Abstract
We investigated whether transformational leadership was associated with more positive perceptions of outcomes among intercollegiate athletic directors in the U.S. Also, we examined whether leader gender influenced perceptions of participants, and if there was an interaction between leadership style and leader gender in predicting organizational outcomes. Division I and II male participants (n = 99) evaluated either a male or female transactional or transformational leader on extra effort, satisfaction, and effectiveness. MANOVA and post hoc analyses were used in our evaluation. Findings indicated transformational leadership was related to more positive organizational outcomes, that there was no difference between male and female leaders on attaining these outcomes, and that there was no interaction between leadership style and leader gender.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Acosta, R. V., & Carpenter, L. J. (2010). Women in intercollegiate sport: A longitudinal study thirty-one year update (1977–2008). Retrieved from http://webpages.charter.net/womeninsport
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press.
Bass, B. M. (1990). From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning to share the vision. Organizational Dynamics, 18, 19–31.
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (2000). Multifactor leadership questionnaires: Technical report, leader form, rater form, and scoring key for MLQ Form 5X-Short (2nd ed.). Redwood City: Mind Garden.
Bryman, A. (1992). Charisma and leadership in organizations. London: Sage.
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.
Burton, L. J., & Hagan, E. M. (2009). Examination of job description in intercollegiate athletics administration: Application of gender typing of managerial subroles. The Sport Management and Related Topics Journal, 5, 84–95.
Burton, L. J., & Peachey, J. W. (2009). Transactional or transformational? Leadership preferences of Division III athletic administrators. Journal of Intercollegiate Sport, 2, 245–259.
Burton, L. J., Barr, C. A., Fink, J. S., & Bruening, J. E. (2009). Think athletic director, think masculine?: Examination of the gender typing of managerial subroles within athletic administration positions. Sex Roles, 61, 416–426. doi:10.1007/s11199-009-9632-6.
Burton, L. J., Grappendorf, H., & Henderson, A. (in press). Perceptions of gender in athletic administration: Utilizing role congruity to examine (potential) prejudice against women. Journal of Sport Management.
Choi, J., Sagas, M., Park, S., & Cunningham, G. B. (2007). Transformational leadership in collegiate coaching: The effects of transformational leadership on job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and organizational citizenship behavior. International Journal of Sport Management, 8, 429–445.
Cunningham, G. B., & Sagas, M. (2008). Gender and diversity in sport organizations: Introduction to a special issue. Sex Roles, 58, 3–9. doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9360-8.
Doherty, A. J. (1997). The effect of leader characteristics on the perceived transformational/transactional leadership and impact of interuniversity athletic administrators. Journal of Sport Management, 11, 275–285.
Doherty, A. J., & Danylchuk, K. E. (1996). Transformational and transactional leadership in interuniversity athletic management. Journal of Sport Management, 10, 292–310.
Eagly, A. H. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A social-role interpretation. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
Eagly, A. H. (2007). Female leadership advantage and disadvantage: Resolving the contradictions. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31, 1–12. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2007.00326.x.
Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (2003). Finding gender advantage and disadvantage: Systematic research integration is the solution. Leadership Quarterly, 14, 851–859. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2003.09.003.
Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109, 573–598.
Eagly, A. H., Wood, W., & Diekman, A. B. (2000). Social role theory of sex differences and similarities: A current appraisal. In T. Eckes & H. M. Trautner (Eds.), The development social psychology of gender. New Jersey: Lawerence Erlbaum Associates.
Foels, R., Driskell, J. E., Mullen, B., & Salas, E. (2000). The effects of democratic leadership on group member satisfaction. Small Group Research, 31, 676–703. doi:10.1177/104649640003100603.
Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1997). Hostile and benevolent sexism: Measuring ambivalent sexist attitudes toward women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 119–135. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00104.x.
Hoeber, L., & Frisby, W. (2001). Gender equity for athletes: Rewriting the narrative for this organizational value. European Sport Management Quarterly, 1, 179–209. doi:10.1080/16184740108721896.
Judge, T. A., & Piccolo, R. F. (2004). Transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analytic test of their relative validity. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 755–768.
Kent, A., & Chelladurai, P. (2001). Cascading transformational leadership, organizational commitment, and citizenship behavior: A case study in intercollegiate athletics. Journal of Sport Management, 15, 135–159.
Klimoski, R. J., & Koles, K. L. K. (2001). The chief executive officer and top management team interface. In S. J. Zaccaro & R. J. Klimoski (Eds.), The nature of organizational leadership (pp. 219–269). Jossey-Bass: San Francisco.
Kuhnert, K. W., & Lewis, P. (1987). Transactional and transformational leadership: A constructive developmental analysis. Academy of Management Review, 12, 648–657.
Powell, G. N., Butterfield, D. A., & Bartol, K. M. (2008). Leader evaluations: A new female advantage? Gender in Management: An International Journal, 23, 156–174. doi:10.1108/17542410810866926.
Robbins, S. P. (2003). Organizational Behavior. Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Rogelberg, S. G., & Stanton, J. M. (2007). Introduction: Understanding and dealing with organizational survey non-response. Organizational Research Methods, 10, 195–209. doi:10.1177/1094428106294693.
Rosette, A. S., & Tost, L. P. (2010). Agentic women and communal leadership: How role prescriptions confer advantage to top women leaders. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 221–235. doi:10.1037/a0018204.
Ryan, T. D., & Clopton, A. W. (2009). Improving response rates in web surveys: A 2 × 2 experiment. Applied Research in Coaching and Athletics Annual, 24, 147–174.
Sartore, M. L., & Cunningham, G. B. (2007). Explaining the under-representation of women in leadership positions of sport organizations: A symbolic interactionist perspective. Quest, 59, 244–265.
Shaw, S., & Frisby, W. (2006). Can gender equity be more equitable?: Promoting an alternative frame for sport management research, education, and practice. Journal of Sport Management, 20, 483–509.
Sibson, R. (2010). “I was banging my head against a brick wall”: Exclusionary power at the gendering of sport organizations. Journal of Sport Management, 24, 379–399.
Stewart, G. L. (2006). A meta-analytic review of relationships between team design features and team performance. Journal of Management, 32, 29–55. doi:10.1177/0149206305277792.
Tiell, B., & Dixon, M. A. (2008). Roles and tasks of the senior woman administrator (SWA) in intercollegiate athletics. Journal for the Study of Sports and Athletics in Education, 2, 339–362.
Tse, H. H. M., & Lam, W. (2008). Transformational leadership and turnover: The roles of LMX and organizational commitment. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2008, 1–6.
Wang, Y.-S., & Huang, T.-C. (2009). The relationship of transformational leadership with group cohesiveness and emotional intelligence. Social Behavior and Personality, 37, 379–392. doi:10.2224/sbp.2009.37.3.379.
Whisenant, W. A., Pedersen, P. M., & Obenour, B. L. (2002). Success and gender: Determining the rate of advancement for intercollegiate athletic directors. Sex Roles, 47, 485–491. doi:10.1023/A:1021656628604.
Yukl, G. A. (1989). Leadership in organizations. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Yukl, G. (1999). An evaluation of conceptual weaknesses in transformational and charismatic leadership theories. Leadership Quarterly, 10, 285–305. doi:10.1016/S1048-9843(99)00013-2.
Yusof, A., & Shah, P. M. (2008). Transformational leadership and leadership substitutes in sports: Implications on coaches’ job satisfaction. International Bulletin of Business Administration, 3, 17–29.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix
Appendix
Adapted for an athletic administration perspective based on the work of Burton and Peachey (2009) and Powell et al. (2008)
Transformational Vignette
Following several embarrassing scandals (recruiting violations, illegal athletic booster activity, student-athlete legal issues) within the athletic department, a new athletic director Joan (John) Barkley was hired by State University to lead the Division I BCS athletics program. Joan (John) has long been recognized by colleagues and friends as a highly optimistic individual. Generally speaking, those who spend anytime with her (him) become infected by her (his) enthusiasm. As a former associate athletic director, working under Joan (John) remarked:
Whenever you’re around Joan (John) you can’t help but feel good. She (he) pays close attention to your personal needs for achievement and growth. In addition, Joan (John) encourages you to be innovative and creative (while remaining within the guidelines of NCAA regulations) in your work; she (he) says that you should never rely on the ‘tried and true’ and always approach old problems in new ways. As a result, Joan (John) makes you feel like you can accomplish anything.
Other colleagues at Joan’s (John’s) previous university remarked that they have never worked in an athletic department so devoted to its leader and her (his) vision. Prior to Joan’s (John’s) taking over at State University, most associate and assistant directors were confused about their roles and responsibilities in the athletic department and were hoping that potential scandals would not result from the lack of effective leadership. Since Joan (John) took over people have become inspired by what the future will bring. State University still has to deal with NCAA sanctions, but the associate and assistant directors in the department have rallied around Joan’s (John’s) radically different and inspirational vision.
One area where Joan (John) has been particularly successful was in calming the concerns of the University President and Board of Trustees. During a recent meeting of the President and Board, Joan (John) demonstrated her (his) excellent communication skills. One Board member related the experience as follows:
Just before the meeting was about to start, the mood was extremely dour, explosive I might add. So then in comes Joan (John), calmly and confidently walking into the meeting. By the end of her (his) 45-min address to the group, we were all mesmerized. Now, as I think about it, we didn’t get the answers we wanted, but most board members are excited about the direction Joan (John) wants to take the athletic department.
Transactional Vignette
Following several embarrassing scandals (recruiting violations, illegal athletic booster activity, student-athlete legal issues) within the athletic department, a new athletic director Joan (John) Barkley was hired by State University to lead their Division I BCS athletics program. Joan (John) has long been recognized by colleagues and friends as a highly focused individual. Generally speaking, those who spend anytime with her (him) feel that they have been appropriately rewarded or disciplined depending on the adequacy of their performance. As a former associate athletic director, working under Joan (John) remarked:
Whenever you’re around Joan (John) you know you will be rewarded if (and only if) you meet your assigned objectives. Joan (John) always follows through on promises of rewards when we successfully complete our assignments. Joan (John) also lets us know when we do not meet performance standards. She (he) doesn’t do anything further about little slips on our part, preferring to let us resolve minor problems on our own. On the other hand, when problems become serious, we know that she (he) will step in and take whatever corrective action is needed.
Other colleagues at Joan’s (John’s) previous university remarked that they have never worked in an athletic department so focused on subordinate performance. Prior to Joan’s (John’s) taking over at State University, most associate and assistant directors were confused about their roles and responsibilities in the athletic department and were hoping that potential scandals would not result from the lack of effective leadership. Since Joan (John) took over people have begun to think that the difficulties will be resolved, one way or another. State University still has to deal with NCAA sanctions, but the associate and assistant directors in the department have rallied around Joan’s (John’s) deliberate management style.
One area where Joan (John) has been particularly successful was in calming the concerns of the University President and Board of Trustees during the annual athletic department performance review. Joan (John) demonstrated that the athletic department is better off when it implements incentives for good performance (within each department) and addresses performance problems before they get out of hand. One associate director said:
I felt my meeting with Joan (John) went well. The objectives we set for next year are reasonable. Her (his) criticisms about some low points last year were fair, and I got positive strokes for the high points. I like knowing where I stand, and being rewarded accordingly.
Other associate and assistant directors agreed.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Welty Peachey, J., Burton, L.J. Male or Female Athletic Director? Exploring Perceptions of Leader Effectiveness and a (Potential) Female Leadership Advantage with Intercollegiate Athletic Directors. Sex Roles 64, 416–425 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9915-y
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9915-y