Abstract
In 2008, minorities represented only 16% of all senior administrators at institutions of higher learning and very few Hispanic women have made it to the “executive suites” of academia (Bridges et al., 2008). The purpose of this phenomenological study was to examine the self-efficacy of Hispanic women in leadership positions at higher education institutions in the United States. The study was guided by Bandura’s theory of self-efficacy, which is “concerned with judgment of personal capabilities.”
Introduction
Recent attention has been given to the lack of diversity in executive leadership in higher education. In 2008, minorities represented only 16% of all senior administrators in institutions of higher education (Bridges et al., 2008). The report released by the American Council of Education (2008) revealed that 55.4% of all senior administrators in higher education institutions were male and 84.2% were White (Kirwian, 2008). In 2003, “91 Hispanic individuals were presidents or chancellors of institutions of higher education, including community colleges, 66 were male and 25 were female; the majority or 48 served as chancellors or presidents at community colleges—15 were females” (de los Santos & Vega, 2008, p. 157). Latinas still remain underrepresented in academic leadership at 4-year institutions.
It is now more important than ever to assess leadership opportunities for Latinas given the increased diversity of the student population. While it may be a difficult task, mechanisms do exist to evaluate and to identify Latina leaders who will best serve the educational needs of all students. Based on the theory of self-efficacy, this study sought to provide a lens through which Latina leaders can participate in the assessment of their own perceptions of themselves as leaders at institutions of higher education. This research study sought to explore how identity, self-efficacy, and culture interface with the attainment of leadership roles for Latinas in higher education. There were two assumptions. The first is that the combination of a strong sense of identity and high self-efficacy lead to perseverance toward leadership positions in academia. The second is that Latinas’ ascension into higher education executive leadership positions is closely related to the strong notion they have about themselves and/or the world around them, specifically academia.
Theoretical Framework
The proposed study was guided by Bandura’s (1997) theory of self-efficacy, which is “concerned with judgment of personal capabilities” (p. 11). Bandura (1997) stated that efficacy “is a generative capability in which cognitive, social, emotional and behavioral sub-skills must be organized and effectively orchestrated to serve multi-purposes” (p. 37). The theory of self-efficacy was applicable for this study because the research questions not only addressed the experiences of Latina in executive leadership positions in higher education but also sought to examine opportunities based on their respective environments. The primary data used to measure self-efficacy was collected through an online survey and based on the participants’ self-efficacy beliefs.
In addition, the proposed study integrated Belenky, Clinchy, Goldberger, and Tarule’s (1986) Women’s Ways of Knowing, which posits that women have five stages of knowing: (a) silence; (b) received knowledge; (c) subjective knowledge; (d) procedural knowledge; and (e) constructed knowledge. Belenky et al. stated that what women considered to be truth affects their perceptions of self, truth, and authority. Participants in the study were provided with an opportunity to reflect on their perception of self and how it has changed throughout their experiences in academia and ultimately how it shaped their ascension into leadership.
Review of the Literature
Recent reports indicate that almost half of the university chief executives are 61 years of age or older and that there will be a “wave of imminent retirements” (June, 2008, p. 1). The American Council on Education (2005) reported that
with regard to gender diversity, the proportion of presidencies held by women has more than doubled over the past decade, from 10% to 23%, but women are still most highly concentrated at community colleges and least likely to lead a doctorate-granting institution. (p. 2)
The review of the literature suggested that to be successful in leadership roles “one must know thyself and leaders must continuously develop their personality styles, modes of thinking and behaviors and in order to expand on these elements, it is important to know his or her own personality traits” (Nolan, 2005, p. 40). The eight Latina leaders who participated in the study emerged as confident individuals who had a clear sense of who they were as leaders and were confident about their capabilities to lead. They are passionate about leading the way for other Latinas seeking to pursue leadership positions in higher education and “debunking myths” about Latinas in leadership. Their success is a testament to the idea that having high self-efficacy will lead to leadership positions in academia.
Because this study highlighted Latina women who have succeeded in obtaining executive leadership positions, the literature review examined relevant research that has been published about Latinas and leadership, culture and ethnicity and the concept of identity vis-à-vis self-efficacy for Latina leaders in academia.
Latinas and Leadership
According to Catalyst, an organization that promotes women’s advancement in business and professions, “women occupy 16% of executive position, and 2% of women are CEOs in Fortune 500 companies” (Catalyst, 2008). In 2008, 2% of women of color held an executive position (Catalyst, 2008). Latinas made up 5.8% of the labor force, and 3.6% were employed in management, professional, and other related positions (Catalyst, 2009). The American Council on Education (2005) reported that
with regard to gender diversity, the proportion of presidencies held by women has more than doubled over the past decade, from 10% to 23%, but women are still most highly concentrated at community colleges and least likely to lead a doctorate-granting institution. (p. 2)
In academia, 23% of presidential positions were held by women in 2006; as of May 2008, there were four women presidents at eight of the Ivy League schools, one of them African American (Catalyst, 2008). Eagly and Carli (2007) suggest that “despite expanding opportunities, it is rare to find women in very high positions, and when they are they receive an extraordinary amount of media” (p. 13). For example, in higher education, the recent appointment of Elsa Murano as the first Hispanic female to lead a doctoral/research university was much celebrated in the media. Headlines read, “Texas A&M Historic First” and “Amazing Journey Brings New President to Texas A&M.” Because so few women ascend into leadership positions, such an achievement is still celebrated in 2009 and “shows that some women are finding their way, but that equality still remains a distant goal” (Eagly & Carli, 2007, p. 13).
Eagly and Carli (2007) discuss how women have gained access to top leadership positions in their book Through the Labyrinth: The Truth How Women Become Leaders. They ask questions like “Can any woman in a fast-paced, high-powered career ever stop saying yes without self-destructing?” and “Are women’s careers compromised by their responsibilities at home?” (p. 49). Studies of women in high-ranking leadership positions discussed consequences of reaching the top of their profession and the “yes” factor. When men make career choices, they may feel some of the consequences that are a result of change in general. Women have to scramble to maintain a home, succeed in their role as mother and/or wife, and at the same time take on every project, work 12-hr days, and volunteer on every committee to succeed in the workplace. Many women on their path to becoming leaders in their profession say yes in order not to “pay the price of irrelevancy” (Eagly & Carli, p. 161). Women take every aspect of their livelihood and include it in their leadership style, whereas men compartmentalize their different roles in life (Helgesen, 1990). Being able to manage the different roles assigned to women is attributed to women being more collaborative (Chin, 2007). Chin suggests that the “collaborative process as a skill and competency of leadership lies in women being ‘feminist’ and using ‘the self’ to promote an effective leadership style” (p. 6).
Glazer-Raymo (1999) stated that “women’s progress through the academic pipeline is closely related to several factors: disciplinary field of concentration, institutional affiliation, mentoring or sponsorship, geographic mobility and race or ethnicity” (p. 39). For many women, especially Hispanic women, family obligations, cultural expectations, and solidification of identity are all elements that need to be explored throughout their experience in higher education. Nolan (2005) stated that as leaders, women are required to “know themselves and how others perceive them so that they can inspire with a shared vision and lead their constituents” (p. 40). The American Council on Education (ACE) Summit for Women of Color Administrators in Higher Education in 2004 reported on the challenges and rewards of minority women in higher education leadership, and “knowing yourself” was a common theme among the women (ACE, 2005). Even with this knowledge, few Latinas make it to the ranks of executive leadership within academia. As the data indicate, only 10% of Latinas lead 4-year colleges and universities.
Culture, Ethnicity, and Identity
For Hispanic women, “racial stratification plays a major role in the low number Latina/o administrators in higher education” (Canul, 2003, p. 168). Layers of stereotypes, marginalization, and tokenism affect the inclusion of Hispanic women in academia. Hispanic women have often been associated with superlative femininity and passivity (Canul). Some of the stereotypes include “baby-machine, poor and uneducated” (Canul, 2003, p. 174). In addition, the notion of silence has been prevalent in Hispanic culture (Jenkins, 2009).
Hispanic women are not expected to be heard, and their voice comes second to their husbands and sons (Moraga & Anzaldua, 1983). In her landmark essay, “How to tame a wild tongue,” Anzaldua (1987) focuses on how language is used to oppress Latinas; she calls this form of oppression “linguistic terrorism” (p. 58). Linguistic terrorism, according to Anzaldua, is used to “rob women of their voice” (p. 59). She states that language is of a masculine tradition and that women can only refer to themselves in relation to a man. For Hispanic women, this exclusion in language is also an exclusion from society because Anzaldua equates linguistic identity with ethnic identity (p. 58). For Hispanic women who are nurtured in an environment that does not value their voices, entering into academia will require Latinas to navigate within an environment in which being heard is required and which can be a challenge. Canul (2003) stated that “in order to survive in higher education, it is vital to publicize one’s successes and act in matter of self-promotion” (p. 170). Characteristics that are essential to success in academia are in direct contrast with characteristics encouraged or nurtured in a Latina’s culture. The eight Latinas leaders who participated in the study seemed to have worked through perceived challenges by creating systems of support that facilitated their journey to executive leadership.
Leadership Practices Germane to Women
It has been suggested that “female behaviors—particularly collaborativeness and nurturance—have become more appropriate for managers than the stereotypical male predilections for power and control” (Robinson & Lipmen-Blumen, 2003). It is these feminine behaviors that have contributed to the success and the ability of women leaders to fit in with the contemporary, less informal structure of an organization (Helgesen, 1990). Unfortunately, higher education administration, traditionally, has followed a hierarchical leadership model that has experienced slow growth in including women in top executive leadership positions (Henck & Hulme, 2008).
Collaboration “is sometimes seen as compatible with women who use nurturance and emotional sensitivity when they are in communication with others and as a way to share power and build consensus in groups” (Rice, 2007, p. 127). As a result, the increased number of women in leadership could be attributed to the more collaborative approach to leadership. A collaborative approach to leadership requires “a rich and informed understanding of one’s innate characteristics, traits and passion; an ability to manage those abilities through a heightened sense of emotional intelligence” (Henck & Hulme, 2008, p. 7). The expectation is that women will exhibit more warmth and collaboration in their leadership style, while men are expected to be more task-oriented and assertive in their leadership style. Ironically, behaviors associated with femininity (behaviors presumed to characterize women) are viewed negatively in respect to leadership (Lott, 2007).
Women leaders “are expected to fulfill the female gender role by being warm and selfless, and on the other hand, they are also expected to fulfill the leadership role by displaying assertiveness and competence” (Eagly & Carli, 2007, p. 101). Eagly and Carli refer to this phenomenon as the “double bind” (p. 104). The double bind is the “requirement that women be communal and avoid directive and assertive behavior, but at the same time requires that effective leadership include agentic behaviors” (Eagly & Carli, p. 104). Women who exhibit masculine behaviors of self-promotion and assertiveness are often at risk of being ostracized because “the men don’t like her and the women don’t either” (p. 105). As a result, women leaders are in a constant state of balancing their behaviors and compromising their leadership style as well as the many roles ascribed to them.
Compassion, understanding, and flexibility are minimum requirements in leadership today, and creative thinking has taken the place of rigid and formal structures. Barton (2006) stated that feminist leaders “keep issues of gender, race, social class, ability and sexual orientation at the forefront of what they do” (p. 3). According to Barton (2006), higher education is still unfriendly to women leaders. Barton studied seven female academic administrators who were self-identified as feminists. The study was designed around a “feminist methodological framework and post-modern perspective that conceive experience and identity as constructed and situational” (p. 8). Themes that emerged from the data indicated that feminist academic administrators “focused on the big picture or a broad social justice and they work towards establishing a diverse environment and one that is inclusive” (p. 13).
Barton’s (2006) study echoed the idea that collaboration and empowerment were essential elements of leadership for women in executive positions. For any leader, including women leaders, effective leadership “begins with a healthy self-awareness and move to self-efficacy rooted in a positive mind-set” (Henck & Hulme, 2008, p. 7). Nolan (2005) suggests that to become an effective leader, one must know thyself and leaders must “continuously develop their personality styles, modes of thinking and behaviors and in order to expand on these elements, it is important to know his or her own personality traits” (p. 40).
Self-Efficacy and Leadership
Self-efficacy is the center of Albert Bandura’s social cognitive theory, which suggests that people have control over their thoughts, feelings, and actions which, in turn, control their environment (1997). Pajares (2003) stated that “individuals are viewed as proactive and self-regulating rather than as reactive and controlled by biological or environmental factors” (p. 139). Motivation and human behavior are directly connected to individuals’ belief about their capabilities.
Bandura (1997) stated that “how people behave can often be predicted by the beliefs they hold about their capabilities”; he called this self-efficacy beliefs (p. 15). These perceptions, he further stated, “help determine what individuals do with the skills and knowledge they have” (p. 15). According to Bandura’s self-efficacy theory, “self-efficacy is concerned not with the number of skills you have, but with what you believe you can do with what you have under a variety of circumstances” (p. 37). In other words, high self-efficacy may be related to how well you know yourself and your own perceptions on what you can accomplish. Bandura states that self-efficacy beliefs are constructed from four principal sources of information:
(1) enactive mastery experience that serve as indicators of capability; (2) vicarious experiences that alter efficacy beliefs through transmission of competencies and comparison with attainment of others; (3) verbal persuasion and allied types of social influences that one possesses certain capabilities; and (4) physiological and affective states from which people judge their capableness, strength and vulnerability to dysfunction. (p. 79)
Betz and Klein (1996) further developed Bandura’s theory of self-efficacy and extended it to the “domain of career-related behaviors” (p. 5). The Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT) states that “contextual variables (e.g., perceived barriers, acculturation, role models) can have an indirect influence on self-efficacy and goals as background variables as well as direct influence at the point in which decisions are made as proximal variables” (Rivera, Chen, Flores, Blumber, & Ponteratto, 2007). SCCT is the foundation for Betz and Taylor’s Career Decision Efficacy Scale (CDSE; 1996) that “measures an individual’s degree of belief that he/she can successfully complete tasks necessary to making career decisions” (p. 6). In terms of leadership behavior, “increasing self-awareness will give women leaders knowledge of blind spots and will make them more conscious of how they are perceived as leaders” (Korabik & Ayman, 2007, p. 120).
In a recent study that measured self-efficacy growth for women who participated in the Executive Leadership in Academic Medicine (ELAM), it was suggested “the power of self-efficacy development as a foundation for increasing the numbers and validity of women academic leaders” (Sloma-Williams, McDade, Richman, & Morahan, 2009). High self-efficacy was evident in all of the Latinas who participated in this study. Each Latina leader cited role models, experiences, and positive influences as critical to their success as leaders. The discussions of the findings will synthesis the connection between Latinas, self-efficacy and leadership.
Method
This study was conducted using a qualitative inquiry from a postpositivist perspective. The qualitative tradition that guides this study is social constructivism. The theoretical framework guiding the study is Bandura’s (1994) Theory of Self-Efficacy.
The study examined the experiences of eight Latina leaders in higher education. The following research question guided the study: How does the perception of self-efficacy for Hispanic women contribute to the attainment of leadership roles within higher education? The following subquestions were also explored:
How does the lived experience contribute to identity formation for Hispanic women leaders in higher education?
How do self-efficacy beliefs shape the journey into leadership roles for Hispanic women leaders in academia?
The method of data collection for the study included a series of phases that correlated with Creswell’s (1998) suggested process for the qualitative interview. A criterion sampling strategy was used to identify a sample for the study. The criteria for inclusion in the study were a Hispanic woman who has a doctoral degree and preferably has tenure; is situated in a 4-year institution of higher education; has had a leadership position (i.e., academic dean, provost, vice president, president, or chancellor) in an institution of higher education for 3 or more years; and self-identifies as a Hispanic woman. The data-collection instrument was an online, open-ended questionnaire developed by the researcher and based on the work of Belenky et al. (1986), Women’s Way of Knowing, and Betz’s and Kleins’s (1996) Career Decision Self-Efficacy Scale (CDSE). The questions were developed in collaboration with and reviewed by researchers and experts in the field of leadership. The questionnaire included a space for the participant to include background information and it was divided into three sections: identity, leadership, and self-efficacy, to collect the data.
Credibility
Credibility is established through three elements: (a) rigorous methods; (b) credibility of the researcher; and (c) believing in the value of qualitative inquiry. In addition, to achieve credibility a researcher must identify his or her biases toward the phenomenon. Biases distort the credibility of the research, and a credible researcher “should adopt the stance of neutrality with regard to the phenomenon being studied” (Patton, 2002, p. 51). Moustakas (1994) stated that “for phenomenological studies the investigator abstains from making suppositions, focuses on a specific topic freshly and naïvely” (p. 47). This process is called Epoche. Epoche is a Greek word meaning “to refrain from judgment, to abstain from or stay away from the everyday, ordinary way of perceiving things” (Moustakas, p. 33). The researcher acknowledged biases, prejudgments, or preconceived ideas of the study in relation to Hispanic women in executive leadership positions in higher education.
Biases included the concept of voice. Derived from feminist theory, it is suggested that voice and identity for women are silenced in a masculine world. Having voice, which is defined as the intellectual concept of self-validation, is the foundation of existing in a masculine world. The field of higher education is situated within the masculine world. So exploring identity and definition of self is important to understand the experiences of women, especially Hispanic women in executive leadership roles.
Transferability
Transferability in a qualitative study can be defined as the process in which the findings are transferable between the researcher and readers (Creswell, 2007). Throughout the study, thick description in the form of quotes and vignettes were generously included in the narrative so that the reader may determine the degree of transferability of the findings for him- or herself (Creswell, 2007).
Dependability
Dependability asks the question, “Does it make sense?” To establish dependability, the experts in the field (tenured professors in the field of higher education leadership) were asked to review the questionnaire. In addition, interviews were conducted in a consistent manner. All data were analyzed in the same manner.
Confirmability
Confirmability refers to the quality of a study and how it can be corroborated by scholars in the field. The review of the literature justified the need for the study and the thick descriptions provided in the narrative conveyed the essences and meanings/themes identified in the data.
Data Analysis
Data analysis in qualitative studies consists of “preparing and organizing data; reducing the data into themes through a process of coding and condensing codes; and representing the data in figures, tables or a discussion” (Creswell, 2007, p. 148). The responses from the online, open-ended questionnaire served as the data to examine the research questions and subquestions. The data was electronically transcribed on the participant’s completion of the online open-ended questionnaire. The researcher-developed web site provided various sorting options that allowed the researcher to view the data as a group, individually, and from various perspectives.
Following the steps of Moustakas’ (1994) Modification of Van Kaam Method of Analysis, first, the data were sorted in the order of the participants’ responses to the online, open-ended questionnaire to gain an understanding of participants’ beliefs and opinions as a group. Participants were coded as P1, P2, P3, etc. (Participant 1, Participant 2, Participant 3, etc.). Second, the data were sorted by thematic sections to allow for a more in-depth understanding of the three elements the researcher sought to research and to get a sense of the overall perceptions of the group on identity, self-efficacy, and leadership.
In addition, during the initial analysis phase, the researcher compiled descriptive notes on first impressions of each participant’s response. In addition, to invoke the essence of epoche as described by Moustakas (1994), the researcher bracketed biases and reflexive feelings to validate trustworthiness of the data. The researcher read the participants’ responses several times to be able to fully grasp and understand the experience. After several readings of the participants’ responses, the researcher began the constant comparative analysis by comparing the responses and searching for concepts. The researcher used the sorting options of the researcher-developed web site to view all responses simultaneously. The researcher viewed the responses online for each question and noted commonalities. The researcher began to prepare the data to uncover concepts, common themes, and events.
Using a preliminary color coding system, the researcher highlighted common ideas for each individual question that were relevant to the experience. The researcher listed meaning units or concepts based on color-coded themes collected from the data that were evident in each response. After color coding, the researcher reviewed the data again, and reduction and elimination of overlapping ideas or vague expressions were completed. The researcher evaluated the remaining data to determine if the ideas were significant to the study. For each participant, the data were individually evaluated to determine the significance to the experience of being a Latina leader in higher education. After several readings of the data and completing the coding process, meanings emerged, and the researcher was able to establish patterns and meanings.
The final step in the analysis process was to draw a conclusion and verify results. After the data were collected, reduced, and displayed, conclusions emerged as definitive findings. The researcher applied the analyzed data to the population being studied: Latina leaders in higher education. The information was interpreted based on prior knowledge of the subject, as presented in the review of the literature and the experiences shared by the participants.
Limitations
As in any other qualitative study, there were limitations noted to this study. Although consistent with qualitative studies, the size of the sample was one limitation to the study. There were 8 participants in the study, and it may affect the generalizability of the study. A second limitation was that responses to the online, open-ended questionnaire were self-reported, which limited the amount of probing or follow-up questioning during the interview.
Discussion of the Findings
The first research subquestion addressed identity as it related to leadership. Although identity is not one of the factors that contribute to self-efficacy, as defined by Bandura (1994), it was important to explore identity as a complement to self-efficacy because an individual would have to know him- or herself before developing self-efficacy. A strong sense of identity will define values and, as evident in this study, many of the Latinas who participated in this study lead from their values. Seven of the 8 of the participants (88%) listed honesty and respect as values they perceived as integral to their identity and important values that guide how they lead. As suggested in the literature review, academia is a very homogeneous environment; nearly 84% of administrators are White. For a Latina to be able to navigate within the majority culture, she has to make compatible her own cultural values with the majority values to survive in academia. This kind of constant navigation or bridging the two cultures requires high levels of ethnic identity and high levels of acculturation. The data revealed that 100% of the participants had a strong sense of self as they developed as leaders and perceived that it has influenced how they make decisions and address challenges. One participant indicated, “You have to be secure in your own skin to deal with adversity and the many challenges and opportunities these jobs afford us” (P5).
The second research question addressed self-efficacy beliefs. Bandura’s Theory of Self-Efficacy posits that there are four sources of self-efficacy—Mastery Experiences, Social Modeling, Verbal Persuasion, and Physiological and Affective Mental States. The study sought to gauge how self-efficacy beliefs shaped the journey into leadership position in higher education for Latinas. Although participants were not directly asked about their self-efficacy, the analysis of the responses to the online, open-ended questionnaire yielded the data to examine self-efficacy beliefs in the 8 participants of the study. The following table summarizes the elements of self-efficacy that emerged from the data.
As indicated in Table 1, the four areas of self-efficacy emerged in the experiences of the participants. The continued appointments of positions in higher education, including faculty experience, served as mastery experiences where their “actions” were perceived as positive. The 8 participants together accumulated more than 200 years of experience, and the majority of the women surveyed (75%) had more than 30 years of experience.
Summary of Self-Efficacy
Fifty-percent of the participants indicated having role models or being part of professional organizations that provided mentors. Social Models are important to leadership development because they provide individuals with the opportunity of seeing similar people in positions that they strive for and will recognize in themselves similar capabilities needed for successful progression into leadership. One participant stated, “I have a Latina president who has been a wonderful role model and friend. She is very demanding but sets the stage for all of us” (P5). It is very encouraging for Latinas to see other Latinas in leadership positions; it helps them see that leadership is a viable journey.
One-hundred percent of participants indicated having family support or strong support networks that encouraged them to pursue leadership positions. Bandura’s theory (1994) states that affirmation and recognition are other ways to increase self-efficacy. The participants of this study looked to family and support networks as a primary source of Verbal Persuasion. For the participants, it was important to have encouragement and support from family. As stated in the literature review, and will be discussed in the next section, family is a high priority among Hispanic women. It shapes the culture and value which, in turn, influences decisions.
The last tenet of self-efficacy that emerged from the data relates to Physiological and Affective states that refer to how participants react to stress or challenging situations. Bandura’s (1994) theory states that a positive or negative mood will influence how a person perceives an experience. If a person has a negative reaction to stress or a challenging task, that person may perceive him- or herself as a failure and may doubt his or her capabilities in performing that task. The Hispanic women who participated in this study all indicated experiencing challenges that caused them to doubt their leadership skills, but they also perceived those challenges as learning experiences and worked even harder at being good leaders. Therefore, based on the study’s findings, evidence of self-efficacy appeared to contribute to successful attainment of leadership positions for the 8 Latina leaders who participated in this study.
Common Themes
Common themes emerged early in the data analysis process. In the previous section, a thorough analysis of the data yielded common themes. This section summarizes the themes revealed from the participants’ experiences. Although participants had varying experiences as related to leadership, four common themes emerged:
Strong sense of values;
Support networks;
Self-awareness; and
Professional experiences.
Each of the themes addressed the centerpieces of the overarching question, self-efficacy and leadership, which guided the study.
Common Theme 1: Strong sense of values
Canul (2005) suggests that recognizing cultural values influences the experience of administrators. In other words, making compatible one’s own cultural values with the majority’s values is essential for survival in academia. As stated in the previous section, values are commonly linked to understanding identity, and identity indirectly influences self-efficacy. You have to know yourself before developing self-efficacy, and for the 8 Latinas who participated in the study, values were at the core of their leadership. Leaders should know what they value. Values influence behaviors and how decisions are made. Three values that emerged from the data were responsibility; honesty and respect (integrity); and academic experiences (education).
Seven out of 8 participants (88%) indicated sense of responsibility or being a role model as factors in how they identify themselves as Latina leaders in higher education. One participant indicated her role as one of service.
Although I see myself as a Latina first, being a Latina gives me the added responsibility of being an advocate and spokesperson for the Hispanic community. I am seen as a role model, a responsibility I take very seriously. (P1) High sense of obligation and responsibility. (P8) It means people view you as a role model and that brings with it a great deal of responsibilities. (P3) It means being a role model, having a unique voice and having the ability to influence. (P7) It is significant because there are very few of us in senior positions. In my circle of private 4-year undergraduate institutions, there are even less. I know most Latinas at my level of leadership and in my field. They are my mentors and supporters. I have to rely on broader circles of mentors from other groups to get what I need. It also means that I have to do my part to bring other Latinas into this work. (P2) I am very proud of what I have accomplished, and I am proud to serve as a role model to our students. (P5)
Seven of the 8 participants (88%) listed honesty and respect as values that they perceived as integral to their identity and important values that guide how they lead. Questions 3, 4, and 6 addressed the notion of self and what values helped in the formation of identity as related to leadership development. The specific narratives were as follows:
I am very straight forward and honest. I do not tell people what they want to hear, but I do believe in being honest, forthright and respecting the individual. (P1) Being honest and direct and not compromising my personal integrity in what I do. I am an honest person and hard worker. (P2) I believe you must communicate with people directly and honestly. People want to be heard and I work hard to be sure I have input from the people I work with. I value collegiality and respect for the individual. (P3) Stewardship of public trust; to those who much is given, much is expected; deal honestly and treat people with dignity; respect all staff and faculty equally, continue to learn from others. (P4) Education, hard work, and respect. I also value my family who instilled a love for education and ethical behavior. (P5) I believe you need to have a strong sense of self and self-direction to be an effective leader. I like to develop a vision collaboratively with those I am working with and allow them to have a voice in the process. A sense of self is something that I find is always developing and changing over time through one’s experiences. (P6)
All participants (100%) indicated that their academic experiences, including mentors, were a value that had an impact on their leadership career. The following are specific narratives provided by the participants that describe what led them to their current executive leadership position. Four out of the eight (50%) indicated that their experience as a faculty member was the beginning of their academic careers.
I was a faculty member for 20 years and taught English. By being a faculty member, I was able to better understand the role of the university and its commitment to its students. (P1) I was an English professor before starting on a path in administration. I have moved up through the administrative ranks in a very traditional and progressional way. (P3) Certainly my academic credentials have helped, but so has my love for my profession. As a student affairs professional, I enjoy doing what I can to help students succeed. (P 5)
Common Theme 2: Support networks
Support networks provide encouragement and advice; and in the case of this study, they support leadership development. Bandura (1994) states that one source of self-efficacy is verbal persuasion. Verbal persuasion provides people with positive reinforcement that they have what it takes to successfully complete a task. In a study conducted with ELAM (Executive Leadership in Academic Leadership), “fellows indicated that the verbal persuasions and reinforcements helped them to recognize the leadership talents they possessed” (Sloma-Williams et al., 2009). For Hispanic women support networks provide verbal persuasion. The data indicated that 100% of the participants for this study indicated that family provided constant support.
My husband is an academic so his support was critically important and he knew the obstacles that I would face. He helped me through the challenges. (P1) My family is my core, and they have always been behind me. I come from a very traditional immigrant family, and I am the first born and only girl. I have gone beyond any box that was defined for me in my core family, but they have been there every step of the way. I talk with them about what I do, and I expose them to my work. They will be there in the front row cheering for me if I become a college president. I know that. (P2)
For the participants of this study, support networks also included mentors that encouraged them to pursue leadership positions.
A psychology professor in college pushed me to go to graduate school. That changed my life and my field got me very interested in the development of young adults and adolescents. (P2)
Cultivating their own support networks is essential to their own success because these support networks are made up of people who understand the challenges that they face as Latina leaders. Members of this support network can help them “learn the rules and offer support” (Sanchez, Hucles, Sanchez-Hucles, & Mehta, 2007).
Common Theme 3: Self awareness
In terms of leadership behavior, “increasing self-awareness will give women leaders knowledge of blind spots and will make them more conscious of how they are perceived as leaders” (Korabik & Ayman, 2007, p. 120). The Center for Creative Leadership (2003) stated that self-awareness is crucial to emotional intelligence, which is needed to develop leadership skills. Emotional intelligence requires “a rich and informed understanding of one’s innate characteristics, traits and passion and an ability to manage those abilities,” specifically for the collaborative style of leadership normally associated with women (Henck & Hulme, 2008, p. 7). In addition, self-awareness is the key to identifying your strengths and weaknesses which is key to handling stress (Center for Creative Leadership, 2003). Stress tolerance and how a leader performs in a stressful situation is related to physiological and affective states of Bandura’s Self-Efficacy Theory. For any leader, including women leaders, effective leadership “begins with a healthy self-awareness and move to self-efficacy rooted in a positive mind-set” (Henck & Hulme, 2008, p. 7).
One-hundred percent of participants of the study identified strengths and weaknesses related to their leadership style. As a group, the participants’ common strengths were communication and determination, and a common weakness among the participants was overburdening themselves. In other words, the participants perceived that doing “too much” as a weakness.
I work very hard and sometimes need to balance better. (P2) I tend to be a little too fast at times, and I do not always slow down as I should. (P3) My weakness is that I try to do too many things all at once. (P4)
The literature attributes this weakness to the “yes factor” (Welch 2005). The “yes factor” is the idea that women take on every assignment, task and project on their road to leadership in order to avoid the perception of “irrelevancy” or not being able to handle leadership (Welch, 2005).
Common Theme 4: Professional experiences
The fourth common theme as identified in Chapter IV is one of the most important elements of self-efficacy, mastery experiences. Mastery experiences, according to Bandura (1994), are experiences that affirm for individuals that they have what it takes to succeed. Self-efficacy is developed if individuals can overcome obstacles through perseverance. For the 8 participants in this study, professional experiences included progression through the academic ranking, serving as role models, and continued appointments to leadership positions. All of these contributed to mastery experiences. As discussed in the review of the literature, academia can be very unwelcoming to women, and more so to Latinas. Gender and ethnic stereotypes make it difficult for a Latina to advance as leaders in academia. The Hispanic women who participated in this study cited both racial and sexist attitudes as a challenging experience, but these same women have used these experiences as motivation to move forward and persevere. Fifty percent indicated having faculty status and 100% serve or have served in a role model capacity which further validates their success. In addition, as a group they have an average of 27 years of experience in higher education. The successes achieved by the participants in the study are a result of their sustained effort through these mastery experiences.
Recommendations
Recent reports published by the Academic Council on Education (Bridges et al., 2008) have raised concerns about diversifying leadership in higher education. Studies cite the lack of Latinas in the doctoral track, gender and ethnic biases that keep Latinas in the periphery of leadership, and lack of support for Latinas on the leadership track. These viewpoints, coupled with the findings related to self-efficacy and identity, were the basis for making the following recommendations:
Increase the opportunity for self-efficacy development for Latinas in doctoral programs. First, a review of programs geared toward Latinas in doctoral programs with the aim to assess the inclusion of self-efficacy elements as defined by Bandura’s Theory of Self-Efficacy (1994) should be conducted. As evident by this study, high self-efficacy will contribute positively to the attainment of leadership positions in higher education. Second, provide a “practicum” in leadership for Latina doctoral students interested pursuing leadership positions that will provide practical application of leadership skills. Third, provide more formal mentoring experiences that will address issues or challenges specific to Latinas in higher education. These types of additional efforts may provide the level and type of support that for some Latina graduate students may lead to successful completion of the Ph.D.
Increase the number of professional development programs for Latinas in higher education with an emphasis on self-efficacy development. The National Hispana Leadership Institute (NHLI) is one program designed to address the “disparity of representation of Latinas in leadership.” According to their website, they are the only program in the nation that focuses on the future of Latina leaders. Organizations like the American Association of Hispanics in Higher Education (AAHHE) have proved to be successful in providing leadership experiences at both the doctoral level and in the development of the junior faculty, but they are not specific to Hispanic women. Developing programs specifically geared toward Hispanic women can strengthen support networks and provide a “space” for Latinas to “air out” challenges specific to them.
Provide diversity training workshops to university executive leadership search firms or hiring committees. Doctoral program directors can prepare Latinas for leadership positions and programs can be developed to hone in on leadership skills via self-efficacy development, as suggested in the recommendations above. However, they will all be in vain if executive search firms or search committees are not continuously trained on diversity issues. The American Council of Education’s recently released report, “Advancing diversity in the American college presidency,” has suggested that although the role of a college president has changed with more focus on fundraising, accountability, and assessment, “presidential search committees continue to look for leaders using the same criteria that have been always been used, limiting opportunities for young leaders, women and minorities” (Kirwian, p. 5). Diversity training specifically designed for executive search firms or search committees may lead to needed change in the leadership search process, making it more inclusive of Latinas.
The recommendations for practice suggested in this study are not exhaustive, but representative of the findings and comments derived from this study.
Further Research
One goal of this study was to add to the research on Latinas in Higher Education with the purpose of examining self-efficacy among Hispanic women leaders in higher education. The results of this study yielded three recommendations for further research. First, it is suggested that a quantitative study be conducted which measures the influence of high self-efficacy on attainment of leadership positions in higher education for Latinas. Second, a comparative based study on what effect participation in a formal leadership program (infused with self-efficacy elements) has on leadership attainment for Latinas in leadership is recommended. The third recommendation is to conduct a review of diversity practices for executive leadership search firms which can open the forum for discussion on diversity as related to search and hiring practices.
Conclusion
Every experience toward leadership attainment is different for every individual, and different factors affect how successful we are as leaders. Few Latinas make it to the ranks of executive leadership within academia, and as the data indicate only 10% of Latinas lead 4-year colleges and universities. For the 8 Hispanic women who participated in this study, high self-efficacy, along with a well-develop sense of self, had a substantial contribution to their success as leaders. The data that emerged from the study indicated that four sources of self-efficacy are important in the journey to leadership and knowing who you are is important to developing self-efficacy.
Despite challenges and adversity the eight Latina leaders who participated in this study have persevered, “debunked myths and stereotypes,” and embodied the definition of leadership. Attainment of leadership positions for Latinas in higher education is achieved through high self-efficacy along with a strong sense of self. In addition, the journey toward leadership requires a shared responsibility by Latinas in the path to leadership, the community that supports them and the gatekeepers to the executive suites of academia.
Increased global competition and the changing demographics of America’s population dictated the need for an examination of the current state of leadership in higher education. Hispanics will play a major role in ensuring the country’s future prosperity and economic development making it crucial for Hispanic women to be at the executive tables where decisions are made that will affect our community.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.