The Effects of Individual, Environmental, Cognitive, and Personality Factors on Motivation to Lead (MTL)

Yıl 2023, , 414 - 438, 27.10.2023

Gökhan Arastaman , Tuncer Fidan , Barış Eriçok

https://doi.org/10.54600/igdirsosbilder.1314168

Cited By: 1

Öz

This quantitative study examines how individual, contextual, cognitive, and personality factors affect teacher leadership motivation. The study included 43,878 high school teachers in Istanbul. Cluster sampling generated 381 samples. Individual variables in this study included gender, marital status, administrative experience, education, and professional experience. Environmental variables included institutional restrictiveness, role ambiguity, and leadership prototypes. Leadership self-efficacy assessed teachers' leadership cognition. The ten-item personality questionnaire measured traits that may affect leadership motivation. Data analysis included descriptive statistics, correlation coefficients, mean, standard deviation, and hierarchical multiple regression. Administrative experience, graduate degrees, professional experience, self-confidence in direction setting, extraversion, emotional stability, and openness to experience increased teachers' affective-identity MTL. Gender, marital status, institutional restrictiveness, role ambiguity, leadership prototypes, self-confidence in commitment and overcoming obstacles, agreeableness, and conscientiousness did not predict affective-identity MTL. The study also found that institutional environment, role ambiguity, and leadership prototypes do not change attitudes toward leadership roles that match personalities and affective-identity MTL. Teachers with undergraduate degrees, direction-setting self-confidence, extraversion, conscientiousness, and emotionally stable traits have higher noncalculative MTL. Finally, male, married teachers with open minds and principals who match their leadership models have high social-normative MTL.

Anahtar Kelimeler

MTL, Leadership, Motivation, Individual factors, Environmental factors

Bireysel, Çevresel, Bilişsel ve Kişilikle İlgili Etkenlerin Liderlik Etme Motivasyonu (LEM) Üzerindeki Etkilerinin İncelenmesi

Öz

Bu nicel çalışma bireysel, çevresel, bilişsel ve kişilik faktörlerinin liderlik motivasyonunu nasıl etkilediğini incelemektedir. Çalışmanın evrenini İstanbul’da görev yapan 43.878 lise öğretmeni; örneklemi ise küme örnekleme yöntemiyle seçilmiş 381 öğretmen oluşturmaktadır. Bu çalışmada bireysel değişkenlerden cinsiyet, medeni durum, yöneticilik deneyimi, eğitim ve mesleki kıdem incelenmiştir. Çevresel değişkenlerden ise kurumsal çevrenin kısıtlayıcılığı, rol belirsizliği ve liderlik prototipleri incelenmiştir. Öğretmenlerin liderlikle ilgili bilişsel kapasitelerini belirlemek için liderlik özyeterliği ölçeği kullanılmıştır. Liderlik etme motivasyonu (LEM) üzerinde etkili olabilecek kişilik değişkenlerini ölçmek için on maddelik kişilik envanteri kullanılmıştır. Veri analizinde betimleyici istatistikler, korelasyon katsayıları, ortalama, standart sapma ve hiyerarşik çoklu regresyon kullanılmıştır. Bulgulara göre, yöneticilik deneyimi, lisansüstü eğitim, kıdem, yön belirleme konusundaki özgüven, dışadönüklük, duygusal dengelilik ve deneyime açıklık öğretmenlerin duygusal kimlik LEM’lerini artırmaktadır. Cinsiyet, medeni durum, kurumsal çevrenin kısıtlayıcılığı, rol belirsizliği, liderlik prototipleri, takipçilerin adanmışlığını kazanma, engelleri aşma, uyumluluk ve sorumluluk, öğretmenlerin duygusal kimlik LEM'ini yordamamaktadır. Çalışma aynı zamanda kurumsal çevrenin, rol belirsizliğinin ve liderlik prototiplerinin, bireylerin kişilikleri ve duygusal-kimlik LEM'iyle eşleşen liderlik rollerine ilişkin algılarını değiştirmediğini bulmuştur. Hesapçı olmayan LEM, lisans derecesine sahip, yönlendirme konusunda kendine güvenen, uyumlu, sorumlu ve duygusal olarak istikrarlı niteliklere sahip öğretmenlerde daha yüksektir. Son olarak, deneyime açık ve birlikte çalıştıkları müdürler liderlik prototipleriyle uyumlu, erkek ve evli öğretmenlerin sosyal-normatif LEM'leri görece daha yüksektir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

LEM, Liderlik, Motivasyon, Bireysel etkenler, Çevresel etkenler

Kaynakça

• Acton, B. P., Foti, R. J., Lord, R. G., & Gladfelter, J. A. (2019). Putting emergence back in leadership emergence: A dynamic, multilevel, process-oriented framework. The Leadership Quarterly, 30(1), 145-164. Atak, H. (2013). The Turkish adaptation of the ten-item personality inventory. Archives of Neuropsychiatry, 50(4), 312-319.
• Aycan, Z., Schyns, B., Sun, J. M., Felfe, J., & Saher, N. (2013). Convergence and divergence of paternalistic leadership: A cross-cultural investigation of prototypes. Journal of International Business Studies, 44(9), 962-969.
• Ayyıldız, P., & Yılmaz, A. (2022). Liderlik kapasitesinin hazır oluş/isteklilik/yetkinlik bakımlarından ölçülmesi ölçeğinin türkçe’ye uyarlanması: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 23(3), 2262-2289.
• Balcı, A. (2013). Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma: Yöntem teknik ve ilkeler. Pegem Akademi.
• Badura, K. L., Grijalva, E., Galvin, B. M., Owens, B. P., & Joseph, D. L. (2020). Motivation to lead: A meta-analysis and distal-proximal model of motivation and leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 105(4), 331-354.
• Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. Freeman and Company.
• Bandura, A. (2002). Social cognitive theory in cultural context. Applied Psychology, 51(2), 269-290.
• Barling, J., Weatherhead, J. G., Pupco, S., Turner, N., & Montgomery, A. W. (2022). Contextual, interpersonal, and personal predictors of young adults' affective-identity motivation to lead. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 43(7), 1118-1139.
• Barrick, M. R., Mitchell, T. R., & Stewart, G. L. (2003). Situational and motivational influences on trait-behavior relationships. In M. R. Barrick, & A. M. Ryan (Eds.), Personality and work: Reconsidering the role of personality in organizations (pp. 60-83). Jossey-Bass.
• Bass, B. M. (1990). From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning to share the vision. Organizational Dynamics, 18(3), 19–31.
• Beycioğlu, K., & Aslan, B. (2010). Öğretmen liderliği ölçeği: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. İlköğretim Online, 9(2), 2-13.
• Blaum, B., & Tobin, K. (2019). Motivating the motivators: An examination of high school principals’ drive to succeed. NASSP Bulletin, 103(3), 253-267.
• Bobbio, A., & Rattazzi, A. M. M. (2006). A contribution to the validation of the motivation to lead scale (MTL): A research in the Italian context. Leadership, 2(1), 117-129.
• Born, A., Ranehill, E., & Sandberg, A. (2018). A man´ s world?–The impact of a male dominated environment on female leadership. Working Paper in Economics No. 744.
• Chan, K. Y., & Drasgow, F. (2001). Toward a theory of individual differences and leadership: Understanding the motivation to lead. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 481-498.
• Chan, K. Y., Rounds, J., & Drasgow, F. (2000). The relation between vocational interests and the motivation to lead. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 57, 226-245.
• Chatturgoon, S. (2008). An exploration into teachers' perceptions on teacher leadership and their motivational levels to engage in leadership roles at school [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Kwazulu-Natal.
• Chen, L. (2016). Linking leader personality traits to motivation to lead: A self-concept approach. Social Behavior and Personality: An international journal, 44(11), 1913–1925.
• Cheung, F., & Lucas, R. E. (2014). Assessing the validity of single-item life satisfaction measures: Results from three large samples. Quality of Life Research, 23, 2809-2818.
• Cho, Y., Harrist, S., Steele, M., & Murn, L.T. (2015). College student motivation to lead in relation to basic psychological need satisfaction and leadership self-efficacy. Journal of College Student Development, 56(1), 32–44.
• Cogliser, C. C., Gardner, W. L., Gavin, M. B., & Broberg, J. C. (2012). Big five personality factors and leader emergence in virtual teams: Relationships with team trustworthiness, member performance contributions, and team performance. Group & Organization Management, 37(6), 752-784.
• Demir, K. (2014). Öğretmen liderliği kültürü ölçeği: Geçerlik ve güvenilirlik çalışması. İlkogretim Online, 13(2), 334-344.
• Dobbs, J., M., Lindsay, D., R. & Jackson, R., J. (2019). Antecedents of the Motivation to Lead: What Type of Leader Wants to Step Up? American Research Journal of Humanities & Social Science (ARJHSS), 2(6), 54-63.
• Dugan, J., Fath, K., Howes, S., Lavelle, K., & Polanin, J. (2013). Developing the leadership capacity and leader efficacy of college women in science, technology, engineering, and math fields. Journal of Leadership Studies, 7, 6-23.
• Ely, R. J., & Rhode, D. L. (2010). Women and leadership: Defining the challenges. In N. Nohria & R. Khurana, (Eds.), Handbook of leadership theory and practice (pp. 377-410). Harvard Business Press.
• Erez, A., & Judge, T. A. (2001). Relationship of core self-evaluations to goal setting, motivation, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(6), 1270-1279.
• Fairman, J. C., & Mackenzie, S. V. (2012). Spheres of teacher leadership action for learning. Professional Development in Education, 38(2), 229-246.
• Fidan, T., & Ayyıldız, P. (2022). The role of prototypicality in educational leadership. In Fenwick English (Ed.), The Palgrave handbook of educational leadership and management discourse (pp. 1-17). Palgrave Macmillan.
• Fidan, T., & Koç, M. H. (2022). Examining the effect of ethical awareness on the relationship between political skill and subjective career success. International Journal of Educational Leadership and Management, 10(2) 110-139.
• Garson, G. D. (2012). Testing statistical assumptions. Statistical Associates Publishing.
• Goddard, Y.L., Goddard, R.D., Bailes, L.P. and Nichols, R. (2019). From school leadership to differentiated instruction: A pathway to student learning in schools. The Elementary School Journal, 120(2), 197-219.
• Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., & Swann Jr, W. B. (2003). A very brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains. Journal of Research in Personality, 37(6), 504-528.
• Guillén, L., Mayo, M., & Korotov, K. (2015). Is leadership a part of me? A leader identity approach to understanding the motivation to lead. The Leadership Quarterly, 26(5), 802-820.
• Günbay, İ. (2005). Women and men teachers' approaches to leadership styles. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 33(7), 685–698.
• Hallinger, P., & Bridges, E. M. (2017). A systematic review of research on the use of problem-based learning in the preparation and development of school leaders. Educational Administration Quarterly, 53(2), 255-288.
• Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (1996). Reassessing the principal's role in school effectiveness: A review of empirical research, 1980-1995. Educational Administration Quarterly, 32(1), 5-44.
• Hameiri, L., Nir, A., & Inbar, D. E. (2014). Confronting uncertainty and risk: The contribution of leadership to school outcomes. Planning and Changing, 45(1/2), 48-82.
• Hancock, D. R., Hary, C., & Müller, U. (2012). An investigation of factors impacting the motivation of German and US teachers to become school principals. Research in Comparative and International Education, 7(3), 352-363. Hancock, D. R., Müller, U., Wang, C., & Hachen, J. (2019). Factors influencing school principals’ motivation to become principals in the USA and Germany. International Journal of Educational Research, 95, 90-96.
• Hogan, R., & Kaiser, R. (2005). What we know about leadership. Review of General Psychology, 9, 169–180.
• Hong, Y., Catano, V. M., & Liao, H. (2011). Leader emergence: The role of emotional intelligence and motivation to lead. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 32(4), 320-343.
• Hoyt, C., & Murphy, S. (2016). Managing to clear the air: Stereotype threat, women, and leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 27, 387-399.
• Jacquart, P., Cole, M., Gabriel, A. S., Koopman, J., & Rosen, C. C. (2017). Studying leadership: Research design and methods. In John Antonakis & David V. Day (Eds.), The nature of leadership (pp. 411-437). Sage Publications.
• Jiang, X., Snyder, K., Li, J., & Manz, C. C. (2021). How followers create leaders: The impact of effective followership on leader emergence in self-managing teams. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 25(4), 303-318.
• Jones, A., & Shideh, R. (2020). Leadership structure and practices in organizations and the development of a new leadership sustainable model. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 14(8), 91-102.
• Judge, T. A., & Ilies, R. (2002a). Relationship of personality to performance motivation: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 797.
• Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., Ilies, R., & Gerhardt, M. W. (2002b). Personality and leadership: A qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 765-780.
• Justus, K., Arghode, V., & Barker, D. (2022). Principal self-efficacy, mindset and performance outcomes: exploring the connection. European Journal of Training and Development. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJTD-07-2021-0092
• Kalish, Y., & Luria, G. (2021). Traits and time in leadership emergence: A longitudinal study. The Leadership Quarterly, 32(2), 101443.
• Kennedy, J. C., Chan, K. Y., Ho, M. H. R., Uy, M. A., & Chernyshenko, O. S. (2021). Motivation to lead as mediator of relations between the dark triad, big five, and leadership ıntention. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 675347.
• Kirkpatrick, S., A. & Locke, E., A. (1996). Direct and indirect effects of three core charismatic leadership components on performance and attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(1), 36–51.
• Krishnakumar, S., & Hopkins, K. (2014). The role of emotion perception ability in motivation to lead. Management Research Review, 37(4), 334–347.
• Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2008). Seven strong claims about successful school leadership. School leadership and management, 28(1), 27-42.
• Li, L., Hallinger, P., & Ko, J. (2016). Principal leadership and school capacity effects on teacher learning in Hong Kong. International Journal of Educational Management, 30(1), 76-100.
• Liden, R.C. & Antonakis, J. (2009). Considering context in psychological leadership research. Human Relations, 62(11), 1587-1605.
• Lindberg, E., Wincent, J. & Ӧrtqvist, D. (2013). Turning stressors into something productive: an empirical study revealing nonlinear influences of role stressors on self-efficacy. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 43(2), 263-274.
• Lord, R. G., & Dinh, J. E. (2012). Aggregation processes and levels of analysis as organizing structures for leadership theory. In D. V. Day, & J. Antonakis (Eds.), The nature of leadership (pp. 29–65) (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
• Lord, R. G., & Hall, R. J. (2005). Identity, deep structure and the development of leadership skill. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(4), 591–615.
• Marsden, P. V., Kalleberg, A. L., & Cook, C. R. (1993). Gender differences in organizational commitment: ınfluences of work positions and family roles. Work and Occupations, 20(3), 368–390.
• McMillin, M. R. (1975). Leadership aspirations of prospective teachers. A comparison of men and women. Journal of Teacher Education, 26(4), 323–325.
• Mizrahi-Shtelman, R. (2021). Role identity and sensemaking as institutional mechanisms for policy translation: The case of school principals and education reforms in Israel. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 20(2), 203-221.
• Mumford, M. D., Zaccaro, S. J., Connelly, M. S., & Marks, M. A. (2000). Leadership skills. The Leadership Quarterly, 11(1), 155–170.
• Murphy, S. E., & Johnson, S. K. (2011). The benefits of a long-lens approach to leader development: Understanding the seeds of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(3), 459-470.
• Oc, B. (2018). Contextual leadership: A systematic review of how contextual factors shape leadership and its outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 29(1), 218-235.
• Paglis, L. L., & Green, S. G. (2002). Leadership self‐efficacy and managers' motivation for leading change. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(2), 215-235.
• Payne, G., & Payne, J. (2004). Key concepts in social research. Sage.
• Pimentel, J. L. (2019). Some biases in Likert scaling usage and its correction. International Journal of Science: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR), 45(1), 183-191.
• Polatcan, M., & Cansoy, R. (2020). Liderlik etme motivasyonu ölçeğinin Türk kültürüne uyarlanması. İnsan ve Toplum Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi, 9(2), 1263-1288.
• Playter, K. L. (2023). Leadership in Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (LCMS) Universities: An Exploration of Perceived Organizational Support and Motivation to Lead in Relation to Gender, Marital Status, and Parental Status (Doctoral dissertation, Regent University).
• Porter, T., Riesenmy, K. ve Fields, D. (2016). Work environment and employee motivation to lead: Moderating effects of personal characteristics. American Journal of Business, 31(2), 66-84.
• Porter, T. H., Gerhardt, M. W., Fields, D. & Bugenhagen, M. (2019). An exploratory study of gender and motivation to lead in millennials. The Journal of Social Psychology, 159(2), 138–152.
• Rosch, D. M., Collier, D. & Thompson, S. E. (2015). An exploration of students’ motivation to lead: an analysis by race, gender, and student leadership behaviors. Journal of College Student Development, 56(3), 286–291.
• Sanchez, S. A. (2003). The relationship among motivation to lead, cognitive ability, and personality [Published doctoral dissertation, Our Lady of the Lake University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
• Schein, E., H. (2010). Organisational culture and leadership (4th edition). Jossey-Bass.
• Schepers, J. (2016). On regression modelling with dummy variables versus separate regressions per group: Comment on Holgersson et al. Journal of Applied Statistics, 43(4), 674-681.
• Sears, G. A. (2006). The principalship: a study of prescriptions, practices and perceptions within a Christian school context [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. The University of Adelaide.
• Shapiro, M., Grossman, D., Carter, S., Martin, K., Deyton, P., & Hammer, D. (2015). Middle school girls and the “Leaky Pipeline” to leadership: An examination of how socialized gendered roles influences the college and career aspirations of girls is shared as well as the role of middle level professionals in disrupting the influence of social gendered messages and stigmas. Middle School Journal, 46(5), 3-13.
• Steele, C. W. (2021). When things get odd: Exploring the interactional choreography of taken-for-grantedness. Academy of Management Review, 46(2), 341-361.
• Sun, J., & Leithwood, K. (2015). Direction-setting school leadership practices: A meta-analytical review of evidence about their influence. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 26(4), 499-523.
• Şeker, M., Baypınar, M. B., Çelikbıçak, G., & Özbay, B. K. (2022). Quality of life ındex: İstanbul 2020. İstanbul İktisat Dergisi, 72(2), 543-568.
• Tafero, T. L. (2007). Personality predictors of motivation to lead [Published doctoral dissertation, Clemson University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
• Tunçdoğan, A., Acar, O. A., & Stam, D. (2017). Individual differences as antecedents of leader behavior: Towards an understanding of multi-level outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 28(1), 40–64.
• Verawati, D., M. & Hartono, B. (2020). Effective leadership: from the perspective of trait theory and behaviour theory. Jurnal REKOMEN, 4(1), 13-23
• Vilkinas, T., Murray, D. W., & Chua, S. M. Y. (2020). Effective leadership: Considering the confluence of the leader’s motivations, behaviours and their reflective ability. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 41(1), 147-163.
• Waldman, D. A., Galvin, B. M., & Walumbwa, F. O. (2013). The development of motivation to lead and leader role identity. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 20(2), 156-168.
• Wang, F., Pollock, K., & Hauseman, C. (2023). Time demands and emotionally draining situations amid work intensification of school principals. Educational Administration Quarterly, 59(1), 112–142.
• Yang, L., Huang, C. & Hsu, T. (2013). Knowledge Leadership to Improve Project and Organizational Performance, International Journal of Project Management 32, 40-53.
• Yukl, G., A. & Gardner, W., L. (2020). Leadership in organisations (9th edition). Pearson.