educational leaders’ perceptions of the impact of mbti

Educational Leaders’ Perceptions of the Impact of MBTI Professional

Development on Leadership Practices in One School Division in Virginia

Daniel Joseph Gardner

Dissertation submitted to the faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and

State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Education

In

Educational Leadership and Policy Studies

Carol S. Cash, Chair

Ted S. Price

John R. Gratto

Jodie L. Brinkmann

February 25, 2021

Richmond, Virginia

Keywords: educational leader professional development, MBTI, Myers Briggs

Type Indicator, personality assessment, school administration

Educational Leaders’ Perceptions of the Impact of MBTI Professional Development

on Leadership Practices in One School Division in Virginia


ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study was to identify the perceived impact of Myers-Briggs Test Indicator

(MBTI) professional development on principal and assistant principal educational leadership

practices in one school division in Virginia. The researcher collected and analyzed data to

determine self-reported leadership changes that came as a result of school-system led

professional development involving the Myers-Briggs Test Indicator. The results of these

findings could help determine if school leaders and school systems would benefit from Myers-

Briggs professional development. The findings were as follows: a) interview participants

indicated only limited benefits of the MBTI training b) some participants identified self-

awareness as a valuable leadership action related to the personality disposition training; c) some

participants identified that they changed how they approached decisions when working with

individuals with similar or different personality preferences and, d) participants indicated interest

in additional MBTI training. Based on these findings, it is reasonable to conclude MBTI could be

considered as a personality disposition tool in the context of comparing educational leadership

personality preferences and understanding certain aspects of the decision-making process. The

majority of the participants also recommended that such professional development be extended

with additional sessions that allow for exploration and learning in specific school and team

settings.

Educational Leaders’ Perceptions of the Impact of MBTI Professional Development

on Leadership Practices in One School Division in Virginia


GENERAL AUDIENCE ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study was to identify the perceived impact of Myers-Briggs Test Indicator

(MBTI) professional development on principal and assistant principal educational leadership

practices in one school division in Virginia. The Myers Briggs Test Indicator (MBTI) was used

as a framework for the professional development. The MBTI is an introspective self-report

questionnaire indicating differing psychological preferences in how people perceive the world

and make decisions. The training was led by school division staff that had been certified to use

the MBTI materials. The researcher interviewed nine school leaders from the school division

located in the southeastern region of Virginia. The majority of participants identified that the

training led to increased self-awareness and a change in how they viewed the decision-making

process as it related to personality preferences. Based on the study findings, it is reasonable to

conclude that MBTI could be considered as a professional development tool. The majority of the

participants also recommended that such professional development be extended with additional

sessions that allow for exploration and learning in specific school and team settings.

iv

Dedication

I dedicate this dissertation work to my mother, Nancy Anne ZurSchmiede Gardner, who

passed on Sunday, September 6, 2020 due to complications with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

(ALS). She was a dedicated wife, mother, educator, counselor, and community member. She

offered endless encouragement and sincere interest in me as a son, father, educator, and

educational leader. Even as she lost the ability to speak for the last six months before her death,

she was able to offer her support. I love you momma. I’ll miss you forever and always.

v

Acknowledgements

I wish to thank my wife and best friend Dr. Shannon Rebecca La Spina. She has suffered

through far too many of my degrees over the last two decades. She appreciates that this one is

called a terminal degree and I hope I can make that true, for a little while anyway. To my three

children Caden, Luca, and Nia. They were old enough to know that I was disappearing for class

and writing, and so I tried to steal away during the early morning hours, thus often greeted by

each of them as they woke up each morning and came to visit me in the dining room (office). To

my dad, who dedicated the last many years to my mom before her passing. And yet he made time

for me, offering editing help and encouragement.

Many thanks to the Virginia Tech community. To my classmates Angela, Kenya,

Monique, Jessica, Alecia, Jeff, George, Carey, Courtney, Jen, Brittany, Kadie, Lindsay, Jenn,

Brenda, and Matt – we put in a lot of hours together. From group projects and assignment

clarification, to complaining and encouraging, our text chain always provided a source of

comradery. To my professors and dissertation committee, thank you for pushing me to be a

better leader and researcher. Dr. Price and Dr. Cash, you gave us wisdom beyond educational

content. I still remember my Ed.D. entrance interview, spending time discussing what it is to find

happiness. I know such a pursuit is lifelong, yet I feel closer to it due to many setbacks,

successes, and experiences that happened over the last few years.

vi

Table of Contents Abstract

General Audience Abstract

Dedication ...................................................................................................................................... iv

Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................... v

List of Figures .............................................................................................................................. viii

List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. ix

Chapter One The Problem .............................................................................................................. 1

Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1 Overview of the Study ................................................................................................................ 1 Historical Perspective ................................................................................................................. 2 Statement of the Problem ............................................................................................................ 3 Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................................... 4 Justification of the Study ............................................................................................................ 4 Research Questions ..................................................................................................................... 5 Conceptual Framework ............................................................................................................... 5 Definitions of Key Terms ........................................................................................................... 6 Limitations .................................................................................................................................. 7 Delimitations ............................................................................................................................... 7 Organization of the Study ........................................................................................................... 7

Chapter Two Review of the Research Literature ............................................................................ 8

Purpose and Organization of the Literature Review ................................................................... 8 Educational Leader Professional Development .......................................................................... 8 School Leader Development of a Professional Community ..................................................... 10 Measuring Personality and Jung’s Theory of Analytical Psychology ...................................... 13 The Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) ............................................................................... 16 The Z-Model for Problem Solving ........................................................................................... 19 The Big Five or the Five-Factor Model (FFM) ........................................................................ 20 Personality Assessment in the Workplace ................................................................................ 22 Team Specific Personality Research ......................................................................................... 25 Personality Assessment and Professional Learning Communities ........................................... 28 Personality Assessment and Effective Communication ........................................................... 29 Limitations in Personality Research ......................................................................................... 29 Summary ................................................................................................................................... 31

Chapter Three Methodology ......................................................................................................... 32

Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................................. 32 Research Methodology ............................................................................................................. 32 Research Methodology Justification ......................................................................................... 33 Instrument Design ..................................................................................................................... 33 Instrument Validation ............................................................................................................... 34 Researcher as the Instrument .................................................................................................... 34

vii

Data Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 35 Site and Sample Selection ......................................................................................................... 36 Data Collection Procedures ....................................................................................................... 37 Data Gathering Procedures ....................................................................................................... 38 Data Management ..................................................................................................................... 38 Time Line .................................................................................................................................. 39 Summary ................................................................................................................................... 39

Chapter Four Results ..................................................................................................................... 40

Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 40 Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................................. 40 Data ........................................................................................................................................... 41

Interview Question 1 ............................................................................................................. 41 Interview Question 2 ............................................................................................................. 43 Research Question 1 ............................................................................................................. 45 Research Question 2 ............................................................................................................. 48

Data Summary .......................................................................................................................... 50

Chapter Five Findings and Implications ....................................................................................... 52

Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................................. 52 Research and Interview Questions ............................................................................................ 52 Findings ..................................................................................................................................... 53

Finding One .......................................................................................................................... 53 Finding Two .......................................................................................................................... 53 Finding Three ........................................................................................................................ 54 Finding Four ......................................................................................................................... 54

Implications of the Findings ..................................................................................................... 55 Implication One .................................................................................................................... 55 Implication Two .................................................................................................................... 55 Implication Three .................................................................................................................. 55 Implication Four ................................................................................................................... 56

Recommendations for Future Studies ....................................................................................... 56 Summary ................................................................................................................................... 56

References ..................................................................................................................................... 58

Appendix A IRB Training Certification ....................................................................................... 66

Appendix B School Division Approval ........................................................................................ 67

Appendix C Virginia Tech IRB Approval .................................................................................... 68

Appendix D Email to Participants ................................................................................................ 69

Appendix E Information Document .............................................................................................. 70

viii

List of Figures

Figure 1 Hypothesized Influence of Personality Disposition Training Exposure on Workplace Effectiveness. ................................................................................................................................... 6

Figure 2 The Z-Model for Decision Making ................................................................................. 19

ix

List of Tables

Table 1 Comparison of the NPBEA Professional Standards to Principal Performance Standards from a Mid Atlantic Public-School Division ................................................................................. 11

Table 2 Overview of Five Major Theoretical Perspectives in Personality Psychology ............... 14

Table 3 Jung’s Function Definitions, Type Descriptions and Profession Examples .................... 16

Table 4 The Four Dichotomies of the Myers–Briggs Type Indicator Assessment ........................ 18

Table 5 Examples of Adjectives, Q-Set Items, and Questionnaire Scales Defining the Five Factors .......................................................................................................................................... 21

Table 6 Educational Leader Interview Questions ........................................................................ 34

Table 7 Interview Question 1 - What Were Your Prior Experiences in and Thoughts about Personality Assessment Tools and Their Impact on Self-Improvement, Performance, or Professional Interactions Prior to the Sessions Done Last Year? ................................................ 41

Table 8 Comparison of Participant Prior Exposure to Personality Assessment Tools and Their Number of Cited Leadership Actions ............................................................................................ 42

Table 9 Interview Question 2 - Summarize the Professional Development You Remember Receiving From the Division Regarding Myers Briggs and Personality Disposition .................. 44

Table 10 Interview Question 3 - What Leadership Actions Do You Believe Have Changed Because of the Leadership Disposition Training? Please Give a Few Examples ........................ 45

Table 11 Interview Question 4 - Reflect on How the Training Addressed these Specific Topics (Identifying Blind Spots, Communication Skills, Group Dynamics, Building Teams, Decision-Making Processes). Give an Example of How Your Leadership Actions May Have Changed Due to this Training Component? ........................................................................................................ 47

Table 12 Interview Question 5 - What, if Any, Value Did You Find in Such Training Sessions? 49

1

Chapter One

The Problem

Introduction

Entering into the professional role of principalship may be better thought of as a gradual

transitional process versus something marked as a single, discreet event (Daresh, 2007). Put

another way, “good principals are not born that way; they learn how to be effective through an

ongoing process of growth.” (Strother, 1983, p. 293) The increasing complexity and demands

placed on educational leaders require that the established principal receive ongoing support and

professional development (Ferrandino, 2001; Shen et al., 2000; Tang, 2018). When weighing

this need for continuing education, content decisions regarding professional development can

come from policy changes, updates to professional standards, district requirements, and

principal interest (Anderson et al., 2016; Professional Standards for Educational Leaders 2015,

2015; Tang, 2018). In a recent study, principals indicated that one of the areas receiving

professional development attention was regarding managing change (Levin et al., 2020). Such

knowledge is needed as principals work to “understand and solve complex education issues”

(Tang, 2018, p. 307). Related, it is important that principals continue to increase their skill set in

collaborative decision-making to address the changing educational environment (Leithwood et

al., 2020). This study analyzes the perceived effectiveness of a professional development

program offered to educational leaders in a school division in the southeastern region of

Virginia.

Overview of the Study

The purpose of this study was to identify the perceived impact of Myers-Briggs Test

Indicator (MBTI) professional development on principal and assistant principal educational

leadership practices in one school division in Virginia. The professional development used in

this study was conducted by school division staff who had been trained to utilize the Myers

Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), a personality inventory that can be used in part for “managing

others, [the] development of leadership skills, [and] conflict resolution” (The Myers & Briggs

Foundation, 2020b). The professional development content was intended to strengthen school

leader understanding of personality disposition or the characteristics that describe or determine

an individual’s behavior across a variety of situations. The educational leaders—principals and

2

assistant principals from a school division in the southeastern region of Virginia—attended the

professional development during 2018 or 2019. The participants were then interviewed between

October and November 2020 to determine the perceived impact of the professional development

on their leadership practices.

Research was conducted using a qualitative phenomenological method, an approach that

“describes meaning for several individuals of their lived experiences of a concept or

phenomenon” (Creswell, 2014, p. 57). Data collection consisted of a series of standardized

open-ended interviews. Data were documented through interview transcripts and notes. An

inductive analysis of data was completed to determine emerging themes from the study

participants (Merriam, 2016). Findings were shared and implications were suggested to inform

practitioners of similar educational leader development programs.

Historical Perspective

The formation of educational leaders has changed over the last several decades. In his

1990 article, Daresh explains the traditional approach to developing a school administrator:

After a few years of teaching experience, a person would enroll in a graduate program at

a local university. In addition to receiving a master’s degree, the aspiring administrator

would, with careful planning (so as not to take “too many” courses), complete the

requirements for an entry-level administrative certificate. (p. 1)

Several states recognized that graduate work was not enough to provide adequate knowledge for

principalship or superintendency, thus administrative internships and other planned field-based

experiences were added. And yet, research indicated that beginning administrators were still

lacking in the areas of role clarification, technical problem solving, and adaptation to a

particular school system’s norms (Daresh, 1990). Daresh (1990) further explained that

formation is needed to develop a framework to support an administrator’s response to a large

variety of future administrative issues. “Formation is an effort to put together those activities

consciously directed toward helping people synthesize learning acquired through coursework

and field experiences, and more important, develop a personalized appreciation of what it means

to be an educational leader” (p. 2). Administrator formation should incorporate activities that

seek to synthesize leadership theory and textbook examples with lived experiences from the

workplace.

3

Once established as an administrator, continued professional development content may

be obtained through university coursework, workshops, conferences, professional association

meetings, collaborative research, and district-run development activities (Goldring et al., 2012;

Rodriguez-Campos et al., 2005). School districts vary in their ability to provide professional

development activities using internal staff or external resources (Turnbull et al., 2015).

This study involved a school division that utilized internal staff members in a

department that focuses on professional learning & leadership. The presenters became certified

MBTI practitioners, allowing them to administer the MBTI instrument and then utilize

resources to facilitate personality trait related professional development. HR professionals and

information reported by Fortune 100 companies indicate that MBTI is a well-known and highly

used personality assessment tool (Furnham, 2008; Paul, 2004). Personality assessment tools,

including the MBTI can be used for a variety of purposes including personnel selection,

coaching, team development, and management training (Furnham, 2018; Lundgren et al., 2017).

Specifically, the Myers-Briggs Company offers “a range of solutions to help improve

organizational performance and address challenges, from team building, leadership, coaching,

and conflict management to career development, selection, and retention” (The Myers & Briggs

Foundation, 2021).

Certified as trainers, and familiar with professional learning for educational leaders, the

presenters led conversations about group dynamics and how to better build a team through the

recognition of potential personality strengths and blind spots. School leaders were given the

MBTI assessment prior to attending a staff development training session. In the session, the

professional development staff presented an MBTI overview, teaching the participants about the

16 different combinations of an MBTI profile. Participants were introduced to both the potential

blind spots and strengths of the MBTI profiles. This information was then placed within the

context of decision-making, as they explained that the decision-making process is approached

differently by each MBTI profile. Real-world examples were discussed to relate the content to

educational decision making. The presenters intended for participants to understand the profile

characteristics of themselves and of others.

Statement of the Problem

Public education has undergone tremendous changes over the last decade. Classrooms

have become more crowded, student demographics have changed, accountability has increased,

4

states have adopted tougher academic standards, and school safety has become a top-of-mind

issue (Hussar et al., 2020; Troyer, 2019; Will, 2019). Educational leaders play a key role in

addressing these issues, ensuring an effective workplace that leads to the success of schools and

positive student performance (Daniëls et al., 2019; Garza et al., 2014; Goddard et al., 2015;

LaPointe & Davis, 2006; Rodriguez-Campos et al., 2005). The increasing complexity and

demands placed on educational leaders require that they receive ongoing support and

professional development (Ferrandino, 2001; Goldring et al., 2012; Shen et al., 2000; Tang,

2018). However, Rowland (2017) cited a shortage of information and rigorous research on

principal professional development. Additionally, Gumus and Bellibas (2016) affirm that few

studies have examined the extent to which professional development has impacted principal

practices. Further, and related to this specific research study, “little research has focused on

school leaders’ personality traits” (Daniëls et al., 2019, p. 121). This study analyzes the

perceived effects of Myers-Briggs professional development on leadership practices.

Purpose of the Study



leadership practices in one school division in Virginia. The researcher collected and analyzed

data to determine leadership changes resulting from school-system led professional

development involving the Myers-Briggs Test Indicator. The results of these findings could

help determine if school leaders and school systems would benefit from Myers-Briggs

professional development.

Justification of the Study

When looking at the success of professional development for school leaders in general,

Goldring et al. (2012) believed more research is needed to evaluate program effectiveness.

Looking at personality assessment, Moyle and Hackston (2018) found although personality

assessments “are used across many applications, such as executive coaching, team building, and

hiring and promotion decisions, the focus of most published research on the use of personality

assessments at work is biased toward assessment for employee selection” (p. 507). Moyle and

Hackston (2018) went on to discuss assessments for employee development, explaining

“personality results are not used to predict performance, but as a vehicle for increasing self-

5

awareness” (p. 512). When considering this perspective, the assessment is more about serving

as a starting point of change for the individual (Moyle & Hackston, 2018). Further, Sutton,

Allison, and Williams (2013) reflected that self-reflection through the Enneagram personality

model was positively associated with improvements in communication and relationships with

coworkers. In doing a search of the literature, the researcher was unable to find research specific

to personality disposition professional development for educational leaders. A study, using

qualitative methodology, of educational leaders who have received division-led MBTI

professional development could help further the knowledge of how leadership practices change

through such professional development.

Research Questions

The research questions of this study were as follows:

1. What, if any, leadership action related changes do educational leaders report after

MBTI division-led training sessions?

2. What, if any, value did educational leaders find in the MBTI division-led training

sessions?

Conceptual Framework

Sutton, Allison, and Williams (2013) shared that self-reflection through a personality

model was positively associated with improvements in communication and relationships with

coworkers. This study is designed to determine educational leaders’ perceived improvements in

workplace effectiveness through insights learned from a personality disposition professional

development session. Does an educational leader’s reflection through personality assessment

staff development lead to “open, productive, caring, and trusting working relationships among

leaders, faculty, and staff to promote professional capacity and the improvement of practice”

(National Policy Board for Educational Administration, 2015, p. 15)?

6

Figure 1

Hypothesized Influence of Personality Disposition Training Exposure on Workplace

Effectiveness.

Definitions of Key Terms

The following operational definitions will be used for the purposes of this study:

Five Factor Model or Big Five. A robust framework for organizing personality concepts

(Benoliel & Schechter, 2017; Digman, 1990; McCrae, 2010).

National Policy Board for Educational Administration (NPBEA). A national alliance of

major membership organizations committed to the advancement of school and school-system

leadership. The organization seeks to lead standards-based and research-informed policy,

preparation, and practice for school and school system leaders (NPBEA, n.d.).

Personal disposition. Any of a number of enduring characteristics that describe or

determine an individual’s behavior across a variety of situations and are peculiar to and

uniquely expressed by that individual (APA, n.d.).

Personality. “The dynamic organization within the individual of those psychophysical

systems that determine his characteristic behavior and thought” (Allport, 1961, p. 28).

Phenomenological research. A method of study which “describes meaning for several

individuals of their lived experiences of a concept or phenomenon” (Creswell, 2014, p. 57).

Educational leader exposure to personality

disposition training staff development

Improvements in problem solving and communication

with coworkers

Perceived impact on workplace effectiveness

7

Professional learning community (PLC). “An ongoing process in which educators work

collaboratively in recurring cycles of collective inquiry and action research to achieve better

results for the students they serve” (DuFour & DuFour, 2010, p. 11).

Limitations

There are several elements of this study that could not be controlled. Participants may

have not shared honest feelings and thoughts during the interview process. The application for

research indicated the results of the study would be shared with the participating division.

Although measures were taken to keep comments anonymous, participants may have feared

being openly critical about the training. Also, participants may have not taken the time to

respond thoroughly. Lastly, for many participants, the training occurred a year prior to the

interviews. Therefore, the ability to recall portions of the training or reflect upon changes in

leadership practices may be limited.

Delimitations

The study only considered one school system in Virginia. The training and experiences

from educational leaders in other regions of the state and country were not considered. The

study only collected the perceptions of educational leaders from a limited pool of participants.

The small number of participants presents limited perspectives.

Organization of the Study

This study is organized into five chapters. The first chapter reviews the overview of the

problem, presents the research questions and a brief description of the methodology. Chapter

two presents historical and current literature, supporting the need for study. A detailed

description of the study methodology is presented in chapter three. The fourth chapter will share

the data and analysis of the study. In the fifth chapter, there will be a summary of the findings,

implications for practitioners, recommendations for future studies, and researcher reflections.

8

Chapter Two

Review of the Research Literature

Purpose and Organization of the Literature Review

This chapter contains a review of the literature related to educational leader professional

development, school leadership, and the measurement of personality. The Big Five or the Five

Factor Model is discussed in order to build a framework for understanding personality

assessment in the workplace, personality assessment in educational settings, and personality as

it relates to effective communication. The Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) and the Z-

Model for problem solving are given specific attention as MBTI was the personality inventory

used in the professional development received by the educational leaders interviewed in this

research study. The chapter concludes with articles regarding the limitations of personality

assessment.

Educational Leader Professional Development

Daresh (1990) offered a foundational framework of the formation of educational leaders

that still applies to current practices. He stated five key elements: mentorship, personal

reflection, understanding of differing interpersonal styles, educational platform development,

and personal professional action planning. Mentorship is common in many fields, helping new

employees make sense of the organization, reduce the sense of isolation, and set up a formal

process for experienced administrators to provide counsel and advice to new or aspiring leaders

(Daresh, 1995; Gill, 2019; Weingartner, 2009). In a Principal Pipeline Initiative sponsored by

The Wallace Foundation, with the program evaluation conducted by Policy Studies Associates,

Inc. and RAND, researchers reported that first- and second-year principals from six districts

highly valued the help from coaches and mentors, rating mentorship higher than other

professional development offerings (Anderson et al., 2016).

The second element, personal reflection, requires that aspiring leaders “develop a sense

of questioning regarding the value of certain practices and assumptions seen in the field”

(Daresh, 1990, p. 3). Administrative preparation programs may expect a personal reflective

journal that requires a student to regularly document descriptions of their experiences and their

responses to them. This reflection, sometimes commented upon by a professor, mentor, or

colleague can help a future administrator strengthen his or her ability to articulate important

9

beliefs. While in the principalship it is important for principals “to reflect on their values and

beliefs about their roles as school leaders, take risks and explore new skills and concepts, and

apply their new knowledge and skills in real school contexts” (Arhipova et al., 2018).

Externally, understanding interpersonal styles is “a skill that is needed by every

successful administrator…along with a recognition of the ways in which those differences may

affect the administrator’s ability to exercise his or her own preferred mode of behavior”

(Daresh, 1990, p. 4). Related to understanding interpersonal styles is the development of

relational skills.

Relational skills are required to build the trust needed to improve teaching and learning,

whether that work involves engaging parents in new ways, integrating new instructional

roles and responsibilities, challenging teacher culture, or addressing particular problems

in teacher performance. (Le Fevre & Robinson, 2015)

These elements are not just important to aspiring administrators but experienced administrators

as well. The training provided in this research study was directed at teams that had varied levels

of administrative experience. Participants explored their personality preferences and learned

how such preferences effect the way they make decisions compared to other leaders.

Daresh (1990) explained an educational platform “should be designed to communicate a

person’s deepest and truest attitudes, values, and beliefs about education” (p. 3). Educators

should occasionally review personal stances about important educational issues. The last

element, personal professional action planning, requires “putting all the insights gathered from

traditional coursework and field-based learning together with insights derived from mentoring,

personal reflection, platform development, and style analysis into a single, coherent action plan”

(Daresh, 1990, p. 4). Although this can be a culminating step for a student in a preparation

program, it should also be a fluid and lifelong pursuit. Goldring et al. (2012) shared that it is

important for an educational leader to be an actor, not a spectator, actively seeking to transfer

professional development learning into action.

When considering the delivery method, professional development content can come

through university coursework, workshops, conferences, professional association meetings,

collaborative research, and district-run development activities (Goldring et al., 2012;

Rodriguez-Campos et al., 2005). Gill (2019) shares that “principals favor individualized support

over traditional workshop-style professional development” (p. 48). Gill explains the thoughts of

10

Vanderbilt University professor Ellen Goldring, citing that one form of professional

development can come from a principal’s supervisor:

“The clear benefits include supervisors spending time in schools and working with

networks of principals on instructional leadership,” she says. “Supervisors engage in

walkthroughs, coaching, and providing more ongoing feedback to principals; they have

a deep sense of the context of each principal’s school and develop closer relationships”

(Wallace Foundation, 2018). In a survey, more than 75 percent of principals involved in

the program said that their supervisors “usually” or “almost always” offered them

“actionable feedback.” (Gill, 2019, p. 46)

Further, several authors (Brookfield, 1996; Richardson & Prickett, 1994) contend that

professional development should incorporate real work situations and take the learner’s

experience into consideration.

Goldring et al. (2012) consolidated information from several works (Evans & Mohr,

1999; Gray & Bishop, 2009; Kelley & Shaw, 2009; Lawrence et al., 2008) suggesting several

essential elements that define high-quality professional development for school leaders:

• Job-embedded instruction that allows participants to apply what they learn.

• Content that addresses leaders’ unique needs for individual stages in their careers.

• Long-term instruction with multiple learning opportunities.

• Coherent curriculum that targets conditions leaders face every day.

• Collegial networks and/or support to discuss and exchange ideas.

(p. 226)

Goldring et al. (2012) stress the importance of investing energy into developing methods to

measure and observe whether or not professional development has a positive impact on

principal practice. Further, LaPointe and Davis (2006) indicate that “little is known about how

to design programs that can develop and sustain effective leadership practices” (p. 16).

School Leader Development of a Professional Community

In 2015 the National Policy Board for Educational Administration (NPBEA) published

professional standards to serve as a guide for educational leaders, updating what was once

known as the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) standards. The NPBEA

coordinated research, surveys, and focus groups, utilizing the assistance of the National

11

Association of Elementary School Principals, National Association of Secondary School

Principals, and American Association of School Administrators. The Standards document

stresses that educational leaders

must pursue all realms of their work with unwavering attention to students. They must

approach every teacher evaluation, every interaction with the central office, and every

analysis of data with one question always in mind: How will this help our students excel

as learners?” (National Policy Board for Educational Administration, 2015, p. 3)

The standards are intended to apply to all levels of educational leadership, including

school, district, state, and national educational arenas. When looking at the standards from a

principal’s perspective, they are aligned with human resource performance standards required of

a school administrator (National Policy Board for Educational Administration, 2015). For

example, Table 1 lists the NPBEA Professional Standards next to a local mid-Atlantic school

district’s current Principal Performance Standards. NPBEA states that the standards should

guide principal preparation and serve as “the foundation for the Model Principal Supervisor

Professional Standards” (National Policy Board for Educational Administration, 2015, p. 7).

Table 1

Comparison of the NPBEA Professional Standards to Principal Performance Standards from

a Mid Atlantic Public-School Division

NPBEA Professional Standards Mid Atlantic Public-School Division Principal Performance Standards

1. Mission, Vision, and Core Values 2. Ethics and Professional Norms 3. Equity and Cultural Responsiveness 4. Curriculum, Instruction, and

Assessment 5. Community of Care and Support for

Students 6. Professional Capacity of School

Personnel 7. Professional Community for Teachers

and Staff 8. Meaningful Engagement of Families

and Community 9. Operations and Management 10. School Improvement

1. Instructional Leadership 2. School Climate 3. Human Resources Management 4. Organizational Management 5. Communications and Community

Relations 6. Professionalism 7. Student Academic Progress

Note. Adapted from “Professional Standards for Educational Leaders.” Copyright 2015 by the National Policy Board for Educational Administration.

12

The NPBEA (2015) states that a principal should “design and implement job-embedded

and other opportunities for professional learning collaboratively with faculty and staff” (p. 15).

He or she should use interpersonal skills and social-emotional insight to understand the

backgrounds and cultures of staff. The NPBEA suggests that this can be done through

developing and supporting “open, productive, caring, and trusting working relationships among

leaders, faculty, and staff to promote professional capacity and the improvement of practice”

(National Policy Board for Educational Administration, 2015, p. 15). This study looks at how

one school division worked to develop principal and assistant principal interpersonal skills

through personality related professional development.

Related to supporting collaborative learning in schools, DuFour and DuFour (2010) state

that the term professional learning community (PLC) has become more popular in the last two

decades. They define a PLC as “an ongoing process in which educators work collaboratively in

recurring cycles of collective inquiry and action research to achieve better results for the

students they serve” (p. 11). DuFour and DuFour (2010) warn that “the term has become so

commonplace and has been used so ambiguously to describe virtually any loose coupling of

individuals who share a common interest in education that it is in danger of losing all meaning”

(p. 10). However, according to Harris and Jones (2010), if done well, PLC’s can be a structured

and effective way to implement new reforms and improve teacher quality.

In Learning by Doing, DuFour and DuFour (2010) define a structure to ensure

successful implementation of PLC’s. The learning community should be focused on ensuring

that all students “learn essential knowledge, skills, and dispositions” (p. 11). Collaborative team

members are intended to “work interdependently to achieve common goals for which members

are mutually accountable” (p. 11). Collective inquiry into the best practices in learning and

teaching should be combined with understanding the current realities of instructional practice

and students’ levels of achievement. Learning by doing means PLC members should “move

quickly to turn aspirations into action and visions into reality” (p. 12). Members should embrace

a continuous improvement mentality, constantly looking for ways to achieve goals and

accomplish the organization’s purpose. Lastly, PLC members must adopt a results orientation,

measuring outcomes rather than monitoring planning and intentions (DuFour & DuFour, 2010).

Benoliel and Schechter (2017) suggested understanding team member personality is

another essential component of the PLC structure. They wrote:

13

Learning more about the relationship of individual personality differences to the diverse

tendency toward knowledge sharing and social relationships within the PLC

development context is valuable because this may help principals in adapting their

learning environments to teachers’ skills, particularly with respect to motivating teachers

with personality traits less predisposed to social learning activities. (p. 231)

Personality trait knowledge can help a principal guide adjustments in PLC structure by

considering individual needs and team dynamics, thus increasing the likelihood of positive

collaboration (Benoliel & Schechter, 2017). For instance, by understanding and communicating

personality differences, PLC members can build trust, an important component of interpersonal

interactions (Benoliel & Schechter, 2017; Harris & Jones, 2010).

Researchers affirmed that trusting relationships are critical to a successful collaborative

community (Eldor & Shoshani, 2016; Garza et al., 2014; Tschannen-Moran & Gareis, 2015;

Youngs & King, 2002). There are many relationships within education that can be affected by

trust including student-teacher, parent-school, teacher-principal, and teacher-teacher

(Tschannen-Moran, 2014). Distrust within these relationships can damage the efficiency and

effectiveness of any organization, but in education, this can negatively impact student

achievement (Bryk & Schneider, 2002; Tschannen-Moran, 2014). Research in teacher-principal

and teacher-teacher relationships affirms trust is an important positive contributor to a

successful school environment (Tschannen-Moran, 2009; 2014b; Tschannen-Moran & Gareis,

2015).

Measuring Personality and Jung’s Theory of Analytical Psychology

This study investigates professional development that utilized the Myers-Briggs Type

Indicator. The Myers & Briggs Foundation (2020b) explained that “the purpose of the Myers-

Briggs Type Indicator personality inventory is to make the theory of psychological types

described by C. G. Jung understandable and useful in people's lives” (para. 1). The history of

personality theory can be divided into several theoretical perspectives (Allen, 2006; Feist et al.,

2018; Maddi, 2001). Feist et al. (2018) explained the development of these theories is built on

the assumptions, backgrounds, and experiences of the individuals. “Psychologists attempt to

explain how human thought, emotion, motivation, and behavior work” (Feist et al., 2018, p. 7).

Personality is so complex it leads to many different perspectives. Adapted from Feist et al.

14

(2018), Table 2 summarizes personality within five different perspectives and also shares the

primary assumptions, key terms, and key figures that have shaped each perspective.

Table 2

Overview of Five Major Theoretical Perspectives in Personality Psychology

Perspective Primary Assumptions Focus/Key Terms Key Figures Psychodynamic • First 5 years of life shape personality

• Unconscious forces are most important

• Neurosis results from unhealthy moving toward, against, or away from others

Unconscious Early recollections Collective unconscious Archetypes Object-relations Identity crisis Relatedness

Freud Adler Jung Klein Horney Erikson Fromm

Humanistic-Existential

• People live meaningful, happy lives • People are motivated by growth and

psychological health • Personality is shaped by freedom of

choice, response to anxiety, and awareness of death

Meaningful life, psychological well-being and growth

Maslow Rogers May

Dispositional • People are predisposed to behave in unique and consistent ways; they have unique traits

• There are five trait dimensions in human personality

Traits Motives

Allport McCrae & Costa

Biological-Evolutionary

• The foundation of thought and behavior is biological and genetic forces

• Human thought and behavior have been shaped by evolutionary forces (natural and sexual selection)

Brain structures, neurochemicals, and genes Adaptive mechanisms

Eysenck Buss

Learning-(Social) Cognitive

• Only explanation for behavior is the conditions that create behavior

• Learning occurs through association and consequences of our behavior

• Learning also occurs through succeeding or failing and watching other people succeed or fail at tasks

• Personality develops as an interaction between internal and external characteristics of the person

• The cognitive constructs we develop to perceive the world and others mold our personalities

Conditioned responses Shaping Reinforcement Observational Learning Modeling Self-efficacy Cognitive-affective units Constructs

Skinner Bandura Rotter Mischel Kelly

Note. Adapted from Theories of Personality, pp. 9-10. Copyright 2018 by McGraw-Hill Global Education Holding, LLC, New York. Reprinted with permission.

15

Jung developed a theory of personality called analytical psychology, in which he

explained that a person’s personality is largely shaped by a collective unconscious, one that

includes experiences that are inherited from our ancestors (Feist et al., 2018). The collective

unconscious content are active influencers in a person’s actions, thoughts, and emotions. This is

in contrast to the personal unconscious, one created by individual experiences that may have

been forgotten or repressed. In addition to these components are the conscious images sensed by

one’s ego. Jung felt that healthy individuals are in touch with the conscious world, but more so

allow themselves to experience their unconscious self and thus achieve individuation or self-

realization (Feist et al., 2018). Individuation is the process of becoming an individual or whole

person. This psychological rebirth is achieved when a person finds a balance between

unconscious content and the conscious ego, a balance which typically means allowing the

unconscious self to become more of the personality’s core (Feist et al., 2018).

Within the dynamics of personality, Jung believed that there were a variety of

psychological types that grew out of two different attitudes and four separate functions (Feist et

al., 2018). The two attitudes, introverted or extraverted, were opposing predispositions of an

individual’s actions or reactions. Introversion was described as the turning inward to one’s

psychic energy, with an emphasis on the subjective. Introverts consider the external world, but

do so selectively through this subjective viewpoint. Conversely, extroverts orient toward the

objective and towards their surroundings rather than the inner world. Jung insisted that both

attitudes existed within the individual, although one may be conscious and the other

unconscious (Feist et al., 2018).

Jung identified four functions—sensing, thinking, feeling, and intuiting—and explained

how they could be combined with the two attitudes (extroversion and introversion) to create

eight different types or orientations (Feist et al., 2018). Citing Jung’s 1921/1971 Collective

Works Volume 6 regarding Psychological types, Feist et al. (2018) define the four functions and

describe the eight types. This information is captured in Table 3.

16

Table 3

Jung’s Function Definitions, Type Descriptions and Profession Examples

Attitudes

Functions Function Definition Extraversion Introversion

Thinking • Logical intellectual activity that produces a chain of ideas, enabling one to recognize meaning

• Rely heavily on concrete thoughts, but may also use abstract ideas from others

• Research scientists, accountants, mathematicians

• Interpretation of events are determined more by the internal meaning they bring versus objective facts.

• Philosophers, theoretical scientists, some inventors

Feeling • Evaluating an idea or event to determining value or worth

• Use objective data to make evaluations, not guided by subjective opinion, rather external values

• Real estate appraisers, objective movie critics

• Base judgements on subjective perceptions rather than objective facts.

• Subjective movie critics, art appraisers

Sensing • Perceiving one’s sensory impulses, recognizing that something exists

• Perceive external stimuli objectively, not greatly influenced by subjective attitudes

• Wine tasters, proofreaders, house painters

• Influenced by their subjective or interpreted sensations of sight, sound, taste, touch, etc.

• Artists, classical musicians.

Intuiting • Perception beyond the workings of consciousness, knowing, without knowing how

• Oriented toward facts in the external world, perceiving them subliminally; guided by hunches contrary to sensory data

• Some inventors, religious reformers

• Perceive elementary facts beyond consciousness

• Prophets, mystics, religious fanatics

Note. Adapted from Theories of Personality, pp. 124-126. Copyright 2018 by McGraw-Hill Global Education Holding, LLC, New York.

The Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)

The MBTI is the most frequently used measure of Jung’s personality types and currently

one of the top-ranked assessments used in workplace settings (Feist et al., 2018; Furnham,

2008; Paul, 2004; The Myers & Briggs Foundation, 2020a). Listed below are a selection of the

guidelines that certified professionals are given for teaching and explaining the MBTI:

• The MBTI is concerned with differences in incorporating information and making

decisions.

17

• The MBTI shows interesting and important behavioral patterns. Knowledge of these

patterns is useful for understanding people and their interaction.

• The MBTI is not a “test” but an “indicator.” There are no right or wrong answers.

• There are no good or bad, or sick or well profiles.

• Each type has its own gifts and its own blind sports.

• Scores do not show maturity or excellence. They show only the strength of the

preference of one element over the other. (Myers & McCaulley, 1985, p. 56)

Rather than placing Jung’s four functions (thinking, feeling, sensing, intuiting) under the

introversion and extroversion attitudes (see Table 3), the MBTI places eight preferences into

four dichotomies (see Table 4).

18

Table 4

The Four Dichotomies of the Myers–Briggs Type Indicator Assessment

Extraversion–Introversion dichotomy (attitudes or orientations of energy)

Extraversion (E) Introversion (I) Directing energy mainly toward the outer

world of people and objects Directing energy mainly toward the inner

world of experiences and ideas

Sensing–Intuition dichotomy

(functions or processes of perception) Sensing (S) Intuition (N)

Focusing mainly on what can be perceived by the five senses

Focusing mainly on perceiving patterns and relationships

Thinking-Feeling dichotomy

(functions or processes of judging) Thinking (T) Feeling (F)

Basing conclusions on logical analysis with a focus on objectivity and detachment

Basing conclusions on personal or social values with a focus on understanding and harmony

Judging-Perceiving dichotomy (attitudes or orientations toward dealing with the outside world)

Judging (J) Perceiving (P) Preferring the decisiveness and closure that

result from dealing with the outer world using one of the judging preferences

(thinking or feeling)

Preferring the flexibility and spontaneity that results from dealing with the outer world using

one of the perceiving processes (sensing or intuition)

Note. Adapted with permission from “Personality Assessment for Employee Development: Ivory Tower or Real World?” Journal of Personality Assessment. Copyright 2018 by Routledge.

The Myers & Briggs Foundation (2014b) website poses a question for each of the four

dichotomies that can help further understand each preference. When thinking of interacting with

the world do you prefer to focus on the outer world (Extraversion) or inner world

(Introversion)? When collecting information do prefer to focus on the basic information you

take in (Sensing) or do you prefer to interpret the information and add meaning (Intuition)?

When making decisions, do you prefer to first look at logic and consistency (Thinking) or first

19

look at the people and special circumstances (Feeling). And in structuring dealings with the

outside world, do you prefer to get things decided (Judging) or stay open to new information

and options (Perceiving).

Once a preference is chosen in each of the four categories the individual can identify

their personality type with a code containing for letters. For instance, someone that identifies

with the preferences of Introversion, Sensing, Feeling, and Perceiving would be an ISFJ.

Descriptions of the sixteen types are available to providing users with information about a

psychological type and its applications. Further descriptions can be used to facilitate analysis of

information about specific groups of people and the interaction of different personality types on

a team (The Myers & Briggs Foundation, 2020a).

The Z-Model for Problem Solving

One of the focal points for the school division professional development analyzed in this

study was on decision making or problem solving. The professional development staff utilized

information about the Zig Zag Process or Z-Model, a MBTI typed based way to approach

problem solving (Center for Applications of Psychological Type, 2004). The “model created by

Isabel Myers and further developed by Gordon Lawrence, uses preferences from the Myers-

Briggs Type Indicator, or MBTI, to help leaders consider questions, deal with ambiguity and

make decisions to move their team or organization forward” (West, 2015).

Figure 2

The Z-Model for Decision Making

Sensing What are the facts?

iNtuition What courses of action are possible?

Thinking Objectively, what are the effects of each possible action?

Feeling What impact will it have on people?

Note. Adapted from “The MBTI Z-Model for Decision Making,” By G. West, 2015, https://mysuccesslab.com/the-mbti-z-model-for-decision-making/ and “The Zig-Zag Process for Problem Solving” by G. Lawrence, https://www.capt.org/products/examples/20023HO.pdf, Copyright 2004 by Center for Applications of Psychological Type, Inc.

20

West (2015) explained that the model focuses on the two dichotomies, Sensing/Intuition

and Thinking/Feeling. Further, she shared how the processes of information gathering and

decision making can be impacted by an individual’s preference:

• Sensing/Intuition. People who show a preference for “Sensing” tend to trust the facts

and evidence they have about a decision they need to make; people with an

“Intuition” preference would rather consider all the possible outcomes before they

decide.

• Thinking/Feeling. “Thinkers” will see decisions as a chessboard that can be

approached strategically; “feelers” will often consider how decisions affect others.

(The Preferences section, paras. 4-5)

Griggs (2018) explained how an individual makes sense of the world through traditions, past

experiences and senses, and also indirectly through hunches, inspiration, and intuition.

Decisions and plans are then based around the objective/rational thinking of one’s mind as well

as the subjective/emotional impact from one’s feelings. West (2015) stresses that despite which

preference may weigh more heavily, it is important to consider the aspects of all four

preferences. Additionally, Griggs (2018) states, “while it is certainly useful for private

contemplation and planning, the Z-Model is particularly effective when there are many folks

involved, each bringing his or her individual strengths to bear” (para. 20).

The Big Five or the Five-Factor Model (FFM)

In order to have a deeper understanding of personality assessments and their use in the

work place the researcher investigated another model that has been cited in several studies. The

five-factor model, also known as the ‘Big Five’ in personality literature, is seen as a robust

framework for organizing personality concepts (Benoliel & Schechter, 2017; Digman, 1990;

McCrae, 2010). Currently the “five-factor model of personality is a hierarchical organization of

personality traits in terms of five basic dimensions: Extraversion, Agreeableness,

Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, and Openness to Experience” (McCrae & John, 1992, p. 175).

Table 5 provides an example of adjectives, Q-Set items, and questionnaire scales defining the

five factors. Q-Set items refers to the California Q-Set, a 100-item instrument that provides a

common language for the description of intraindividual (within the individual) functioning

(McCrae et al., 1986). The questionnaire scales were trait names obtained from the Revised

NEO Personality Inventory (Costa et al., 1991).

21

Table 5

Examples of Adjectives, Q-Set Items, and Questionnaire Scales Defining the Five Factors

Factor Factor definers Name Adjectives Q-sort items Scales Extraversion (E) Active

Assertive Energetic Enthusiastic Outgoing Talkative

Talkative Skilled in play, humor Rapid personal tempo Facially, gesturally expressive Behaves assertively Gregarious

Warmth Gregariousness Assertiveness Activity Excitement Seeking Positive Emotions

Agreeableness (A) Appreciative Forgiving Generous Kind Sympathetic Trusting

Not critical, skeptical Behaves in a giving way Sympathetic, considerate Arouses liking Warm, compassionate Basically trustful

Trust Straightforwardness Altruism Compliance Modesty Tender-Mindedness

Conscientiousness (C) Efficient Organized Planful Reliable Responsible Thorough

Dependable, responsible Productive Able to delay gratification Not self-indulgent Behaves ethically Has high aspiration level

Competence Order Dutifulness Achievement Striving Self-Discipline Deliberation

Neuroticism (N) Anxious Self-pitying Tense Touchy Unstable Worrying

Thin-skinned Brittle ego defenses Self-defeating Basically anxious Concerned with adequacy Fluctuating moods

Anxiety Hostility Depression Self-Consciousness Impulsiveness Vulnerability

Openness (O) Artistic Curious Imaginative Insightful Original Wide interests

Wide range of interests Introspective Unusual thought processes Values intellectual matters Judges in unconventional terms Aesthetically reactive

Fantasy Aesthetics Feelings Actions Ideas Values

Note. Adapted from “An Introduction to the Five-Factor Model and its Applications.” Journal of Personality. Copyright 1992. Reprinted with permission.

The five-factor model was the most commonly found framework in research on the effect of

personality in the workplace.

22

Personality Assessment in the Workplace

Personality assessment is used for a variety of purposes including personnel selection,

coaching, team development, and management training (Furnham, 2015; Lundgren et al., 2017).

Four decades ago it was estimated that major corporations were using forty percent of the

assessment instruments for management development and team building activities, focusing on

self-exploration and self-reflection (Lundgren et al., 2017). And since then the “acceptance and

popularity of personality assessments in organizational contexts has grown enormously over the

last 40 years” (Moyle & Hackston, 2018). Lundgren et al. (2017) conjectured that use may grow

even more extensively as new technology allow for a faster creation and dissemination of tests.

Furnham (2015) provided a comprehensive overview of assessing personality and

individual differences, explaining there are five methods to collect data on individuals. The self-

report can come from structured and unstructured interviews as well as from a review of an

applicant’s curriculum vitae. Observation data come from the references and testimonials from

others that know an individual. Performance tests measure maximum performance, typical

performance, and behavioral qualities in an individual. Physiological tests collect medical

information through physical and blood sample checks. Lastly, biographical data can be

collected through a review of an individual’s personal history or biography (Furnham, 2015).

Furnham (2008) conducted a survey of 255 British-based HR practitioners to determine

the preferred method of psychometric testing (e.g., assessment centers, references, and

interviews). A second part of the survey asked respondents to share knowledge, use, and

validity of 21 personality and motivational tests commonly used by assessment related

professionals and 19 aptitude, ability and intelligence tests. When rating the testing methods and

placing unweighted value on the sum of validity, cost, practicality, and cost scores Furnham

found the following results: “Assessment Centres 14.86%; Cognitive Ability Tests 13.88%;

Personality Tests 13.59%; Interview 13.54%; Work Sample 13.44%; Job Knowledge 12.8%;

Appraisal Data 12.78%; Educational Qualifications 11.89%; Biodata 11.0%; Peer Ratings

10.77%; References 9.65%; Personal Hunch 7.78%” (p. 302). These results might be

interpreted that Assessment Centres to be the best method to assess employees. However, the

individual scores require closer attention. For instance, the Assessment Centres received the

highest cost rating and the lowest practicality rating. The researchers highlighted Assessment

23

Centres, cognitive ability tests, and work samples as the most valid, and interviews as the most

practical.

Personality assessments recognized by over 50% of the respondents’ included the 16

Personality Factor Questionnaire, Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, Occupational Personality

Questionnaire, Belbin Team Role Inventory, Eysenck Personality Tests, Big Five, Fundamental

Interpersonal Relations Orientation Behavior, and Occupational Stress Inventory. Furnham

(2008) explained that “the motive behind this research was essentially trying to determine

practitioners, rather than researchers, attitudes to, beliefs about, and knowledge of,

psychometric tests” (p. 304). The researchers found that practitioner’s knowledge and use of the

tests were based on different criteria than that used by psychometricians and psychologists.

Lundgren et al. (2017) thus noticed tensions between psychologists and non-psychologists, as

the non-psychologist practitioners would commonly choose tests that were condemned by

psychologist researchers in terms of their psychometric properties. Further, psychologists felt

validity of testing was compromised when human resource development (HRD) practitioners

administered and interpreted tests without appropriate training.

Lundgren et al. (2017) had a more expansive scope than Furnham (2008). The authors

used an exploratory research design, conducting 30 semi-structured interviews with industry

stakeholders in Germany, the UK, and the Netherlands. The interviews were conducted between

2012 and 2016, yielding 39 data points that were further enhanced by 6 industry documents, and

3 observations. Interviews were conducted with stakeholders with a variety of academic

backgrounds, years of experience, and industry positions. Data were collected in three rounds:

(a) chronologically organizing interviews from each country while maintaining a descriptive

narrative; (b) highlighting pertinent topics per case; and (c) integrating insights from all the data

to explain findings and discover emergent themes.

The authors discussed how HRD practitioners’ reasoning for choosing a test varied

based on ease of use, length, cost, publisher marketing, or historical considerations. They also

noted the company purpose for utilizing personality tests. The focus was either individual- or

team-based, with the intent varying between exploration and employee development (Lundgren

et al., 2017).

In contrast, Moyle and Hackston (2018) found that although personality assessments

“are used across many applications, such as executive coaching, team building, and hiring and

24

promotion decisions, the focus of most published research on the use of personality assessments

at work is biased toward assessment for employee selection” (p. 507). Moyle and Hackston

(2018) go on to discuss assessments for employee development, explaining “personality results

are not used to predict performance, but as a vehicle for increasing self-awareness” (p. 512).

When taking this approach, the organization and HR practitioner should realize that sharing the

results of the assessment is more about serving as a starting point of change for the individual

(Moyle & Hackston, 2018). For example:

In a rare experimental field study, Sutton, Allison, and Williams (2013) showed that

self-awareness improved as a result of training with a personality type instrument

(Enneagram); the reflection and insight gained was positively associated with job

contentment and enthusiasm, and with improvements in relationships and

communication with colleagues. (Moyle & Hackston, 2018, p. 512)

Similar to DuFour and DuFour’s (2010) PLC success mentality of a results orientation, Moyle

and Hackston (2018) stressed the focus of the scores should not be about the assessment, but

what is done with them. How can a person or group move forward based on the results? How

will barriers be overcome? This may require the help of a practitioner skilled in interpreting and

working through results. Or in some cases it may be better to use a less comprehensive

assessment model to allow easier understanding of the assessment outcomes and possible

avenues for change (Moyle & Hackston, 2018).

Moyle and Hackston (2018) also discussed the criteria for choosing a personality

assessment when focusing on the developmental process versus selection. When an HR

practitioner assesses for selection the process may need to be more comprehensive, with a

bigger assessment, one that is mapped to the five-factor model, and with details that can help

predict job performance. Developmental-minded assessments may not need to cover all the

aspects of personality, focusing on a specific area relevant to the developmental outcome. The

assessment (and results) should be easy for an employee to understand. Reports of assessment

results should be nonthreatening, as such an approach tends to be more effective, and, if

possible, the skill of the practitioner as a team facilitator or coach should be high (Moyle &

Hackston, 2018). Coe (1992) agrees that practitioner skill is important, stating that one of the

largest problems with the use of personality assessment use is inadequate training. Improper use

of the tool can lead assessors to unfairly stereotype people (Coe, 1992).

25

Team Specific Personality Research

The school division professional development analyzed in this study explored how

differing personality preferences may interact in decision making situations. This section

reviews research studies that examined how individual personality types and their combination

within a team can impact team interactions, combined competencies, and team outcomes. All of

the reviewed studies discussed their results in terms of the five-factor model of personality.

Studies in the late 1990s began to examine the role of personality in team contexts

(Barrick et al., 1998; Mount et al., 1998; Stewart, 2003). More recent studies have affirmed

some of the earlier findings or led to deeper insight into compounding specific personality types

within a team (Curşeu et al., 2019; Radović et al., 2020). Barrick et al. (1998) pulled together 51

work teams to examine “relationships among team composition (ability and personality), team

process (social cohesion), and team outcomes (team viability and team performance)” (p. 377).

The nearly 700 participants came from teams that assembled small appliances and electrical

equipment and individuals from fabrication and maintenance teams from two rubber plants.

Team level data (social cohesiveness, team conflict, member flexibility, team communication,

and workload sharing) were assessed using a variety of combined scales rated by the

participants. Team viability and performance was independently assessed through ratings.

General mental ability (GMA) was assessed using the Wonderlic Personnel Test (Form 5) and

Personal Characteristics Inventory was used to assess the five-factor model of personality

(Barrick et al., 1998).

Barrick et al. (1998) found that teams composed of members with higher

conscientiousness and cognitive-ability ratings perform better (per a supervisory rating) than

those that are less conscientious and lower in cognitive-ability. Teams that are more emotionally

stable and agreeable are also more likely to have higher performance. They also found that

teams without disagreeable or introverted members were found to be higher performing teams.

These team-based findings contrasted the Barrick and Mount (1991) study that indicated little

correlation between emotional stability, agreeableness, and job performance. Teams with higher

cognitive ability, that are more emotionally stable, and more extraverted were more likely to

stay together in the future. They believed this was because such teams are “likely to experience

positive intragroup interactions and thereby likely to become more socially cohesive” (Barrick

et al., 1998, p. 388).

26

Barrick et al. (1998) described how team performance is hindered when there is a mix of

conscientious and not-so-conscientious members on a team. They conjectured that this may be

because those rated higher in conscientiousness must perform their own tasks and also re-do the

low-conscientious member tasks. Additionally, teams that have even a single member who is

highly disagreeable “is associated with lower performance, less cohesion, more conflict, less

open communication, and less sharing of the workload” (Barrick et al., 1998, p. 388).

Mount et al. (1998) combined the Barrick et al. (1998) study with ten others to complete

a meta-analyses comparing two types of jobs: those “that involve teamwork (where employees

interact interdependently with coworkers)…[and] those that involve dyadic interactions with

others (where employees provide a direct service to customer and clients)” (Mount et al., 1998,

p. 145). All of the big five factors had non-zero relations with ratings on job performance that

involves interactions with others, and in the effect that these factors may have on the quality of

team relationships. Conscientiousness, as in other previous analyses, continued to be a valid

factor for predicting performance for a variety of jobs. As predicted in the authors’ hypothesis,

emotional stability and agreeableness were stronger predictors of job performance for jobs that

involved teamwork versus dyadic ones. Surprising to the authors, extraversion and openness to

experience had correlations that were higher than expected, although scores were lower than the

other three factors (Mount et al., 1998).

Mount et al. (1998) noted:

When jobs involve teamwork, the importance of Emotional Stability and Agreeableness

increases while the importance of Conscientiousness decreases somewhat. Thus, when

work is to be accomplished in situations where teamwork is critical, it is particularly

important that individuals be cooperative, considerate, trusting, and friendly (agreeable)

as well as secure, calm, and steady. (emotionally stable; p. 162)

The authors cautioned generalizing their results to teams that may have different dynamics than

the ones studied in their work. They suggested future research, exploring other team situations,

would help contribute to a better understanding of how personality-performance effects

different teams.

Stewart (2003) agreed that personality is “an important construct in teams, but it can be

understood only from a multilevel perspective” (p. 202). Citing the work of Kozlowski and

Klein (2000), Stewart summarized three cross-level models for describing the relationships

27

between different constructs at different levels of analysis as it relates to individual personality

and team level personality. In the direct effects model, “the individual-level traits are expected

to interact with team- and organization-level constructs to influence team-level personality”

(Stewart, 2003, p. 199). He explained that agreeableness and extraversion have a greater impact

in team settings than when viewing individual job performance based on these factors.

Therefore, organizations should give weight to thinking about how individual selection

decisions can impact a team. The moderator effect model looks at the “influence of the team

setting on relationships between individual traits and individual performance” (Stewart, 2003, p.

200). Organizations should recognize the higher-level team component can alter relationships at

the individual level. Lastly, in the frog pond effects model, the “effect of an individual’s traits is

dependent on the configuration of the individual traits of others. For instance, the

conscientiousness of an individual team member may affect team-level conscientiousness only

if other team members are relatively very low on conscientiousness” (Stewart, 2003, p. 201).

Radović et al. (2020) sought to “examine connections between the composition of

personality traits of team members, team performance and team behaviour competences” (p.

35). Subjects were given Costa & McCrae’s Neo-Pi-R Inventory to determine ratings within

the Five factor model: Neuroticism (N), Extraversion (E), Agreeableness (A), Consciousness

(C) and Openness (O). The research took place in a telecommunication company with 87

participants that were split into 20 four to six member teams. Team leaders filled out

questionnaires to assess team behavior competencies. Researchers had access to internal

company data to collect yearly performance information (Radović et al., 2020).

Radović et al. (2020) found that the “correlation between Extraversion expressed in the

average of the team, the team work performance and the team’s goal achievement is statistically

significant” (p. 36). The researchers explained teams with higher reporting extroverts found

higher efficiency through higher social cohesion of the team. Goal achievement correlated with

average measure of Openness, Consciousness, and Agreeableness. Goal success for teams with

a higher average of the Openness dimension was explained through the deeper tendencies of

learning, discovery, flexibility, and acceptance of change. The researchers stated that teams with

a high Agreeableness dimension had individuals with less competitive attitudes, thus leading to

greater synergy in team performance. Overall, the researchers concluded that team member

personality traits and their compatibility is important. They suggested that organization

28

psychology should explore team development solution focused organization coaching and

systematic corporative coaching (Radović et al., 2020).

Personality Assessment and Professional Learning Communities

Collaboration in professional learning communities (PLC’s) can contribute an increased

level of student learning (Prenger et al., 2019). As principals often coordinate professional

development within a school, it is helpful to understand how personalities can effect PLC

development. Benoliel and Schechter (2017) discussed “the importance of teachers’ personality

traits in explaining the interplay and social exchanges among teachers in a PLC network and the

potential influence of these traits in enhancing and/or constraining PLC development” (p. 223).

The authors believed individual teacher motivation, with respect to knowledge sharing,

relationship building, collaborative learning, and social interactions, should be explored through

the five-factor model (Benoliel & Schechter, 2017). Benoliel and Schechter (2017) made the

case that extraverted teachers would help initiate change, generate excitement, initiate

interactions, and utilize social networks. Teachers high in the agreeable personality factor would

help to maintain intra-group cooperation negotiating “in ways that capitalize on the advantages

of community interactions” (Benoliel & Schechter, 2017, p. 226).

Agreeableness is also associated with knowledge sharing, trusting interpersonal skills,

and can-do attitudes. The authors cited Borgatti and Foster (2003), explaining “conscientious

people are perceived as disciplined, experts, and hard workers” (Benoliel & Schechter, 2017, p.

227). They also tend to be more socially connected, facilitating an “increase [in] opportunities

to seek, share, and receive knowledge resources (Benoliel & Schechter, 2017, p. 227).

Individuals with high levels of neuroticism struggle with stress, have fewer intimate

relationships, are ineffective at handling interpersonal differences, and are not likely to engage

in social interactions or knowledge sharing. Thus neurotic individuals would “lead to a smaller

contribution from such teachers to PLC development and sustainability” (Benoliel & Schechter,

2017, p. 227). Lastly, highly open individuals “are likely to perceive their PLC social network

as an environment conducive to actively searching for opportunities to learn and to innovate”

(Benoliel & Schechter, 2017, p. 228). They may be more likely to work towards integrative

solutions and facilitate communications between PLC team members (Benoliel & Schechter,

2017).

29

Benoliel and Schechter (2017) stressed principals are critical in “designing and

modifying PLC cultures, that will foster the absorption, assimilation, and application of

knowledge not only among teachers with predisposition for knowledge sharing and

interpersonal relationships but also… among teachers who are less comfortable with knowledge

sharing” (p. 228). They affirmed the work of Tschannen-Moran (2009), stating “the significance

of trust as a positive factor for promoting learning, encouraging the sharing of good practices,

and stimulating open collaboration among educators” (Benoliel & Schechter, 2017, p. 228).

Principals should be cognizant of team personality trait composition so they can help facilitate

knowledge sharing and social interaction, especially when teachers that are more introverted or

neurotic may need assistance with these important PLC attributes. PLC networking efforts can

also be enhanced by being aware of teachers’ predispositions, supporting teachers in their

networking skills (Benoliel & Schechter, 2017).

Personality Assessment and Effective Communication

The understanding of the interpersonal characteristics of a leader and the team that they

support can be an key factor in maximizing effective communication (Zheng et al., 2016).

Moyle and Hackston (2018) reported that reflection through self-awareness training was

positively related to improvements in communication with colleagues. When assessing team

communication, Barrick et al. (1998) found that teams that were more extraverted and

emotionally stable were likely to experience positive intragroup interactions. The Big Five traits

of conscientiousness, extraversion, and agreeableness were found to be positively related to

communication skill (Khuong et al., 2016). Although the word communication was not

specifically included, related terms such as interplay, social exchanges, interpersonal

relationships, knowledge sharing, collaboration, and social networking were examined in the

context of personality traits (Benoliel & Schechter, 2017). Benoliel and Schechter (2017)

suggested that principals should be aware of team personality trait composition so they can help

facilitate knowledge sharing and social interaction.

Limitations in Personality Research

The use of personality assessment in the workplace is not an exact science and several

factors can affect the validity of using results to predict or create desired outcomes. Barrick and

Mount (2005) advised that when situations are strong, there is a decrease between personality

30

and behavior. They suggested that personality is a distal motivational force, “which influences

behavior through proximal performance motivation variables like goals, self-efficacy, and

expectancies” (p. 366). Barrick and Mount (2005) also stressed that measurement can be a

major concern, writing:

[A]lthough personality is fairly stable and so is the context, the response to items on a

personality inventory at any one moment is determined by many traits and states and by

many features of the immediate situation. Consequently, traits will usefully predict

behavior only when it is aggregated (Epstein, 1979), either over a category of behaviors

(e.g., counterproductive behavior) or across time (annual performance or longer).

Second, we must recognize that global traits (like the Big Five) are best for explanation

and theory development; however, prediction of narrower and more specific behaviors at

work will require correspondingly narrower trait constructs. (p. 366)

Ryan and Barrick (2003) mentioned that “neither the science of personality assessment

nor its applied practitioners have information about the comparative performance of the

different instruments available in the marketplace.” (p. 18). For instance, looking at the Myers-

Briggs Inventory, University of Oxford associate professor Merve Emre wrote:

For some time, it has been a well-known fact that the type indicator is not scientifically

valid; that the theory behind it has no basis in clinical psychology; and that it is the

flagship product of a lucrative global corporation, one whose interests sit at the shadowy

crossroads of industrial psychology and self-care. (Emre, 2018, p. xv)

Moyle and Hackston (2018) took on the key criticisms of the MBTI, arguing they have been

misguided and misleading. In doing so, they affirmed the complexity of personality assessment.

They recommended a new branch of research they “have termed experiential validity,

systematically measuring the perspectives and experiences of test takers in developmental

contexts, to identify which assessments have the greatest lasting developmental impact” (p.

514).

Epstein (2010) warned that good personality theory should include variables, such as emotions,

motives, and needs. Despite his work on the five-factor model, he believed it “falls far short of

providing a foundation for a complete theory of personality” (Epstein, 2010, p. 39). Barrick et

al. (2001) indicated “that when lower-level personality and lower-level criterion constructs are

appropriately linked stronger correlations might occur” (p. 24), affirming that the FFM may be a

31

good way to create a common language, however higher correlations between personality

factors and job performance can only come when assessed at a more detailed level.

Summary

The increasing complexity and demands placed on educational leaders requires

education leaders to receive ongoing support and professional development (Ferrandino, 2001;

Shen et al., 2000; Tang, 2018). Effective communication is one topic that receives professional

development attention as it can help facilitate interpersonal relationships, knowledge sharing,

and social networking (McEwan, 2003; Peterson, 2002; Tyler, 2016). There is value in

understanding and communicating personality differences when fostering collaboration

(Benoliel & Schechter, 2017; Harris & Jones, 2010). Further, understanding personality trait

composition can help an educational leader successfully facilitate knowledge sharing and social

interaction within a professional learning community (Benoliel & Schechter, 2017). Personality

assessment and interpretation is complex, thus use of such information requires appropriate

expertise (Coe, 1992; Moyle & Hackston, 2018).

32

Chapter Three

Methodology




leadership practices in one school division in Virginia. Interviews with school leaders from a

school division in the southeastern region of Virginia were conducted in between October and

November of 2020. Data were analyzed to determine whether educational leaders reported

intentional actions that came as a result of understanding personality through the MBTI and

staff development. The results of these findings may help determine if school leaders and school

systems should invest in Myers-Briggs-based staff development.

This chapter explains the methodology used to conduct the study. Next, decisions

regarding sampling participants, as well as data collection and analysis, is described. The

validity and reliability of the study is also discussed.

Research Methodology

This study used a basic qualitative methodology of research, research that does not

indicate ordinal values (Guest et al., 2012). “Qualitative research is based on the belief that

knowledge is constructed by people in an ongoing fashion as they engage in and make meaning

of an activity, experience, or phenomenon” (Merriam, 2016, p. 23). Further, the research design

is phenomenological. Creswell (2014) explains that such a study “describes meaning for several

individuals of their lived experiences of a concept or phenomenon” (p. 57). This study

investigates the phenomenon of educational leader practice change that may come as a result of

personality disposition training.

Participant perspectives were collected in a way that combined a standardized open-

ended interview with a guide approach. “The standardized open-ended interview consists of a

set of questions carefully worded and arranged with the intention of taking each respondent

through the same sequence and asking each respondent the same questions with essentially the

same words” (Patton, 2002, p. 342). An interview guide approach is less structured, listing

questions or issues that are to be explored over the course of the interview (Patton, 2002). A

combined strategy was selected because it offered “flexibility in probing and in determining

33

when it is appropriate to explore certain subjects in greater depth, or even to pose questions

about new areas of inquiry that were not originally anticipated in the interview instrument’s

development” (Patton, 2002, p. 347). Further, the use of inductive probing allowed the

“researcher to clarify expressions or meaning and further permits participants to tell their story”

(Guest et al., 2012, p. 13).

Merriam (2016) captured this design in a different way, calling it a semi-structured

interview process and offering a descriptive list of components:

• Interview includes a mix of more-and-less structured questions

• Questions are used flexibly

• Specific data are usually required from all respondents

Data collected from the interviews were documented as interview transcripts, field notes, and

email correspondence.

Research Methodology Justification

Interviewing allows the researcher “to enter into the other person’s perspective…

[beginning] with the assumption that the others is meaningful, knowable, and able to be made

explicit” (Patton, 2002, p. 341). “Qualitative researchers are interested in understanding how

people interpret their experiences, how they construct their worlds, and what meaning they

attribute to their experiences” (Merriam, 2016, p. 6). Sofaer (1999) found that qualitative

research methods are valuable in providing rich descriptions of complex phenomena” (p. 1101).

As this research was conducted to determine educational leaders’ interpreted experiences, the

basic qualitative research process was determined to be the most appropriate method.

Instrument Design

The interview questions were designed to answer the following research questions:




sessions?

Table 6 displays the interview questions. The interview instrument was created after

interviewing the school division director in charge of planning and implementing the

professional development sessions with the participants.

34

Table 6

Educational Leader Interview Questions

Interview Questions 1. What were your prior experiences in and thoughts about personality assessment tools

and their impact on self-improvement, performance, or professional interactions prior to the sessions done last year?

2. Summarize the professional development you remember receiving from the division regarding Myers Briggs and Personality Disposition.

3. What leadership actions do you believe have changed because of the leadership disposition training? Please give a few examples.

4. If not covered above, can you reflect on how the training addressed the specific topics below. Give an example of how your leadership actions may have changed due to this training component?

a. identifying blind spots b. communication skills c. group dynamics d. building teams e. decision-making processes

5. What, if any, value did you find in such training sessions?

Instrument Validation

Patton (2002) stressed the importance of question clarity, emphasizing the “importance

of language that is understandable and part of the frame of reference of the person being

interviewed” (p. 362). First, feedback on an initial draft of the questions was obtained from an

expert panel of ten educational leadership professionals. The interview questions were edited

and sent back to the panel for a validation of the modified interview tool. Further, the interview

tool was discussed with a school principal that had attended the professional development

session. He was promoted to a central office role and would not qualify for the research study.

His feedback helped modify the questions to be specific to the training content. Lastly, the

questions were shared and edited with one of the district professional development staff

members that had conducted the training sessions. This helped ensure the questions were

pointedly related to the professional development content.

Researcher as the Instrument

It is essential that throughout the entire research process that the researcher be aware of

how his or her biases, values, and personal background can shape all of the components of the

research process (Creswell, 2014). Patton (2002) states that the “quality of the information

35

obtained during an interview is largely dependent on the interviewer” (p. 241). As described in

the section above, this relates to the importance of posing questions that make it clear to the

interviewee what is being asked (Patton, 2002). A researcher must also make sure the questions

and demeanor in which they are asked keep neutrality and rapport in mind. Patton (2002)

defined neutrality as “a stance vis-à-vis the content of what that person says” (p. 365). Further,

“neutrality means that the person being interviewed can tell me anything without engendering

either my favor or disfavor with regard to the content of his or her response” (p. 365). Whereas

neutrality is a stance vis-à-vis the content, rapport is a stance vis-à-vis the person being

interviewed. “Rapport is built on the ability to convey empathy and understanding without

judgement” (Patton, 2002, p. 366).

In order to keep this sense of neutrality, the researcher must recognize and acknowledge

how experiences may bias the collecting and analyzing of data (Roberts & Hyatt, 2019). As will

be referenced in the Site and Selection section, participants are public school educational

leaders that took part in professional development related to the MBTI. I have been a public-

school educational leader for eight years and have taken part in many personality disposition

training sessions in personal and professional settings, including Myers-Briggs, the Enneagram,

Gallup StengthsFinder, and Personalysis. Additionally, I found the information about

personality and suggested next steps offered by these programs to be valuable and helpful

regarding personal/professional growth and in positively shaping interactions with others.

During the interview process, I remained neutral in demeanor and response and while analyzing

data, sought to minimize my own positive judgement of the MBTI tool.

Data Analysis

The collected qualitative data were explored and organized through an inductive process

called Applied Thematic Analysis (Guest et al., 2012). This type of analysis aligns with a more

positivist approach than an interpretivist one. Rather than analyzing qualitative information in a

less structured manner, without any quantification of the collected discourse (interpretivism),

the positivist approach seeks to be more systematic, structuring analysis in way that can create

quantifiable information. This lends itself to determining themes, concepts, and patterns within

the collected interview transcripts (Guest et al., 2012). Merriam (2016) similarly explained that

such an inductive analysis organizes data into “categories [that] are conceptual elements that

36

‘cover’ or span many individual examples or bits or units of the data you previously identified”

(p. 206).

The creation and ongoing development of a codebook is central to Applied Thematic

Analysis and was used in this research study. Guest et al. (2012) explain:

Codebook development is a discrete analysis step where the observed meaning in the

text is systematically sorted into categories, types, and relationships of meaning. The

text is reread and analyzed via segmenting and coding into these categories, types, and

relationships. We generally do this in an iterative fashion, reading text in batches and

modifying the codebook as new information and new insights are gained. (p. 52)

The codebook contains codes, defined as “textual description[s] of the semantic boundaries of a

theme or a component of a theme” (Guest et al., 2012, p. 50). Citing work from MacQueen et al.

(2008), Guest et al. (2012) share that a code entry should contain the following components:

code label, short definition, full definition, when to use, and when not to use. This process seeks

to reduce ambiguity in the coding process. “Analytic objectives keep you focused on the task at

hand and help you prioritize which themes to develop in the analysis” (Guest et al., 2012, p. 68).

They primarily analytic objective for this study was to answer the following research

questions:




sessions?

As interviews were completed, the researcher took anecdotal notes to assist in codebook

and code creation. As transcript coding proceeded, themes were discovered and, in some cases,

required the recoding of previously coded transcripts. Throughout the coding process, the

researcher also collected participant quotations that were used to highlight and “lay bare the

emergent themes for all to see” (Guest et al., 2012, p. 95). Final quotes for Chapter 4 were

selected based on their ability to exemplify an intended concept (Guest et al., 2012, p. 95).

Site and Sample Selection

Participants were chosen through purposeful sampling. “Purposeful sampling is based

on the assumption that the investigator wants to discover, understand, and gain insight and

therefore must select a sample from which the most can be learned” (Merriam, 2016, p. 96). In

37

order to obtain information-rich cases about educational leader change through personality

disposition staff development, participants had to be selected specifically. Patton (2002)

defined “information-rich cases are those from which one can learn a great deal about issues of

central importance to the purpose of the inquiry” (p. 230). This study identified school leaders

that had been given a personality assessment and then been given a specific staff development

session to understand the results and make use of the information.

The subject pool that met these criteria was a select group of public-school leaders from

one school district in southeastern Virginia. The school division’s learning and leadership

department identified the qualified candidates as they had record of who had attended the

training. The division sent two emails to what they identified as 169 qualified candidates on

September 30 and October 7, 2020. Ten potential candidates were scheduled for interviews.

One was disqualified for the study when discussion indicated that he had not participated in the

division specific training. In order to determine the adequacy of nine participants serving as an

appropriate sample size the researcher sought response saturation throughout the interviewing,

coding, and data analysis process. “Reaching a point of saturation or redundancy means that you

begin hearing the same responses to your interview questions or seeing the same behaviors in

observations; no new insights are forthcoming” (Merriam, 2016, p. 101).

Data Collection Procedures

As part of the university requirements, the researcher completed Institutional Review

Board (IRB) training before beginning the study to acquire official IRB certification (see

Appendix A). The school division selected for the interviews required approval of a research

proposal through a formal process. The division suggested the proposal go through their process

first, so that any feedback regarding changes could be incorporated into the Virginia Tech IRB

review process (see Appendix B for the school division approval letter). Ultimately, the

researcher obtained IRB approval from the Virginia Tech IRB Office (see Appendix C). All of

the guidelines and protocols for the participating school division were followed for conducting

the interviews with educational leaders within the division.

The division sent an invitation email (see Appendix D) and a research study Information

Document (see Appendix E), clearly explaining what would occur during the interview. The

candidates were instructed to contact the researcher by phone or email. A date was scheduled

for the interview.

38

Data Gathering Procedures

Interviews were conducted using teleconferencing software between October 2020 and

November 2020. With permission, the interviews were recorded with multiple devices. The

audio files were labeled with pseudonyms in order to protect the identity of each participant. All

the interviews were transcribed to a text document using the teleconferencing transcription

software resource.

Confidentiality and anonymity precautions were taken throughout the research and

writing process. The transcribed interview contained only pseudonyms to protect the identity of

the interviewees and school division. The participant names, school names, and school division

name only appear on one document, which remained secure in another location on the

researcher’s password-protected computer.

In order to ensure validity of the participant interviews, original transcripts were

returned to the interviewees exactly as transcribed, giving participants the opportunity to make

changes and return comments by a specified date. Although conducted by email, a paper

response was offered. Emails received were downloaded and stored in a secure location on the

researcher’s computer in order to protect participant confidentiality.

Data Management

Study data were organized through coding, in order to ensure that the interviews, notes

and documents would be easy to access and maintained confidentially throughout the analysis

and writing process (Merriam, 2016). A clear, pseudonym file naming system was used to

ensure confidentiality, as well as the ability for the research to connect information with an

interviewee. A secured, researcher only folder was created to store the coded interviews, notes,

documents, and correspondence for one year. The data were labeled in a way so that individual

documents could be accessed by the researcher at any time. The information was password

secured on the researcher’s computer. A folder of all of the documents was stored in the secure

University Google Drive until successful defense of the dissertation. At that time, the online

documents were removed. The key that connects participant names to participant interviews

was not stored online.

39

Time Line

The research request was submitted to the participating school division in May 2020.

School division approval, with required conditions, was received in June 2020. The researcher

completed and presented the research proposal to the dissertation committee in July 2020. When

approved for study, the researcher contacted the school division to share needed changes in

August 2020. The division replied with accepted changes in September 2020. The research then

submitted an IRB request in September 2020. Once permission was obtained the school division

sent out an invitation email to potential interview participants on September 30, 2020 and

October 7, 2020 (see Appendix D). Potential participants contacted the researcher to schedule

an interview. Interviews were conducted between October and November 2020. The interviews

were transcribed and coded in November 2020. The respondents were provided with member

checks to verify their responses.

Summary

This qualitative research study utilized a researcher created set of interview questions

that sought to collect participant perceptions of leadership action changes and the perceived

value of the division led training. The research protocol was approved by the participating

division and Virginia Tech Institutional Review Board. Interviews were conducted in October

and November 2020 utilizing teleconferencing software with transcription enabled tool. In

Chapter 4 the researcher explored and organized the collected qualitative data through an

inductive process called Applied Thematic Analysis.

40

Chapter Four

Results

Introduction

This chapter presents the data and a detailed analysis of the information gathered during

the collection process of this study. The data collection process included face-to-face interviews

with nine public-school leaders from one school district in southeastern Virginia. The

participants were presented with five open-ended interview questions, which directly related to

the research questions:




sessions?

The interviews were completed over four weeks using an online teleconference

platform. The platform recorded the video and audio of the interview and also provided a text

transcription that could be downloaded and pasted into a document for coding purposes. The

participants were provided a copy of the interview questions in the initial recruitment email and

informational document. Participants were interviewed in no particular order and were coded

sequentially in order of interview. For example, the first participant interviewed was coded as

P1, the second participant interviewed was coded P2, and so on.





data to determine leadership changes that came as a result of school-system led professional

development involving the MBTI. The results of these findings could help determine if school

leaders and school systems would benefit from Myers-Briggs professional development.

41

Data

This chapter reports the data organized within the interview questions and the research

questions. The raw data will be shared in a table, followed by an explanation of the data and the

identification of any emergent themes. A summary of all data collected will be presented at the

conclusion of this chapter.

Interview Question 1

The first interview question was designed to prompt personal and professional exposure

to any personal assessment tools. Table 7 displays themes that emerged from participants’

responses, which prompted participants to share prior experiences in and thoughts about

personality assessment tools and their impact on self-improvement, performance, or

professional interactions prior to the school division professional development sessions.

Table 7

Interview Question 1 - What Were Your Prior Experiences in and Thoughts about

Personality Assessment Tools and Their Impact on Self-Improvement, Performance, or

Professional Interactions Prior to the Sessions Done Last Year?

Response P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 Found disposition tool exposure valuable X X X X X X X Lots of exposure to disposition tools X X Some exposure to disposition tools X X X X Little exposure to disposition tools X X X MBTI exposure X X X StrengthsFinder exposure X X X Experienced disposition tools through church X X

Two of the participants had a lot of exposure to personality disposition tools prior to the

school division training, four had some exposure, and three had little exposure. The researcher

determined exposure based on the amount or depth of previous personality disposition

experiences. Once all of the interviews were reviewed each participant was placed in a level

relative to each other. One participant from each of the exposure categories mentioned they had

worked with the MBTI. Of those, two mentioned they had worked with the Gallup

StrengthsFinder materials. Two of the participants shared that they worked with personality

disposition tools within their church. Seven out of the nine participants indicated that they had

42

found personality disposition tools valuable prior to the school division training. P3 who

indicated lots of exposure to disposition tools stated “I really like personal development and

personal career development like books and resources. I use a lot of audible format books” (P3,

l24). P5, who had a lot of exposure throughout growing up shared about how the resources

helped with

understanding my emotions, understanding who I am and who I am not, what I bring to

situations, and what I can't bring to situations and knowing those limitations about

myself and knowing who I am, also. And taking being able to take ownership of this is

how I am. And that part really helped as far as prior to now. (P05, l148-150)

Research Question 1 addresses reported leadership action changes and will be discussed

in more detail in a future section. The analysis yields a number of noted responses by each

participant. In order to further examine interview question 1, Table 8 compares the prior level of

participant exposure (noted in Table 7) to the number of noted responses by each participant

cited in Table 9.

Table 8

Comparison of Participant Prior Exposure to Personality Assessment Tools and Their

Number of Cited Leadership Actions

Participant Exposure Number of responses

P3 A lot 2 P5 A lot 5 P1 Some 3 P6 Some 4 P7 Some 1 P8 Some 2 P2 Little 3 P4 Little 1 P9 Little 5

Participants with a lot of prior exposure to personality assessment tools had responses ranging

from two to five remarks. Participants with some exposure had responses ranging from one to

four remarks. And participants with little exposure had responses ranging from one to five

remarks. None of the participants indicated a negative attitude about personality disposition

43

tools nor that they felt the amount of exposure to such tools affected their openness to the

division training.

Interview Question 2

Table 9 displays the participants’ responses to interview question 2, which prompted the

participants to explain the professional development they remember receiving from the division

regarding Myers Briggs and personality disposition.

44

Table 9

Interview Question 2 - Summarize the Professional Development You Remember Receiving

From the Division Regarding Myers Briggs and Personality Disposition

Response P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 Compare to others activity X X X X X X X Movement activities X X X X X List of questions activities X X X Line activity X X X Decision making content X X X Four by four chart activity X X Rule following discussion X Picture activity X X Parts of a house activity X X How leaders are different concept X X Very little specifics remembered X

Seven out of the nine participants spoke about an activity that allowed them to compare

their MBTI profile to others attending the same training session. P6 shared that the participants

were

clumped with other Associate Principals, Assistant Principals, and Resource Teachers.

And then we started talking about our similarities. And then they kind of grouped us

together based on our, our Myers Briggs finding. We had conversations and they had

created like little houses that had all of the Myers Briggs personality types on it. And

then they asked us questions and then we would answer based on how our findings

related to how we were as leaders. (P6, l50-53)

P7 recalled similar stating “they put us with common folks common you know people who had

the similar results and then we were able to talk about our different experiences as a result of

what that data meant to us” (P7, l87-88).

Five of the participants specifically mentioned movement activities. The remarks often

connected the content of the course with getting up and physically moving in the room.

Decision-making activities were mentioned by three of the participants. P1 shared several

remarks regarding personality disposition and decision making:

Depending on what your strengths were like you either did like the, when you're

making a decision, you did like you move really quickly and then you took more time

45

doing data analysis and then you like quickly made a decision…They made us go

around the room to show that where some people were still collecting information

based on a decision topic versus the people who had already made a decision and were

sitting in decision land by the time you are still collecting data. (P1, l69-71)

P3 recalled the training covering the four phases of a problem-solving model seen through

differences of the MBTI letters, giving an example that “somebody who is Thinking may have

been at that phase, like if they are just a thinker, like they got their first but then they were there

for a really long time” (P3, l67). Additionally, P4 stated that

they had us basically going through the decision-making process and having you move

at certain points and then the other people in your group moving at different points

depending on their personality so you could see where they spent the most time in the

decision-making process based on their Myers Briggs. (P4, l140-141)

Research Question 1

The question: “What, if any, leadership action related changes do educational leaders

report after MBTI division-led training sessions?” encompassed interview questions 3 and 4.

Table 10 displays themes generated from participants’ responses to interview question 3, which

prompted the participants to share leadership actions they believe to have changed because of

the training. They were also asked to give specific examples.

Table 10

Interview Question 3 - What Leadership Actions Do You Believe Have Changed Because of

the Leadership Disposition Training? Please Give a Few Examples

Response P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 Self-awareness X X X X X X Decision making as team X X X X X Exposure prompted reflection X X X X Gave a broader perspective X X X X Learned about comfort zones X X X Communication skills X X Situational strengths & growth areas X X

Four of the nine participants shared that exposure to the MBTI prompted reflection on

their personality and how it related to leadership practices, both their own and how they

46

perceive the practices of other leaders with whom they work. Reflection was also closely related

to participants discussing self-awareness. P5 shared how she and her fellow administrator “were

from the very beginning, very reflective on everything. So, when we both went through our

Myers Briggs training together, we were very reflective and very strategic with what we kind of

did with that information” (P5, l171-172). P6 shared:

It made me more curious about my team like so I felt like I had a solid understanding of

myself as a leader because the themes that what I found from the results really does

sound like who I was as a person and it really did help me understand myself better as a

leader. (P6, l60-61)

P9 combined this self-reflection with considering how others may solve a problem, stating,

“Once I had a chance to, like, really think about that I realized that sometimes being so quick to

react and solve a problem doesn't always take into consideration people's feelings (P9, l92-93).

The reflection theme was similar to participant statements regarding self-awareness. For

instance, P6 shared the following:

I had to understand that my role in the team was different, even though I was unlike

them. I had to be comfortable with myself and understanding who I was and what I

brought to the team as opposed to what they brought to the team. (P6, l67)

The quote above also captured another common theme, which was decision-making as a

team. Five out of the nine participants made reference to changing their leadership practices in

this area due to the disposition training. P4 remarked that after discussing the training with her

team they have “really been able to play to each other's strengths, based on what we are versus

the other, because I think other than judging, we were completely opposite” (P4, l153). Also

related to team decision-making P9 stated that she needed to, “be conscious about slowing

down and making sure that I, you know, talk with the whatever stakeholders are involved in the

decision-making process and really try to understand them before jumping to a solution to a

problem” (P9, l94).

Table 11 displays themes generated from participants’ responses to interview question 4.

Participants were reminded about specific components of the professional development training

in order to prompt additional thoughts about the training and/or how the training impacted their

leadership practices.

47

Table 11

Interview Question 4 - Reflect on How the Training Addressed these Specific Topics

(Identifying Blind Spots, Communication Skills, Group Dynamics, Building Teams,

Decision-Making Processes). Give an Example of How Your Leadership Actions May Have

Changed Due to this Training Component?

Response P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 Blind spots X X X X X Decision-making process X X X X Group dynamics X X X Communication skills X X One-time training not enough X X Useful if leadership team embraced X X Building teams X Taking risks X No direct change X Interesting X

Blind spots had the highest percentage of participant response once being reminded of

the training components. P6 remarked:

I think it made me more open to ask people about my blind spots because they are blind

spots and so it's hard for me to identify those. So I felt like I felt more comfortable going

to members of my team or even some teachers are saying, hey, like you know, what are

some things that you're seeing that I might be doing it, I might can improve upon. (P6,

l74-76)

P5 extended the concept of blind spots to colleagues as well stating, “not knowing my

teammates blind spots because they're new to my team makes it harder” (P5, l191-192). P4

shared a specific blind spot that came from the training:

I'm into details, but there's also another section. That's the big picture. So really seeing

like, Okay, where are these details going to fit into that big picture, you know. So just

kind of making me think a little bit more that way. I think would be the ideal the blind

spot for me. (P4, l165-166)

P2 and P8 added remarks about decision making, having not commented during

question three about the same topic. P2 recalled “We talked about, or other parts of that day

were people that are more detailed, you know, need to know every detail. Those that were more

bigger picture don’t want to focus on all of the details” (P2, l77). Further, P8 shared:

48

My team always knew that I would be asking a lot more follow up questions to get

clarity on tasks and such, while some may be more of you can hand it to me and go. So,

when it came to tasks that we were dividing and conquering up or building up our teams

and things like that we knew what our strengths were and we knew how we were going

to be able to fill those gaps as well. (P8, l74-76)

P4 had a similar view about details versus big picture:

Depending on what Myers Briggs type you are you're at a different decision-making

process for different amounts of times and it can really kind of help you in the grand

scheme of things to kind of flush out whatever decisions you're making to be sure you're

hitting everything you need to do. (P4, l183-184)

And P6 recalled:

And somebody could just, they can already see the big pic picture. It can make a

decision based on that versus someone like me. I'm very detail oriented. And so I need to

know the steps and… that can really impact the dynamics of the same in terms of

decision making. (P6, l123-124).

Two participants felt that the one-time training was not enough to appropriately

implement the knowledge gained to the fullest extent. P1 and P6 shared that they felt the

training would have been more powerful if the entire leadership team (in the school where they

worked) embraced the training or attended the training together. P6 explained that the training

did not transition to her veteran principal colleague in same way it had to herself, therefore she

“wasn’t able to bring what [she] learned from the training to the whole team” (P6, l108).

Research Question 2

The question: “What, if any, value did educational leaders find in the MBTI division-led

training sessions?” aligned with interview question 5. Table 12 displays the participants

responses to the interview question. Participants were asked to share what value they found in

the training sessions.

49

Table 12

Interview Question 5 - What, if Any, Value Did You Find in Such Training Sessions?

Response P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 Personal growth X X X X X Compare past and present X X X X Understanding a coworker X X X X Recommended continued MBTI training X X X X X One-time training not enough X X X No wrong personality X X X No direct change X X Limitations X X Growth as a leader X X

Comparing past and present disposition tool experiences, statements regarding personal

growth, and insight into coworkers were the top three categories for the final interview question.

P1 said, “it is interesting how taking it in college versus taking it you know 20 years later that

you have differences in the results” (P1, l117). P4 found the division training more meaningful

than her exposure in the past stating it was “because not only was I older, of course, but I was

able to understand what exactly some of the activities that they did” (P4, l185).

Regarding personal growth, P5 shared the following:

I think that there is tremendous value and understanding who you are personally not

only as a leader, but just as a person and being able to take kind of ownership of that and

finding strength in it instead of, you know, constantly looking at your own limitations. I

know my limitations and I work to work around them. But I think that it's important that

I take in and I own, who I am and who walks into that job every day. Because that is

what you kind of have to stand behind at the end of the day. (P5, l218-221)

P4 commented that the training helped her understand how central she was on many of the scale

preferences. And P2 stated, “I do think it's valuable that we just [do such activities] for personal

growth” (P2, l83).

Four participants shared how the training helped them view coworkers differently. P4

said that her “biggest take away from that was when my coworker and I could finally

understand each other” (P4, l192). P5 gave an example of how understanding her colleagues

MBTI preferences helped her realize that “it's not that she was micromanaging but much more

50

that she needed to know that things were in the works” (P5, l162). P6 explained how the

training:

[opened her] eyes to understand it a different you know ends of the spectrum that people

bring to the table and what makes it seem unique, you know, ultimately, we all bring

something different to the table and learning how to accept that is very important and I

and it definitely made me more conscious. (l142-143)

Two participants stated they could not cite a specific change in their leadership actions

due to having attended the training. Those same two participants, as well as an additional one,

commented that they felt like the one-time training was not enough. Five of the nine participants

commented that the MBTI training is something that should continue. P2 said that “as far as the

county it would be a good next step to visit it. Look a little bit deeper into how we could work it

into our work” (P2, l83). P3 stated that she wanted the

opportunity to do some of that work with other associate principals, but I'd also like the

opportunity to do some of that work with my current team because I think that was kind

of disjointed. You know, and I think if the five of us were having experiences together.

It would be really powerful, especially if we stick together as a team like if the five of us

continue to be together, it'll only make us better. (P3, l160-163)

P4 felt more MBTI training would be valuable but suggested it be done during a staff

development day as pulling administration out of the building during a school day can be

problematic. P8 felt all staff should do it, beyond just administrators, but recognized there is an

affordability concern. P9 suggested it is good ongoing content for teams that may already work

together recognizing that the “training is very reflective and certainly valuable, but after I feel

like after a couple months, you kind of forget about it” (P9, l133-134).

Data Summary

The data analysis included coding the participant responses, identifying response themes

that occurred, and determining frequency of these themes. The majority of the participants had

some or a lot of exposure to disposition tools prior to the division training discussed in this

research study. Fewer than half had prior MBTI exposure. When describing the division

professional development four of the participants were able to give five or more details about

the training activities. Five participants have four or fewer details. Most cited the activities that

had to do with comparing MBTI preferences to each other.

51

When asked about how their leadership actions changed after the division training

several participants shared that they became more self-aware of how a particular personality

preference may impact how they perceive or interact with others. Five out of the nine

participants cited it positively impacting how they approached decision making in the

workplace. When prompted about the training content, five indicated the training made them

more aware of their blind spots. Two participants expanded upon their examples of how the

training involved decision making. Two that had not previously mentioned decision-making

activities shared details that indicated that they recalled the topic as part of the training. Five of

the participants cited personal growth as a valuable lesson from the training. Several also shared

concrete examples of how the training was helpful in understanding their coworkers. Five of the

nine participants recommended the county continue some form of MBTI training.

Based on these responses, Chapter five includes findings and implications, a summary of

the work, and recommendations for future research.

52

Chapter Five

Findings and Implications





data to determine self-reported leadership changes that came as a result of school-system led

professional development involving the MBTI. The results of these findings could help

determine if school leaders and school systems would benefit from Myers-Briggs professional

development.

Research and Interview Questions

The research questions of this research study were:




sessions?

The following interview questions addressed the research questions:

1. What were your prior experiences in and thoughts about personality assessment tools

and their impact on self-improvement, performance, or professional interactions

prior to the sessions done last year?

2. Summarize the professional development you remember receiving from the division

regarding Myers Briggs and Personality Disposition.

3. What leadership actions do you believe have changed because of the leadership

disposition training? Please give a few examples.

4. If not covered above, can you reflect on how the training addressed the specific

topics below. Give an example of how your leadership actions may have changed

due to this training component?

a. identifying blind spots

b. communication skills

c. group dynamics

53

d. building teams

e. decision-making processes

5. What, if any, value did you find in such training sessions?

Findings

Finding One

Interview participants indicated only limited benefits of the MBTI training.

Without any prompting regarding content (Interview Question 2), participants primarily

recalled activities from the professional development training instead of how the training

impacted their leadership practices. Three of the participants each recalled four different

specific activities. The other six recalled four or fewer activities. Three participants cited a

decision-making activity. When prompted to discuss leadership action changes or the value of

the training, there were themes that emerged (Findings Two and Three) however, few

participants shared specific examples of how the training was implemented into their leadership

practices when answering Interview Question 3.

The limited recall or lack of incorporating the training content into practice could relate

to three of Goldring et al.’s (2012) essential elements of high-quality professional development:

a) job-embedded instruction that allows participants to apply what they learn; b) long-term

instruction with multiple learning opportunities; c) collegial networks and/or support to discuss

and exchange ideas.

Finding Two

Some interview participants identified that the training increased their self-awareness,

impacting how they interacted with colleagues.

Six of the nine participants shared that the training impacted self-awareness in the

context of how they relate to others (Interview Question 3). Five of the nine participants shared

that the training helped them identify blind spots (Interview Question 4). Five of the nine

participants indicated that they found the training was valuable for personal growth (Interview

Question 5).

Such training is in line with Daresh (1990) where he explained the importance of

personal reflection, indicating that “developing reflective skill is an important way to develop a

sense of questioning regarding the value of certain practices and assumptions seen in the field”

54

(p. 3). Moyle and Hackston (2018) had found that personality results were often used as a

vehicle for increasing self-awareness.

Finding Three

Some interview participants identified that the training changed how they approached

decisions when working with individuals with similar or different personality preferences.

Five of the nine participants shared that the training impacted how they make decisions

at work (Interview Question 3). Four of the nine participants shared that the training helped

them understand how individuals with different personality preferences approach the decision-

making process (Interview Question 4).

Researchers found that the differing composition of personalities on a team can impact

team performance (Barrick et al., 1998; Curşeu et al., 2019; Mount et al., 1998; Radović et al.,

2020; Stewart, 2003). The Z-Model for Problem Solving was a specific part of the training

designed to “help leaders consider questions, deal with ambiguity and make decisions to move

their team or organization forward” (West, 2015).

Finding Four

Some interview participants indicated interest in additional MBTI training.

When combining response categories from Interview Questions 4 and 5, eight of the

nine participants indicated that the MBTI related training should continue, sharing that the one-

time training was not enough. Some shared that it would be more impactful for leadership teams

in a school to have related follow-up professional development with their specific leadership

team. The division training had principals trained separately from assistant or associate

principals, thus some participants were suggesting that the training be done with school teams.

This finding is related to a research finding from Goldring et al. (2012) in which they

recommended that high-quality professional development for school leaders included the

elements of job-embedded instructions that allow participants to apply what they learn, support

long-term instruction with multiple learning opportunities, and provide support to discuss and

exchange training related ideas.

55

Implications of the Findings

Implication One

School divisions could review the benefits of personality related training to determine if it can

provide meaningful value for its educational leaders.

Finding One indicated that participants indicated limited benefits of the MBTI training.

School divisions could consider all of the essential elements discussed by Goldring et al.

(2012):

• Job-embedded instruction that allows participants to apply what they learn.

• Content that addresses leaders’ unique needs for individual stages in their careers.

• Long-term instruction with multiple learning opportunities.

• Coherent curriculum that targets conditions leaders face every day.

• Collegial networks and/or support to discuss and exchange ideas.

(p. 226)

Further, school divisions could also consider other personality assessment tools used for

professional development.

Implication Two

School divisions interested in personality related training could provide professional

development in the context of increasing a participant’s self-awareness of his or her

dispositions and how they relate to others.

Finding Two indicated that some participants’ leadership action changes related

primarily to having increased their self-awareness through the MBTI training. The school

division indicated that the workshop sought to build better teams through helping participants to

recognize personality strengths and blind spots. This goal was met for some participants. It is

recommended that if a similar goal is desired, a similar format be utilized.

Implication Three

School divisions interested in personality trait related training could consider it when seeking

to increase a participant’s understanding of how personality preferences impact the decision-

making process.

Finding Three indicated that the training changed how some participants approached

decisions when working with individuals with similar or different personality preferences. The

56

Z-Model of Problem Solving is recommended for informing educational leaders how to

incorporate personality preferences into the decision-making process.

Implication Four

School divisions interested in personality trait related training could consider ongoing

professional development to better support educational leaders.

This is related to Finding Four. Most of the participants shared that the training should

continue, many saying it should be done with the specific leadership teams within each school

in the division. Such follow-up training would allow the participants to be reminded of the

content in the specific context of their workplace. Discussions would be more specific to the

team personalities and decisions that the specific school leadership team makes, rather than

general examples that were used in the single training session.

Recommendations for Future Studies

Based on the results of this study and the gaps still existing in the current body of

research, I recommend the following instances in which further research could be done on this

topic:

1. Researchers could do a similar qualitative study with other school divisions that have

completed similar professional development sessions.

2. Research could be deepened to incorporate the specific personality preference results

from the participants, determining a correlation between any participant types and

their responses.

3. Researchers could consider the difference in elementary school and secondary

school leaders. One participant pointed out that elementary teams are often two

people whereas secondary teams may be two or three times that size and thus impact

the decision-making model.

4. Research interviews could be conducted closer to the time of the training.

Summary

This study found that there was some benefit to personality disposition related

professional development session led by an MBTI certified trainer. The training was not

impacted by the level of prior exposure that participants may have had to personality disposition

tools. Comparison and movement activities, in which participants responded to hypothetical

57

scenarios or preferences was a memorable component of the training. Although interview

participants indicated only limited benefits of the MBTI training participants, some reported

that their leadership actions were changed with regard to increased self-awareness and in how

they will consider personality preferences when making decisions. The majority of the

participants recommended that such professional development be extended with additional

sessions that allow for exploration and learning in specific school and team settings.

58

References

Allen, B. P. (2006). Personality theories: Development, growth, and diversity. (B. P. Allen

(Ed.); 5th ed.). Pearson Education.

Anderson, L. M., Turnbull, B. J., Policy Studies Associates, I., & Education, R. (2016).

Evaluating and supporting principals. Building a stronger principalship: Volume 4. In

Policy Studies Associates, Inc. Policy Studies Associates, Inc.

Arhipova, O., Kokina, I., & Rauckienė-Michaelsson, A. (2018). School principal’s management

competencies for successful school development. Tiltai, 78(1), 63–75.

Barrick, M. R., Stewart, G. L., Neubert, M. J., & Mount, M. K. (1998). Relating member ability

and personality to work-team processes and team effectiveness. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 83(3), 377–391. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.83.3.377

Benoliel, P., & Schechter, C. (2017). Is it personal? Teacher’s personality and the principal’s

role in professional learning communities. Improving Schools, 20(3), 222–235.

Borgatti, S. P., & Foster, P. C. (2003). The network paradigm in organizational research: A

review and typology. Journal of Management, 29(6), 991–1013.

Brookfield, S. D. (1996). Adult learning: An overview. In A. Tuijnman (Ed.), International

Encyclopedia of Adult Education and Training. Pergamon.

Bryk, A., & Schneider, B. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement. Russell

Sage Foundation.

Center for Applications of Psychological Type. (2004). The zig-zag process for problem

solving. Retrieved 8-14-2020 from

https://www.capt.org/products/examples/20023HO.pdf

Coe, C. K. (1992). The MBTI: Potential uses and misuses in personnel administration. Public

Personnel Management, 21(4), 511.

Costa, P., McCrae, R., & Dye, D. (1991). Facet scales for agreeableness and conscientiousness:

A revision of the NEO personality inventory. Personality and Individual Differences,

12(9), 887–898.

Creswell, J. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches

(4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Curşeu, P. L., Ilies, R., Vîrgă, D., Maricuţoiu, L., & Sava, F. A. (2019). Personality

characteristics that are valued in teams: Not always “more is better”? International

59

Journal of Psychology, 54(5), 638–649.

Daniëls, E., Hondeghem, A., & Dochy, F. (2019). A review on leadership and leadership

development in educational settings. Educational Research Review, 27, 110–125.

Daresh, J. C. (1990). Formation: the missing ingredient in administrator preparation. NASSP

Bulletin, 74(526), 1–5.

Daresh, J. C. (1995). Research base on mentoring for educational leaders: What do we know?

Journal of Educational Administration, 33(5), 7.

Daresh, J. C. (2007). Mentoring for beginning principals: revisiting the past or preparing for the

future? Mid-Western Educational Researcher, 20(4), 21–27.

Digman, J. M. (1990). Personality structure: Emergence of the five-factor model. Annual

Review of Psychology, 41, 417–440.

DuFour, R., & DuFour, R. (2010). Learning by doing : A handbook for professional learning

communities at work. Solution Tree.

Eldor, L., & Shoshani, A. (2016). Caring relationships in school staff: Exploring the link

between compassion and teacher work engagement. Teaching and Teacher Education,

59, 126–136.

Emre, M. (2018). The personality brokers: The strange history of Myers-Briggs and the birth of

personality testing. Doubleday.

Epstein, S. (2010). The Big Five Model: Grandiose ideas about surface traits as the foundation

of a general theory of personality. Psychological Inquiry, 21(1), 34–39.

Evans, P. M., & Mohr, N. (1999). Professional development for principals: Seven core beliefs.

The Phi Delta Kappan, 80(7), 530.

Feist, J., Feist, G., & Roberts, T.-A. (2018). Theories of personality (9th ed.). McGraw-Hill

Education.

Ferrandino, V. L. (2001). Challenges for 21st-century elementary school principals. Phi Delta

Kappan, 82(6), 440.

Furnham, A. (2008). HR professionals’ beliefs about, and knowledge of, assessment techniques

and psychometric tests. International Journal of Selection & Assessment, 16(3), 300–

305.

Furnham, A. (2015). Personality assessment: Overview. In J. Wright (Ed.), International

encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences (2nd ed., pp. 849–856). Elsevier.

60

Garza, J. E., Drysdale, L., Gurr, D., Jacobson, S., & Merchant, B. (2014). Leadership for school

success: Lessons from effective principals. International Journal of Educational

Management, 28(7), 798–811.

Gill, J. (2019). Lean on me: To help principals become better instructional leaders, districts are

boosting on-the-job supports such as mentoring and coaching. Educational Leadership,

76(6), 43–48.

Goddard, R., Goddard, Y., Sook Kim, E., & Miller, R. (2015). A theoretical and empirical

analysis of the roles of instructional leadership, teacher collaboration, and collective

efficacy beliefs in support of student learning. American Journal of Education, 121(4),

501–530.

Goldring, E. B., Preston, C., & Huff, J. (2012). Conceptualizing and evaluating professional

development for school leaders. Planning & Changing, 43(3/4), 223–242.

Gray, C., & Bishop, Q. (2009). Leadership development: Schools and districts seeking high

performance need strong leaders. Journal of Staff Development, 30(1), 28–30.

Griggs, E. (2018). The Z-Model for deciding & planning: A useful process for business or

personal matters. Retrieved 1-3-2021 from https://medium.com/@ericgriggs/the-z-

model-for-deciding-planning-f764d3587e32

Guest, G., MacQueen, K., & Namey, E. (2012). Applied thematic analysis. SAGE Publications,

Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483384436

Gumus, E., & Bellibas, M. S. (2016). The effects of professional development activities on

principals’ perceived instructional leadership practices: Multi-country data analysis

using TALIS 2013. Educational Studies, 42(3), 287–301.

https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2016.1172958

Harris, A., & Jones, M. (2010). Professional learning communities and system improvement.

Improving Schools, 13(2), 172–181. https://doi.org/10.1177/1365480210376487

Hussar, B., Zhang, J., Hein, S., Wang, K., Roberts, A., Cui, J., Smith, M., Bullock Mann, F.,

Barmer, A., & Dilig, R. (2020). The condition of education 2020 (NCES 2020-144). U.S.

Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

Kelley, C., & Shaw, J. J. (2009). Comprehensive leadership development: A portrait of

programs. In M. D. Young, G. M. Crow, J. Murphy, & R. T. Ogawa (Eds.), Handbook

of research on the education of school leaders (pp. 499–514). Routledge.

61

Khuong, M. N., Linh, L. T. M., Toan, N. Q., & Phuong, N. T. M. (2016). The effects of

personality and communication skill on employee job performance at multi-national

companies in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. Journal of Economics, Business and

Management, 4(4), 296–302.

Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Klein, K. J. (2000). Multilevel theory. Jossey-Bass.

LaPointe, M., & Davis, S. H. (2006). Effective schools require effective principals: a study of

professional development for principals offers these findings about the qualities and

impact of strong programs. Leadership, 36(1), 16–38.

Lawrence, M., Santiago, H., Zamora, K., Bertani, A., & Bocchino, R. (2008). Practice as

performance: Honing your craft. Principal Leadership, 9(4), 32–38.

Le Fevre, D. M., & Robinson, V. M. J. (2015). The Interpersonal challenges of instructional

leadership: Principals’ effectiveness in conversations about performance issues.

Educational Administration Quarterly, 51(1), 58–95.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X13518218

Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2020). Seven strong claims about successful school

leadership revisited. School Leadership & Management, 40(1), 5–22.

https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2019.1596077

Levin, S., Leung, M., Edgerton, A. K., & Scott, C. (2020). Elementary school principals’

professional learning: Current status and future needs. October.

http://learningpolicyinstitute

Lundgren, H., Kroon, B., & Poell, R. F. (2017). Personality testing and workplace training:

Exploring stakeholders, products and purpose in Western Europe. European Journal of

Training and Development, 41(3), 198–221. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJTD-03-2016-

0015

MacQueen, K. M., McLellan-Lemal, E., Bartholow, K., & Milstein, B. (2008). Team-based

codebook development: Structure, process, and agreement. In G. Guest & K. M.

MacQueen (Eds.), Handbook for team-based qualitative research (pp. 119–135).

Altamira.

Maddi, S. (2001). Personality theories: A comparative analysis (6th ed.). Waveland Press, Inc.

McCrae, R. (2010). The place of the FFM in personality psychology. Psychological Inquiry,

21(1), 57–64.

62

McCrae, R. R., Costa Jr., P. T., & Busch, C. M. (1986). Evaluating comprehensiveness in

personality systems: The California Q-Set and the five-factor model. Journal of

Personality, 54(2), 430–446.

McCrae, R. R., & John, O. P. (1992). An introduction to the five-factor model and its

applications. Journal of Personality, 60(2), 175–215.

McEwan, E. K. (2003). 10 traits of highly effective principals: From good to great

performance. SAGE Publications.

Merriam, S. B. (2016). Qualitative research : A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.).

Jossey-Bass.

Mount, M. K., Barrick, M. R., & Stewart, G. L. (1998). Five-factor model of personality and

performance in jobs involving interpersonal interactions. Human Performance, 11(2/3),

145–165.

Moyle, P., & Hackston, J. (2018). Personality assessment for employee development: Ivory

tower or real world? Journal of Personality Assessment, 100(5), 507–517.

https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2018.1481078

Myers, I., & McCaulley, M. (1985). Manual, a guide to the development and use of the Myers-

Briggs type indicator. Consulting Psychologists Press.

National Policy Board for Educational Administration. (2015). Professional standards for

Educational Leaders National Policy Board for Educational Administration formerly

known as ISLLC Standards. http://www.npbea.org

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd editio). Sage

Publications.

Paul, A. M. (2004). The cult of personality: How personality tests are leading us to miseducate

our children, mismanage our companies, and misunderstand ourselves. Free Press.

Peterson, K. (2002). The professional development of principals: Innovations and opportunities.

Educational Administration Quarterly, 38(2), 213.

Prenger, R., Poortman, C. L., & Handelzalts, A. (2019). The effects of networked professional

learning communities. Journal of Teacher Education, 70(5), 441–452.

http://login.ezproxy.lib.vt.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=t

rue&db=eric&AN=EJ1231139&scope=site

Professional Standards for Educational Leaders 2015. (2015).

63

Radović, S., Matić, J. S., & Opačić, G. (2020). Personality traits composition and team

performance. Management: Journal of Sustainable Business & Management Solutions

in Emerging Economies, 25(3), 33–41.

Richardson, M. D., & Prickett, R. L. (1994). Recognizing how adults learn: Implications for

principals. NASSP Bulletin VO - 78, 558, 85.

Roberts, C., & Hyatt, L. (2019). The dissertation journey : A practical and comprehensive guide

to planning, writing, and defending your dissertation (3rd editio). Corwin.

Rodriguez-Campos, L., Rincones-Gomez, R., & Shen, J. (2005). Principals’ educational

attaintment, experience, and professional development. In School Principals (pp. 30–

45). Peter Lang Copyright AG.

Rowland, C. (2017). Principal professional development new opportunities for a renewed state

focus. American Institutes for Research, February, 28. www.edupolicycenter.org

Shen, J., Rodriguez-Camps, L., & Rincones-Gomez, R. (2000). Characteristics of urban

principalship: A national trend study. Education and Urban Society, 32(4), 481–491.

Sofaer, S. (1999). Qualitative methods: What are they and why use them? Health Services

Research, 34(5 part 2), 1101–1118.

Stewart, G. L. (2003). Toward an understanding of the multilevel role of personality in teams.

In M. R. Barrick & A. M. Ryan (Eds.), Personality and work : Reconsidering the

personality in organizations (pp. 183–204). Jossey-Bass.

Strother, D. (1983). The many roles of the effective principal. The Phi Delta Kappan, 65(4),

291–294.

Sutton, A., Allinson, C., & Williams, H. (2013). Personality type and work-related outcomes:

An exploratory application of the Enneagram model. European Management Journal,

31(3), 234–249.

Tang, J. J. (2018). The professional development of macau school principals: Making the most

of the best. Chinese Education & Society, 51(5), 307.

The Myers & Briggs Foundation. (2020a). MBTI Basics. Retrieved 8-9-2020 from

https://www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-personality-type/mbti-basics/

The Myers & Briggs Foundation. (2020b). MBTI Type at Work. Retrieved 8-15-2020 from

https://www.myersbriggs.org/type-use-for-everyday-life/mbti-type-at-work/

The Myers & Briggs Foundation. (2021). MBTI about us. Retrieved 2-18-2021 from

64

https://mbtitraininginstitute.myersbriggs.org/about-us/

Troyer, M. (2019, November 18). 25 ways American education has changed in the last decade.

https://stacker.com/stories/3665/25-ways-american-education-has-changed-last-decade

Tschannen-Moran, M. (2009). Fostering teacher professionalism in schools the role of

leadership orientation and trust. Educational Administration Quarterly, 45(2), 217–247.

Tschannen-Moran, M. (2014). The interconnectivity of trust in schools. In D. Van Maele, P. B.

Forsyth, & M. Van Houtte (Eds.), Trust and school life (2nd ed., pp. 57–81). John Wiley

& Sons, Inc.

Tschannen-Moran, M., & Gareis, C. R. (2015). Faculty trust in the principal: An essential

ingredient in high-performing schools. Journal of Educational Administration, 53(1),

66–92.

Turnbull, B. J., Riley, D. L., MacFarlane, J. R., Policy Studies Associates, I., & Education, R.

(2015). Districts taking charge of the principal pipeline. Building a stronger

principalship: Volume 3. In Policy Studies Associates, Inc. Policy Studies Associates,

Inc.

http://login.ezproxy.lib.vt.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=t

rue&db=eric&AN=ED555869&site=eds-live&scope=site

Tyler, D. E. (2016). Communication behaviors of principals at high performing Title I

elementary schools in Virginia: School leaders, communication, and transformative

efforts. Creighton Journal of Interdisciplinary Leadership, 2(2), 2–16.

https://doi.org/10.17062/cjil.v2i2.51

Weingartner, C. J. (2009). Principal mentoring : A safe, simple, and supportive approach.

Corwin.

West, G. (2015). The MBTI Z-model for decision making. Retrieved 8-14-2020 from

https://mysuccesslab.com/the-mbti-z-model-for-decision-making/

Will, M. (2019, December 12). 10 ways the teaching profession has changed over the past 10

years. https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/10-ways-the-teaching-profession-has-

changed-over-the-past-10-years/2019/12

Youngs, P., & King, M. B. (2002). Principal leadership for professional development to build

school capacity. Educational Administration Quarterly, 38(5), 643.

Zheng, X., Yin, H., Liu, Y., & Ke, Z. (2016). Effects of leadership practices on professional

65

learning communities: The mediating role of trust in colleagues. Asia Pacific Education

Review, 17(3), 521.

66

Appendix A

IRB Training Certification

67

Appendix B

School Division Approval

Department of Assessment, Research and Evaluation

June 12, 2020 Mr. Daniel Gardner 2274 White Horse Road Maidens, VA 23102 Dear Mr. Gardner: The Department of Assessment, Research and Evaluation has reviewed and approved your research study entitled “Principals’ perceptions of the impact of MBTI professional development on their leadership practices”. Your study was approved by the review committee with revisions and/or conditions. Please see the attached document for the revisions. Once the revisions are completed and approved and IRB is on file, you can start your research. Your research has been approved for the Fall 2020 Semester. Approval to conduct the study is limited to one year from the time of proposal submission. If the research timeline or any other aspect of your study changes during the time frame, please contact Helen Whitehurst and submit the changes for review prior to proceeding. If you are affiliated with an organization with an Institutional Review Board (IRB), the IRB approval letter must be on file in our office prior to beginning the study. Although your study has been approved, participation by individuals and schools is completely voluntary. Reports and publications generated from this study should not identify the individuals, schools, or the division and all research materials should accurately represent the party conducting the study. It is our expectation that you will submit a final report upon completion of the study to the Department of Assessment, Research and Evaluation. Please contact Helen Whitehurst at [email protected] who will assist you in the process of beginning your research studies in the schools or offices that you have requested. Thank you for your interest in Henrico County Public Schools. Sincerely,

Tiffany Hinton, Ph.D. Helen Whitehurst, Ph.D. Director of Assessment, Research and Evaluation Educational Specialist - Research Henrico County Public Schools Henrico County Public Schools 804-652-3835 804-652-3831

68

Appendix C

Virginia Tech IRB Approval

'LYLVLRQ�RI�6FKRODUO\�,QWHJULW\�DQG5HVHDUFK�&RPSOLDQFH,QVWLWXWLRQDO�5HYLHZ�%RDUG1RUWK�(QG�&HQWHU��6XLWH��0&��7XUQHU�6WUHHW�1:%ODFNVEXUJ��9LUJLQLD��LUE#YW�HGXKWWS��ZZZ�UHVHDUFK�YW�HGX�VLUF�KUSS

0(025$1'80

'$7(� 6HSWHPEHU��

72� 7HG�6�3ULFH��'DQLHO�-RVHSK�*DUGQHU

)520� 9LUJLQLD�7HFK�,QVWLWXWLRQDO�5HYLHZ�%RDUG��):$��H[SLUHV�2FWREHU��

35272&2/�7,7/(� (GXFDWLRQDO�/HDGHUUVTXR�V�SHUFHSWLRQV�RI�WKH�LPSDFW�RI�0%7,�SURIHVVLRQDOGHYHORSPHQW�RQ�WKHLU�OHDGHUVKLS�SUDFWLFHV

,5%�180%(5� ��

(IIHFWLYH�6HSWHPEHU��WKH�9LUJLQLD�7HFK�+XPDQ�5HVHDUFK�3URWHFWLRQ�3URJUDP��+533�GHWHUPLQHG�WKDW�WKLV�SURWRFRO�PHHWV�WKH�FULWHULD�IRU�H[HPSWLRQ�IURP�,5%�UHYLHZ�XQGHU��&)5��G��FDWHJRU\�LHV��LL��2QJRLQJ�,5%�UHYLHZ�DQG�DSSURYDO�E\�WKLV�RUJDQL]DWLRQ�LV�QRW�UHTXLUHG��7KLV�GHWHUPLQDWLRQ�DSSOLHV�RQO\WR�WKH�DFWLYLWLHV�GHVFULEHG�LQ�WKH�,5%�VXEPLVVLRQ�DQG�GRHV�QRW�DSSO\�VKRXOG�DQ\�FKDQJHV�EH�PDGH��,IFKDQJHV�DUH�PDGH�DQG�WKHUH�DUH�TXHVWLRQV�DERXW�ZKHWKHU�WKHVH�DFWLYLWLHV�LPSDFW�WKH�H[HPSWGHWHUPLQDWLRQ��SOHDVH�VXEPLW�DQ�DPHQGPHQW�WR�WKH�+533�IRU�D�GHWHUPLQDWLRQ��7KLV�H[HPSW�GHWHUPLQDWLRQ�GRHV�QRW�DSSO\�WR�DQ\�FROODERUDWLQJ�LQVWLWXWLRQ�V��7KH�9LUJLQLD�7HFK�+533DQG�,5%�FDQQRW�SURYLGH�DQ�H[HPSWLRQ�WKDW�RYHUULGHV�WKH�MXULVGLFWLRQ�RI�D�ORFDO�,5%�RU�RWKHU�LQVWLWXWLRQDOPHFKDQLVP�IRU�GHWHUPLQLQJ�H[HPSWLRQV��$OO�LQYHVWLJDWRUV��OLVWHG�DERYH��DUH�UHTXLUHG�WR�FRPSO\�ZLWK�WKH�UHVHDUFKHU�UHTXLUHPHQWV�RXWOLQHG�DW�

KWWSV��VHFXUH�UHVHDUFK�YW�HGX�H[WHUQDO�LUE�UHVSRQVLELOLWLHV�KWP

�3OHDVH�UHYLHZ�UHVSRQVLELOLWLHV�EHIRUH�EHJLQQLQJ�\RXU�UHVHDUFK��

35272&2/�,1)250$7,21�

'HWHUPLQHG�$V� ([HPSW��XQGHU��&)5��G��FDWHJRU\�LHV��LL��3URWRFRO�'HWHUPLQDWLRQ�'DWH� 6HSWHPEHU��

$662&,$7('�)81',1*�

7KH�WDEOH�RQ�WKH�IROORZLQJ�SDJH�LQGLFDWHV�ZKHWKHU�JUDQW�SURSRVDOV�DUH�UHODWHG�WR�WKLV�SURWRFRO��DQGZKLFK�RI�WKH�OLVWHG�SURSRVDOV��LI�DQ\��KDYH�EHHQ�FRPSDUHG�WR�WKLV�SURWRFRO��LI�UHTXLUHG�

69

Appendix D

Email to Participants

Subject: Request for Participation in Educational Leadership Research – IRB 20-646 Dear XXXXX County Leader, You are receiving this email because you participated in several Myers Briggs division-led staff development sessions during 2018-2020. The sessions coincide with a Virginia Tech research study that I am completing for an Ed D. degree. These are some example interview questions that may be asked:

1. What were your prior experiences in and thoughts about personality assessment tools and their impact on self-improvement, performance, or professional interactions prior to the sessions done last year?



4. Reflect on how the training addressed these specific topics (identifying blind spots, communication skills, group dynamics, building teams, decision-making processes). Give an example of how your leadership actions may have changed due to this training component?

5. What, if any, value did you find in such training sessions? Participation in this research is optional. If you agree to participate, you will be contacted to schedule a 45-minute online audio/video interview session using Zoom software. Interviews will be transcribed and sent to you to confirm accuracy. Interviews will be coded for anonymity. Data and results will be used as part of my dissertation research. When the dissertation process is completed the information will be share with your school division and made available to all research participants. This research plan has been reviewed the Virginia Tech IRB process (IRB 20-646). Your participation in this brief interview will anonymously inform your school division on the effectiveness of the program, potentially leading to positive changes for the future. Your time will also inform the larger field of educational leadership, providing information about how personality disposition training may impact professional communication. Please contact me at [email protected] or 804.539.2748 to request more information. I am also happy to answer any questions you may have. Regards, Dan Gardner, Ed. D. Candidate Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

70

Appendix E

Information Document

Information Sheet for Participation in a Research Study

Principal Investigator: Dan Gardner, 804.539.2748, [email protected] IRB# and Title of Study: IRB-20-646 Educational Leader’s perceptions of the impact of MBTI professional development on their leadership practices You are invited to participate in a research study. This form includes information about the study and contact information if you have any questions. I am a doctoral candidate at Virginia Tech, and I am conducting this research as part of my course work. You are invited to take part in this research study because you are a principal or assistant principal that participated in Myers Briggs staff development training between 2018-2020. The purpose of this study is to identify the perceived impact of division-led Myers-Briggs Test Indicator professional development on principal leadership practices. The researcher will collect and analyze data to determine leadership changes that came as a result of school-system led professional development involving the Myers-Briggs Test Indicator. The results of these findings could help determine if school leaders and school systems would benefit from personality-disposition professional development. WHAT SHOULD I KNOW? If you decide to participate in this study, you will be contacted by Dan Gardner to schedule a 45-minute online audio/video interview session using Zoom software. Dan Gardner as you a series of questions (examples included below) and make note of your responses. Interviews will be recorded, transcribed and sent to you to confirm accuracy. The study should take approximately 45 minutes of your time and will include questions such as:

1. What were your prior experiences in and thoughts about personality assessment tools and their impact on self-improvement, performance, or professional interactions prior to the sessions done last year?



71

4. Reflect on how the training addressed these specific topics (identifying blind spots, communication skills, group dynamics, building teams, decision-making processes). Give an example of how your leadership actions may have changed due to this training component?

5. What, if any, value did you find in such training sessions? We do not anticipate any risks from completing this study. You can choose whether to be in this study or not. If you volunteer to be in this study, you may withdraw at any time without consequences of any kind. You may also refuse to answer any questions you don’t want to answer and remain in the study. The investigator may withdraw you from this research if circumstances arise which warrant doing so. CONFIDENTIALITY We will do our best to protect the confidentiality of the information we gather from you, but we cannot guarantee 100% confidentiality. Any data collected during this research study will be kept confidential by the researcher. Your interview will be video/audio-recorded and then transcribed. The researcher will code the transcript using a pseudonym (false name). The transcription will be uploaded to a secure password-protected computer. The researcher will maintain a list that includes a key to the code. The master key and the transcription will be stored for 3 years after the study has been completed and then destroyed. The video/audio file will be deleted after the transcription has been confirmed by a participant. WHO CAN I TALK TO? If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to contact Dan Gardner (804.539.2748) or Ted Price, PhD ([email protected]). You are not waiving any legal claims, rights or remedies because of your participation in this research study. If you have questions regarding your rights as a research participant, contact the Virginia Tech HRPP Office at 540-231-3732 ([email protected]). Please print out a copy of this information sheet for your records.

educational leaders’ perceptions of the impact of mbti

Documents