| This descriptive correlational study examined the perceived effectiveness of the leadership styles of deans and compared the results with an earlier study. This study was a replication of the study conducted in Pennsylvania by Dr. Mary Finnick. The theoretical basis for the study was Hersey and Blanchard's Situational Leadership Theory.;The study had two purposes: to determine the dominant leadership styles of the deans, as perceived by themselves and by their faculty, and to determine whether these styles were perceived to be effective by the deans and their faculty.;The independent variable leadership style was measured by means of the Leadership Effectiveness and Adaptability Description (LEAD Self, LEAD Other), designed by Hersey and Blanchard. The styles reported were combinations of task and relationship behavior.;The dependent variable, effectiveness, was measured by the LEAD instruments; a global question on faculty-perceived effectiveness; and faculty supervision obtained from the Job Descriptive Index (JDI).;The population for the study consisted of 29 deans (83 percent) and 294 faculty (71 percent) from National League for Nursing accredited baccalaureate nursing programs in New York State. The statistical techniques used were Chi Square, Pearson Correlation, One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), Multiple Regression Through the Origin, and post hoc Scheffe test.;In both studies deans perceived their leadership adaptability as above average in effectiveness, while faculty perceived their deans' leadership adaptability in the low range of positive. On the faculty-perceived global question on effectiveness, faculty perceived their deans' leadership styles to be above average to very effective, and they were satisfied with supervision.;The New York study identified the leadership style, low task/high relationship, as the dominant leadership style perceived by the deans. No dominant leadership style was identified by the administrative heads in Pennsylvania.;Faculties in both studies identified high task/high relationship as the dominant leadership style of their deans and that style was considered effective. There were perceptual differences between deans and their faculties in relation to leadership style. The LEAD Self instrument did not provide significant findings but the LEAD Other tool was a reliable measure. |
