was 58, divorced, and did not have

children. When I called Linda, she greeted me as if we were old friends; she was warm

and enthusiastic, and although miles apart, I felt as though I was sitting right next to her.

She described her career path as traditional, advancing through the academic ranks, but

one that had also included some tremendous institutional and cultural challenge. This,

consequently, deepened her appreciation for her current role as president and the

institution she served. I was completely captivated by her experiences and often felt as

though she were coaching me when she discussed leadership lessons about taking risks

and building confidence. As a leader, Linda genuinely valued people and relationships.

On a number of occasions, she recalled experiences working with “great” people, even

though sometimes the work itself was quite difficult. She also had a great perspective on

the future of higher education and the role that women can have in leadership. She

explained that higher education is fluid and that leaders need to help institutions stay

61

relevant by balancing mission and change. She felt that women can certainly have a

greater role in that, but they need to develop and maintain effective working

relationships.

Data Analysis Process

The interviews with the participants provided main data for analysis,

supplemented by my ongoing researcher notes and memos. The data analysis process

included a full immersion of myself into the data to relive the experience of each

participant, close reading and re-reading of the interview transcripts, and coding for

identification of themes that revealed the essential structures of resilience.

Phenomenological data analysis includes specific steps that were described in chapter

three and that I followed when analyzing the data obtained for the purposes of this study,

namely: bracketing, horizonalization, clustering for meaning, imaginative variation, and

synthesis of meaning.

Bracketing

Realizing that I share a number of commonalities with the participants, including

gender, leadership, and experience with adversity, I prepared for each interview by

clearing my mind of any preconceptions about the participants or our likenesses, thus

keeping myself in check through practicing reflexivity. This allowed me to focus entirely

on the experiences of the participants and view the phenomenon through their eyes. I

found myself quickly captivated by each of their stories and disappointed that I was not

able to spend more time with each woman.

Horizonalization

62

Data horizons are significant statements that relate to the phenomenon. At the

initial stages of data analysis, I reviewed each transcript, along with my memos and self-

reflective notes, and identified 765 words and phrases that were relevant to the

phenomenon of resilience. I also provided each participant with a written transcript of

each one’s interview to review for accuracy of fact and to ensure that I accurately

reported on her demographic data.

Clustering for Meaning

The data horizons were then grouped into 9 broad categories: leadership, career

advancement, sources of support, barriers, work-life balance, overcoming behaviors

(reaction), personal attributes, image and identity, and life purpose. I assigned 56 codes

to the broad categories, from which 12 subthemes emerged that bore particular relevance

to the research questions. Further analysis revealed three primary themes that captured

the phenomenon of resilience experienced collectively by the participants: (a) resilience

as response to adversity, (b) resilience shaping identity and the capacity for personal and

professional success, and (c) resilience enhancing the meaning and purpose of life.

Appendix C illustrates the relevance of initially identified codes to the study

research questions. Correspondingly, Appendix D presents the main themes and

subthemes that are responsive to the research questions.

Imaginative Variation and Synthesis of Meaning

The conditions under which the phenomenon was revealed are illustrated as

textural and visual themes that show what the participants experienced and how

(Moustakas, 1994). During this step of the analysis, I considered the various ways in

which the themes were interrelated and the conditions under which the phenomenon was

63

experienced so as to reveal the essence of the phenomenon, thereby endowing it with a

composite meaning. A graphic representation of the composite meaning of the

phenomenon of resilience is presented in Figure 4 at the end of the chapter.

Resilience: Thematic Analysis

Resilience as Response to Adversity

Each of the participants described ways in which she experienced and responded

to adversity along her path to the presidency. Figure 1 captures the subthemes that were

revealed as the participants described how they experienced resilience as response to

adversity.

Figure 1. Resilience as a response to adversity.

64

Resilience as Response to Adversity

Responding to adversity

Sources of Support

Overcoming Barriers

Recognizing Gender Bias

Career Advancement

Work-life Balance

Overcoming barriers to professional advancement. The simple act of

overcoming a barrier may require strength, wisdom, or fortune, but overcoming adversity

requires resilience. The women I interviewed all described a perpetual adversarial reality

that required a persistent reaction on their part in order to successfully advance in their

careers. The most common situations the women described were related to accepting the

challenges of their jobs, being open to change, accepting setbacks and changes in

direction, managing their emotions, and embracing their disabilities.

The first step to overcoming a barrier is to identify the obstacle and accept it as a

challenge. Each woman admitted facing some difficulty during her career progression

and accepted many of the challenges as being a part of the job. The very nature of some

of the challenges these women accepted demonstrated their capacity to confront adversity

and accept change. For example, Margaret accepted the challenge of leading a small

college that was close to closure and admitted that although she confronted and overcame

many obstacles, she continued to carry the emotional burden throughout her presidency:

“The fact that I was instrumental in laying off 20% of the faculty and 25% of the staff

never went away.” She explained how even after the institution regained stability, the

faculty and staff who survived the layoffs were traumatized and slow to trust in her

leadership and in the future of the institution. Margaret’s experience illustrates how

overcoming some obstacles may still feel like failures. She had to downsize the

workforce to balance the budget and give the institution a fighting chance. Accepting the

challenge of leading a struggling institution included obstacles that she did not anticipate,

but she had the capacity to overcome and ultimately demonstrated success. Similarly,

65

Sharon experienced a painful faculty termination as a provost, but remained confident in

her decision:

So, I really just kind of had to have faith in myself that I was doing the right thing, that we had gotten to a particular place, that we had followed all the university's procedures and, but even at the end, when it turned out the way I wanted it to turn out, I still felt like throwing up.

Sharon and Margaret accepted the challenges of their respective roles, and despite their

personal feelings, they managed to overcome a number of serious trials that advanced

them in their careers and grew their capacity for resilience.

Jenni accepted the challenge of entering into three very rigorous search processes

to advance her career. She described one search that ended in protest and ultimately to

her resignation:

There was a search process, a very rigorous national search. I went through the whole search and the Board of Trustees offered me the job. I accepted the job, but there was a humongous worldwide protest against me being the president.

Her first experience in a national search was painful and ended in failure. However, she

continued to persevere and entered another search that was just as rigorous, but it ended

with a successful appointment as a president.

All of the women made a point of saying they felt responsible for making, “the

hard decisions.” They all found value in seeking input from their executive leadership

teams, but were quick to accept responsibility for the final decision. Their dispositions to

take action and accept responsibility supported their career advancement. There were

also times when the women experienced setbacks and had to make adjustments or change

to advance their careers. Carol and Margaret referred to setbacks they experienced very

early in their careers that shaped their career pathways. For example, Margaret said, “I

was just finishing that program, fully expected to go to work for ABC Hotel, and I never

66

got the call I expected to get.” Although their experiences were initially disappointing,

ultimately they were redirected into careers in higher education. Carol explained that by

not getting the first few presidencies for which she applied, she gained the opportunity to

develop professionally:

But there have been so many jobs where I should have gotten the job. Going way back to teaching, that's why I taught in those small towns, because I couldn't get the job in the big town where I was living. Sometimes I couldn't even get an interview. You have to just keep plugging at it because you know you're not going to get a job if you never apply. I think I had applied for maybe two presidencies, I guess, and most of it had to do with location, and I probably could have done those. I didn't get them. Then I got that provost job and then I really developed really well professionally.

Ann described her success and setbacks as learning experiences: “I've learned by doing

things well and making mistakes.” Ann’s perspective reinforces that doing things well

strengthens resilience by building confidence and informing learning.

Managing emotions was also described as a barrier that some of the women had to

address to advance in their careers. Linda spoke very openly about feeling demoralized

in meetings and only after deep reflection could she move past the experience:

I would stew when I realized that I wasn’t being taken seriously. Or when I was being sort of dismissed. And I would definitely close up and shut down. I would be angry; I would be embarrassed; and for me, the way I got over it was either the meeting ended, you know, and I might reflect on it and stew more, or I might reflect on it, decide that it’s probably best that I didn’t continue to try to contribute that idea because I don’t think it would have gone anywhere.

Similarly, Margaret had to learn how to control her emotions when she was fighting to be

heard:

I think there was a fair amount of [time when I was] not being taken seriously, and I've also always been pretty outspoken. I've gotten more controlled, much more controlled over time, but I used to just kind of pop off.

67

Linda and Margaret both experienced belittlement and marginalization. Linda responded

by retreating and reflecting on the experience, but Margaret was more outspoken.

Neither accepted their treatment as appropriate and, in turn, vowed to make sure they

never treated anyone in the same manner.

Finally, by embracing what was otherwise considered a disability, Jenni

completed her undergraduate and graduate degrees, developed programs to support

individuals with hearing impairments, and became well-known as an advocate for deaf

education. She explained that although she dreamed of being a pediatrician, she found

that it was too difficult for her to participate in the labs and follow the lectures as a deaf

learner. Eventually, she explained, “I picked my major as a way to get my degree. That

was the only way I understood I was going to graduate with a respectful transcript.” By

changing her major, she strategically harnessed her strengths and used them to forge a

path to complete her degree. She explained how she thoroughly enjoyed higher

education and decided to pursue her doctorate and sought an interpreter for the first time:

Then eventually I wrote my dissertation about how [the] American Sign Language community has an unwritten literature through storytelling, and that many of the stories or literary creations are passed among people. Not necessarily parents or child, but just passed around so that all deaf people know them. That was great. It was really exciting work, because that helped me learn more about myself.

Jenni continued to use her disability as an advantage: “We had many, many successful

programs with outcomes . . . I took all that work and all the research we had about

success, and I proposed that for the national mission program, and then I was hired.”

What could have been a professional limitation became a source of strength and power.

Unfortunately, Jenni later experienced a horrific public revolt during her first

presidency. She was chastised in the media for not being “deaf enough” and remarked on

68

how she felt: “My life was over.” She felt defeated, but instead of allowing herself to be

consumed by grief, she remained confident in herself and her abilities and was offered a

leadership position at another institution. Her previous positive experiences helped her

build the capacity to be resilient when it was crucial to her success.

Recognizing gender bias. When asked the question “Have you ever experienced

gender as a barrier?” all but one woman said that they had experienced some form of

discrimination based upon their gender. Their stories revealed a deep, cultural reality that

still exists in the workplace and within our institutions of higher education. Linda

described her experience of gender bias as “patronizing”:

I’m not sure exactly it’s gender, per say, but I have a real issue with anybody that treats me as if I’m stupid . . . and I think a lot of times that is definitely a gender patina that sort of clouds, but it’s also not to say that the person that is being a jerk doesn’t treat everybody that way . . . but I certainly felt, in some situations, that there was, I was being patronized, you know? I was being told basically, “Just go sit in the corner, honey; you don’t need to talk now.” So . . . certainly things like that. That would make me stew. I never felt I was passed over for an opportunity. I might have felt I was silenced from participating or from asking questions or contributing an idea, or being heard when I did contribute an idea. But I never felt that . . . I didn’t get a position I wanted, or something like that for being a woman. So it wasn’t the big stuff. Now, I do also think that there is certainly some evidence that my salary did not go up at the same rate as men, and things like that, which is very important, whether you have a family or whether you are single, because you have to provide. But I always felt there were other ways to get that salary by doing extra work, [getting paid] a stipend, and teaching summer school, and things like that. But I recognize now that I was having to do extra stuff to get those salaries that men were getting just from teaching.

Carol also experienced gender bias during her career advancement and made a point

about the role of the board of trustees having the political power to maintain the status

quo of male dominant leadership at the presidential level. Carol explained:

I don't think it was until I really started looking at presidencies, to be honest with you. I think it came up during the provost search. I don't know whether it did my first VP job, but I heard later that it came up because one of the other vice presidents at ABC College said that the president was saying, “Well I think I'm

69

going to appoint Carol because she had the best interview,” and one of the other ones said but she's a woman . . . I think it came up in that context. There's a real, still, and again it may not be in other parts of the country, but certainly in the south and the southwest parts of the country, it's really there, that there's still a problem of imagining a woman to be the top person in any organization. There's notable exceptions, but it's still few and far between.

Carol continued to elaborate:

I know that I've seen searches where clearly, clearly there were four presidential finalists and three of them were women and one was a man and the women were all in their 50s, the women were all either . . . One was a president; two were vice presidents; and the guy was in his 30s and he was an associate VP and he's the one that got the presidency . . . I looked at the four finalists. . . . I was surprised the guy was even in the finals because there was that much of a gap between experience. When he got it, I was just, like, “wow,” I either figured it was age, sex, or race, because one of the VP's was a Hispanic lady, so I thought they're uncomfortable with one or maybe both of those things because the women were all accomplished in their 50s and the guy was not that accomplished in his 30s.

I really have seen it more when you really finally get to that top, and I think part of that is who's doing the selection, because it's much more political, it's much more, “well we've got to think about what the community's going to think” . . . And the boards that are doing the picking, most of them are still not very diverse. You've got a lot of White males doing the selection.

Margaret experienced direct forms of sexual harassment and observed how men

even used their physical characteristics to establish a position of power. Margaret shared

the following experiences:

Gender was huge, and almost any story that you've heard did happen to me at some time. The assumption that women weren't tough enough, couldn't do it, a lack of respect for a different style, if you aren't screaming, yelling, cussing, then you're probably not very tough.

Sexuality was always a part of the conversation with him, but that's not how he made his decisions. We lived with that. If your boss had sexual requirements, you tried to avoid those and not get into a position where your department got damaged, but nobody reported that stuff. You didn't talk about it. You didn't deal with it. It was just the way the world was.

Being short doesn't help. It's real easy, and I don't have any body boundaries, but it's very easy for people to walk up, and I'm just the right size, just sort of slip your arm around. That kind of is not a position of power. There is some research that the leaders, the presidents of colleges and universities, tend to be male, and well over six feet tall.

70

In terms of advancement, Ann denied gender was a barrier, and instead, remarked

about how being the only woman at the table was an advantage:

In some ways, I may have been fortunate that they needed a woman at the table because I was on that sort of early curve, so I didn’t experience gender bias in terms of my career. On the other hand, I certainly experienced it in the workplace and it ranged from being at the ABC Club . . . with the Chancellor. . . ., and they would not let women in the Club; would not let me in the front door, said, “women had to enter in the back”; the Chancellor went with me and we came in the kitchen door . . . to not being taken seriously with a male colleague who did things like leave a blown up naked doll in my office . . . to just having to fight to get my word in. But aside from that, by and large, you know, those kinds of experiences, I found the more able and competent I was, the more respected I was. And, I ended up making a lot of really great male friends. Working for some great men who gave me fabulous opportunities and treated me like “one of the guys,” and I mean that in a positive way.

Ann was honest about being humiliated, as a woman, and yet, she transcended gracefully

beyond embarrassment to confidence and found that she was more respected for the

experience she endured.

Similar to Ann, Sharon also found her gender to be an advantage in her career

progression. Although she also recognized gender discrimination in the workplace, she

was fortunate to have not experienced it herself:

I just really can't think of anything that, because I'm a woman, that kept me from being able to advance in the way that I wanted to. Sometimes I feel like I got opportunities that others might not have, because I’m a woman.

As the researcher, I considered whether Ann and Sharon may have experienced second-

generation bias, which surfaces in other forms of inequitable treatment and is less direct

than traditional gender discrimination. Margaret was very direct about the naivety of

some women who do not believe that gender bias exists. In regard to how female leaders

need to prepare for the future, Margaret shared the following:

I think it's going to be a very interesting time. I'm concerned . . . in your generation, maybe even a little older than you, there's a group of women who, and

71

there may still be in this upcoming generation . . . there's a group of women who somehow think that the problems of acceptance of gender have been resolved. When I was coming up, when you were being disregarded or mistreated on the basis of gender, you knew what it was. If you believe that that doesn't exist, and this is true for African Americans even more, if you think that's been fixed, then when you hit that garbage, you think it's something wrong with you.

I know of two or three women . . . that I believe had permanently debilitating, life-altering illnesses, and psychological problems related to hitting that ceiling and not, initially at least, knowing what it was. They internalized it. They had failed, and when you're talking about very high achievers, and then suddenly, they have completely failed, that's physically and emotionally devastating. I do worry that, and I've thought about this a lot in terms of what do you say to young women? I don't want them going out in the world expecting that men are going to treat them badly, or that they're going to be devastated by glass ceilings. I want them to be positive, and dream about what they can be, but I don't want them to get clobbered, and not know what it is.

I haven't quite figured out how the best way to handle that is, but because real, live prejudice, flat out prejudice, still exists against women, and women, and African Americans, and Hispanics in particular, not to mention the LGBT community, are dealing with that all the time. That's a problem I don't know. We need to figure out how to . . . You need to be ready, but not expecting the worst. You need to be prepared.

Career advancement. The women in this study were all accomplished and

successful presidents who advanced in their careers by taking advantage of opportunities

as they were presented, learning from their mistakes, and feeling empowered by their

colleagues. Early career success was an experience shared by all of the women, in

addition to having the support of supervisors or mentors who created opportunities for

them to advance. Sharon “never applied for a job”; she just “took opportunities as they

were presented.” Similarly, Jenni was “pushed into administration” and was “asked to

become [a] provost.” All of the women remarked that on at least one occasion, there was

someone in a position of influence who opened a door to their advancement. Among

those who were instrumental in their success were supervisors, colleagues, headhunters,

or even board members, all of whom encouraged these women to take on additional

responsibilities to prepare them for the next step. In terms of adversity, these women

72

were empowered by those who sponsored their success, thereby building their confidence

and strengthening their capacity to experience resilience.

Responding to adversity. Confronting challenges, accepting criticism, coping

and adapting to reality, reflecting and changing perspective, and persevering were

commonly mentioned among the participants. Although I would not describe any of the

participants as “confrontational,” I did sense a superior level of confidence that was

indicative of success in facing adversity. With the exception of Carol who said, “My

personality type is such that I have confidence even when I probably shouldn’t have

confidence,” the participants gained confidence and strengthened their resilience by

confronting challenges in their childhood, adulthood, and throughout their professional

careers. Margaret shared an experience about confronting the challenges of working

directly with others as “one of the most important lessons of my career.”

Accepting criticism along with coping and adapting were also important

experiences mentioned by all but one participant. Although most of the women described

an experience with accepting criticism or adapting to a new reality, they experienced

different emotional responses such as anger, frustration, embarrassment, and sadness.

Alternatively, Sharon described how she had been able to “erase difficult times,” a

coping strategy that was not shared by the other participants. At first, I wondered if this

was an act of denial, but as she elaborated on her experience and explained the role of her

faith in the coping process, it was clear that as she made peace with the situation, she was

released from the emotional burden, as if it was “erased.”

Deep reflection led to changes in perspective for these women, allowing them to

successfully adapt to new circumstances. Sharon found that it was helpful to “stop and

73

think” about how she could be most effective in her role, a process that ultimately

increased her effectiveness and opened new doors for her career advancement. Nicole

faced significant challenges balancing graduate school as a young wife and mother,

which upon reflection, she considered “a real growing period . . . and a kind of time when

I really had to, sort of, see what I was made of.” The energy to make it through the

difficult times is referred to as perseverance, “the determination to keep going despite

difficulties, discouragement, and disappointment” (The Resilience Center, 2015,

“Perseverance”). Carol described the energy required to persevere:

You just got to have the resilience to keep going . . . I always say that I know I’m going to work harder than everybody else so that’s going to be half the battle. After that, if you just keep showing up and keep pounding on it, it’ll eventually get done. A lot of people don’t have that kind of energy.

Similarly, Margaret found the energy to persevere through a divorce by working harder,

allowing her to feel success amid the pain of the loss of her marriage. Collectively these

women did not back down from adversity. Instead, they experienced resilience by

pushing through their circumstances with strength and stamina and adapted to new

circumstances.

Sources of support. Family, mentors, professional and social networks, and

religious faith were all mentioned as important sources of support that strengthened the

participants’ resilience. All of the women remarked that they had professional parents as

role models growing up that were sources of support and motivation. As adults, the

sources of support were expanded to include spouses, siblings, friends, and pets.

Five of the participants experienced a mentor relationship on the path to the

presidency; two of them had female mentors. Margaret shared a story about the value of

74

her veteran male mentors that helped her understand some of the differences between

men and women:

There were a bunch, and they played different roles in my life, but again, I grew up in an all-women's world. Frank was very helpful, as was Jack, and a friend of mine here, all of whom are veterans, and I think that's not unrelated, who taught me about the importance of the command and control system, also about the importance of taking care of your people, which is at the heart of good military leaders, are really concerned about the people that they're responsible for. They really helped me understand men. I learned so much from all three of these people, about . . . I do think that whether it's innate, or learned in our culture, men and women think differently about things, and they function differently, and it behooves you to understand that difference.

Ann described important relationships with former presidents for whom she worked and

board members with whom she currently works:

The presidents I worked for . . . were both mentors to me, giving me wide ranging responsibilities and opportunities for growth beyond my job description. While I never talked about a presidency with either of them, they clearly had given me the kind of experiences that prepared me for the presidency and they have been helpful when I have reached out to them during the course of my presidency. So I’ve just worked for some great men. After becoming president, similarly, there were a couple of trustees, again male, at [my current institution], and some fabulous women, here, on our board who have also been guiding lights, sources of support and encouragement, and I have learned a lot from them.

Although Carol remarked that she had several good role models, she only credited

one individual as being a mentor, recognizing the difference between role models and

mentors:

I will say that there was a female professor that was at [graduate institution] all the way through and she actually became my major professor in both my master’s and my doctoral studies. I had started taking classes and I just saw her in the department and heard that she was married and had two kids and I do remember feeling a sense of relief that, “oh, well, you could do that and still have a family” . . . She was the only female in the department.

75

In contrast, when asked about mentor relationships, Nicole explained that she did not

have the benefit of mentors during her career development and now maintained a

commitment to help other women:

No, really, I had to do a lot of that on my own. You know, philosophy is a very male-dominated profession. So I didn't have any women professors in graduate school. I didn't have role models in the profession to look up to. There weren’t even very many women in my graduate program. I didn't have other, you know, other women that were farther along that I could ask advice from. So I had to do a lot of that recognition on my own, but I do believe my mother, both of my parents were very supportive, and I think my mother's example was probably very, very helpful to me. My husband was very helpful to me, but I really did not have mentors and guides along the way. It's one of the reasons that I am so committed to mentoring and guiding others at this point.

Similar to mentor relationships, participation in professional development and

social networks varied for each woman. Three mentioned participation in formal

presidential preparation programs, such as the ACE Fellows Program, CIC New

President’s Program, and the Harvard Executive Management Program, but all the

women acknowledged some involvement in their local or regional higher education

advocacy organizations. Collectively, the participants placed the greatest value on

having built relationships with other presidents and professional colleagues during their

tenures. Linda explained:

I think the feeling to know that if I pick up the phone and call for something, they are going to answer the phone, and they know I would as well. So, it doesn’t mean we have to talk a lot, and we really don’t talk a lot, but it’s good to know they are there for you.

Finally, four of the seven participants also described their faith as a significant

source of strength and support during their development, adding another dimension to

their phenomenological experience. Sharon described how she had to have faith in

herself when she faced difficult situations: “I really just kind of had to have faith in, in

76

myself, that I was doing the right thing.” Ann turned to her faith for inspiration: “I am a

religious person and my faith is very important to me. So that is really the source.”

Work-life balance. Within the context of work-life balance, the participants

were asked: “How do you take care of yourself?” All of the women described the

sacrifices they had made to achieve career success. Setting boundaries, managing their

time, eating healthy, exercising, and including family were ways they attempted to

achieve balance, but all admitted balance was a regular struggle. Ann had to confront

“working mother guilt” early on in her career and told the following story:

First of all, women have to do whatever genuine works for them. I was much happier as a working mother than as a stay-at-home mother. I tried it very briefly and it was a disaster. So I think, first of all, women have to do what works for them and their family and be happy and comfortable with that decision, without guilt. I think working mother guilt is frankly not productive. I think women need to deal with it. And I remember well, the female dean to whom I reported . . . [when] I was the assistant dean, telling me that until I resolved my working mother guilt, I was never going to be either the mother or the career person that I could be. And she was quite right, as difficult as it was to hear at that time.

For Ann, balance meant feeling successful as a mother and professional. Similarly,

Sharon described success at achieving balance as measured by her attendance at her

children’s school and extracurricular activities: “I tried to fit those sort of important

childhood events in there and don’t really recall missing very many.” Her husband and

children were also able to attend a number of events at the institutions for which she

worked, further supporting a feeling of work-life balance.

I was also intrigued by the spousal relationships and hearing about how some of

the spouses took on a “reversed-role” of host and homemaker in support of their wives’

presidencies, and saddened by one woman’s story of a failed marriage and other love

interests, because of her career. In both situations, resilience was strengthened. Sharon’s

77

husband entertains at the home and, although he also has a teaching career, he enjoys his

role as a presidential spouse and she, in turn, finds strength in the support he provides to

her and the institution. Margaret experienced a painful divorce, during a critical time in

her career advancement, but rebounded by “working harder” and essentially throwing

herself into her work to remain focused and productive. The divorced women defined

their work-life balance differently from the other women. Margaret and Linda described

balance in terms of setting boundaries and managing expectations. For Linda, balance

came with some important realizations:

You cannot be everywhere . . . The other thing that’s important for balance is really knowing yourself well enough to say “What are the things I do that give me energy versus the things I do that deplete me?” And it doesn’t mean that you don’t still have to do some of those things that deplete you, but it does mean that you really invest in those things that energize you.

The married women referred to work-life balance in terms of managing their professional

and family obligations and personal health. Participating in the meaningful moments of

their spouses’ and children’s lives and taking time to rest, exercise, and eat healthy were

ways they achieved balance.

Resilience Shaping Identity and the Capacity for Personal and Professional Success

All of the women shared stories that revealed the ways in which the experience of

overcoming barriers and obstacles had shaped their identities and led to success. Figure 2

captures the primary subthemes that were revealed in relation to identity: emotional

intelligence, self-actualization, image, personal attributes, and leadership qualities.

78

Figure 2. Resilience shaping identity and the capacity for personal and professional success.

Emotional intelligence. Six of the seven participants specifically described their

abilities to manage their own emotions and the emotions of others as a critical

development in their leadership portfolios. Carol shared that she learned about emotional

control from a male president for whom she worked and further explained that “you can't

wear your feelings on your sleeve. You can't internalize so much that you become

ineffective.” Similarly, Margaret confided that she was also careful about displaying her

emotions:

Don't ever let anybody see you cry. As a mature president, there were times that people absolutely saw my emotion, but I tried to make sure that it was never out of control. . . . It was important to try really hard, no matter what my prejudices were, to hear everybody, hear what they were really saying.

79

Identity

Emotional Intelligence

Image

Leadership Qualities

Self-Actualization

Personal Attributes

Margaret also made a point of sharing how she was also mindful of the impact of her

decisions on other people:

When I made decisions that were very painful for people, students or faculty and staff, I was personally convinced that it had to be, and that it was certainly right for the institution, and in most cases, that it was really the right thing for the individual. Having done that, then I could, having some confidence that the decision was the right decision made in the right way, I could be pretty peaceful with it.

Emotional intelligence is also concerned with recognizing how others perceive a person

and making the necessary adjustments to ensure one’s behavior conveys the intended

message. This process enhances leadership effectiveness and builds capacity for

resilience. Linda reflected on this point and said:

The more you do to understand how you interact with other people, and how you are perceived, the better. You can learn a budget . . . you can learn shared governance, but learning how to be with people and how to treat people, that’s worth investing in, really investing in.

Self-actualization. Referring back to resilience theory, Richardson (2002)

explained that there is a “force within everyone that drives them to seek self-

actualization, altruism, wisdom, and to be in harmony with a spiritual source of strength”

(p. 313). Four of the women referred to an experience whereby they learned more about

themselves and similarly, the other three women attributed some level of their success to

their own efforts. Collectively, all the participants experienced resilience through the

realization of their own success. For Linda, recognizing that she was making progress

was an important source of strength to persevere in a situation that seemed hopeless. The

institution for which she worked was in an economically impoverished and desolate

location, making it very difficult to build relationships and achieve a sense of community.

She was able to nurture herself and feel successful by telling herself:

80

You’re accomplishing what you want to accomplish and you are building friendships and connections and you are learning what you want to learn and all of this is for somewhere else that you will go and put it to work.

Self-nurturing was also an experience shared by two of the other women. Carol

remarked on how she “never did get down on [her]self” when she didn’t get the job she

wanted or win an election she entered. Nicole sought therapeutic support and learned to

self-nurture:

I have gotten much better over the years at learning how to self-nurture myself, and some of that comes frankly through . . . talk therapy, which was very helpful in helping me understand myself better and figuring out what I needed to do to support myself and what all of these different choices I have made meant to me.

Ann often felt like a minority as a woman among her male peers, but realized that “the

more able and competent I was, the more respected I was.” The other three women

experienced self-actualization as they reached specific achievements, such as completing

their graduate degrees and becoming college presidents.

Qualities of a leader. The women were asked: “How would you describe your

leadership style and how do you believe you are perceived as a leader”? The most

common responses included the descriptors: action-oriented, team-builder, consensus-

builder, relationship-builder, communicator, collaborator, empowering, supportive,

integrity, and trustworthy. Ann described herself as “action-oriented, goal-oriented,

collaborative.” Similarly, Nicole said she was “energetic, action oriented, and

collaborative.” Both women valued collaboration and described their roles as motivating

others and building momentum to improve performance. Margaret described her style as

more patience and gentle:

I think I give people a lot of room to do their jobs in a way that works for them, and for the people they work with. I think of it more, at this point, as being an orchestra conductor. My job is to help you all work together as a team, around

81

what I hope is a common vision. Within that, I can support a wide variety of ways of getting at it.

Jenni enjoyed casting an even wider net and remarked on how she enjoyed an organic

process:

I like to use the process of meeting with people to help understand what the best decision is. I'm more of weaver than a line drawer. . . . I think typically in the college, the president would set up a task force and give them a charge. Then next group would go out and get some input from people and come back. They would get some information from other schools and come back, and then they'd make a recommendation to the president. I really prefer a organic process. The whole community has the question, anyone can be talking about it and what they talk about may actually be part of the actual decision. There isn't a task force. It's more of a community conversation; I just have to make sure that the conversations are happening enough times in the right groups and that we're getting some clear records or some clear statements about what people are talking about and what they think. Then eventually, we'll meet with the faculty; we'll meet with the senior team; we'll meet with the administrative counsel. Eventually we'll meet with all the groups, but it won't be by a vote.

Although their styles were different, in terms of how they built consensus and made

decisions, all of the women put their relationships with people at the center of their work.

They listen, share, communicate, build, engage, and empower others to do the same.

These women were authentic and their leadership inspired trust among those with whom

they worked and was reflected in the success of their institutions.

Personal attributes. As the women shared their stories of struggle and success, I

noted several personal attributes that the women appeared to have in common. First, they

were all genuinely appreciative of their success, their families, and the opportunities they

had been given. All of the women attributed their success, at least in part, to how they

had been supported by others. Reciprocally, they expressed care and concern for others

and made a point of considering the impact of their decisions on people.

82

Second, the women all projected a high level of self-confidence and moral

conviction. Linda remarked that she was really good at her job, and Carol described how

she operated out of her self-confidence:

I have confidence even when I probably shouldn't have confidence. I don't know why. I'm confident that I'll either figure it out or I'll get somebody else to figure it out and we'll get it done. I'm a very optimistic, competent person . . . I feel like that I have a strong enough moral compass that we will at least do the right thing based on the information that we have at the time.

The other women expressed similar sentiments, explaining that while they valued the

input of others, they remained confident in their decision-making abilities, used their

intuitions, and were willing to take full responsibility. Their confidence was also

balanced by humility. In this regard, Nicole clarified the need for humility:

It's very humbling, I think, to be president, because you are very aware of your shortcomings, you have to be really honest with yourself and take note of your strengths too, to know what you can do, what you can't do.

Even more humbling was Jenni’s perspective on her disability when compared to others:

“I've done a lot of work understanding my own privilege. In the grand scheme of things,

I find that my deafness is not as significant as some other challenges that people face.”

Even as these women were experiencing the success of a presidency, they were very

humble in acknowledging their own strengths and contributions.

Third, all of the women found passion and pride throughout their lived

experiences. Jenni found a love for literature, which led to her academic

accomplishments, when she could no longer pursue her dream of becoming a physician.

She also had a passion for her family, her work, and for teaching. Similarly, Margaret

had a passion for helping young people develop socially and academically. When she

described the work that she had done with students earlier in her career, her eyes lit up

83

and she smiled. Margaret reflected: “We really developed a very successful program for

giving students major responsibility. We also got the reputation between the two of

us . . . to being able to take the students that nobody wanted.” She further explained how

she used many of the same strategies to develop young professionals throughout her

leadership as a president.

Image and identity. The personal identities of the women in this study had been

shaped by the image expectations related to their gender, including the role of “being

president.” Being a female is a distinctive quality that differentiates these women

presidents from their male counterparts. Nicole embraced her gender identity in graduate

school:

Certainly, even early in my career as a graduate student, I had to make peace with the fact that in many professional situations, I would be seen not just as a graduate student, or a philosopher, or a professor, but as a woman graduate student, or a woman philosopher, or a woman professor. And that there was no way that that identity could be separated from my professional work. Sometimes that meant facing discrimination and sometimes that meant recognizing I had obligations to help other women, but that I had to weave that, I had to weave those identities together because the world was not going to separate them or allow me to separate them.

Nicole also suggested that women, by nature of their gender, make good leaders:

I think we need leaders that use both sides of their brain, both analytic, data-driven problem solvers, but at the same time, people with really good emotional intelligence. It's one of the reasons that I think women make such good leaders, often, is because they, women, often are able to express both parts of themselves, both in of their thinking and their decision making. And particularly on college campuses, that ability to see both parts of a problem and to make decisions that take both of those things into account, that aren't just driven by emotions and a desire to win people over, but at the same time, aren't just driven, imagining that you can just look at numbers on a page.

Nicole’s work on identity had helped her recognize the ways in which her gender can

strengthen her role as a female president. She approached her work with feeling and

84

empathy for others, while maintaining a contagious level of enthusiasm. Her work as a

president shaped the expectations for what a female college president “should be” and, in

turn, being a college president shaped her identity as a woman.

Margaret described her experience as playing a role for which she was not

naturally inclined:

People want to see a president . . . It still wasn't about me, but I needed to be certain things. As long as what was being asked of me I could do with integrity, I was willing to play that role. I understood it as a role that I played . . . and I wasn't naturally inclined to love to meet all kinds of new people, and travel around the, shake every hand in the room, and so forth. Those were things I learned to do because that was the role. It wasn't me. It was the president . . . reaching out to all these people.

All of the women acknowledged that a part of their role was to represent the institution

and be visible at all times. For Linda, that also meant a loss of privacy: “You have to

assume you are always being watched.” This is especially true for those presidents who

live on the campus property.

Interestingly for Jenni, her identity as a deaf person meant that she could not

represent other deaf individuals because she was married to a hearing man and had

hearing children:

I didn't have the personal attributes, or I didn't have the attributes of deaf people that deaf people wanted to see in the president. Inability to be the symbolic leader is the biggest reason why I couldn't be the president.

In Jenni’s case, she personally possessed the same attributes as those she would

represent, but her public identity was different.

Resilience Enhancing Meaning and Purpose: Being a President Is Meaningful

College presidents are facing insurmountable challenges in the current higher

education environment. Despite the economic, political, global, and social challenges,

85

the participants in this study all remarked about how rewarding their jobs as presidents

had been and truly appreciated having the opportunity to serve their institutions. For

instance, Jenni felt a calling to become an administrator, but said that “it wasn't about

being a president as much as finding meaningful work.” Similarly, Linda reflected on the

meaningfulness of being a president:

[It] has truly meant everything to me. I see it as the culmination of all my experiences. I see it as a leadership role that I am really good at. I am blessed to be where I want to be with students and colleagues I want to be with, in a location that I love. It means everything in terms of feeling like I am doing something important and meaningful that has a lasting impact.

Nicole also enjoyed her presidency experience and expressed: “It really is a privilege

because you are invested with this institution that means so much to so many people and,

just the responsibility of that has been very meaningful to me.” The work of being a

college president had been enjoyable and personally fulfilling for all of the participants.

Such fulfillment strengthens resilience and provides meaning and purpose.

Summary of the Findings

The participant stories revealed that resilience is a multi-dimensional

phenomenon that encapsulates a variety of human traits and lived experiences, mainly in

response to adversity. Resilience has been instrumental in shaping the participants’

identities and providing the meaning and purpose of their lives as professionals and

individuals. Although the participants described the phenomenon of resilience along

their respective paths to the presidency in different ways, they all recognized resilience as

a critical component of their professional development.

Thus, the themes and subthemes identified as a result of data analysis spoke

eloquently to the research questions posed for this study. Figure 3 portrays the

86

subthemes and their relevance to the research questions. The findings support that female

college presidents perceive and experience resilience on their paths to the presidency in

the following ways: in response to adversity; by using emotional intelligence; through

self-actualization; and through various sources of support, such as family, friends, and

professional networks. Further, they defined professional advancement as overcoming

barriers, recognizing gender bias, achieving promotional advancement in their careers,

and managing a work-life balance. Finally, the women presidents described their

perceptions of themselves in terms of their leadership qualities, their personal attributes,

their identities as “president,” and the meaning and purpose they found in their lives.

Figure 3. Subthemes and their relevance to the research questions.

87

In response to adversityBy using emotional intelligence Through self-actualizationThrough sources of support

How do female college presidents perceive and experience resilience on

their path to the presidency?

Overcoming barriers Recognizing gender bias Career advancementWork-life balance

What does professional advancement mean to

these women?

Qualities of a leader Personal attributes Image and identity is shaped by the role of president Being a president has provided meaning and purpose

What are their perceptions of

themselves as successful and resilient leaders?

Figure 4 represents the “Dimensions of Resilience” as a composite meaning of the

phenomenon of resilience based on the commonly shared experiences of the participants

reflected through the main themes of their resilience as a response to adversity, resilience

as sharing their identities, and, finally, resilience as contributing to the meaning and

purpose of their lives.

Iden

tity

Purpose

RESILIENCE

RESILIENCE

RESILIENCE

Figure 4. Representation of the phenomenon of resilience.

88

I keep the subject of my inquiry constantly before me, and wait till the first dawning

opens gradually, by little and little, into a full and clear light.

— Isaac Newton

CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION, DISCUSSION OF THE FINDINGS, AND

REFLECTIONS

The purpose of this study was to explore the ways in which women presidents

have experienced the phenomenon of resilience along their paths to the presidency. As a

female leader in higher education aspiring to become a president, I have a personal

interest in learning from the experiences of other women who have successfully ascended

to the presidency. Gender inequity continues to exist in higher education leadership,

despite the parity that exists among its students. Multiple studies have been conducted

that reveal the gender gap that persists among college and university presidents; however,

few studies focus on how women successfully overcome adversity and become

presidents. I felt compelled to study women presidents to gain insight into their journeys

and to reveal the source of their strength and determination.

Discussion of the Findings

The three dimensions of resilience constitute the essence of the phenomenon as

experienced by the participants in this study: (a) resilience as a response to adversity, (b)

resilience that shapes identity and the capacity for personal and professional success, and

(c) resilience that enhances the meaning and purpose of the participants’ personal and

89

professional lives. Resilience is a multi-dimensional experience, meaning that the

phenomenon is fluid and moves among and between each dimension simultaneously.

Identity is shaped and changed in response to adversity, and in turn, resilience is

strengthened as the individual successfully responds and adapts to adversity. The ways in

which these women experienced resilience is similar to the waves of resilience (see Table

1) described by Richardson (2002), whereby resilient qualities exist within the

individuals that “predict social and personal success,” followed by the second wave,

“coping with stressors, adversity, change, or opportunity in a manner that results in the

identification, fortification, and enrichment of protective factors,” and finally the third

wave, “the identification of motivational forces within individuals” (p. 308). All of these

women possess a set of personal attributes that predict their success: confidence,

humility, passion, pride, and moral conviction. They have learned to “cope” with

adversity by changing and adapting to their circumstances, and finally, they all have a

purpose that drives them to succeed.

Response to Adversity

The barriers that the women presidents described in this study were similar to the

barriers described in the literature review: pathways, lack of mentoring, good old boy

network, gender bias, cultural differences, and work-life balance. Five of the women in

this study followed the “traditional” path to the presidency, which means they began their

careers as faculty members and ascended through the academic ranks into administration

as an academic dean, then provost or vice president for academic affairs, and finally to

the presidency. This is consistent with the literature review that revealed the majority of

women presidents, 38% compared to 26% of men, served as a chief academic officer

90

(CAO) prior to becoming a president (Song & Hartley, 2012). Further, none of the

women aspired to become a president, which is also consistent with Madsen’s (2008)

research that found women did not intentionally look for leadership positions, but found

themselves in those positions as a result of hard work and good performance. The lack of

an intentional pursuit of a presidency suggests that women still do not see themselves as

viable candidates for those roles and do not see a clear path to follow. Eagly and Carli

(2007) described the pathways that women follow to leadership as a “labyrinth” that is

often indirect and filled with challenges. Consistent with this research, the pathways that

the participants followed were indirect and unintentional as a result of the barriers they

faced as they developed as leaders.

Mentors and role models were an important source of support for all but one of

the women, although the nature of their experiences varied. Some of the women had the

benefit of both male and female mentors and some had either male or female mentors.

Both types of experiences were regarded by the participants as valuable, although Duff

(1999) asserted that women need other women mentors to experience true empathy and

the realization of one’s true potential. Consistent with Madsen’s (2008) research, the

participants also described other relationships that were important to their success, such

as role models, sponsors, and supporters. In addition, they all expressed a commitment to

helping other women advance, and most of them remained active in leadership

organizations that support women or had organized their own support groups. The very

reason they all provided for participating in this study was to support the development

and success of other women in higher education.

91

The good old boy network was only mentioned by one of the participants,

Margaret, who seemed to have the most experience with gender discrimination. She

experienced the supremacy of the good old boy network during her involvement with the

national athletic organization in which her institution was a member. She learned a lot

about the power of money and politics there and during her time working with the

legislature. Her experience with the good old boy network strengthened her ability to

work with men by giving her the insight into how the organizations functioned. She

learned how to navigate the male network systems and expanded her own sphere of

influence. The other participant experiences were not consistent with Byrne’s (1971) (as

cited in Ballenger, 2010) research where women shared how they often felt as though

they were left out of conversations because they did not share the same personal interests

as men, and as a result, were not included in social networking circles. This may be an

indication that the good old boy network varies by institutional type, size, and regional

location.

Although gender bias is most often cited as the primary barrier to advancement

for women, this was not cited by all of the participants in this study. Ann and Sharon

both remarked on how their gender has been an advantage for them in terms of their

careers. However, as Root (2010) suggested, “gender is a belief system which is taught,

and . . . individuals can choose to believe that gender is a barrier or obstacle to their

career goals” (p. 1); this is consistent with Ballenger’s (2010) suggestion that gender bias

has moved to a “second generation” bias. Based on the stories that Ann and Sharon

shared, I believe they have experienced a form of second generation bias that, although

they have not acknowledged this, they have successfully overcome.

92

Cultural barriers were the least cited form of adversity, which is interesting given

the number of women who came from the academic ranks where bullying and

undermining are often experienced in relation to tenure and promotion (Sedivy-Benton et

al., 2014). However, the two women who referred to culture as a barrier to their success

shared profound stories. Jenni’s experience with the cultural barrier of not being “deaf

enough” and Linda’s experience of working at an institution that was geographically

isolated certainly shaped their identities and strengthened their resilience. Their

experiences are certainly consistent with Ballenger’s (2010) research that asserted women

continue to face cultural and structural barriers that limit their access to power and status

in higher education. The fact that the other women did not recognize culture as a specific

barrier may suggest that they have experienced a culture that supports the leadership

identity work necessary for the advancement of women (Ely et al., 2013), and were a

good “fit” with the institution’s values. Culture also varies by institutional type, size, and

location. Ultimately, it is the institutional culture that will either support or deny the

advancement of women into leadership roles. Women presidents have an opportunity,

although some of the participants in this study go even further to say they have an

obligation, to create a culture that supports the development and advancement of women.

Finally, the challenges of work-life balance were shared by all of the participants,

regardless of whether they were married or divorced. All of the women humbly

acknowledged their success as accomplished professionals and leaders, but admitted their

success has required tremendous sacrifices on the part of themselves and their families.

The literature confirms that women continue to carry a disproportionate level of

responsibility related to caring for the home and raising children (Longman & Madsen,

93

2014); however, two of the participants referred to the significant and certainly reversed

role that their spouses had assumed in support of their career success. On a more

personal level, most of the women admitted that they are not as diligent as they should be

about taking care of themselves and recognized that they need to actively work to

establish and protect their boundaries and find ways to focus on the their mental,

emotional, and physical well-being.

Identity

Woven within the phenomenon of resilience are the structures of the lived

experience: selfhood, sociality, embodiment, temporality, spatiality, project, and

discourse (Ashworth, 2003). Resilience is a dimension of each of those structures and

has shaped the identity of each of the women in this study.

Selfhood. The women presidents closely correlated their own perceptions of

themselves to the way they believe others perceive them, thereby revealing their

authenticity. As leaders, all the women believed that the way they see themselves—

action-oriented, authentic, collaborative, empowering, supportive, ethical, and

trustworthy—is also how their constituents view them. The literature review revealed

that a common leadership characteristic among women is authenticity, which is a “pattern

of leader behavior that draws upon and promotes positive psychological capacities and a

positive ethical climate . . . fostering positive self-development” (Walumbwa et al., 2008,

p. 94). Further, the authentic leader is perceived as caring, genuine, and ethical, all the

ways in which the participants believe others perceive them.

Heifetz et al. (2009) described the practice of “mobilizing people to tackle tough

challenges and thrive” (p. 14) as adaptable leadership. This is very similar to the way

94

Sharon described herself as having learned how to “activate people to want to try to do

their best work or advance the institution by setting them up in situations to let them be

successful.” This leadership style was also the model that all of the participants

experienced when they were subordinates or followers as opportunities were provided to

them to grow and develop. As presidents, they replicated this model and became

adaptable leaders.

In terms of gender and personal identity, Nicole shared her story of how she came

to accept her identity as a women, and Jenni shared her story of how she was forced to

alter her identity as a deaf person. Both acknowledged their identities by allowing their

realities to become known to their selves.

Sociality. Relationships with other people were consistently mentioned as a

critical component of how these women advanced in their careers and were at the center

of how they described their leadership styles. These relationships shaped the

participants’ identities, first by being influenced by mentors, role models, and colleagues

and then by applying those models to their relationships with other people. As a result of

their experiences with belittlement and marginalization, Linda and Margaret were shaped

to treat others with dignity and respect. The other women replicated their experiences by

leading with integrity and intentionally supporting the advancement of women.

Embodiment. Emotional intelligence was an important trait that all but one of

the women participants specifically mentioned in relation to their leadership and

identities. This is also one of the seven abilities that Reivich and Shatte (2002) associated

with measuring resilience, in addition to impulse control, empathy, optimism, causal

analysis, self-efficacy, and reaching out. Although the participants did not necessarily

95

aspire to be presidents, these women did aspire to be good leaders and learned very early

on in their careers to be aware of their emotions and how others perceive them. Their

actions as leaders shaped their identities as perceived by others and were reflected back to

them through their interactions. The participants were also shaped by their roles as

presidents. Margaret accepted that role and was consciously aware of how it shaped her

behavior and her identity for others: “Those were things I learned to do because that was

the role. It wasn't me. It was the president.” Nicole also found that as president: “you

represent and symbolize the institution”. All of the women explained how being

president was more than a job; it shaped their identity.

Temporality. The experiences these women had with self-actualization also

worked to shape their identities and build their awareness of their own resilience. It was

often as a result of failures and setbacks, or even through the experience of managing a

difficult project or situation, that these women learned about their own strengths and

abilities, which is consistent with Sonnenfeld (2002) who asserted that leadership is a

series of critical failures that shape one’s potential for success. The experiences of these

women shaped their perceptions of what they could achieve and further extended their

own aspirations for success. Temporality for these women was building the capacity to

be presidents. It was also about balancing their time in the most productive ways to

attend institutional events, spend time with their family, and be there for important

moments with their children.

Spaciality. Similar to temporality, spatiality also shaped the capacity for the

continued success of these women presidents. Linda offers the best example of spatiality

in her story about taking a position in a remote location that made it nearly impossible to

96

build relationships and community. She refers to that time as “a learning experience, in

itself, but it was also good for me because it was a really hard job.” That experience

strengthened her resilience and her self-confidence in knowing that despite her location

and surroundings, she could still be a successful leader and make a positive impact.

Linda also shared the way she has been shaped as a president by spatiality through the

loss of privacy as a public figure, making the point that you are always the president and

have an obligation to manage your behavior and emotions and do your best to represent

the institution and the office.

Purpose

Project. The purpose we define for ourselves is what gives life meaning (The

Resilience Center, 2015). The women in this study did not set out to be presidents as a

matter of purpose, but found meaning in their experiences as presidents. All of them

remarked about how grateful and blessed they are to have the experience of being a

president and how fulfilled their lives have become. For Carol, being president has been

about “doing the right thing.” For Margaret, being president was a “huge responsibility.”

For Ann, it has been “a huge privilege . . . full of meaning.” The relationship between

purpose and being president is very strong for these women, which further strengthens

their resilience and determination for success.

Discourse. The last structure of lived experience is discourse, the very words

used to describe experiences. Many of the women used the word “love” in reference to

how they felt about their jobs, revealing their passion for their work. They also used the

words “grateful” and “privilege,” revealing their feelings of being in service to others.

97

Recommendations for Future Research

The findings of this study relate to the phenomenon of resilience as a multi-

dimensional experience that shaped the identities and revealed meaning in response to the

adversity that seven women confronted on their paths to the presidency; however, this

study did not explore this phenomenon for men. How do male presidents experience

resilience on their paths to the presidency?

The women in this study did not aspire to become presidents. As the traditional

pipeline weakens, and the gender gap persists, more research is necessary to determine

why women, not just provosts, do not aspire to become college presidents. The gender

representation of the college student population, 57% female to 43% male (Cook, 2012),

warrants an equitable balance of female and male presidents.

Another line of research that is necessary is related to how women are groomed

for the presidency. The women in this study remarked how they were consistently

presented with opportunities to learn and advance, in some cases, directly into a

presidency. However, little research exists on how women are groomed for the

presidency, outside of the professional development programs offered by the American

Council on Education (ACE), the Council of Independent Colleges and Universities

(CIC), and the Higher Education Resource Service (HERS). The women in this study

referred to experiences that they were offered, many times by their male presidents or

other male supervisors, to take on additional leadership responsibilities. They all

indicated that they simply “took advantage of opportunities as they were presented.”

Were these intended to be experiences to help these women develop their presidential

skills? What would a succession plan look like for female leaders who want to become

98

president? Would the leadership development objectives be different for women than for

men?

Finally, why do some women not aspire to become presidents or pursue other

interests after serving in that role? Are there similarities between men and women who

do not aspire to become presidents or chose other paths after serving as presidents? How

do these life and career choices relate to the weakening pipeline of interest in the job of

president? What is the role of spiritual and psychological health in strengthening

resilience? I believe that exploring these questions will position others for success and

inform the larger body of research related to challenges of leadership in higher education.

Final Reflections

I began this journey three years ago with the determination to prove to myself, my

family, and my colleagues that I could become a college president. Having already

reached the highest level of professional success that my current credentials could

provide, it was time to pursue the doctorate. I thoroughly enjoyed the course work and

the opportunity to learn from the other students in my cohort. I knew from the beginning

that I wanted to study some aspect of that which I aspired to become so as to gain insight

and knowledge from those who have forged the path ahead; however, it was after my

own experience with adversity that I decided to explore the gift that we have all been

given to transcend beyond our natural and societal limitations and achieve success.

Resilience is a process available to all of us, like a small flame waiting for a spark

to reveal its true potential. It grows with new challenges and gets stronger with each

accomplishment. It provides the power to persevere in the face of defeat, and it grants

meaning and purpose to life. As I poured through the literature on presidential leadership

99

in higher education, I kept getting stuck on the statistic that only 1 in 4 presidents are

women. Why aren’t there more women presidents? Then I began to consider how the

chosen few made it. What is different about the women who are presidents? What is the

story behind their success that I need to tell?

The literature on gender equity in the workplace characterizes successful women

as strong, smart, and determined. When I reflect on my own experiences and learning

about women presidents, I realize that all of the women presidents I knew, and those for

whom I had worked, were certainly intelligent and driven. However, I didn’t necessarily

think of the women I knew as “strong” in the same ways. I began to tease out what

“strong” meant in relation to leadership and realized that there are several layers to what

it means to be “strong.” There is certainly the physical aspect of strength, but there is

also an element of being “strong” in the way you carry yourself and interact with others.

I didn’t necessarily think of the women I respected most as being “strong” in their stature

or demeanor, but I did consider a different aspect of strength that they did have in

common—resilience.

Most of my professional and academic development work has been on leadership

and organizational behavior; however, resilience had not been a primary focus of my

scholarship thus far. The opportunity to explore this phenomenon with women presidents

has been a rewarding learning experience. I was captivated by each of my participants’

lived experience, as though each woman was delivering a special message to me as a

mentor, coach, or friend. Ironically, the timing of each of their interviews intersected

with a time when I was experiencing a similar challenge and reflecting upon how to

100

move forward. I found encouragement and hope in their experiences and applied that

knowledge to my own situation.

The dissertation journey has taught me to just keep going, even when the path is

unclear and the challenges seem insurmountable. It is not the final outcome that is most

important; it is the experience along the way that builds character and gives life meaning.

I have a purpose. I have also learned to trust myself, accept criticism, and accept

setbacks as opportunities to learn. It is through the inquiry process that perceptions are

challenged, truth is revealed, and knowledge is created. Trusting this process has

expanded the depth of my own learning and development and inspired me to challenge

my preconceptions about leadership and gender identity. I’ll never stop learning.

My experiences as a woman, daughter, wife, mother, student, professional, leader,

and now researcher have all shaped my identity. The dissertation journey has led me to

question my own identity in relationship to the very different “roles” I must often project.

I now understand that I am not just one of those identities; rather, I am one in the same. I

am a mother and professional, a wife and a leader, a woman and a researcher. Further, by

embracing my identity as a whole person, I am stronger. I am authentic. Finally,

resilience is an experience that helps me adapt to the new challenges and circumstances

that give my life meaning and purpose. I have a gift.

101

REFERENCES

Altbach, P. G., Berdahl, R. O., & Gumport, P. J. (2011). American higher education in

the twenty-first century (3rd ed.). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University

Press: 0801899060.

American Council on Education. (2007). The American college president: 20th

anniversary. Washington, DC: American Council on Education, Center for Policy

Analysis.

Ashworth, P. (2003). An approach to phenomenological psychology: The contingencies

of the lifeworld. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 34, 145–156.

Retrieved from

http://web.b.ebscohost.com.libweb.ben.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?

vid=14&sid=5d6f6a6e-abae-43cd-8494-

aed71980f644%40sessionmgr114&hid=105

Ashworth, P. (2016). The lifeworld—enriching qualitative evidence. Qualitative

Research in Psychology, 13(1), 20–32. doi: 10.1080/14780887.2015.1076917

Association of American Colleges and Universities. (2007). College learning for the new

global century: A report from the National Leadership Council for Education &

America’s Promise. Washington, DC: Author.

Ballenger, J. (2010). Women's access to higher education leadership: Cultural and

structural barriers. Forum on Public Policy Online, 2010(5). Retrieved from

http://forumonpublicpolicy.com/vol2010no5/archivevol2010no5/ballenger.pdf.

102

Christman, D, E., & McClellan, R. L. (2008). Living on barbed wire: Resilient women

administrators in educational leadership programs. Educational Administration

Quarterly, 44(1), 3–29.

Christman, D. E., & McClellan, R. L. (2012). Discovering middle space: Distinctions of

sex and gender in resilient leadership. Journal of Higher Education, 83(5), 648–

670.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2008). The nature of inquiry—Setting the field.

In L. Cohen, L. Manion, & K. Morrison, Research methods in education (pp. 5–

48). New York, NY: Routledge.

Cook, B. J. (2012). The American college president study: Key findings and takeaways

[Spring Supplement]. American Council on Education. Retrieved from

http://www.acenet.edu/the-presidency/columns-and-features/Pages/The-

American-College-President-Study.aspx

Creative Commons. (n.d.). Transformational leadership. Retrieved from

http://www.langston.edu/sites/default/files/basic-content-files/TransformationalLe

adership.pdf

Creswell, J. W. (2006). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five

approaches. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating

quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson

Education, Inc.

Dominici, F., Fried, L. P., & Zeger, S. L. (2009). So few women leaders. Academe, 95(4),

25–27.

103

Duff, C. (1999). Learning from other women: How to benefit from the knowledge,

wisdom, and experience of female mentors. New York, NY: AMA Publications.

Eagly, A., & Carli, L. (2007). Through the labyrinth: The truth about how women

become leaders. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Eagly, A. H., Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C., & Van Engen, M. L. (2003). Transformational,

transactional, and laissez-fare leadership styles: A meta-analysis comparing men

and women. Psychological Bulletin, 129(4), 569–591. doi: 10.1037/0033-

2909.129.4.569

Ely, R., Ibarra, H., & Kolb, D. (2011). Taking gender into account: Theory and design for

women’s leadership development programs. Academy of Management Learning

and Education, 10(3), 474–493.

Ely, R., Ibarra, H., & Kolb, D. (2013, September). Women rising: The unseen barriers.

Harvard Business Review, 9, 60–66.

Englander, M. (2012). The interview: Data collection in descriptive phenomenological

human scientific research. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 43, 13–35.

doi: 10.1163/156916212X632943

Fulmer, C. L. (2010). Unpacking the evidence of gender bias. Journal of Women in

Educational Leadership, 8(2), 81–97.

Greene, R. R., Galambos, C., & Lee, Y. (2003). Resilience theory: Theoretical and

professional conceptualizations. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social

Environment, 8(4), 75–91. doi:10.1300/J137v08n04_05

104

Hartley, H. V., III, & Godin, E. E. (2010). A study of chief academic officers of

independent colleges and universities. Retrieved from

http://www.cic.edu/Research-and-Data/Research-Studies/Documents/CICCAOSu

rvey.pdf

Heifetz, R., Grashow, A., & Linsky, M. (2009). The practice of adaptive leadership.

Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing.

Helgesen, S. (1990). The female advantage: Women’s ways of leadership. New York,

NY: Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, Inc.

Hesse-Biber, S. N., & Leavy, P. (2011). The practice of qualitative research. Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Higher Education Resource Services (2015). About HERS. Retrieved from

http://hersnet.org/about/

Holmes, A. G. (2014). Researcher positionality: A consideration of its influence and

place in research. Researchgate, 1–29. Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260421552.

Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. B. (2008). Educational research: Quantitative,

qualitative, and mixed approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE

Publications.

Johnston, S. (2015, September/October). A disappointing showing. Trusteeship, 23(5), 2.

Jones, J. (2014, March 7). Clogged pipelines [Supplement]. Chronicle of Higher

Education, 45–48.

Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

105

Kim, Y. M., & Cook, B. J. (2013). On the pathway to the presidency 2013:

Characteristics of higher education’s senior leadership. Washington, DC:

American Council on Education.

Ladkin, D. (2012). Perception, reversibility, “flesh”: Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenology

and leadership as embodied practice. Integral Leadership Review, 12(1), 1–13.

Retrieved from http://integralleadershipreview.com/6280-perception-reversibility-

flesh-merleau-pontys-phenomenology-and-leadership-as-embodied-practice/

Lawthom, R., & Tindall, C. (2011). Phenomenology. In P. Banister, G. Bunn, E. Burman,

et al. (Eds.), Qualitative methods in psychology: A research guide. 2nd edition.

Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press/McGraw Hill. Retrieved from

http://www.creweandnantwich-

u3a.org.uk/Groups/Philosophy/RTFs/Ch1%20Phenomenology%202011.rtf

Lennon, T. (2013). Benchmarking women’s leadership in the United States. Denver, CO:

University of Denver-Colorado Women’s College. Retrieved from

http://womenscollege.du.edu/media/documents/BenchmarkingWomensLeadershi

pintheUS.pdf

Longman, K. A., & Madsen, S. R. (Eds.). (2014). Women and leadership in higher

education. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.

Luthar, S., Cicchetti, D., & Becker B. (2000). The construct of resilience: A critical

evaluation and guidelines for future work. Child Development, 71(3), 543–562.

Madsen, S. R. (2008). On becoming a woman leader. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Madsen, S. R. (2015). Why do we need more women leaders in higher education? (HERS

Research Brief No. 1). Retrieved from

106

http://hersnet.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/HERS-Research-Brief-No.-1-

Susan-Madsen-.pdf

Morse, J. (2015). Critical analysis of strategies for determining rigor in qualitative

inquiry. Qualitative Health Research, 25(9), 1212–1222. doi:

10.1177/1049732315588501

Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Publications.

National Leadership Council for Liberal Education & America’s Promise (2008). College

learning for the new global century (2008 Edition). Washington, DC: Association

of American Colleges and Universities.

Parker, P. (2015). The historical role of women in higher education. Administrative Issues

Journal, 5(1), 3–14. doi: 10.5929/2015.5.1.1

Reivich, K., & Shatte, A. (2002). The resilience factor. New York, NY: Three Rivers

Press.

Richardson, G. E. (2002). The metatheory of resilience and resiliency. Journal of Clinical

Psychology, 58(3), 307–321.

Roberts, C. (2010). The dissertation journey. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Root, R. L. (2010). Breaking the gender barrier. Forum on Public Policy, 2010(2), 1–19.

Retrieved from

http://forumonpublicpolicy.com/spring2010.vol2010/spring2010archive/

root.rev.pdf

Sachs, J., & Blackmore, J. (1998). You never show you can’t cope: Women in school

leadership roles managing their emotions. Gender & Education, 10(3), 265–279.

107

Saldaña, J. (2015). Thinking qualitatively: Methods of mind. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE

Publications.

Sedivy-Benton, A., Strohschen, G., Cavazos, N., & Boden-McGill, C. (2014). Good ol’

boys, mean girls, and tyrants. Adult Learning, 26(1), 35–41. doi:

10.1177/1045159514558411

Selingo, J. (2013, March 4). As colleges evolve, so must their presidents. Chronicle of

Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/As-Colleges-

Evolve-So-Must/137635/

Song, W., & Hartley, H.V., III. (2012). A study of presidents of independent colleges and

universities. Council of Independent Colleges. Retrieved from

http://www.cic.edu/Research-and-Data/Research-Studies/pages/Study-of-

Presidents.aspx

Sonnenfeld, J. (2001). Heroic leadership’s greatest battle. In W. Bennis, G. Spreitzer, &

T. Cummings, The future of leadership (pp. 189–208). San Francisco, CA:

Jossey-Bass.

The Resilience Center. (2015). Discovering your resilience core. Retrieved from

http://www.resiliencescale.com/2014/12/discovering-your-resilience-core/

Ulysse, B., & Lukenchuk, A. (2013). Presaging educational inquiry. In A. Lukenchuk

(Ed.), Paradigms of research for the 21st century (pp. 3–30). New York, NY:

Peter Lang Publishing.

U.S. Department of Education. (2006). A test of leadership: Charting the future of U.S

higher education. A report of the commission appointed by Secretary of

Education Margaret Spellings. Washington, DC: Author.

108

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

109

APPENDIX A

CONSENT FORM

110

APPENDIX A

Consent Form

Dear participant:

My name is Heather Bigard. I am a doctoral student in Higher Education and Organizational Change (HEOC) program at Benedictine University, Lisle, IL. I am conducting a qualitative research study, Preparing the Next Generation to Lead: A Phenomenological Study of Resilience among College Women Presidents, in which you are invited to participate.

The purpose of this phenomenological study is to investigate ways in which female leaders experience their presidency and perceive resiliency as a construct and lived experience conducive to their success as higher education professionals. Additionally, this study enquires into the identity construction of these female leaders as they describe their lived experiences.

The following research questions guide this study: (a) How do female college leaders perceive and experience resilience on their path to the presidency? (b) What does professional advancement mean to these women? (c) What are their perceptions of themselves as successful and resilient leaders?

This research is important to me because I have yet to find a significant study that addresses how women college presidents successfully overcome adversity in their leadership development and career advancement in higher education. It is important to me to identify the barriers and success strategies that women have faced to encourage more women to assume leadership positions in higher education and reduce the parity that exists between genders.

Upon your consent, I will schedule a time to interview you about your career development. The interview will be conducted in person or via distance means of communication. During the interview, I will ask a series of questions pertaining to your career path, leadership development, the experience of overcoming adversity, and being a college president. The interview will last approximately two hours and will be audio- and/or video-recorded (pending your consent) and transcribed verbatim. A follow-up interview may be requested based on research needs. The interview transcript will be presented to you for verification of accuracy.

There are no known risks in this study. Your participation is strictly voluntary and you can withdraw from it at any point and without any penalty to you. You are guaranteed full confidentiality and anonymity when participating in this study. Your identity will be kept fully confidential. A pseudonym will be assigned to your name and your actual name will be known only to the principle investigator (me).

111

For confidentiality purposes, the interview transcript and all files pertaining to your participation in this study will be stored in a locked cabinet for ten years and destroyed afterwards if no longer needed. All computer files will be kept on a secure server, which will be password protected. Excerpts from the interviews may be included in the final dissertation report or other later publications. However, if, at a subsequent date, biographical data were relevant to a publication, a separate release form would be sent to you.

This study is being conducted in part to fulfill requirements for my Doctor of Education (Ed.D.) degree at the College of Education and Health Services at Benedictine University in Lisle, Illinois. This study has been approved by the Benedictine University Institutional Review Board, chaired by Dr. Alandra Weller-Clarke who can be reached at xxxx@xxx.xxx; or at (xxx) xxx-xxxx.

If you have any questions regarding this study, please contact me at: (xxx) xxx-xxxx, or by email: xxxx@xxx.xxx. You may also contact my dissertation director, Antonina Lukenchuk, at: alukenchuk@ben.edu; or antoninalukenchuk@gmail.com.

A signed copy of this consent form will be provided to you. To grant your consent, please complete the two sections below.

Thank you,

Heather BigardDoctoral Candidate Higher Education and Organizational ChangeBenedictine University

I have read the information presented in the consent form above and I voluntarily agree to participate in this research study.

Name: __________________ Signature: ___________________Date: _______________

I have read the information presented in the consent form above and I voluntarily agree to have my interview audio and/or video-recorded.

Name: __________________ Signature: __________________Date: _______________

112

APPENDIX B

INTERVIEW GUIDE

113

APPENDIX B

Interview Guide

Introduction

1. Please tell me about yourself. What was it like to grow up in your family?

2. What role did education play in your life when growing up?

3. How did you career in higher education start?

Career Development

4. Please tell me about the story of your career development.

5. What professional positions have you held and for how long?

6. How did you know that you wanted to become a college president?

7. Have you had mentors, sponsors, or coaches in your life? If so, who were/are

they? What role, if any, have they played in your life?

8. Have you ever experienced barriers to your advancement? If so, what were/are

they?

Have you experienced gender bias?

How have you been affected by institutional culture?

Have you achieved a satisfactory work-family balance?

9. To what do you attribute your success in overcoming those barriers?

Leadership and Identity Construction

10. Please describe your leadership style. Which of them defines you most as the

leader?

114

11. How have you developed your leadership skills and qualities? Which of these

skills and qualities have been your biggest strengths and prepared you for

presidency?

12. How do you perceive yourself as a leader?

13. Does being a female leader have relevance in your experience? Please explain.

14. What has becoming a president meant to you?

15. How have you become engaged in professional development activities and

organizations? Which of them do you credit as most helpful to your leadership

development?

Resilience

16. How would you describe resilience?

17. How have you experienced resilience in relation to your career advancement?

18. How has resilience shaped you as a leader?

Temporality: Looking into the Future

19. Thinking ahead, how do you envision leadership being developed in the future of

higher education? What types of leaders will lead? What types of leadership will

higher education benefit most from?

20. If you are to address female leaders aspiring for presidency, what would you like

to tell them?

21. What is the next chapter in your leadership journey?

115

APPENDIX C

CODES RELEVANT TO RESEARCH QUESTIONS

116

APPENDIX C

Codes Relevant to Research Questions

Category Code Research Question 1

Research Question 2

Research Question 3

Leadership 1 Action X2 Authenticity X3 Builder X4 Collaboration X5 Communication X6 Developer X7 Integrity X8 Relationships X9 Empowerment X10 Supportive X11 Trust X

Career Development

12 Chosen X

13 Learned X14 Network X15 Opportunity X16 Pathway X17 Professional Development X18 Role Models X19 Skill X20 Support from Others X

Sources of Support 21 Family X22 Faith X23 Mentors X

Barriers 24 Challenges X25 Emotions X26 Disability X27 Gender X

Work-life Balance 28 Participation in family X29 Sacrifice X30 Set Boundaries X31 Healthy Living X32 Unsuccessful X

Overcoming 33 Accept Criticism X X34 Adaptable X X35 Confront Challenges X X36 Cope X X37 Emotional Intelligence X X38 Perseverance X X39 Perspective X X40 Reflective X X41 Self-discovery X42 Self-nurture X43 Self-empowerment X44 Success X X X

117

Personal Attributes 45 Appreciative X46 Assertive X47 Confident X48 Humility X49 Humor X50 Intuitive X51 Passionate X

Image and Identity 52 President X53 Privileged X54 Professional X

Purpose 55 Calling X56 Meaningful work X

118

APPENDIX D

THEMES RELEVANT TO RESEARCH QUESTIONS

119

APPENDIX D

Themes Relevant to Research Questions

Question 1: How do female college leaders perceive and experience resilience on their path to the presidency?

Theme

Responding to adversity Confront challenges Accept criticism Cope and adapt to reality Reflect and change perspective Persevere

Resilience as Response to Adversity

Experience as emotional intelligence Manage emotions Know thyself and how you interact with others

Resilience as Shaping Identity

Experience as self-actualization Self-discovery Self-empowerment Self-nurture Success

Resilience as Shaping Identity

Sources of Support Family (parents, spouses, siblings, pets) Mentors Professional Networks Religious Faith Social networks, sense of belonging

Resilience as Response to Adversity

Question 2: What does professional advancement mean to these

women?

Overcoming barriers Accept the challenges of the job Be open to change Accept setbacks and changes in direction Manage emotions related to fear, demoralization, failure, grief,

isolation, regret, being disliked, silenced, and ignored. Embrace disabilities

Resilience as Response to Adversity

Recognizing gender bias Sexism Second generation gender bias

Resilience as Response to Adversity

Career Advancement Took advantage of professional development and advancement

opportunities, as presented. Learned from role models and mistakes. Empowered and supported by colleagues and supervisors

Resilience as Response to Adversity

120

Followed a variety of pathwaysAchieving work-life balance

Making sacrifices for career success Include family in work events Setting boundaries and managing time and expectations Healthy living Overall unsuccessful at achieving balance

Resilience as Response to Adversity

Question 3: What are their perceptions of themselves as successful and resilient leaders?

Qualities of a Leader Action-oriented Authentic Builder of teams, relationships, consensus Communicates and Collaborates Empowers, supports, and develops others Integrity Trustworthy

Resilience as Shaping Identity

Personal Attributes Appreciative Caregiver Confident Humble Intuitive Passionate Proud Ethical and moral convictions

Resilience as Shaping Identity

Image and Identity is shaped by the role of being “president” Being female is a distinctive quality Must be visible with very little privacy Serves as a representative of the institution at all times.

Resilience as Shaping Identity

Being president has provided meaning and purpose. Work has been enjoyable and personally fulfilling. Appreciative of the opportunity to serve.

Resilience Enhancing Meaning and Purpose

121