PROFILE, ADVERSITY QUOTIENT®, AND MULTIFACTOR LEADERSHIP CHARACTERISTICS OF STUDENT AFFAIRS AND SERVICES ADMINISTRATORS: TOWARDS A LEADERSHIP MANAGEMENT TRAINING DESIGN A Dissertation Presented to the University Graduate Programs Silliman University through the College of Education In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Education Major in Educational Administration JARUVIC CLAVANO RAFOLS November 2015 iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS My expression of appreciation and utmost gratitude to the following people whose support, time, encouragement, and professional assistance contributed a lot in shaping this study to its final form: To the Research for Improvement towards Excellence (RSITE) program under Private Education Assistance Committee (PEAC), I will be forever grateful for the scholarship; To Dr. Paul Stoltz, CEO, PEAK Learning, Inc. for granting me permission to conduct this study, by providing all necessary information and the tool for data collection. I also highly appreciate the timely help and cooperation extended by Ms. Katie Martin of PEAK Learning, Inc. to help me complete this research in time. Likewise, to Mindgarden Inc. for facilitating my request to provide me with the latest version of MLQ (X5 short); To my adviser and statistician, Dr. Pablito A. de la Rama, for his insight, expertise and patience, which guided me to develop and understanding of the data. My deepest gratitude for all the support he has shared with me during the research writing of my dissertation. Without him, this paper would not have been completed; To the dissertation panelists for their intellectual contribution, patience, concern, understanding and constant encouragement which inspired me towards my goal; To Dr. Batchiba Ramira Lacdo-o, for her words of comfort and her expertise in the finalization of this study; To Dr. Edna T. Calingacion, the Dean of Student Services for unselfishly sharing the information needed for this study and for being kind-hearted to extend the RSITE information; To Dr. Dave E. Marcial, for his valuable inputs and suggestions during the defense and for dear friendship at all times; To Dr. Earl Jude Paul L. Cleope, for his enlightening suggestions as well as significant insights in improving this study; To Dr. Reynaldo Y. Rivera, for his invaluable contribution to help me formulate the conceptual model of this study and for being a supportive dean in the graduate studies programs; To Mrs. Loyda Fontelo, of the Graduate Studies Programs for her support and assistance. iv To my friends and colleagues in the Student Affairs and Services and specially the Guidance and Testing Division Team for all the encouragement and support; To Ms. Johanna Basa-Rodriguez, our psychometrician for her brilliance in the scoring and in the interpretation of data; To Mrs. Arlenie Acupanda and Mrs. Ginger Flores, for helping me all throughout my preparation for this study; To Prof. Mary Ann Temprosa, for her expertise and patience in editing this paper and for giving suggestions for the improvement of this research study; To Dr. Margaret Helen Udarbe-Alvarez, for the insight, comments and encouragement during the formulation of my study; To all my respondents (Student Affairs and Services Administrators in Negros Oriental and Siquijor Island) for sparing their time in answering all the questioners. Indeed, I will for ever be grateful for your participation which enables me to materialize this kind of study; To my Mother, for being my inspiration to complete this study. This accomplishment is my gift to her; To all my dear friends in VSO Uganda, for the unfailing encouragement and moral support; Most specially, to my wife, Sharon, for the love and for patiently understanding my situation for the past several months; and, And above all, to Our Creator, for the countless blessings He has showered upon me. Jaruvic Clavano Rafols v ABSTRACT This study was primarily aimed at investigating the relationship between the Student Affairs and Services administrators’ selected demographic profile in terms of age, sex, civil status, socio-economic status, educational attainment, and years of work experience and their Adversity Quotient® profile (AQP) overall results in terms of the following CORE dimensions: control, ownership, reach and endurance. Moreover, it looked into the relationship between demographic profile and Multifactor Leadership Characteristics overall results of the respondents through Multifactor Leadership Questioner (MLQ X5 short) based on the following factors: 1) Idealized Influence (II-Attributed); 2) Idealized Influence (II-Behavior); 3) Inspirational Motivation (IM); 4) Intellectual Stimulation (IS); 5) Individual Consideration (IC); 6) Contingent Reward(CR); 7) Management-by-Exception-Active (MBEA); 8) Management-by-Exception- Passive (MBEP); and, 9) Laissez-Faire (LF) and their demographic profile. Lastly, it sought to determine the relationship between the respondents’ Adversity Quotient® overall results and Multifactor Leadership Characteristics overall results. In particular, this study focused only on the Student Affairs and Services administrators of the public and private higher education institutions (HEIs) in Central Visayas Region within Negros Oriental and Siquijor. The schools were identified by the Commission on Higher Education Regional Office (CHEDRO VII), Philippines. There were 36 respondents identified as former and present Student Affairs and Services administrators (deans, directors, managers, assistant directors, unit heads, coordinators, and faculty designates) working full-time in the higher education institutions (HEIs) of Central Visayas Region specifically within Negros Oriental and Siquijor. All assessment tools were answered voluntarily by the respondents. The descriptive-correlational research design was used for data analysis of the three sets of instruments utilized for the study. The demographic profile referred to age, sex, civil status, socio-economic status, educational attainment, and years of work experience. The Adversity Quotient® was measured through the Adversity Quotient® version 9.0 an online instrument provided by Dr. Paul G. Stoltz of Peak Learning, Inc. The Multifactor Leadership Questioner (5X-short) by Bernard M. Bass and Bruce J. Avolio (2004) was used to assess the respondents’ leadership characteristics. vi In the treatment of data, the following statistical tools were used: percentage, weighted mean, point biserial coefficient, and pearson product moment r. Findings showed that there was no significant relationship between the respondents' Adversity Quotient® overall results and their selected demographic profile (sex, age, civil status, socio-economic status, educational attainment, and years of work experience). Moreover, there was also no significant relationship between the respondents' Multifactor Leadership Characteristics overall results and their selected demographic profile. Lastly, there was also no significant relationship between the respondents' adversity quotient® and their multifactor leadership characteristics overall results. The results of the study showed the need for a leadership management training design to enhance leaders who have been found to have low and below average Adversity Quotient level in CORE dimension: control, ownership, reach, and endurance. Simultaneously, the need to increase frequency on transformational behaviors and decrease the frequency of transactional and passive/avoidant behaviors among Student Affairs and Services administrators must also be addressed. Along the process, these leaders can positively influence their associate’s awareness of what is important, and move them to see themselves and the opportunities and challenges of their environment in a new way. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS Title Page . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i Approval Sheet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v Table of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi Chapter I. THE PROBLEM AND ITS SCOPE Page Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Statement of the Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Scope and Limitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Significance of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Theoretical Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 Conceptual Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Research Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 viii Research Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 Research Respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Research Instruments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 Research Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Statistical Treatment of Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 IV. PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 INTERPRETATION OF DATA V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . 106 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 Findings and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 VI. ACTION PLAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 VII. BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156 VIII. APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167 VIII. CURRICULUM VITAE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176 ix LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1 Distribution of HEIs in Negros Oriental and Siquijor . . . . . 63 2 Distribution of Respondents by, HEI . . . . . 64 3.a Adversity Quotient® Score Range and Equivalents . . . . . 67 3.b Adversity Quotient® CORE score Range and Equivalents . . . . . 68 4 Profile of Respondents in Terms of Age and Sex . . . . . 74 5 Profile of Respondents in Terms of Civil Status and Educational Attainment . . . . . 75 6 Profile of Respondents in Terms of Socio-economic Status (Monthly Income) and Years of Work Experience . . . . . 77 7 Distribution of Respondents’ Adversity Quotient® CORE Dimensions And Overall Results . . . . . 79 8 Distribution of Respondents’ Multifactor Leadership Characteristics: Idealized Influence- Attributed Factor Results . . . . . 84 9 Distribution of Respondents’ Multifactor Leadership Characteristics: Idealized Influence- Behavior Factor Results . . . . . 85 10 Distribution of Respondents’ Multifactor Leadership Characteristics: Inspirational Motivation Factor Results . . . . . 86 11 Distribution of Respondents’ Multifactor Leadership Characteristics: Intellectual Stimulation Factor Results . . . . . 87 12 Distribution of Respondents’ Multifactor Leadership Characteristics: x Individual Consideration Factor Results . . . . . 88 13 Distribution of Respondents’ Multifactor Leadership Characteristics: Contingent Reward Factor Results . . . . . 90 14 Distribution of Respondents’ Multifactor Leadership Characteristics: Management by-Exception-Active Factor Results . . . . . 91 15 Distribution of Respondents’ Multifactor Leadership Characteristics: Management by-Exception-Passive Factor Results . . . . . 92 16 Distribution of Respondents’ Multifactor Leadership Characteristics: Laissez-Faire Factor Results . . . . . 93 17 Test of Independence Between The Respondents’ Adversity Quotient® Overall Results and Demographic Profile . . . . . 94 18 Test of Independence Between The Respondents’ Multifactor Leadership Characteristics Results and Demographic Profile . . . . . 98 19 Test of Independence Between Respondents’ Adversity Quotient® and Multifactor Leadership Characteristics . . . . . 102