Changing Definitions of Leadership or Same old “Hero” Leader?

Objective/Research Question: The urgency to replace retiring community college leaders has been a topic of research and discussion for the past two decades. Concurrently, expansive definitions of leadership and collaborative approaches to leading have emerged. The central research question for this study was: How do sitting community college leaders define leadership? The sub-questions included: Do definitions of leadership differ by gender? Do definitions of leadership differ by position? Methods: Coding of survey data from approximately 770 sitting leaders occurred based on responses to the prompt: How do you define leadership? Descriptive statistical analysis occurred based on demographics and on position related to the coded responses. Results: This study found three prevalent ways of defining leadership: leader-focused (leader’s abilities mentioned); other-focused (leader included others, collaboration mentioned); institution-focused (leader focused on institutional needs/mission). About half of both women and men used leader-focused definitions, with slightly more men than women in the tallies. More women than men used other-focused definitions, whereas men used definitions more institutionally focused compared to women (not statistically significant). Leader-focused definitions were also most prevalent by position, with mid-level leaders using this definition slightly more than top-level leaders. Top-level leaders used a combination of institution-focused definitions more so than mid-level leaders, however (not statistically significant). Conclusions: A shift to more other-focused ways of leading is emerging. Those in mid-level positions hold onto leader-focused definitions of leadership, and this points to the need to reconceptualize mid-level leadership and ideas of leading that include others and connect to institutional missions and initiatives. The complex nature of today’s organizations requires broader conceptions of leadership.