| The purpose of this study was to determine if community college cabinet-level administrators in North Carolina exhibited a preference for certain conflict management modes and to ascertain if a relationship existed between conflict mode preference and participant age, leadership role, administrative tenure and gender as well as size of institution and location of institution. The Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument, which identifies conflict style preferences in the five distinct categories of competing, collaborating, compromising, avoiding, and accommodating, as well as a Personal Data Questionnaire provided the framework for analysis.;Participants in the study were cabinet-level administrators as defined by the North Carolina Community College System: (1) chief academic officer, (2) chief business officer, and (3) chief student affairs officer. A total of 120 administrators participated in the study for an overall response rate of 75%.;Study results indicated that community college cabinet-level administrators in North Carolina have a preference for compromising and collaborating modes of conflict management; competing was their least preferred mode. Findings also showed that leadership role was the only statistically significant factor related to conflict mode preference. Chief business officers preferred collaborating as a mode of conflict management; chief student affairs officers preferred compromising to address conflict.;Although not statistically significant, several themes emerged from the data: younger cabinet-level administrators were more likely to compromise than to collaborate, female administrators were more likely to compromise and less likely to compete than their male counterparts, and leaders from rural schools preferred to collaborate and to avoid, whereas administrators from urban institutions preferred to compromise and to compete.;An understanding of current conflict management modes of cabinet level administrators in North Carolina community colleges may assist these institutions in planning leadership training programs, implementing succession management strategies, and creating hiring protocols for new administrators. |
