| What the leader of any organization can accomplish depends to a great extent upon whether or not followers decide to lend their support. This dependency is especially critical in higher education where governance is shared. In an effort to understand the constituent's views of presidential leadership, this study explored the dimensions on which faculty leaders, administrators, and board of trustee members evaluate their presidents, and factors that contribute to that assessment.; Data consisted of abstracts of 142 transcribed interviews conducted by the Institutional Leadership Project at thirty-two institutions (eight each universities, state, independent, and community colleges) during 1986-87. Qualitative methods were used to determine if campus leaders supported their president and to identify the dimensions used in the evaluations.; The majority of campus leaders supported their presidents; however, support varied by role with board members and administrators far more favorable than faculty leaders. Dimensions on which presidents were assessed included: "willingness to be influenced," "competence," "respect for culture," "encouraging the free flow of information," "association with outcomes," "involvement," "commitment to institution," "leader primarily through position," "appearance, image or impact," and "comparison with predecessor." The dimensions used varied for the three groups of campus leaders with board members assessing presidents on their perceived "competence" or "commitment," administrators on "competence," and faculty leaders on "willingness' to be influenced."; One-half of the thirty-two presidents enjoyed a high level of institutional support; just under one-third had mixed support; and one-fifth had low support. The level of support for the president appeared related to the length of tenure of the president (with persons new to the position enjoying high support more often than those holding the position for five years or longer) and to the type of institution (with presidents at state colleges lacking support more often than other presidents).; It was concluded that presidents were evaluated according to the extent to which they were perceived to share their power and meet expectations deriving from the symbolic nature of the presidency. Perceptions, however, were related to the role of observer, tenure of president and type of institution. |
