l WWW WW 3 129300 LIBRARY Michigan State University This is to certify that the dissertation entitled The Relationship of Brain Hemisphere Dominance to the Professional Development of Chief Educational Administrators presented by Leslie Lyn Wessman has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Doctor of_Ehilgsgph¥mgmem_JEMunistration and CurricUlum Major professor Date W MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0-12771 MSU UBRARms RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to remove this checkout from your record. FINES will be charged if book is returned after the date stamped below. : 3%21432901 14.13:, MAY : 1117:2001 ‘ ' C l w THE RELATIONSHIP OF BRAIN HEMISPHERE DOMINANCE TO THE PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT OF CHIEF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATORS BY Leslie Lyn Wessman A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillnent of the requirenents for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Depart-ent of Adninistration and Curriculum 1987 Copyright by Leslie Lyn Wessman 1987 ABSTRACT THE RELATIONSHIP OF BRAIN HEMISPHERE DOMINANCE TO THE PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT OF CHIEF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATORS BY Leslie Lyn Wessman During the past three decades American educational institutions have moved from rapid growth and abundant resources to population declines and eroding financial funding. The turbulent sixties caused many a chief administrator to think seriously about the loss of power. prestige, clarity. and certainty from the positions of president and superintendent. Though the times are not as turbulent in the eighties, rapid changes have begun. and more appear on the horizon. Within this context of ambiguity and change. the purpose of the study was to initiate some brain dominance research of chief educational administrators to determine what personal and work elements are key in the present executive leadership in the State of Michigan. and to learn what cognitive processes might be developed to promote a balance of technical. intuitive, and conceptual skills. The brain research, brain dominance, and nanagement/ leadership literature was surveyed to determine cognitive potential and organizational needs for executive development. Previous brain dominance studies have demonstrated that people gravitate toward occupations due to mental preferences. therefore utilizing "competencies" to reach personal and organizational goals. This descriptive study surveyed voluntary subjects who are public college/university presidents. school superin- tendents, and top level administrators in academic affairs and finance who represent the most ready pool of future education executives. Two hundred thirty-two subjects completed the Herrgghn Brain Dominance Instrugent, providing several measurements of brain dominance including a dominance profile code. right/left and cerebral/limbic dominance raw scores, key descriptors. and scaled scores for the dominance "degree" in each of four quadrants. There were four major findings: 1) Chief administrators are characterized by a style predominantly left-brained in orientation; 2) Top level administrators with responsibility for academic and financial affairs are characterized by a style congruent with the content of their work; 3) A cognitive style which utilizes interpersonal. intuitive. and emotional skills. and depends on the ability to express ideas. was the least preferred quadrant; 4) Chief administrators demonstrated a strong preference for the safe—keeping. maintaining elements of work, compared to the risk-taking. conceptualizing activities which lead organizations toward and through change. This dissertation is dedicated to all those who journeyed with me on rocky road, and pleasant path alike-- and encouraged me to smell the flowers along the way.... ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The completion of this dissertation project has been a labor of sheer determination. as well as a stimulation of curiosity for learning experiences outside of the comfortable and successful corners of my life. There have been many individuals who have facilitated this process and have made the two-year journey both realistic and manageable. My Committee Chairman, Dr. Max Raines, has guided my studies from the beginning with a special sensitivity to my tendencies toward perfection and my own brain dominance pattern. He has both firmly and gently urged my condensation of ideas and verbage, while at the same time trusting my independent nature which demands adult learning status. Max was always available, yet always challenging me with a clarity of purpose, a commitment to credible research. Dr. Robert Docking, my mentor in Michigan education. has provided a model of multi—dominant executive leadership in action. His humor. his vision, and his commitment to kids learning in safe and exciting environments has been present from the first time we met in a workshop. "Educating Both VI Sides of the Brain". The hospitality and friendship of Bob, and his wife Mill, have kept me safe, warm, and well-fed on many a cold night in East Lansing. Dr. John Suehr has been both an encourager and challenger. introducing me to graduate studies at M80 in the Winter of 1980. His challenge at proposal time made me keenly aware of the pitfalls of bias, and the need for intentionality in planning for and executing scientific research. Dr. Cass Gentry has been meticulous in his critiquing of my work, specific in his suggestions for improvement, and always inviting the consideration of implications. His personal enthusiasm for my project made the need for corrections and modifications livable. Mr. Rafa Kasim of the Office of Research Consultation has been a patient teacher of both statistical method and the operation of SPSSX on the mainframe computer. There were times he had to deal with a resistant learner. yet he persevered. For this perseverance I will be eternally thankful! Dr. Russell Rogers showed me the doctoral study "ropes", provided the necessary measure for material inclusion-~"the need- to—know versus the nice-to—know"--and has been an ever-present friend in toxic times, as well as a congruent professional partner in human resource development consulting. vll Finally, but probably most importantly, I want to thank the two most important pe0ple in my life--husband and son--Bob and Dai. for their constancy. their understanding, their sharing of household duties so that "Mom could be a doctor someday too." Now it's time to celebrate. The work is done, the goal achieved. Thanks to all. There are flowers. even in research! vlll TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xii Chapter I. THE PROBLEM 1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . 1 Statement of the Problem . . . . . . . . . . 6 Statement of the Purpose . . . . . . . 9 Research Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Research Procedures u . . . . . 11 Definition of Terms and Abbreviations . . . . 14 Limitations and Delimitations . . . . . . . . 15 Basic Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Significance of the Study . . . . . . . . . . 17 Overview of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 11. REVIEW OF SELECTED LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . 19 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Brain Research . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Administrator Effectiveness . . . . . . . . . 34 Parallel Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 III. THE METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY . . . . . . . . . 53 Introduction . . . 53 Procedure Used for Selecting the Population . and Sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Theoretical Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 Validity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 Reliability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 Structure and Scoring . . . . . . . . . . . 7O Appropriateness of Instrument . . . 77 Statistical Design and Procedure for Study . 77 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 IV. PRESENTATION AND DATA ANALYSIS. . . . . . . . . 82 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 Presentation of the Data . . . . . . . . . 85 Chief Administrators . . . . . . . . . . . .103 Ix Page Top Level Administrators . . . . . . . . . .112 Academics Administrators . . . . . . . . . .114 Finance Administrators . . . . . . . . . . . 118 Independent Variables . . . . . . . . . . . 124 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .128 V. SUMMARY. FINDINGS. CONCLUSIONS. AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY . . . . . .130 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .130 Findings and Implications . . . . . . . . . .134 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .152 Recommendations for Further Study . . . . . .156 A Final Word . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .162 APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .164 A. Initial Contact Materials . . . . . . . . . . 167 B. Follow-up Letter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167 C. Raw Data for the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174 Table II. VIII. IX. XI. XII. XIII. XIV. XV. XVI. LIST OF TABLES Page Returns of HBDI surveys for Inclusion in Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 Frequency Distributions of Chief/Academics/ Finance Administrators . . . . . . . . . . 89 Frequencies and Percentages of Most Prevalent Dominance Patterns . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 Frequency Distributions of Multiple and Single Dominance Patterns . . . . . . 92 Hemispheric Interactions of Study Population 95 Means of Left/Right Brain Dominance Scores . 98 Means for Cerebral/Limbic Brain Dominance Scores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 Frequency Distributions and Percentages of Brain Dominance Scores for Chiefs. . . . . 102 MANOVA Tests of Significance for Chiefs . . 110 Key Descriptors for Chief Administrators . . 111 Key Descriptors for Academics Administrators 117 Key Descriptors for Finance Administrators . 121 MANOVA Tests of Significance for Academic Administrators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122 Frequencies and Percentages of Years of Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126 Frequencies and Percentages of Size of Institutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 MANOVA Tests of Significance for Relationship of Variables . . . . . . . . 129 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. The Triune Brain . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 2. Specific Functions of Left and Right Hemispheres . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 3. Fourfold Model of Brain Dominance . . . . . 63 4. Repulsion/Attraction Concepts of Multiple Brain Dominance . . . . . . 64 5. Graphing of HBDI Scores to Visually Demonstrate Dominance Patterns . . . . . 75 6. Relative Weightings of H801 for Scoring . . 76 7. Profile Codes for Continuum of the Herrmann Brain Dominance Instrument . . . . . . . 88 8. Inter- and Inner-Hemispheric Interactions . 94 9. Composite Scaled Scores for Higher Education Presidents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 10. Composite Scaled Scores for K-12 School Superintendents . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 11. Composite Scaled Scores for ISD and Women Superintendents . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 12. Composite Scaled Scores for Academics Administrators . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 13. Composite Scaled Scores for Finance Administrators . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118 14. Frequencies and Percentages of Community Types by Study Groups . . . . . . . . . . 125 15. Comparative Profiles of Three Brain Dominance Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . 138 CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM INTRODUCTION Leaders in educational institutions have been widely criticized for a perceived ineffectiveness in adjusting to changing times. The turn-over rate among educational admini- strators is relatively high throughout all levels of educa- tion. This may occur in part because of advancement to better positions. but departure to less responsible positions does occur. often by choice for those who are judged to have failed. Such failure may occur for a variety of reasons. but inadequate preparation for leadership. failure to understand the uniqueness of leadership in education. and unrealistic expectations among constituents are surely among the most common causes. A lack of responsiveness to change and significant executive turn—over rate are not peculiar to educational organizations. Most of the research directed toward organi- zational effectiveness in recent years has found that execu- tives in most American organizations have ”perfected their skills for maintaining and managing the existing organi- zational structure-—yet they have been slow to respond as "change agents”. "pathfinders." "statesmen". and "innovators" (Srivastva, 1986. p. 1). Fifty years ago Barnard discussed the importance of executive thinking which he claimed incorporated both logical and non-logical thought in decision—making. He proposed that there were three purposes for executive mental effort: 1) "To ascertain truth. 2) to ascertain a course of action and 3) to persuade (1938. p. 235)." The last two purposes. he empha- sized. should utilize a non-logical approach and incorporate intuitive and conceptual thought processes. In 1955 Katz identified the three basic ”Skills of the effective Administrator" as technical. human. and conceptual (1974. p. 91). After twenty years of experience with executives in American corporations. Katz revisited his discussion of administrative skills to insure a more balanced valuing of the concepts. Katz submits that strong leaders are not born. but rather have strong aptitudes and abilities which can be improved by practice and training--and even those who lack natural ability can learn to improve their effectiveness. He recognizes that technical skills have received great attention--too often at the expense of the other two. Of human skills. Katz argues that a focus on internal. intragroup skills is essential in lower and middle management roles. while the facilitation of cooperation and consensus between departments or competing groups-~intergroup skills--is increasingly important in successively higher levels of management. Nortman's studies (1982) indicate that executives think and act more strategically (long range) while lower level managers must be concerned with daily operations (short range). Other researchers have demonstrated that the chief executive intuitively becomes the instrument through which loyalties build. morale gets created. and people are motivated toward the accomplishment of organizational goals (Peters and Waterman, 1982; Bennis and Nanus, 1985). Katz urges those who aspire to executive positions to learn a more holistic approach to thinking in concepts: "...thinking in terms of relative emphases and priorities among conflicting objectives and criteria; relative tenden- cies and probabilities (rather than certainties); and rough correlations and patterns among elements (rather than clear- cut cause-and-effect relationships)" (1974. p. 101). Educa- tional organizations have been identified in organization development literature as "organized anarchies" (Cohen. March, and Olsen. 1972) or "loosely coupled systems" (Neick. 1982). In these fast—changing times. chief administrators are being encouraged to be responsible for managing a symbol system of key values in order ...to help people interpret what they are doing. strengthen action by giving persons an understanding of what might be happening and what can be done next. link people who might otherwise feel isolated. give people ways to describe what they do that will evoke interest and approval from others. and give people answers to puzzles they encounter (Heick. 1982. p. 676). McKinney and Keen (1974) suggest that there is not one "right" way for executives to solve problems. but rather that there is a managerial cognitive style--a mode of thinking that is related more to propensity than to capacity--one which is holistic in nature. Schein (1985a) believes that the managerial cognitive style, or "career anchor". develops during an individual's career through combining one's conscious personal motives. needs. and values with his/her knowledge. skills and talents. As a result of his research on chief executive officers. Schein identified eight Career Anchors; the Managerial anchor is preferred by persons who discover as their career progresses that they really want to become general managers.. They acknowledge a propensity for wanting to reach a level in the organization at which their managerial efforts and decisions will make a difference between organizational success and failure. Schein identifies three areas of competence which are necessary for persons who eventually become the chief executives of organizations: 1) Analytical campetence—-the ability to identify. analyze. synthesize and to think cross—functionally and integratively; 2) Interpersonal and Intergroup competence--the ability to influence. supervise. lead. manipulate, and control people at all levels of the organization toward the achievement of organizational goals. 3) Emotional competence—-the capacity to be stimulated by emotional and interpersonal issues and crises rather than exhausted or debilitated by them; the capacity to bear high levels of responsibility without becoming paralyzed; and the ability to exercise power and make difficult decisions without experiencing guilt or shame. Heick (1982) suggested that thinking is inseparably woven into and occurs simultaneously with executive action. Mintzberg (1976) applied brain hemisphere research to management theory. demonstrating through the observations of chief executive officers of five major corporations that a leader's intuitive assessment of situations and people within the organization is a primary source of information for decision-making and problem-solving. Over the past thirty years brain research has presented an evolving. specific understanding of the specialized functions derived from brain structure. Researchers Roger Sperry (1975). Michael Gazziniga (1985), Paul McLean (1973). and Robert Ornstein (1984) continue to demonstrate the specialization. complexity, interdependency. and impressive capacity of the human brain. Brain dominance studies have begun to map patterns of mental preferences as they relate to career effectiveness (Coulson and Strickland. 1983; Norris. 1984; and Herrmann. 1982; 1986). Research confirms that "an individual will be able to attain higher competence on the job if there is a good match between mental preference and the work elements required to do the job” (Herrmann. 1986). Organization development researchers and specialists are utilizing the evolving evidence from the neurosciences as one resource for examining executive behavior. (Bennis. 1982; Kolb. 1982; Heick. 1983; Mintzberg and Waters. 1982; and Argyris. 1982). The conceptual and intuitive approaches to executive thought and action have been demonstrated as giving balance to the rational. analytical approaches which have been emphasized for the past thirty years in management training programs. "...the art of executive leadership is above all a taste for paradox. a talent for ambiguity. the capacity to hold contradictory propositions comfortably in a mind that relishes complexity (Cleveland. 1985. p. xv)." Researchers (Mintzberg. 1976; Fry and Pasmore, 1983; Dennis and Nanus, 1985) believe that those who promote the training and selection of America's executive leadership should scrutinize their curricula and criteria to incorporate more holistic skills which are not typically given time or attention. A similar need exists in educational adminis— tration programs (Neick. 1982; Norris. 1984). STATEMENT or THE Pnogpgg Rationale As the nation looks to the advent of the twenty-first century. it is experiencing significant changes in social and economic conditions which challenge American prosperity and economic leadership. International competition. a widened world community. and the advent of a service economy are placing new demands on higher education institutions to prepare students for rapidly changing skill requirements. job displacements. and career shifts rather than to primarily prepare students for singular. life—long careers. Historically. the goal of education in America has been to instill a sense of common culture in our children. to transmit to them shared standards of behavior. and to prepare them for productive lives. Today--in times of rapid and profound changes in population. technology. the economy. the family structure. and in learning-~this goal of cultural transmissions is increasingly difficult to achieve within the constraints of an educational system that was created to service an agrarian economy. then adapted to be responsive to the needs of industrialized growth (Naisbitt. 1982). Today the changing nature of families and a shift away from the authority of religion has burdened the education system, by default. with the responsibility of not only educating students. but also attending to their social and emotional needs. Educational institutions organized to accommodate a way of life 150 years old cannot prepare students technically. intellectually. and emotionally to be productive citizens in the twenty-first century. Major change is needed. Legislators in the majority of states are attempting to take charge of educational reform for political reasons. Leaders in American corporations have become increasingly involved in the educational process of their workers for practical reasons. providing remedial courses in basic math and English for entry-level workers. American educational leadership--school superintendents and college and university presidents--must become more aggressive and articulate in envisioning. presenting. promoting and empowering a more adaptive and self-renewing educational system. They are the key players in meeting current demands for improvement. In addition to rational problem-solving. they must be leaders who can conceptualize visions of the future and lead their organizations in new directions for change. The most recent barrage of criticisms of American education is related to the highly prized value of professional autonomy. Etzioni (1964) considered the dilemma of heading a professional organization. Autonomy in educational organizations invites low interdependencies between organizational members. unclear or shifting goals. a lack of instructional technology. and the absence of effective performance appraisal procedures (Neick. 1982). All these cultural dynamics of American educational organizations produce a basic ambiguity in leadership life (Cohen, March. and Olsen. 1972). The Problem Studies indicate that a significant number of the experienced chief administrators will have departed by the beginning of the new century. Three generations of college presidents will have held office between 1980 and 2000-- 10.000 in total (Kerr and Gade. 1987). In the State of Michigan over one third of the superintendents are presently eligible for retirement (Department of Education report. 1987). Uncertainty. ambiguity. diversity. complexity. and paradox are conditions of both the external environment and the nature of the internal structure of educational organizations. Individuals with a broad range of skills. aptitudes. and professional and life experiences must be in the roles of executive leadership. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to initiate some brain dominance research of chief educational administrators to determine what personal and work elements are key in the present leadership. and what cognitive processes might be encouraged to promote a balance of technical, intuitive. and conceptual skills. It is hoped that results from this study might be used to recruit. select. and prepare future chief administrators. and to generate hypotheses for future research. RESEARCHgQUESTIONS The over-all, guiding question in this study was to discover the brain dominance patterns of chief educational administrators from several types of educational institutions in the State of Michigan. The following research questions gave direction to the study: 1. Are there significant differences in the brain dominance patterns of educational chief administrators at identified institutional levels? a. Presidents of four-year higher education institutions b. Presidents of two-year higher education institutions c. Superintendents of K—12 school districts of 5000+ student populations d. Superintendents of K-12 school districts which are outside the state aid funding formula 10 e. Superintendents of intermediate school districts and the Superintendent of Public Instruction 2. Are there significant differences in the brain dominance patterns among chief administrators versus top level administrators with focused responsibilities? a. Presidents of higher education institutions versus top administrators responsible for faculty and academic affairs b. Presidents of higher education institutions versus top administrators responsible for finance and business affairs c. Superintendents of school districts versus top administrators responsible for curriculum/instruc tion d. Superintendents of school districts versus top administrators responsible for finance and business 3. Are there any significant differences in brain dominance patterns in terms of the following variables: 1) number of years of chief executive experience. 2) size of institution. and 3) type of community in which located (urban. small city. suburban. or rural)? Answers to the above questions provided data to support or reject the research hypotheses. RESEARCH PROCE‘UR_§ Selectiog;of the Study Population The study population was selected from two groups which are assumed to represent educational leadership in the State of Michigan: 1. The primary study group was invited from chief educational administrators of public education institutions in the State of Michigan. The institutions included 15 4-year state colleges and universities. 29 2-year community 11 colleges. 57 intermediate school districts. 58 K-12 public school districts serving 5000+ student populations. 77 K-12 public school districts representing a variety of student populations. geographic locations. and community type. and the Superintendent of Public Instruction. A total of 237 chief educational administrators were invited to participate in the study. 2. The second group of top level administrators was selected from the institutions served by the chief admini- strators. (4 year colleges and universities. 2-year community colleges. and the K-12 public school districts serving 5000+ student population) and chosen for their technical/functional responsibilities in the organization (i.e. finances. curriculum. or academic affairs). It is assumed that this is the most ready pool of experienced candidates for chief administrative positions. One hundred ninety-two top level administrators were invited to participate in the study. 3. There are 10 women chief educational administrators in the State of Michigan--two are community college presidents. In addition to the other K-12 superintendents. the eight women were invited to participate. The potential study group numbered 435 educational administrators. 12 Instrggentation Used The Herrmann Brain Dominance Inventory is a paper- pencil, self-survey questionnaire containing 120 questions. each of which has a dominance "tilt" in one of four quadrants, representing the structure and specialized functions of the brain: 1) People whose thinking style preferences are primarily in the left cerebral quadrant enjoy analyzing complex situations and are intrigued by solving technical and mathematical problems. when confronted with a problem. they are more likely to employ logical cognition patterns than those with dominance in other quadrants. 2) People whose thinking style preferences are primarily in the left limbic quadrant focus on organizing the facts. planning and attending to details. They are skilled at implementing ideas and following through. These individuals approach problems in a step-by-step. controlled procedural manner. 3) Right limbic individuals enjoy the interpersonal aspects of their job. They are skilled at developing and expressing ideas and understanding the interpersonal climate of work groups and organizations. They approach problems in an intuitive manner. using feelings--a gut reaction--more than facts to make decisions. 4) Right cerebral individuals prefer conceptualizing. synthesizing. and creating new ideas. They are skilled at being innovative and seeing the big picture. when confronted 13 by a problem. they approach it in an experimental. intuitive manner. These individuals become frustrated with details and others who operate in a sequential. conservative. safe- keeping manner. (Coulson. 1983) Although people tend to interpret. understand. and act on their environment in one or more of the quadrants listed above. every individual who is not brain damaged receives input from the environment in a whole-brained way. Each person who took the Herrmann Inventory. consequently. received a score in each of the four quadrants. providing a measurement of cognitive style preferences--a Whole Brain view. Data Analysis The scores from the Herrmann Inventory were summarized in five categories. The Overall Dominance Scores represent a balance between the left- and right-hemisphere processing. and the balance between cerebral and limbic processing. The Profile Code indicates the quadrant(s) which is pre— ferred. that which is commonly used, and that which is avoided when possible. The Doninance Scaled Scores are derived from the raw scores for the four quadrants. multipli- ed by 1.5 in order to dramatize the degree of "tilt" in each quadrant. The Key Descriptors are eight adjectives chosen as self-perception indicators of what individuals believe best characterized them. The scores were analyzed for frequency. central tendency and variability. ANOVAs and MANCOVAs tested the research hypotheses. l4 QQEJNITION OF TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS An understanding of certain key terms is important to this study. particularly those related to brain dominance. Analytic: The cognitive process of separating the whole into parts and examining them to understand their nature. and to see how they are related. Brain dominance: The hemisphere of the brain. both cerebral and limbic. which has governance over behavior. Cerebral: Referring to the outermost portion of the brain. the newest evolutionary development of the brain structure; the cerebral hemispheres. right and left. are most popularly thought of as processing ”higher" cognitive thought. Cognitive: Concerned with the perceiving and thinking mental processes. Conceptual: The ability to conceive thoughts and ideas in the mind by developing abstract ideas generalized from specific instances. Empathy: An ability to understand the feelings of another person. and communicate that understanding. Interpersonal: Able to develop and maintain meaningful and pleasant relationships easily and with many different kinds of people; comfortable with human diversity. Limbic: Referring to the portion of the brain structure that surrounds the brain stem. which is nestled below the two cerebral hemispheres. and which is responsible for perceiving the concrete world. 15 Mind: The mind is to the brain as digestion is to the stomach—-the brain is what IS. and the mind is what the brain DOES. Vision: The ability to discern through foresight and to formulate images of the future. Abbreviations app; is the abbreviation used for the Herrmann Brain Dominance Inventory. L§_Js the abbreviation used for the left cerebral quadrant of the Brain Dominance Profile model. representing analytic mental processes. RC is the abbreviation used for the right cerebral quadrant of the Brain Dominance Profile model. representing conceptual mental processes. pp is the abbreviation used for the left limbic quadrant of the Brain Dominance Profile model, representing organizing. administrative mental processes. 32 is the abbreviation used for the right limbic quadrant of the Brain Dominance Profile model. representing interpersonal mental processes. LIMITATIONS AND DELIMITATIONS Limitations This study will be limited to chief educational administrators in all public educational institution types (four) in the State of Michigan who volunteered to participate and who actually returned the completed instruments. 16 Selected top level administrators. in the State of Michigan. with functional/technical responsibilities which address the financial. instructional or curriculum needs of the educational organization will be studied because they represent the most ready pool of candidates for chief administrative positions. Voluntary participation will determine those selected for the study. Delimitations This study will not attempt to predict success of administrative leadership. This study will not determine or evaluate the prepara- tion and/or training of educational administrators. This study will examine a relatively small sample because of the necessary one-to-one surveying procedures. This study will not examine the sexual differences in brain dominance of chief educational administrators because of the small population of women in executive positions (10) in the State of Michigan. BASIC ASSUMPTIONS There are four basic assumptions related to this study: 1. The criterion group consisting of chief admini- strators in four levels of public educational institutions (i.e. higher education. including 4-year colleges/ universities and 2-year community colleges. intermediate school districts. K-12 school districts, and the State 17 Department of Education) in the State of Michigan is representative of the universe of public education chief administrators. 2. Self-reports of personal characteristics and preferences are reflective of the actual functioning of participants and not overly influenced by "self-typing" of early ascriptions of family functioning. 3. Public educational systems in the State of Michigan will represent a complexity of structure. sub- units and financial resources. as well as diversity of constituency groups and program offerings. 4. The Herrmann Brain Dominance Inventory will continue in use as a tool for determining dominant cognitive style patterns in persons as related to their career choices. SIGNIFICANCE OFglflE STUDY The results of this study may have a variety of uses: 1. The descriptive results may provide specific areas of focus for personal choices for professional development of practicing chief administrators and those top level administrators aspiring to the executive position. 2. The findings may have implications for the recruitment. selection and training of chief educa- tional administrators. 3. The descriptive results of this study could assist in selecting advanced-degree candidates for educational administration programs. and in guiding individuals into the most appropriate course of study within the administrative field. 18 4. Since the study explores the analytical. interpersonal. and conceptual aspects of management and leadership. it could influence the content and design of future educational administration training programs. OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY The study will be presented in five chapters. Chapter I will include an introduction; the rationale and a statement of the problem; a statement of the purpose for the study; the research questions and procedures; definition of terms; the limitations and basic assumptions; a statement of the significance of the study; and an overview of its organization. A review of selected literature and research on identi— fied mental processes of chief executives. leader and manager behaviors, the organizational dynamics of educational institutions. and brain dominance technology will be presented in Chapter 11. Chapter III will present the methodology of the study. Chapter IV will present and analyze the data collected for this study. Chapter V. the concluding chapter. will include a listing of findings. a summary. a discussion of the implications of the study. conclusions, and recommendations based on the findings of the study. CIAPTII II REVIEI OE SELECTED LITERATURE W Educational institutions have been responding to decreases in traditional student populations, to increases in student diversity and complexities of constituent groups. to fast-developing technology with increased demands for changes in instructional methodology and for measurable results. and to reductions in and a shifting of financial resources. Change is a major element in the dynamics of educational organizations in the 1980's. Chief educational administra- tors are the managers of the complexity. ambiguity. and paradoxes inherent in these changes. Current management and leadership studies are articu- lating the need for creative responses to change. The concept of Executive Mind has recently become a field of inquiry to explore what. why, and how executives think. feel. and act (Srivastva et al. 1983). The executive in action provides a particularly suitable focus for exploration of the rational and the non-rational. of the systematic and the intuitive. and how these dichotomies merge into a patterned whole as the executive goes about his or her business (Torbert. 1983). One of the outcomes from the prolific brain research of the past thirty years is that as scientists have examined how the brain functions. they have enabled organizational researchers to gain a greater understanding of how human 19 20 brains "filter" reality. and shape not only individual perceptions but also personal and institutional values (Schein. 1985b). This chapter will first present current brain research as it provides the foundations for executive thought; several key concepts of administrator effectiveness will be considered from the viewpoint of mental processing and resulting behaviors; views on the unique environments of educational organizations will be examined; and parallel studies of brain dominance as they relate to the work of chief executives will be reviewed. BRAIN RESEARCH A brief overview of the progress in brain research is intended to present both the breadth and depth of consider- able brain research as it provides the foundations for executive thought; several key concepts of administrator effectiveness will be considered from the view point of specific brain structures. their characteristics and functions; attention will be given to the importance of specialized mental processing. beyond the popularized notion of right- and left-brains. As each of the research areas are outlined. connections will be made with some of the new insights into managerial thought and action. The Neuron--The Beginning of Strpcture The human brain weighs approximately three pounds. and is comprised of 100 to 200 billion separate. well-defined neurons communicating with one another at trillions of 21 synaptic points. In 1906 Spanish neuroscientist. Ramon y Cajal. compiled massive evidence to show that the incredibly complex interconnections among neurons were not random. but rather highly structured and specific in their processing. and intended for the storage of sensory data and perceived information (Hubel. 1979. p. 5). The multiplicity of neurons and their synapses are surrounded by ten times as many glial cells. the "glue" that holds the brain together. With increased use these cells also create a special coating. called myelin. which insulates the connecting fibers that carry electric signals/information between nerve cells at a much faster and more efficient rate. By increasing the number of glial cells in the brain through sensory-enriched environments, the speed of learning and information processing is accelerated. It is the neural activity of the brain which produces the multiple levels of consciousness known as the human mind. (Restak. 1984. pp. 27-49) As adults deliberately take their minds into new areas. they do more than just add to their stores of information. Even as the content of mind is enlarged. the context is also altered. The working through of new intellectual and creative challenges. particularly in a depressurized setting. is believed to change the chemical structure of the neurons involved and thereby strengthen the cell bodies. Information can then be processed more quickly and accommodate more 22 power. thus making more complex neural networks. The executive mind is constantly faced with both intellectual and creative challenges--often in pressurized settings. Executives are constantly learning and integrating the dynamics of the organization. Kolb (1984) proposes a model for problem management which is derived from a single, holistic. and adaptive process of learning through experience: the dialectic movement from situation analysis (valuing and priority settlng).to problem analysis (informa— tion gathering and problem definition). to solution analysis (idea getting and decision making). and finally implementa- tion analysis (participation and planning). Kolb's model is intended to utilize both the logical. rational mental processes in equal balance with reflection and abstract conceptualization-—an interactive process congruent with the neural structure of the brain. The Tripne Brgin--Evolption of Structure At the Laboratory of Brain Evolution and Behavior of the 0.8. National Institute of Mental Health Dr. Paul MacLean has worked for nearly thirty years to understand the programming of two ancient brain systems he believes to be buried in the interior of our skulls. MacLean's Triune Brain Theory (1973) provides an evolutionary view of human brain development, and an underpinning for an intuitive understanding of the powerful influence that irrational forces appear to have in shaping human behavior and lives. 23 The brain as explained by MacLean is an integration center for the nervous system. The vast majority of creatures do not have any brains at all in this sense; their various subsystems are not unified in a “head office". The size and complexity of an animal's brain tends to be directly related to that species' survival needs. Humans have no standard way of living. We have a variety of responses to our external worlds; we are extremely adaptable and dependent on a great number of behaviors. Humans have developed means of survival and a way of living that demands a stupendously large brain. (See Figure 1) Figure 1: lbs lriune Brain SOURCE: Paul D. lac Lean. A lriuna Concept of thg Brain and Behaviour (Ioronto: University of Ioronto Press. 1973). p. 9. MacLean's view of the human brain is somewhat like an archaeological site. with the outer layer composed of the most recent brain structure. the cerebral cortex. or "new mammalian brain", the most highly developed in humans. It can look into the future and anticipate the consequences of 24 actions. The cerebral cortex furnishes us with our most human qualities: language. ability to reason. ability to deal with symbols. and ability to develop a culture. This newest brain is described as being responsible for the non-emotional analysis of the external environment--it operates unhindered by signals and noise generated in the internal world. It is thought to have a predilection for dividing things into smaller and smaller units. to perform abstractions. and to allow the development of reading. writing. and arithmetic. The "old mammalian brain". better known as the limbic brain. is shared with all other mammals. It deals with the emotional feelings that guide behavior and the recording of memories. Though this brain has no verbal language to express logical certainty. it does seem to have "the capacity to generate strong affective feelings of conviction that we attach to our beliefs. regardless of whether they are true or false" (MacLean. 1975. p. 218). MacLean noted that memory. just as a feeling of personal identity, depends on the brain's ability to combine internal and external experiences. "The condition that makes us unique as individuals is this private. combined form of experience" (MacLean, 1978. p. 331). The R-Complex. or Reptilian brain. is the oldest and deepest buried of the three human brains, completely enclosed by the limbic system. This brain includes the upper 25 brainstem--a complex structure where the neural mechanisms are responsible for behavior involved with safe-keeping and maintaining the status quo: The reptilian brain is filled with ancestral lore and ancestral memories and is faithful in doing what its ancestors say. but it is not a very good brain for facing up to new situations. It is as though it were neuroses bound to an ancestral ego. (1978. p. 277) MacLean postulates that such human characteristics as ritualism, awe for authority. social pecking orders. and comfort levels developed in "personal territory". may be partially caused by the reptilian brain. The understanding of the human brain which MacLean has brought more clearly into view is that as a whole. it is not harmonious. but works through a precarious. constantly changing balance of these three ”partners". There has been increased research into the significance of the limbic system in recent years. Studies are inconclusive as to specific functions of each of its parts, but like the cerebral hemispheres it has duality of structure--right and left sides. In the brain dominance model (Herrmann.1985). the left limbic system is identified as the center for planning and organizing activities. It influences the degree of structure and control that colors one's thinking and is itself greatly influenced by the safe-keeping aspect of the R-Complex. 26 The right limbic system governs a broad spectrum of intense emotional feelings: fear - rage. fight - flight. relaxation — tension. pleasure - pain. expectation- actuality. stability - instability. participation — warding off. and sociability - self-asserting. (A.T.W. Simeons. 1961. p. 32) It is certain that the major nerve routes between the body's perceptual and movement systems and the highest brain mechanisms in the neo-cortex travel through the limbic system (Nauta. 1979. pp. 40-53). It is to this limbic brain that humans "downshift" when threatened by intense peril or high stress (Hart. 1983. pp. 108-111). It has "a greater capacity than the reptilian brain for learning new approaches and solutions to problems on the basis of new experience" (MacLean, 1978. p. 278). but generally it keys quickly on what it senses is happening in the outside world. and it does not do more thinking—-it just reacts to avoid "pain" and to heighten "pleasure" and it does not have the ability "to put its feelings into words" (p. 278). MacLean's final conclusions emphasize that the way each person "sees" reality depends largely on the holistic functioning of the brain. the ancient and the newer parts alike. The Forebrain--Ipterconnectiopg In the early 1970's Walle Nauta discovered that the vast interconnecting nerve pathways from the frontal lobes of the cerebral hemispheres had two major destinations—-one straight 27 into the center of the limbic brain and one to the sensory input areas of the cerebral cortex (197. p. 181). Research- ers now believe that the frontal lobes are in the "driver's seat"--they can and do trigger key choices in human perceptions and behaviors. This is the structure of the brain where it is believed the human value system is refined and given meaning (Pugh. 1977. p. 152). When this aspect of the human neural equipment is "exercised". it strengthens the centers believed to be largely responsible for our abilities to see patterns of change; to extrapolate from present trends to future possibilities; to self-regulate bodily processes through insight. internal commands and generation of visual images; to form highly complex threads of creativity and analysis using formal logic and metaphor; and to produce the rational and emotional foundations for altruism and social interaction (Lynch. 1984. p. 117). Specialization of the ngispheres--Fppctions Bicameral. duality. split-brain. asymmetry. and hemisphericity are all terms applied to the prodigious research relating to the two cerebral hemispheres of the brain. Many of the studies of brain duality have served to divide researchers. psychologists. philosophers. and educa- tors into two camps--the pro and con interpretations and extrapolations of the implications of the functions of the 28 "two brains". and the attempts to propose the "correct" understanding of the practical application of the growing and changing views of "brainedness". In the mid-nineteenth century. researchers began to identify specialized functions in identified areas of the brain. Broca's (1861) area. located in the left frontal lobe. is primarily concerned with language production. while Wernicke's (1874) area is concerned with semantic/meaning aspects of language. and is located in the left temporal lobe. It was the evidence of language being resident in the left hemisphere that began to give rise to the belief that this was the "primary" brain (Geschwind, 1977). In 1978 Ruben Gur. using the computerized technology of the PET scan and radioactive glucose. demonstrated that wide areas of the brain. certainly not limited to the left hemisphere. were involved in the processing of language. The visual and auditory areas may become involved because of visual or verbal associations. Memory. which is involved with structures of the brain in the limbic system. must also be needed for language ability (Gur et al. 1982). The whole brain is able to function in concert through the corpus callosum (200 million nerve fibers--more nerve connections than all of the remaining nerve structures run- ning from the brain to the rest of the body) which serves as an instantaneous communication network between the two cerebral hemispheres. In early experiments severing the corpus callosum of cats. Roger Sperry was able to infer that 29 each half of the brain was capable of functioning indepen— dently. Sperry. with associates Levy (1968. pp. 151-155) and Gazzaniga (1970) were able to study in laboratory settings the split brain patients of neurosurgeons Vogel and Bogen (1969, pp. 73-105) to determine the specialized abilities housed in each hemisphere, and how the two hemispheres interact. (See Figure 2) Left Right 1. Verbal 1. Visual 2. Numerical 2, Spgtial 3. Linear 3. Perceptual 4. Euclidean 4. lntuitive 5. Ratiorial 5. Imaginative 8. Logical 6. Fantasy 7. Geometric 7. Imagery B. Metaphoric 9. Sensory GwauCflbmm: Figure 2: Specific Functions of Left and Right Heaispheres. SOURCE: lax R. Runnels. 'Cerebral Symmetry: An Urgent Concern for Education,’ Phi Delta Kappan. March 1976, 57. (7) 471-412. 3O Ornstein conducted EEG studies of intact-brain subjects in order to determine how well each hemisphere performs relative to the other on specific tasks--that is. the relative abilities of each hemisphere (1972, pp. 92-108). As each of the hemispheres gathers in the same sensory information. each half of the brain may handle the inform- ation in different ways: LEFT ”EMISPHERE In the majority of persons. the left hemisphere specializes in language (Gazzaniga. 1967; Kimura. 1973; Nebes. 1974). This hemisphere finds its strengths in analytic reasoning, logic, long-term memory, sequential and mathematical mental processes (Bogen. 1973; Dumas. 1975; Luria. 1970, Baddeley, 1982), in controlled emotion (Sperry, 1975); and in the control of linear time (Ornstein. 1972). RIGHT HEMISPHERE The right hemisphere tends to be non—verbal (Gazzaniga. 1983). though it has been able to take over language function in some aphasic patients (Zaidel, 1983). It demonstrates a superiority in spatial tasks and visual processes (Kimura. 1973; Kinsbourn and Smith, 1974; Gazzaniga and LeDoux. 1978. Levy. 1969), and facial recognition (Jaynes. 1976). Artistic ability (Edwards. 1979; 1986) and musical skills (Bogen and Gordon, 1971) were identified as strengths of right hemi- sphere processing. Metaphorical (Samples. 1976) and diver- gent thinking processes (Austin, 1971) are combined with the left hemisphere language to produce creative and persuasive 31 ideas. Intuition. a function of the right hemisphere, is a highly efficient way of knowing without using prior knowledge or reason. The intuition is fast and accurate. processing a wide array of information on many levels. and giving instant- aneous cues about how to act (Agor, 1984). The emotional aspects of this hemisphere place the expression of emotion and feelings. the inference of others' feelings and motivations, and a sense of humor as a high priority. Integrating information and making inferences from that synthesis, especially when dealing with visual or nonverbal material are processes which often happen uncon- sciously. but can be brought to consciousness and utilized with intentionality (Lynch, 1984. p. 29). Whole Brain--Optippl Use of Strpcture and Function The early work of Gazzaniga and Ornstein served a useful purpose for helping a wider population begin to gain increas- ed understanding of brain function, though it is too simple a framework. The human brain does not break down into neat categories. Its performance can often best be understood as "a choice of what is most favorable under the circumstances" (Restak. 1984. p. 248). PET scan studies have demonstrated that the same activity may be carried out by different brains according to past experiences and present goals (Mazziotta. 1983). The metabolic mapping of individuals is providing a new dimension to the old truth: ”People may not only be of a 32 ‘different mind' on issues. but they may also use different parts of their brains to do the same thing" (Restak. 1984, p. 250). Brain Dominance—-Tpe Proper Fit In 1868 John Hughlings Jackson proposed the idea of the "leading" hemisphere. following the discovery of Broca's language area: "The two brains cannot be mere duplicates if damage to one alone can make a man speechless. For this process, of which there is none higher. there must surely be one side which is leading" (in Springer and Deutsch. 1981, p. 12). Later studies demonstrated that there were shifts in dominance aided by the presence of the corpus callosum when various tasks were presented to the brain's sensory fields—- shifts from "task to task. subject to subject. and trial to trial" (Cohen. 1979. p. 309). Wilkins and Stewart (1974) suggest that the brain directs the task. content. or work toward the style-appropriate hemisphere. Dominance can be seen more concretely in the choice of a dominant hand, foot, or eye; seldom are both sides used equally well. Another demonstration of cerebral dominance might be found in a couple assembling a toy on Christmas Eve--one reads the instructions step-by-step, the other prefers to lay out all the parts. look at a picture of the assembled toy and proceed. It is clear that it is important for each hemisphere to do the mental task for which it is best suited. There is. however, a tendency for an individual to develop a style of cognitive processing in which one 33 hemisphere usually is dominant; he relies too heavily on the dominant mode. even when it is inappropriate to the task at hand (Levy. 1976). Herrmann has developed a metaphorical model of brain dominance which has four quadrants reflecting the preferred modes of knowing, correlated directly with the specific kinds of work that persons chose as central in their lives. Research focused on professionals in specific occupations reveals that "people gravitate towards work that allows them to use their preferred modes of knowing in ways that contribute to their success and fulfillment" (Herrmann, 1986. p. 20) Data exhibiting comparable brain dominance profiles have been collected in 784 occupational groups. An individual's mental preferences influence not only the work they do, but the way in which the work is carried out. Typically. an individual will be able to attain higher competence on the job if there is a good match between mental preference and the work elements required to do the job. Under these conditions. competence is achieved faster, more easily. and at a higher level than when there is a mismatch (Herrmann, 1986. p. 20). In the Herrmann studies, dominance is not a simple either/or situation. Data indicates that most individuals have multiple dominance: 30% are single dominant; 40*. double; 25%. triple; and 5% are dominant in all four quadrants. or "whole brained" (Herrmann. 1985). 34 Clarification There has been much discussion about which is primary-- the brain or the mind. For the purposes of this study, this researcher accepts the premise that the brain is the tool of the mind--the brain is the physical structure which activates and facilitates the mental processes which represent the workings of the human mind. In discussions which utilize the concept of "mind", there will be an attempt to ground the phenomena in structures and functions of the human brain. DMINISTRATOR EFFECTIVENESS In 1936 Barnard articulated the differences between non—logical and logical mental processes as they applied to common vocations, especially executive functioning: It should go without saying that both kinds together are much better than either alone if the conditions permit; but when this is not possible, good sense would suggest that if there are various processes available for doing work, one should be selected that is best adapted to it. It seems that this does not occur with sufficient frequency and that it takes a good deal of judgment and experience to do it well. (1938. pp. 306—7) Barnard was the early proponent of both effectiveness and efficiency in managing organizations, emphasizing the use of appropriate mental processes. Hersey and Blanchard's Situational Leadership concept (1982) is focused on increas- ing the manager's effectiveness for developing the "influence potential of followers" by examining the relationship between three primary factors: 1) the amount of direction 35 and control (Directive Behavior) a leader gives; 2) the amount of support and encouragement (Supportive Behavior) a leader provides; and 3) the competence and commitment (Development Level) that a follower exhibits in performing a specific task (Blanchard. 1985). There is no one best style of leadership. Managers must assess the task to be accomp- lished and the development level of the followers, then choose the appropriate leadership style. "Directing" and "Coaching" styles incorporate more left hemisphere processes, while "Supporting" and "Delegating" utilize more of the right. Mppggers or Leaders? In "Managers and Leaders: Are They Different?" (1977) Zaleznik contrasted leaders and managers both in light of their behavior within their organizations and in terms of their personality. needs, and attitudes as observed during clinical studies. Zaleznik argues that leaders see goals as more personal. action—oriented opportunities. They prefer to articulate ideas about work in terms of images that excite people, and to develop options for how the work can get done. He characterized leaders as essentially loners--relating with others more intuitively and empathicly than personally; their empathy enables them to understand what different events mean to different individuals. They are risk takers and visionaries who accept the challenge of changing conditions. 36 Zaleznik's view of managers depicts them as committed to enabling others to accomplish tasks by coordinating and balancing the structure of work. They negotiate and bargain. and make flexible use of rewards and punishments. They see goals as more impersonal--a given—-reacting to them in a passive, accepting manner. Managers prefer to work with people. by relating to them according to roles and task accomplishment. Studying social history, Burns (1978) focused his research on two kinds of leadership: transformational and transactional. The transformational leaders (Zaleznik's leader) identify personally with the mission of the institution. are perceived by followers as solitary. inspirational figures who can engender intense emotions in organizational members. In addition. the transformational leaders have stronger empathy skills than the average person. enabling them to identify needs of organizational members even when members are not consciously aware of them. thereby being able to accurately assess and provide a mission and goals that, when achieved. respond to the followers' needs. Transformational behaviors reflect more of the emotional, synthesizing and wholistic mental processes. The transactional leaders (Zaleznik's manager) view the leader-follower relationship as a process of exchange: rewards for work done. jobs for votes. favor for favor. They are focused on the task at hand. mobilizing people to accomp- lish the task, making short-range plans which provide for 37 conformity. stability. and smooth, steady relationships. The transactional behaviors are grounded in the factual, organi— zing, and analytic mental processes. Transformational leaders never leave matters as they find them-—they usually have a clear change objective, some particular end state in mind. Burns contends that most leaders today are transactional. responding to the bureaucratic nature of most organizations as well as the culture which evolves: An organization is a system. with a logic of its own, and all the weight of tradition and inertia. The deck is stacked in favor of the tried and proven way of doing things and against the taking of risks and striking out in new directions. (Rockerfeller. 1973. p. 72) Wortman (1982) focused his studies on operating and strategic managers in corporations. His thesis is that top managers-~executives--think and act strategically (long range), whereas managers further down in the corporate structure must be concerned with daily operations. According to Wortman. executives (leaders). as opposed to managers. exercise strategic management not only via the more obvious dimensions of analysis. policy formulation. evaluation. and planning. but also in their personal behavior. Executive leaders must be more charismatic. inspiring. and flexible. They must have the skills to inspire followers to accept change, to take initiative and risks. Wortman implies 38 that there may be basic differences in personal character- istics between those who rise to executive leader status and those who remain in the management ranks. Stimulated by Getzels and Cuba's (1957) model of organizations. Abbott (1960) developed a concept of "selective interpersonal perception" for understanding administrative relationships. In essence the concept supports the conclusion that each person may be said to function in a world of his own making-~his attitudes and values serve as a perceptual screen; he interprets his environment according to the way he perceives it; and he reacts to that environment in accordance with his interpretations. McKinney and Keen (1974) created a model of managerial cognitive style for the purpose of calling into question the popular assumption that there is one "right" way of solving problems. As these two researchers developed their model. they precisely chose the term "style" rather than "structure" in order to stress their belief that modes of thinking relate more to propensity than to capacity: An individual's style develops out of his experience.... This suggests not only that tasks exist that are suited to particular cognitive styles. but also that the capable individual will search out those tasks that are compatible with his cognitive propensities. In addition. he will generally approach tasks and problems using his most comfortable mode of thinking. (1974, pp. 82-83) In the area of decision-making, Wilmotte. Morgan and Baker (1984) argue that organizations can take advantage of the diverse ways in which people reason by creating 39 administrative teams which reflect specialized information- processing abilities of the brain. Agor (1985) has observed that most organizations assemble teams to solve problems based on the criteria of who is responsible for the area in question or who has worked for the organization a given number of years. He suggests that a potentially more pro- ductive way to solve a problem would be to assign personnel on the basis of brain skills. Bass reports in Leadership and Perforpgnceggeyong ggpectptions (1985) on his empirical research which is intended to support the study and understanding of trans- formational and transactional leadership. He contends that transformational leadership is not a rare phenomenon limited to a few world-class leaders. Rather, it is to be found in varying degrees in all walks of life; in fact, while concept- ually distinct. Bass believes that transactional and trans- formational leadership are likely to be displayed by the same individuals in different amounts and intensities. Bass proposes that once we have broadened the scientific evidence to support the existence and importance of the transactional/ transformational leadership characteristics. then we must turn our attention to determining how to "identify and encourage its appearance in the military. in business and industry, and in educational and governmental agencies" (Bass. 1985. p. xv). 4O Professioppl_9evelgppent Katz (1974) proposed in 1955 that "technical," "human" and "conceptual" skills were keys to administrator effect- iveness. Technical skill. according to Katz, assumes "an understanding of and proficiency in the methods. processes, procedures. and techniques" of educational institutions (p. 91). In non-instructional areas it also includes specific knowledge in finance, accounting. scheduling. purchasing. construction. and maintenance. Human skill refers to the executive's ability to work effectively and efficiently with other people on a one-to-one basis and in group settings. This skill requires ”considerable self-understanding and acceptance as well as appreciation, empathy. and consider- ation for others" (p. 91). Its knowledge base includes an understanding of and facility for adult motivation. attitudi- nal development. group dynamics, human need, morale, and the development of human resources. Conceptual skill includes the executive's ability to see the organization. the community in which it is situated. and the political. social and economic forces as they interact and impact the whole (p. 93). Twenty years of working with senior executives in a wide variety of industries convinced Katz of the importance of human and conceptual skills which were not being emphasized in professional development programs. He submits that intragroup skills are essential in lower and middle management roles, and that intergroup skills-—facilitating 41 cooperation and consensus between departments, or competing groups--is increasingly important in successively higher levels of management. Wortman (1982) foresees a shift in leadership style for executives: 1) They will need to be more participative with their boards because those members will have more and more influence on the analysis and formulation of organizational goals and on the monitoring of executive performance; and 2) in large organizations executives will have more of a peer relationship with top level managers/administrators and will need a more collegial style. The key factor for the executive in these new relationships will be "having trust and being trusted" (p. 379). Zaleznik (1964). Mintzberg (1974). and Fry and Pasmore (1983) urge more understanding of the interpersonal relations of managers and their effects on the functioning of the organization. In research on leadership dimensions and cognitive style, Weissenberg and Gruenfeld (1966) expressed the concern that in public service institutions. persons are promoted to management positions based on achievement tests. Their research indicated that these individuals tended to shun interpersonal aspects of leadership behavior and "may be poorly motivated to make distinctions among the performances of group members" (p. 394). Katz (1974) argued that it was crucial for executives to develop their conceptual skills to the degree that it became a natural part of the executive's makeup——visualizing 42 educational “enterprise as a whole and coordinating and integrating its various parts" (p. 100). The "general management point of view" involves always thinking in terms of relative emphases and priorities among conflicting objectives and criteria, relative tendencies and probabili- ties (rather than certainties), rough correlations and patterns among elements (rather than clear-cut cause-and- effect relationships) (p. 101). He senses that conceptual skill of this type may be an innpte ppility; if not. he encourages those who aspire to executive positions to learn this more holistic approach early in their careers. In studies of 90 effective leaders, including chief executive officers, university presidents, politicians. coaches, and newspaper publishers, Bennis and Nanus (1985) found that the general common denominator in effective leaders was the ability to provide a vision--a focus for people's energies to accomplish the organizational goal. Peters and Waterman (1982) report the nature and uses of communication used by leaders who "manage by walking around" (p. 121). Barnard (1938) claimed that the three essential functions of the executive were 1) "to provide the system of communication. 2) to promote the securing of essential efforts; and 3) to formulate and define purpose" (p. 217). Conceptualizing is the key to effective executive functioning. 43 Establishing common goals is not only a matter of communication. but more importantly an issue of power. The rise of participative management practices indicates a need to empower organizational members. After discussing the bases of power and utilizing the theory of power needs (McClelland, 1975). Burke (1986) suggests that organizational leaders must have moved beyond the "need to have impact on others" to " the desire to influence and empower others to achieve" (p. 56). Burke's research demonstrates that the leader. as opposed to the manager. is one who is sensitive to the system. By being in tune with the group's desires and by conceptualizing and envisioning these desires, the leader empowers (p. 72). In observing executives on the job, Mintzberg (1975) noted that individuals tended to gravitate toward their mental dominance; the analytic left-brained types usually ended up in staff positions, whereas high-level managers tended to be right-brained. intuitive types who depended on non-verbal interpersonal cues. "hunches". strategy formation, and the synthesizing of large amounts of information. Today's executive decision-makers live intensely and have more obligations and problems than they have time. For them the highest need is to cut through the complexities of the modern world and come to quick creative decisions intui- tively. Taggart (1981). Agor (1984). Lynch (1984). and Rowan (1986) urge managers to develop trust in their intuitive abilities and to follow good "hunches". The timing factor of 44 intuitive decision-making was observed in the research of Giannini et al (1978). As the communication channel is kept open between the two hemispheres. executives may enjoy the benefits of a wider spectrum of possibility. of potentiality. and of mental maneuverability. From his research on the dynamics of career development in organizational chief executives, Edgar Schein (1985) developed a group of eight "Career Anchors". Everyone differs in how they view their careers and working life; each person has a degree of each of the anchoring patterns, but one is more dominant than the rest. Schein created a career development instrument through which individuals could inform themselves more specifically of their own personal needs. motives. values. and experiences that could facilitate career development. In Schein's Career Anchor concept. the Managerial Competence career anchor is preferred by persons who combine the fullest range of cognitive processes-—in other words. is "whole brained". Three areas of competence are identified which are necessary for the general manager whose goal is to become the chief executive of an organization: 1) Applyticpl Cogpgtepgg is the ability. under great time pressure. to take incomplete informa- tion of unknown validity and convert that information into a clear problem statement that can be worked on. These persons can identify. analyze. synthesize and state problems in such a way that decisions can be made. The ability to think cross-functionally and integratively gives these individuals the skills to manage the process of decision-making in the organization as a whole. 45 2) Ipterpersonal and Intergropp Coppeteppg: As much of the technical information that goes into decision making will increasingly be in the heads of subordinates and peers as organizational tasks become more complex, so the quality of decisions will increasingly hinge on the ability of general managers to bring the right people together around the right problems. and then to create an interpersonal problem-solving climate that will elicit full exchange of information and full commitment from participants. Executives quickly learn that the complexity of organiza- tional tasks is such that they simply cannot any longer make decisions by themselves. They are highly dependent on the information and insight of others and must find ways of eliciting and utiliz— ing the involvement of those others. As in trans- formational leadership. the ability to influence, supervise, lead, manipulate, and control people at all levels of the organization toward organiza- tional goal achievement is a pivotal dimension of the Managerial Career Anchor. 3) Epotional Coppetence is the capacity to be stimulated by emotional and interpersonal issues and crises rather than exhausted or debilitated by them; the capacity to bear high levels of responsibility without becoming paralyzed; and the ability to exercise power and make difficult decisions without experiencing guilt or shame. Schein believes that it is the essence of the executive's job to absorb the emotional strains of uncertainty, interpersonal conflict. and responsibility. In his research. he has found that it is this aspect of the job that managerially-anchored persons increasingly seek, that excites them, that makes their jobs meaningful and rewarding (Schein, 1985, pp. 42-44). Another career anchor which applies to some top management level persons is Technical/Functional Competence (Schein. 1985. pp. 40-42). This career anchor attracts persons who build their sense of identity around the content of their work, the technical or functional area in which they are succeeding. They prefer to develop increasing skill in their area of expertise; they want to be specialists. Some 46 technically or functionally anchored people have sufficient managerial talent to function at senior levels. but they clearly prefer the content of their work to the management of people. Egpggtionpl Institptiopg Selznick (1957) defined an institution as a "nearly natural product of social needs and pressures--a responsive. adaptive organism.... Organizations become institutions as they are infused with values... The infusion produces a distinct identity" (pp. 5—6). Sergiovanni (1980) argues that executive administrators of educational institutions must accept the very real multi-faceted existence of values in the administrative process and the need for "value—ordering". Over the past two decades there has been a growing gap between what schools purport to teach concerning values and how the school and its agents behave. "Administrative effectiveness for school executives depends upon the continuous examination of internalized value assumptions. ...Value conflict. for example, is treated at the interpersonal level and on a one-to-one basis rather than at the organizational level. Yet the major value problems ....are at the organizational level" (p. 29). Karl Weick. in his "Administering Education in Loosely Coupled Schools" (1982), points out that the dimensions of leadership in educational institutions are markedly different 47 because of the basic assumptions and belief system operating in the organizational culture. Schein (1985) defines culture as the deeper level of basic assumptions and beliefs that are shared by members of an organization, that operate unconsciously. and that define in a basic 'taken-for-granted' fashion an organiza- tion's view of itself and its environment. These assumptions and beliefs are learned responses to a group's problems of survival in its external environment and its problems of internal integration. (1985, p. 6) Researchers in organizational behavior (Cohen, March and Olsen. 1972; Weick. 1982) point out that educational admini- strators have been trying to apply conventional management practices to their institutions. assuming that they are like most other bureaucratic organizations. A major cultural value in our American experience is individual autonomy. In colleges and universities this autonomy takes the form of "academic freedom". while in public schools it is in the regard for the professional status of the teacher in the classroom. There is low interdependence among the teaching professionals at all levels of education--a very weak network for the dissemination and coordination of information. and little structure for formal or informal feedback on the effectiveness of efforts (Weick. 1982, p. 675). Contemporary studies of educational effectiveness are demanding more intentional actions and observable results (Muschel. 1979; Edmonds. 1982; Chickering. 1981): unclear goals. a lack of instructional technology. and the absence of effective performance appraisal procedures produce a basic 48 ambiguity of leadership life in American educational organi— zations unlike most other bureaucratic organizations (Weick. 1983). Environmental conditions facing educational leaders are unprecedented according to Culbertson (1976): the long history of growth in schools has ended; the resources available for education are more limited; and concomitantly. there is a loss of confidence and a growing skepticism among citizens about education and its benefits. Ambiguous structure and adverse times offer unique leadership opportunities to those who have a propensity for the work. These dynamics operate at the cultural level of educational organizations--they are basic assumptions and beliefs which are taken for granted and have dropped out of awareness in the daily operations of the institutions. Schein encourages executive leaders to see themselves as managers of the organizational culture: ...Culture determines not only the ways in which the internal system of authority. communication. and work is organized and managed but also the organization's most basic sense of mission and goals. .. Culture controls the manager more than the manager controls culture, through the auto- matic filters that bias the manager's perceptions. thoughts, and feelings. As culture arises and gains strength. it becomes pervasive and influen- ces everything the manager does. even his own thinking and feeling.... (Organizational Culture and Leadership, 1985, p. 314) Zaleznik (1977) believes that there are two different courses of development for those who are responsible for organizations: 1) the development through socialization. which prepares the individual to guide institutions and to 49 maintain the existing balance of social relations; and 2) the development through personal mastery. which impels an indivi- dual to struggle for psychological and social change. "Society produces its managerial talent through the first line of development. while through the second leaders emerge" (p. 75). PARALLEL STUDIES Herrmann (1985) has collected brain dominance data over the past eight years which demonstrates that the successful chief executives in business and industry are typically whole-brained in their dominance patterns--they access the analytical, integrative. organizational, and interpersonal components of their mental processes in appropriate situations. Two brain dominance studies (Coulson and Strickland. 1983; Norris. 1984) have focused on educational administra- tors; both studies included school superintendents. neither has studied the administrative leadership in institutions of higher education. Coulson and Strickland (1983) compared the thinking style preferences of two related occupational groups-~school superintendents and corporate chief executive officers (CEOs). Several similarities were observed in these two groups: "both headed sizeable organizations; both established goals. influenced policies. and determined the direction taken by their organizations; both were called upon to solve 50 difficult problems. the resolution of which determined the growth or deterioration of their organizations (1983, p. 22)." By administering the Herrmann Brain Dominance Survey-— the instrument to be utilized in this study--superintendents demonstrated more preference for left—mode thinking. while CEOs by comparison utilized more right-mode thinking. As reasoners and analyzers. superintendents were more rational. cognitive. quantitative. controlled, structured and conserva- tive. CEOs—-innovators and experimenters--tended to be more emotional, expressive. personal. and creative than superin- tendents. In her doctoral dissertation (1984). Cynthia Norris studied educational administrators. including superintend- ents. principals. and supervisors-~top and middle management levels. The nomination process was based on the three administrative skills described by Katz (1974): human. conceptual and technical. Superintendents in this study, which also utilized the Herrmann Survey. were characterized by a brain dominance style which was analytical. In the nomination process. this group was ranked as highly technical and less adept in the processes of conceptualization. Principals in this study exhibited a better balance between the analytical (left-brain) and conceptual (right brain) modes of thought than the superintendents. The "combined qualities suggest that they have the potential for concept- ualization as well as the skills to insure that the imple- mentation of ideas takes place" (Norris. 1984. p. 228). 51 Coulson (May 1986) has stated that the brain dominance data which has been collected to date on school superinten- dents is almost without exception left dominant, with the greatest preference being that which processes organization. planning, and controlling. Superintendents indicated that their least preferred mode was the one dealing with emotions. interpersonal relationships. and expressive skills--the very strengths of the transformational. influencing leader. Summary Brain research of the past three decades has demonstrat- ed the immense capacity for human mental processing, the inter-connectedness and interdependence of the brain struc— tures. and the natural proclivity for specialized responses to appropriate situations. Recent management and leadership studies indicate that emphasis in management/administration training programs over the past few decades has been placed on the transactional, safe-keeping aspects of running organizations. Both the external and the internal environments of most human organi- zations today are experiencing rapid changes which require risk-taking, conceptualizing, and intergroup skills that will empower persons in these organizations to re-evaluate the nature of their work. and its responsiveness to a world that is entering a new century of human accomplishments. Recently there have been many management books flooding the shelves claiming the need to utilize more of the right brain processes. Many imply that right is better than left. r." 52 Brain dominance technology demonstrates that whole brain is best for persons who choose to manage change. ambiguity, complexity, and paradox in their organizations. It is no longer appropriate to think of management/leadership in "either/or". "yes. but" elements: ....the indispensable quality of executive leadership--the get—it-all-together function in complex systems--is breadth. But a person who is willing without embarrassment to be styled a generalist is constantly impressed with the importance of somebody getting to the bottom of specialized questions. To focus on the generalist role is emphatically not to say that speciali— zation and disciplinary expertness are passe'. A world of coordinators would be as much of a mess as a world of specialists. The need is to stir them together in the stew of social theory and action, which means that both kinds of people have to learn to live with each other in a symbiosis of mutual respect and mutual dependence. (Cleveland. 1985. p. xvii) This study was intended to examine in Michigan's present educational executive leadership the degree of preference for mental processes that enhance conceptual and intergroup skills, as well as enhance the abilities to visualize a course for future action/change. and to persuade organizational members to follow toward organizational goal achievement. r”! CHAPTER III THE METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY INTRODUCTION The Descriptive Survey Method was utilized in this study to delineate as precisely as possible the outstanding characteristics of mental processes that constitute "execu- tive thought" in chief educational administrators in the State of Michigan. Many research studies over the years have focused on executive behaviors; only recently. with the increased knowledge from brain/mind research. have studies been conducted which observed and attempted to describe mental processes which influence executive action (Torbert. 1983; Mintzberg and Waters, 1983; Pondy, 1983; Weick. 1983). In examining the brain dominance patterns of the present educational executive leadership, this study attempted to determine primarily if there were any significant differences between chief administrators representative of diverse educa- tional institutions in the State of Michigan. and secondarily between chief administrators and those who were top level administrators~-with focused responsibilities--and who, in all probability, are the most ready pool of experienced candidates for chief executive positions. The study also investigated the effects of such intervening variables as: number of years experience, institution size. and type of community location on the chief administrators. 53 54 The study incorporated the following procedures to obtain the sample and the data: 1. Identified the various types of educational institu- tions in the State of Michigan and potential population sizes. 2. Selected a representative sample from the five identified institutional types that would allow observation and description of the mental characteristics of the total chief administrator population. 3. Sent a letter of invitation to all potential parti- cipants with specific explanation of the parameters of the study and an enclosed consent card. 4. Consenting participants completed a personal survey of their own brain dominance patterns using the Herrmann Brain Dominance Instrupent. This chapter discusses the methods and procedures used to complete this study. The rest of the chapter is designed around three major sections: (1) Procedures Used for Select— ing the Population and Sample for Study; (2) The Herrmann Brain Dominanceglpstrppent; and (3) Statistical Design and Procedures of the Study. The variables considered in the study were brain dominance categories, administrative position, and institutional type. 55 PROQEQURE USEQ FOR SELECTING THE POPULATION AND SAMPLE Selecting the Population The focus of this study was Chief Educational Admini- strators in the State of Michigan. In selecting the study population. which was intended to reflect different executive administrative demands and environments. this researcher utilized "independence of units" and "representativeness" as two desirable characteristics of a population from which to generalize the findings (Long. Convey. Chwalek. 1985. p. 86). Four levels of educational institutions in the state were identified: (1) Four-year colleges and universities; (2) Two-year community colleges; (3) K—12 public schools; and (4) Educational service organizations (i.e. Intermediate School Districts and the State Department of Education which provide special education. technical and vocational education, information processing services, and professional and curriculum development opportunities). These four levels. or "independent units" allowed for stratified sampling (Leedy, 1985. p. 157). The numbers of chief administrators in each of these levels were uneven due to the varying numbers of institutions at each: 15 four-year college/university presidents; 29 two-year community college presidents; 530 public school superintendents; 57 ISD superintendents and one state superintendent of schools--a total chief executive population of 632. The table of random numbers technique could not be 56 used with consistency through all levels because of the small populations in higher education institutions. In addition, the cost of mailings/printing to survey the entire population was prohibitive for this researcher since no grant monies were sought to support the study. Yet representativeness was essential. A representative population of the public school superintendents was determined: (1) All superintendents of schools serving student populations of 5000+ were selected for the complexity of their structure and the variety of consituent groups. This group totalled 58. (2) The majority of districts in the state are average to small in size. To give another "level" which would represent these types of districts, and at the same time be identified through a statewide organizational structure, all districts outside the state aid financing formula which were not included in the 5000+ group were chosen. This group totalled 77. This breakdown of the public school superintendents increased the population stratification to five levels. The literature survey showed behavioral differences between chief executives and top level managers with technical or functional responsibilities. (Wortman, 1982; Schein. 1985). Since top level administrators are logical candidates for the chief positions. this researcher wished to study the differences in brain dominance between these two groups. Again. financial constraints limited the numbers in this study. Two groupings of top level administrators were 57 established: (1) those with responsibilities for academic affairs or curriculum and instruction; and (2) those responsible for business and financial affairs. The researcher selected representative groups from higher education and public school levels: Top level administrators from four-year and two-year higher education institutions. and those from public schools of 5000+ student populations, made up three study groups. The potential study populations in these three groups were: (1) 15 academic officers and 15 finance officers from four—year schools; (2) 27 academic officers and 23 finance officers from two-year schools; and (3) 55 curriculum assis— tant superintendents and 55 business assistant superinten- dents from 5000+ public schools. Of all the chief educational administrator positions (632) in the State of Michigan. only two percent are filled by women (two community college presidents and eight school superintendents). This researcher was interested in seeing what brain dominance patterns were represented by women executives, though no statistical studies could be made. The two women college presidents were already included; the eight superintendents were invited to participate in the study. The 1987 Edition of the Michigan Education Directory was utilized for identifying individuals, their titles of responsibility, and addresses. The reduced numbers of top level administrators compared with the numbers of chief administrators at each level was due either to shared 58 responsibilities in the organizational structure (therefore no top level individual could be identified), or the position was vacant at the time of population selection. The total study population of chief educational administrators was 245, and the total population for top level administrators was 190, providing a grand total study population of 435. Spppling Procggppg Random sampling of these stratified subpopulations was achieved by inviting all individuals within each group to participate in the study; those who participated and returned a correctly completed survey instrument constituted the randomness of the sampling-~all were included in the study (Leedy, 1985. p. 156-157). Surveying by mail has the advan- tage of allowing respondents as much time as they require to consider each question carefully before answering. At the same time. this is a limitation of the study because it transfers a great deal of control to the subject who may fill it out hastily and without reflection, or may consult friends or family members regarding their answers. There is no way for the researcher to detect or control these negative influences or their effects" (Williamson. 1982. p. 132). It is also possible that a particular pattern of brain dominance may have influenced the tendency to complete the survey. However. in order to study individual brain dominance patterns across a large population, this researcher believed the survey method of willing respondents was the most real- istic approach. 59 A letter of explanation and request for participation was sent to a potential study population of 435 individuals. Stamped and addressed consent cards. outlining the rights of the participant in accordance with the guidelines of the Michigan State University Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects. were enclosed. Upon the receipt of a consent card, a brief instruction sheet, a copy of the Herrmann Brain Dominance Survey Instrument (H801). and a self-addressed. stamped envelope were mailed. When a completed instrument was returned, it was scored and an individual Profile and Consolidated Score Sheet with accompanying interpretive materials were sent to the respondent in return for their participation. (See Appendix A for initial contact materials.) Positive responses were received from a total of 278 individuals. (See Table I) The small numbers of higher education participants would be a limitation on statistical tests of significant differences between populations. This response rate from the total group was quite positive in view of the personal nature of the study and the sensitive public image of the roles of chief and top level administrators. Since the response was completely voluntary, there was no attempt at a follow-up or second request. There were some responses which were incorrectly completed. Letters of explanation for correct completion and a xeroxed copy of the incorrect section were returned for a corrected response. 60 TABLE I RETURNS 0F N801 SURVEYS FOR INCLUSION IN SIUDY TOTAL 8801 H801 CORRECT INSTITUTION/POSITION SENT RETURNED 8 FOR STUDY I TOTAL STUDY WP 435 m 54 232 53 A-year University Presidents 15 1 ll 7 ll l-year Academic Officers 15 6 lo 5 33 l-year Financial Officers 15 8 53 7 41 2-year College Presidents 29 15 52 12 ll 2-year Academic Officers 2? 12 ll 11 ll 2-year Financial Officers 23 14 61 13 57 K-12 5000+ Superintendents 58 36 62 33 5? K-12 5000+ Curriculum Superintendents 55 34 62 25 45 K-12 5000+ Financial Superintendents 55 33 60 25 45 K-12 4999- Superintendents 11 63 82 ll 61 ISO Superintendents 58 43 ll 40 TD Nonen Superintendents 8 1 88 T 88 Herrmann Brain Dominpnce Inventory The Herrmann Brain Domipgpce Inventory (HBDI) is a paper—pencil, self-survey questionnaire containing 120 questions. The instrument was developed by Herrmann (1976- 1981) for use in identifying different brain dominance classifications. and cognitive and personality styles among management education workshop participants. The HBDI is a combined biographical/preference questionnaire that deals with such topics as college major and occupation. preferred work elements, best/worst subjects in school. and hobbies. 61 The instrument uses preference ratings for adjectives or phrases descriptive of individuals. and of work and leisure activities. Questions related to brain structure are included which record handedness, language center, motion sickness and energy level. A final section, "Twenty Questions" is intended to obtain further information on preferences for creative/intuitive approaches vs. discip- lined. safekeeping approaches to problem solving. Administration of the instrument is easy and convenient. taking 20-30 minutes to complete. The instruments have been used in the following ways: 1) To provide trainers with information about the learning styles and preferences of workshop parti- cipants; 2) To provide individual reports to the participants describing their personal styles and preferences; 3) To help participants appreciate and value their own profile and those of others who may be different; 4) To demonstrate significant similarities and differences in communication; 5) To provide the basis for assembling a composite "whole-brain" group for educational and problem- solving activities. The instrument utilizes a quantitative scoring procedure with the twelve sections given relative weightings of importance. The Consolidated Scoresheet translates the data into a numerical interpretation of the individual sections as they relate to four quadrants representing the structure and specialized functions of the brain. The Profile sheet 62 provides an immediate. visual display of an individual's brain dominance. demonstrating the location and intensity of preferred modes of thinking. THEORETICAL MODEL For more than two decades the emphasis in discussion about brain hempisphere specialization has typically focused on the dominance of right and left hemispheres in indivi— duals. The Fourfold Model of Multiple Brain Dominance (Bunderson. Olsen. and Herrmann, 1982. p. 3) posits the existence of not just two dominance classifications. but rather four distinct and measurable dominance categories: each hemisphere has two distinct anatomical sections-- cerebral and limbic--which process information in different ways. The Fourfold Model utilizes descriptive adjectives pertaining to the four categories generally consistent with the work of a variety of brain researchers. The term brain dominance is used to denote two things. First, it denotes a preference for one of the four categories of brain processing over another. Second, it denotes an ascendence of one type of process over another in competing for what might be called attentional resources. The Fourfold Model states that even as individuals have a characteristic comfort and preference for one hand over the other, one eye over the other, etc. they have a charateristic comfort, preference, and dominance in dealing with the types of information processing (53 activities characterized by the four quadrants as described in Figure 3. LEFT CEREBRAL OUADRANT RIGHT CEREBRAL QUADRANT Analytical Creative Mathematical Synthesizer Logical Artistic Technical Holistic Problem Solver Conceptualizer attraction \ng attraction 1 x 1 LEFT LINBIC QUADRANT RIGHT LINBIC QUADRANT Reliable Interpersonal Planful Emotional Controlled Sympathetic Safekeeping Musical Administering Spiritual FIGURE 3 Fourfold Model of Brain Dominance The theory further asserts that there is a negative correlation in the population between right and left. That is. if a person is right brain dominant it is less likely that this person will simultaneously have a strong left brain preference. This repulsion is strongest between the diagonal elements. That is. the model asserts a strong repulsion between cerebral right and limbic left. and between cerebral left and limbic right. It asserts a weaker repulsion between the cerebral left and the cerebral right, or between limbic 64 left and limbic right. The model also asserts that there is an attraction between cerebral left and limbic left and between cerebral right and limbic right. This implies an overall left versus right brain dominance. Despite the assertions above, the theory does not posit an either/or situation. It asserts that individuals can have multiple dominance; that is. a preference or comfort in dealing with processes characteristic of two or more of the four types of brain processing. Restated: (1) The same-side combinations are much more likely than dual-side combinations. (2) Cerebral pairs or limbic pairs are more likely than cross-cerebral/limbic pairs. The repulsion and attraction concepts represented in this model were demonstra— ted in a correlation study by Bunderson and Olsen in 1981, summarized in Figure 4. The power of the Fourfold Model of Brain Dominance appears to be related to the pervasiveness and sweep of the all: :vcr T “ a” T 1 1 Hi— @ a." Figure 4: Repulsion/Attraction Concepts of lultiple Brain Dominance “Correlations Among the Four Categories of Dominance' SOURCE: Bunderson. C. V., J. 8. Olsen, and W. E. Herrmann, 'A Fourfold Model of Multiple Brain Dominance and its Validation through Correlation Research.‘ unpublished paper. 1882. 65 left and right hemisphere constructs across several dimen— sions of individual differences: cognitive ability. personality, learning styles and strategies. and performance tests. VALIDITY Constrpctigglidity Stugies An extensive construct validity study was undertaken to "identify a practically useful and theoretically coherent set of learning profile measures which could be used in manage- ment and instructional settings" (Bunderson, 1982. p. 23). In the first phase of the study (1980) a learning profile battery which consisted of fifteen instruments. which in some way measured patterns of hemisphere dominance, were selected for an initial profile battery administered to 145 persons. college students and managers. The scores were factor analyzed to yield eight interpretable factors: Left versus Right Hemisphere Dominance General Fluid and Visual Intelligence on Timed Tests Use of Multiple Learning Strategies Thinking versus Feeling Verbal Quantitative Thinking Style Holistic Non-Verbal Thinking Style Visual vs. Verbal Learning Preference Use of Learning Expansion Strategies NH mqmowboe The eight factors accounted for 60 percent of the total variance in the correlation matrix of profile scores. This study demonstrated the pervasiveness of the left and right 66 dominance constructs across several domains of individual differences. In the second phase of this validation process (1981), the HBDI was administered to 439 employed adults from a variety of professions and occupations. The factor analysis of these scores yielded seven factors: 1. Controlled. Organized (LL) versus Creative Synthesizer (CR) Introversion versus Extroversion Analytical. Logical (CL) versus Interpersonal, Emotional (LR) Visual Learning Preference Visual Closure Verbal Learning Preferences Analytic. Mathematical Style (JON 403mb Actually. two factor analyses were employed with the second study group. The first study provided strong construct validation information about the four quadrant scores of the Fourfold Model--reliable, analytical. synthesizer. and interpersonal. The second study provided construct valida- tion information for the left and right dominance scores. The HBDI scores were then cross-validated with the scores from the learning profile battery as predicted. Though most of the instruments in the learning battery presumed an either/or dominance score. the Fourfold Model assumes that some individuals will be double. triple dominant, or even "whole brained." The factor analytic data demonstrated the multiple brain dominance. even though the pattern is exceptional. The relationships of the four brain 67 dominance scores across the other categories of mental ability of the other instruments ranged from modest to strong, but in predicted directions with but few exceptions. A third validation study is presently in process in the form of a PHD dissertation based on the scores of 8000 instruments under the supervision of Dr. Victor Bunderson. Vice President of Research Management, Educational Testing Service (Herrmann. 1986). Criterion-Referenced Stpgy There has been increasing interest in career choices which reflect the dominant use of one hemisphere. One such study conducted an experiment in which the EEG waveforms of persons in two very different career fields were compared with the predictions of brain dominance in the HBDI. This study was conducted jointly by the Departments of Biomedical Engineering and Systems Analysis at the University of Texas at Arlington (Schkade, 1981. p. 330). The basis of the analysis consisted of computing the ratio of the power of the EEG waveform of the left hemisphere to that of the right hemisphere for each subject. and computing the mean ratio for all subjects in each of the two career groups. The experimental results indicate that accountants and artists have very different cognitive styles that are manifested physiologically. In terms of the ratio of the power of the hemispheres. a value of 1.0 would indicate no dominance (equal uses of each hemisphere), a ratio of less than one indicates dominant use of the left hemisphere, while 68 a ratio greater than one indicates dominant use of the right hemisphere. In this study of 12 accounting students and 12 studio art students, the mean power ratio for accounting students was 0.77 while the corresponding ratio for art students was 1.2. a statistically significant result that is expected to result randomly with a probability less than 0.001. The experimenters then examined the validity of the predictions of the HBDI in the hopes of finding a less time-consuming and expensive method for determining hemisphere dominance than the EEG. The validity of the HBDI was supported precisely by the findings of the EEG (Schkade, p. 331). RELIABILITY A survey instrument is uniquely capable of generating a broad range of data about the characteristics of a "target" population. Weick (1983) suggests that executive thinking is inseparably woven into and occurs simultaneously with action: "thinking qualifies activity. thinking provokes activity, and thinking intensifies activity" (p. 222). Massarick (1983) asserts that managers do not function in terms of fixed categories or labels--rather there is a complex intertwining of rationality and intuition, which "merges into a PATTERNED WHOLE as the executive goes about his or her business (p. 250). In order to study executive mental processes. only a limited range of individual differ- ences is sufficiently public for a researcher to study them 69 directly. Therefore, a survey instrument provides the vehicle for individual introspectivenss and self-awareness to be revealed for the purposes of observation and examination. Williamson, et.al. (1982) point out some of the problems in subjective self-reports: ...the motives behind what people report (and what they fail to report) about themselves are a great deal more complex than any pure desire to provide the researcher with an accurate account. The motives of avoiding painful or embarrassing self-revelation and of highlighting personal qualities that may lead to respect or prestige make it difficult to assume that survey respondents' reports about either their actions or their attitudes are, in all cases. accurate (p. 157). The HBDI has proved to be a survey instrument that is flexible and adaptable in terms of a wide variety of subjects and occupations. and produces replication of brain dominance patterns as they relate to an individual's mental preferences and the occupation they have chosen (Herrmann, 1986. p. 20). To date well over 150.000 HBDI instruments have been processed in training sessions worldwide. These completed instruments have been collected in a data bank at the Brain Dominance Institute for the purpose of creating a data base. or scientific sample, from which to generate norms for occupations, and to provide a basis for continuing brain dominance research. Revised educational and occupational weightings which are used in the scoring of the HBDI have been completed in 1986 for 179 educational and 784 occupa- tional categories. These weightings are based on a sample of 7O nearly 10,000 individuals. Weighting decisions were deter- mined by correlating actual total scaled scores against the existing HBDI educational and occupational weightings combined with accumulated knowledge. and the statistical research that has been gathered from 1982 to 1986. From this same data bank 31 profile patterns ranging from single to whole brain dominance delineate the major characteristics of each profile and the typical occupations represented. Brain dominance patterns of individuals and occupational groups have been sufficiently replicated to demonstrate reliability. STRUCTURE AND SCORING "The content, wording, sequence, and structure of the questions as well as the overall layout of the questionnaire are crucial to its success" (Williamson, 1982, p. 157). The HBDI is in its sixteenth version since it was originated from opinion research at General Electric in 1976. Herrmann postulated that there is a continuum across the mental spectrum from left to right. and each person occupies a position on that contiuum. The HBDI is intended to clarify each individual's unique placement on that spectrum. Brain dominance is an organizing principle that allows individuals to understand behavior; the Herrmann model was developed from brain research findings rather than a psychological base, therefore the questions are organized so as to reflect both brain structure and function. Questions on brain structure include 1) the location of the language 71 center of the brain which is indicated by handedness and the handwriting position in the dominant hand: 2) motion sickness studies (Mirabile and Glueck, 1979) indicate that right-brain dominant persons who are more inner. self-contained tend be more affected by motion than left-brain dominant individuals who are more involved with controlling the external environ- ment; 3) energy level is often associated with time of day and hemisphere dominance--day people tend to be left brained and night people, right brained. The survey form begins with questions of a biographical nature that are immediately accessible and non-threatening: Educational Focus, Occupational position and description of the nature of work, Handedness/writing position. and Best/Worst subjects in elementary and secondary schooling. The next two sections. Work Elements and Key Descriptors, are focused on the descriptive adjectives or behaviors which are personal in nature and reflect a dominance "tilt" toward each of the four quadrants of the Fourfold Model of Brain Domin- ance, and as correlated in the factor analysis studies of 1981 (Bunderson, Olsen and Herrmann). These two sections require the respondent to weigh mental and behavioral preferences as they think about themselves, and code them in a manner that demonstrates dominance. A section on Hobbies follows, giving relief from areas where an individual might feel the potential for being ”judged". Hobbies consistently demonstrate the duality individuals express in their discretionary time when there 72 are no economic constraints; the answers in this section often indicate individual preferences most strongly and are utilized as supportive data to the work elements and key descriptors. The brain structure elements of energy level and motion sickness precede a dominance function section, Adjective Pairs, which asks for a forced-choice response to 24 adjective pairs. The results of this section also provide further confirmation of the four quadrant scores of the earlier preference sections. The next section of the questionnaire is focused on introversion and extroversion. Correlation studies with the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (Bunderson. 1981) indicate that left-brain dominance correlates with introversion and right-brain dominance. extroversion. The structure of the question allows the respondent to mark his/her perceived position on a scale ranging from left/introversion to right/extroversion. The final section of the HBDI is entitled "20 Questions". This was the last segment to be included in the final form of the survey in 1980. The questions represent right or left value—laden issues, intended to obtain further information on preferences for creative/intuitive/risk-taking approaches versus ordered/disciplined/safe-keeping approaches to problem solving. The scoring of the HBDI is accomplished by counting up the mathematical values of each item in each section according to a dominance tilt toward each of four quadrants. The scores for all sections are then summed to provide a 73 dominance score for left and right hemispheres and cerebral and limbic levels. The raw scores for each of the four quadrants--left cerebral. left limbic, right limbic, and right cerebral--are multiplied 1.5 to obtain scaled scores which are then plotted out on a circular interval scale, the Herrmann Brain Dominance Profile. The Profile is intended as a visual, metaphorical model of brain physiology. utilized most often in workshop settings to facilitate both individual and group understanding of the significance of individual brain function and information processing preferences. The model is divided vertically into the specialized hemispheres--right and left. In the brain's structure, these two hemispheres are connected by the corpus callosum--200 million+ nerve fibers which provide rapid, oftentimes instantaneous communication between the two different perceptual and processing brains. Brain dominance theory suggests that a person could exhibit and use the characteristics and strategies of both left and right hemispheres situationally. moving back and forth with ease. In addition, the model is divided horizontally into the cerebral (top) and limbic (bottom) areas of the brain. The resulting four quadrants provide a clarifying framework for an individualized profile. While the cerebral hemispheres are thought of as the more cognitive. intellectual parts of the process, the limbic system is becoming better understood as the more organized and emotional part of the brain, 74 transforming information as input into memory. The Herrmann Brain Dominance Profile shows visually the thinking prefer- ences as measured by the Herrmann Participant Survey Form. Relative preference is determined by a scale running from O to 100 and beyond, beginning at the center of the circle and extending outward toward the edge in each of the four quadrants. >> Thinking modes that individuals tend to avoid would fall within the range of 0 — 33. This Ayplp category is represented by "3" in a profile code. >> Modes frequently used fall between 34 - 66. The USE category is represented by "2". >> Modes that they PREFER to use range from 67 - 100 and beyond, represented by "1". A quadrant that shows a "1" category is said to be dominant. For interpretive purposes (See Figure 5), the Profile code below of 3211 would be read around the circle, counter- clockwise on a continuous scale ranging from O to 100+. The above example indicates the left cerebral is (28) "avoid;" the left limbic. (50) "use;" right limbic, (90) "prefer;" and right cerebral, (120) "prefer." This Profile reflects a double dominance--two quadrants in the "prefer" category. In the population that has taken the HBDI, 308 are single dominant; 40%. double; 25%. triple; and 5% are dominant in all four quadrants, or "whole brained" (Herrmann. 1985). The occupational group which has most consistently demonstrated 75 whole-brain dominance are chief executive officers in business and industry (Herrmann, 1985). HERRMANN BRAIN DOMINANCE PROFILE ceasing. gone UPPER LEFT / , , 1 '- - a \ UPPER RIGHT Le cal site... A , ’ ’ \ \ E’) 33$"; ii:ii'ii.":.~.. / ’PREFEH \ Mpm ’ I. ' a ‘1 LEFT I I an "0' ' l mam MODE ‘ 1 MODE l 1‘ ’b I \ ,’ \ ‘3. I \ l \ I Controlled \ / laterpmeaal infirm. \ / 8.0mm.“ 3.2118313? ‘ \ \ I , ’ 'w LOWERLEFI' ‘--_._._.—” LOWERRIGHT UMBIC MODE VISIBLE PROFILE CODE A O 1!". Ned Herrmann ;— Figure 5: Graphing of HBDI Scores to Visually Demonstrate Dominance Patterns The total picture of scores--each section of the questionnaire reflecting the placement of answers in respect to the left-right continuum--is recorded on the Consolidated Scoresheet. The relative weightings of each section are demonstrated in Figure 6. This score sheet and the Profile were sent to each respondent, along with interpretive materials (See Appendix B for the follow-up letter). 76 HERRMANN BRAIN DOMINANCE CONSOLIDATED SCORE SHEET Olfli tw Ned Memnenn I- I :. ' r4 ‘ Lell Hemisphere Domhence KEY g ' E DESCRIPTORS Logan WM (NM) MUM .i 5 Factual _ H 25 ‘ - ‘ 9 333%??? 1:1 grail a? “.1223: 3 :3..- »s 3:33 5 i 15 e_£snwon§T SUBJECTS if: WWW-09 two-00 W {mm-w EWIW wen-e- aep 8 EDUCATIONAL won J u E L, . L 6 OCCUPATION } L} c L, 9 8 HOBBIES } gt <3 . 5e L 5 . LANGUAGE CENTER m C3 ml: mg 4 HANOEONEss :02 “on “one hangar!» Lou neg-o mum LelII‘Some non heap tell 4 MOTION SICKNESS g .3 '1' .1 y 4 ENERGY LEVEL of! . to... “T" 2 ADJECTNE PAIRS D L'" Stowe! LeIi Lo... MD M E: 15 TOTAL SCALE scones Cl :1 D [:1 leovsnr/Exmovem "[M' 1 1 I I I “M ——4— I I l 100 Figure 6: Relative Neightings of HBDI for Scoring The scores that were analyzed in this study included the Profile Code, hemispheres and the cerebral and limbic levels. the Dominance scores for right and left and the four scaled scores for the quadrants derived from the Fourfold Model. In addition. Key Descriptors. a frequency distributi on was done of the 77 APPROPRIATENESS OP INSTRUMENT As demonstrated in the construct validity studies, other instruments measuring personality, learning and cognitive styles. learning strategies, and performance ability measured right and left hemisphere dominance. but in a bipolar, either/or franework. The literature review for this study indicates that organizational executives demonstrate an integration of hemispheric processing. The HBDI was created initially for use in management training settings, and has more recently provided data which validates brain dominance characteristics for numerous occupations. The simplicity of instructions also makes the instrument appropriate for survey by mail. STATISTICAL DESIGN AND PROCEDURE FOR STUDY The data in this study are considered as noninal, ordinal, and interval in nature. The nominal data include differential categories specifying administrator levels (higher education, public school, service) type/size of educational institutions,and key descriptors: the ordinal data include the greater/lesser characteristics--or degrees of difference-—of the profile codes, and the years of experience; the interval data include the raw scores for left/right hemisphere doninance. cerebral/limbic dominance, and the scaled scores for the two cerebral and two limbic quadrants. Parametric statistics were employed for the analysis of the data. 78 The macro-design of this study includes the examination of central tendencies, the variability of scores. and analy— sis of variance (MANOVA). General research hypotheses. derived from a review of prior studies and theoretical literature were developed. The hypotheses were explored by attempting to answer a set of related questions. The follow— ing questions. followed by the micro-designs. composed the content of the investigation of data: Question 1. Are there significant differences among the grain dominance_pgtterns ofgeggcational chiefgggginistrators itgigentifiegginstitutlonal levels? Frequency distributions and percentages of all brain dominance patterns reflected in the profile codes were analyzed to determine if differences existed among chief administrators responsible for different levels of educa- tional institutions. Dominance patterns were graphed using group averages to visually demonstrate the degree of differences. Frequency distributions and percentages of multi- and single dominance patterns were also analyzed. Frequency distributions and percentages of attraction/ repulsion concepts of multiple brain dominance were charted. Simple frequency distributions of key descriptors from the five chief adlinistrator groups were examined and compared to previous research studies. Variability of the raw scores for left/right dominance, cerebral/limbic dominance. and the scaled scores for left cerebral, left limbic, right limbic and right cerebral 79 quadrants were analyzed for the measures of dispersion through the use of range and standard deviation. Because this study examined five chief administrator groups of varying sample size. the NANOVAs were used to test the research hypotheses. Previous studies demonstrated that school superintendents--one level of chief administrators in this study--were more left—brained and transactional in dominance (Coulson, 1983: Norris. 1984). Review of the literature suggested that the higher the management level in business/ industrial organizations, the lore right brained/transform- ational skills are utilized (Katz. 1974; Mintzberg, 1976; Wortman, 1982; Herrmann, 1985; Schein, 1985; Bennis and Nanus, 1985) This question investigated the brain dominance patterns of five levels of chief educational administrators to determine any patterns of consistency among groups. A sixth level of chief administrators (women superin- tendents) was studied briefly without the statistical depth because of their small number in the larger population. Question Q. Are there significantAgifferences in the_ brain dominancegpgtterns among chief administrators with academic or finggglgl responsibilities? The same statistical methods for central tendency,‘ variability. and variance, as above, were utilized to answer this reasearch question. The levels studied were organized according to three groups-~1) chiefs and top level adminis~ trators in 2) academics and 3) finance--and three institu- 80 tional levels--1) four-year higher education, 2) two—year higher education, and 3) K-12 public schools of 5000+ population. Group averages of the different groups were graphed for the three different institutional levels in order to provide a visual demonstration of dominance differences. Question 3. Are tagre any significant differences in brain dominanceaaatteraaaia,terag of the followiag ga31ables: 1) nuaber of years of chief eaaaative experience, 2) siae of institation, aag 3) type of coaapnity 1a which located (urban, saall city, saburban, or rurail? Three major areas of focus comprised this question. First, it was the researcher's intent to investigate the effects of system size and the number of years of experience as a chief administrator on brain dominance patterns as indicated from the Scaled Scores of the four quadrants. Second, a third variable, community type, was examined to note any differences arising from geographic/social influ— ences. School system size and number of years of experience were determined by a supplemental question stamped on the top margin of the HBDI. Community type was determined through the examination of a State of Michigan map. Statistical procedures for this question consisted of: 1) Discrete variable of Community Type: Tabulating the frequencies and percentages of the type of communities which were represented in each of the study groups; 2) Continuous 8] variable of Years of Experience: Tabulating the frequencies and percentages by five-year increments for each of the study groups; and 3) Continuous variable of System Size: Tabulating the frequencies, percentages and range of institution sizes represented in each study group. The MANOVA statistical test included these three variables. SUMMARY This study explored the brain dominance patterns of chief and top level administrators throughout the State of Michigan and investigated differences found between six levels of chief administrative groups, and three levels of top level academics and finance administrators. Chapter IV presents these research findings. CHAPTER IV PRESENTATION AND DATA ANALYSIS INTRODUCTION This study investigated the brain dominance patterns of chief educational administrators to determine what personal and work elements are characteristic of the present profess- ional educational leadership in the State of Michigan. The primary focus of this study was on Chief administrators-—the executives of the educational institutions in the state. A secondary focus was given to groups of top level administra- tors in academic affairs and finance who represent the most ready pool of future educational executives. Volunteer subjects from the total population of higher education presi- dents. intermediate school district superintendents, and selected groups from the total population of K-12 school superintendents participated; volunteer subjects from the top levels of administration in the total higher education popu- lation and from the K-12 level in school districts of 5000+ student population also participated. Subjects in the study completed the Haggaann Brain Dominance Instruaant, a paper-pencil, self-survey instrument developed to identify and measure the nature and degree of an individual's brain dominance characteristics. The HBDI provided several measurements including an individual domi- nance profile code, right/left and cerebral/limbic dominance raw scores, key descriptors, and scaled scores for the 82 83 dominance "degree" in each of four quadrants. Various statistical procedures were used to investigate and to determine if there were significant differences among the dominance patterns of these individuals and between the different levels. The remainder of this chapter presents those data in relation to the research hypotheses. Data are reported for the following groups; 4-year higher education presidents (N=7), 2-year higher education presidents (N=12), K-12 5000+ school superintendents (N=33). K-12 Out-of-Formula superintendents (N=47), service organi- zation (ISO and state department of education) superinten- dents (N=40). 4-year higher education academics officers (N=5), z-year higher education academics officers (N=11), K-IZ 5000+ curriculum superintendents (N=25). 4-year higher education finance officers (N=7), Z-year higher education finance officers (N=13), and K-12 5000+ finance superin— tendents (N=25). There are 8 women school superintendents in the state; they were invited to participate. Data are reported on this group of women superintendents (N=7), and comparisons are noted with previous women executive studies. The researcher recognized the limitations of the small (7-13) populations and the application of statistical procedures. In a few analyses, the total group (Chiefs N=139. Academics N=41. Finance N=45) is used and data reported for that number of respondents. 84 Research Qaestionsgaag Hypotheses The major question guiding this study was to discover what patterns of brain dominance were present in the chief educational administrators in the State of Michigan. A secondary question required the examination of patterns of top level administrators who represent the most current pool of candidates for chief executive positions in educational organizations. Three specific research questions and their null hypo— theses were utilized for testing the study population for any significant differences: Question 1. Are there significant differences in the brain dominance patterns of educational chief administrators at identified institutional levels: 1) Presidents of four- year higher education institutions; 2) Presidents of two-year higher education institutions; 3) Superintendents of x—12 school districts of 5000+ student populations; 4) Super- intendents of K-12 school districts which represent a range of student populations from 4999 to 200; 5) Superintendents of intermediate school districts and the Superintendent of Public Instruction. Null hypothesis tested: There are no significant differences in the brain dominance patterns of chief administrators at identified institutional levels. Question 2. Are there significant differences in the brain dominance patterns among chief administrators versus top level administrators with focused responsibilities: 1) 85 Presidents of higher education institutions versus top administrators responsible for faculty and academic affairs; 2) Presidents of higher education institutions versus top administrators responsible for finance and business affairs; 3) Superintendents of school districts versus top admini- strators responsible for curriculum/instruction; 4) Super- intendents of school districts versus top administrators responsible for finance and business. Null hypothesis tested: There are no significant differences in the brain dominance patterns among chief administrators versus top level administrators with focused responsibi- lities. Question 3. Are there any significant differences in brain dominance patterns of chief administrators in relationship to the following variables: 1) number of years of chief execu— tive experience, 2) size of institution, and 3) type of community in which located (urban. suburban. small city, or rural)? Null hypothesis tested: There are no significant differences in brain dominance patterns of chief administrators in rela- tionship to the variables of years of experience. size of institution, or type of community. PEESENTATION OF TEE DATA The data will be organized in three different categories most commonly examined in the interpretation of the HBDI: Dominance Profile Codes; Right/Left and Cerebral/lebic Dominance Raw Scores; and Scaled Scores for the Four 86 Quadrants of Brain Dominance. When all of the data have been presented, a section will follow which summarizes the find- ings in light of each hypothesis. noting the evidence for its support or non—support. Dominance Profile gagaa The profile codes are a "shorthand" method for under— standing an individual's mental preferences. The four-digit code indicates a generic category into which each profile falls. By way of comparison, human blood can be typed. yet there are further characteristics that make an individual's blood unique. There are 81 possible generic classes of brain dominance profiles, with 17 occurring most frequently. All 17 occurred in this study population; 9 other dominance codes were present which included 28 participants (12 percent of the total study population). There is a four-digit code assigned to each generic category; each digit represents either a primary dominance (1), a secondary (2), or a terti- ary preference (3) for each of the four quadrants of the brain dominance model. This numerical representation is based on the continuous scaled scores of each of the four quadrants: >> Thinking modes that individuals tend to avoid would fall within the range of 0-33. This AVOID category is repre— sented by "3" in the Profile Code. >> Modes frequently used fall between 34-66. The USE category is represented by "2". 87 >> Modes that individuals PREFER to use range from 67- 100 and beyond, represented by "1". A quadrant that shows a "1" category is said to be dominant. The code starts in the cerebral left quadrant and pro ceeds counter-clockwise (Refer to page 74). Each code falls on a continuum beginning with 1333 through 1212 in the Left Cerebral quadrant, around and through the Left and Right Limbic quadrants, ending in the Right Cerebral quadrant with 2121 through 3331 (See Figure 7). Table II presents the frequency distributions by domi- nance profile code for all subjects in the study. As shown in the table. the most prevalent brain dominance patterns for the total group of chief administrators, including the women, (N=146) were: 1. 1122 with frequency of 33 (representing 23 percent N of the group). 2. 1121 with a frequency of 25 (representing 17 percent of the group). 3. 2111 with frequency of 16 (representing 11 percent a: of the group). 4. 1221 with a frequency of 15 (representing 10 percent of the group). 5. 2121 with a frequency of 11 (representing seven percent of the group). The most prevalent patterns for the top level academics administrators (N=41) were: 88 MOST lEFT ®®®@ Illv Iv 2323 3333222 1111 1111111 1111 2323223 2233 2233233 ‘IIII llv 111 11 322 32 232 11 111 32 33332 33221 32 1 33222 32322 11 1 32322 11111 11 1 11111 11111 11 1 Illv lllv 11 11 11 1111 23 111 232 223 111 l 11111 11111 22323 12233 3323322 3223232 1111111 2223233 Ilv 11111 22323 22233 23333 3322 1111 1111 3232 It ®@@® MOST RIGHI FIGURE 7 Profile Code Order for Continuum of the Herrmann Brain Dominance Instrument (Circular symbols are a visual representation of ) dominance in one or more quadrants. 89 1. 1121 with a frequency of seven (representing 17 percent of the group). 2. 1122 and 2211 each with a frequency of five (each representing 12 percent of the group). 3. 2112 with a frequency of four (representing 10 percent of the group). 4. 2111 with a frequency of three (representing seven percent of the group). TABLE II FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF CHIEF/ACADEMIC/FINANCE ADNINISTRATDRS IN MICHIGAN, 1981 CHIEF ADNINISTRATORS ACADEMIC ADHINISIRATDRS FINANCE ADMINISTRATOR DONINANCE Cum. Cum. Cum. Cum. Cum. Cum. amt f t f t f t f t f t f 4 1111 5 3 5 3 1 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 1112 8 5 13 8 2 5 3 1 3 1 3 1 1113 1 1 14 9 0 0 3 1 0 0 3 1 1121 25 11 39 26 1 11 10 24 6 13 9 20 1122 33 23 12 49 5 12 15 36 14 31 23 51 1123 4 3 16 52 1 2 16 38 2 4 25 55 1131 2 1 18 53 1 2 11 40 4 9 29 64 1132 3 2 81 55 1 2 18 42 4 9 33 13 1133 0 0 81 55 0 0 18 42 2 4 35 11 1211 3 2 84 51 2 5 20 41 0 0 35 11 1212 0 0 84 51 1 2 21 49 8 0 35 11 1221 15 10 99 61 1 2 22 51 3 1 38 84 1222 1 1 100 68 0 0 22 51 1 2 39 86 1231 1 1 101 69 0 0 22 51 1 2 40 88 2111 16 11 111 80 3 1 25 58 2 4 42 92 2112 3 2 120 82 4 10 29 68 1 2 43 94 2121 11 1 131 89 2 5 31 13 1 2 44 96 2131 1 1 132 90 0 0 31 13 0 0 44 96 2211 6 4 138 94 5 12 36 85 1 2 45 98 2221 2 1 140 95 1 2 31 81 0 0 45 98 2321 1 1 141 96 2 5 39 92 0 0 45 98 3111 2 1 143 91 2 5 39 92 0 0 45 98 3121 1 1 144 98 0 0 39 92 0 0 45 98 3211 2 1 146 99 2 5 41 91 0 0 45 98 tt FINAL PERCENTAGES REFLECI Rouuoxue 90 The lost prevalent patterns for the top level finance administrators (N=45) were: 1. 1122 with a frequency of 14 (representing 31 percent of the group). 2. 1121 with a frequency of six (representing 13 percent of the group). 3. 1131 and 1132 each with a frequency of four (each representing nine percent of the group). 4. 1221 with a frequency of three (representing seven percent of the group). Table III presents the most frequent dominance profile codes by each administrative group. As shown, Chief and Finance administrators have 1122 as their lost prevalent code; Academic adainistrators' most prevalent code is 1121. Of the top three occurring groups of the total study group, all but three dominance patterns are IABLE III FREQUENCIES AND PERCENTAGES 0F N051 PREVALENT DONINANCE PAITERNS AMONG CNIEF/ACADENICS/FINANCE ADNINISIRATDRS (N=232) IN MICHIGAN, 1987 PRINARY SECONDARY TERTIARY GROUP CODE N= 3 CODE N= R CODE N= 3 CHIEF ADNINISIRAIORS 1122 33 23 1121 25 17 2111 16 11 ACADEIIC ADIINISIRAIDRS 1121 7 11 1122 5 12 2112 A 1D 2211 5 12 FINANCE ADNINISTRATDRS 1122 1A 31 1121 5 13 1112 3 7 91 characterized by left-hemisphere dominance on the profile code continuum: Academic administrators have 2211 occurring as the second most frequent code (representing 12 percent of their level). Chief administrators have 2111 occurring as the third most frequent code (representing 11 percent of their level), and Finance administrators have 1221 occurring as the third most frequent code (representing seven percent of their level). The 1221 code can tilt either to the left or to the right depending on the scaled scores of the four quadrants. Later examination indicates that the finance officers in this study, demonstra- ting this 1221 code tilt to the left. Another approach to analyzing the Profile Codes is to examine the occurrences of multi-dominance. As has already been noted, a "1" represents a dominant quadrant. The power of the Herrmann Brain Dominance model is that persons are not limited to an either/or process of mental competencies. but rather have the natural potential for development and access to all four quadrants. Individuals range from a single dominant quadrant to "whole brain"--exhibiting a preference for and a willing access to all four quadrants. Table IV presents the frequencies of single. double. triple, and whole-brain dominance patterns for the entire study population. displayed according to the twelve adminis- trator levels. In the general population that has 92 IDLE IV FREWENCY DISIRIWIIUS 0E MIIPLE AID SIRE MIME PAIIEMS IOIAL SIDDY W F232 m» ME 1 IRIPLE MIME p; G MLE IWE SINGLE GENERAL N801 PDPULAIIN (.3 150.000) 25 DIIEF AMINISIRAIE (I'M!) c-YEAR MEIER £0 PRESIGEIIS Percmt of Study Group (1) Z-YEAR NICIER ED PRESIDENIS ' Percent of Study Group (12) A-IZ 50009 SUPERINIENDENIS Percent of Study Group (33) um: 0.f. SGPERIIIENODIIS Percent of Study Group (‘1) ISO SUPERIIIENOEIIS Percent pt Study Group (10) m SUPERIIIEIDEIIS Percent of Study Group (1) 12 30 35 43 21 25 E1 25 51 E3 51 10 IOIALS Subtote le : Incidence of Doeinence MIC MINISIIAIM (N1) t-YEAR MEIER summon Percent of Study Group (5) 2-YEAR NIOIER EWCAIIN Percent of Study Group (H) [-12 50004 PUBLIC socoou Percent 01 Study Group (25) 51 21 30 20 5‘ El Subtote Ie: Incidence of Goeime A1 F A" IISIRAI N t-YEAR mam taxman Percent of Study Group (1) Z-VEAR meta mum Percent of Study Group (13) um 50009 MUG sum Percem of Study Group (25) Subtote1e: lncidmce of Guinence 51 12 2! 02 50 G5 (OVAL STUDY WP It?” Percent of lotel Group 132 51 232 93 completed the HBDI--approximately 150,000 persons--30 percent are single dominant; 40 percent. double; 25 percent. triple; and five percent are whole-brained. In this total study population grouped by levels of administrators. single dominance occurred four times in the Chief group (three percent of this group): once in the Academic group (two percent); and once in the Finance group (two percent). Double dominance occurred 80 times in the Chief group (55 percent); 23 times in the Academic (56 percent); and 29 times in the Finance group (64 percent). Triple dominance occurred 57 times in the Chief group (39 percent); 16 times in the Academic group (39 percent); and 15 times in the Finance group (33 percent). There were five occurrences of the Whole-brain code in the Chief group (three percent) and one in the Academic group (two percent); there were no occurrences of this code in the Finance group. The total group of educational administrators differ from the general HBDI study population with marked increases in the incidence of double and triple dominance: Single: 30 percent in the HBDI population versus three percent in this study; Double: 40 percent in the HBDI versus 57 percent in this study; Triple: 25 percent in the HBDI versus 38 percent in this study; and Whole-Brain: five percent in the HBDI versus three percent in this study. Another concept arising from the multiple dominance representation of the Profile Code is the direction of interaction between quadrants. Herrmann has labeled these CEREBRAL LEFT MODE Connoneo CWNIIIVC Planner . thenueI-on mslulwt LOWER LEFT CEREBRAL LEFT LognceI Analyze! Mememeucel TOCMICII Problem Sorter arr-Izz— Controlled Weave Phone: ngemeuon WWOIIW LOWER LEFT n—amz-um—gmz FIGURE 8: 0 LEFT MODE <7 94 lNTER-HEMISPHERIC INTER- CEREBRAL . RIGHT C'OIIM Sannee-zer Amen: How-c Commune: RIGHT MODE Interpersonen Emononeu Sp-mw Telke: LOWER RIGHT OOMINANCE PROFILE LIMBIC CEREBRAL CEREBRAL RIGHT Cveeuve SYRIMSIZEI ANSI-c Housuc Concentuauzer RIGHT MODE DOMINANCE PROFILE LIMBIC AND INNER-HEM] SPHERIC INTERACTIONS 95 interactions inter- and inner-hemispheric dominance (See Figure 8 on the preceding page). When dominance patterns demonstrate preference for quadrants across the two hemispheres (left and right). the interaction is known as "inter-hemispheric". When the patterns show preference for quadrants on the same hemisphere. the interaction is called "inner-hemispheric". This movement between hemispheres is grounded in the repulsion/attraction portion of the Fourfold Theory. Table V describes the frequency distributions and percentages of these interactions in the total study popula- tion. In studies of chief executive officers'. Herrmann has called attention to the multi-dominant nature of top TABLE V HEHISPHERIC INTERACTIONS OF THE STUDY POPULATION =232 CHIEFS GROUP ACADENIC GROUP FINANCE GROUP NATURE OF INTERACTION I t 8 2 I i Attraction Interaction Left inner-hemispheric 76 52 16 39 3d 76 Right inner-heeispheric 29 20 II 34 3 7 Cerebra1 inter-heeispheric )6 II 2 5 5 11 Liebic inter-heeispheric 3 2 4 IO 1 2 Rbpulsion Interaction Left Timbic/right cerebraT 13 9 2 5 0 0 Right Tiebic/Teft cerebral 0 0 I 2.5 I 2 Single Dbeinance Left 1 1 0 0 1 2 Right 3 2 1 2.5 0 0 finale Brain (four quadrants) 5 3 I 2.5 0 0 96 executives and the ease with which they move from inner- to inter-hemispheric processing. The nature of their work requires an ability to understand and to be able to communi— cate with and to people of all dominances. as well as address organizational needs and problem-solving from several points of view. In all three major groups (Chiefs, Academics and Finance Administrators). the most frequent interaction was the left inner-hemispheric dominance with Chiefs having 76 occurrences (52 percent). Academics, 16 (39 percent). and Finance administrators. 34 (76 percent). The second most frequent interaction was the right inner-hemispheric dominance for two groups: Chiefs with 29 occurrences (20 percent). and Academics with 14 (34 percent). The second most frequent interaction for Finance administrators was the cerebral inter-hemispheric dominance. five occurrences (11 percent). Demonstrative of the Fourfold model, the left cerebral and right limbic interaction had only two occurrences in the entire population (.8 percent); the other diagonal interaction between left limbic and right cerebral quadrants occurred 15 times (six percent) in the entire population, and most frequently in the Chiefs group. 13 times (nine percent). In the final analysis. the Dominance Profile Code data clearly demonstrates that chief educational administrators. as well as the current pool of candidates for these executive positions. are characterized by a style predominantly left-brained in orientation. 97 Bight/Left and Cerebral/Limbic Dominance Raw Scores A second analysis of brain dominance was conducted by using the HBDI left/right and cerebral/limbic dominance raw scores. These scores indicate the degree of dominance between the left (analyzing. logical) and right (synthesizing. conceptual) hemispheres, and the cerebral (abstract) and limbic (concrete) processing of the individual's world. The numbers in these raw scores (for example. R/L (right/left): 120/57 or C/L (cerebral/limbic): 43/117) correspond to the degree of brain dominance of the respective hemisphere or cerebral/limbic level. Any score in the 50 and above range is considered to be meaningful. Once a score moves into areas beyond 100. the individual begins to be committed to that quadrant's manner of mental processing more than would be indicated in a score below 100. The R/L: 120/57 example above does not mean that a person is exceptionally logical and controlled. and lacking in interpersonal and conceptual skills; rather. any score beyond fifty indicates that the individual has access to those specialized mental processes. but may not utilize them as frequently as above 100. Herrmann's research (1985) has demonstrated that high scores (beyond 100) indicate that an individual most often expresses him/herself in mental processes and resulting behaviors typical of that particular hemisphere or cerebral/limbic level. Table VI shows comparisons of the means, range and standard deviation of the Chief Administrator population; 98 brain dominance in raw scores is represented by group means for the left versus right hemispheres. Four of the six groups have left dominance scores of 100 or more; the other two groups are in the 90's. Superintendents of educational service institutions-—Intermediate school districts and the State department of education (N=40)--have. as a group. the highest mean for left-brain dominance. Their mean score (112.93) exceeds the mean score for the total group (105.97). The nature of the work inherent in services MflEVI HEANS FOR LEFT/RIGHT BRAIN DOMINANCE SCORES 0F CHIEF EDUCATIONAL ADNINISTRATORS IN NICHIGAN. 1981 STUDY GROUP N = 146 STANDARD GROUP N= HEAN DEVIATION NINIHUH MAXIMUM 4-YEAR HIGHER ED PRESIDENTS 7 Left hemisphere 103.29 18.80 83 140 Right hemisphere 97.00 17.05 77 124 2-YEAR HIGHER ED PRESIDENTS 12 Left hemisphere 99.00 22.68 70 130 Right hemisphere 100.33 25.35 67 138 K-12 5000+ SUPERINTENDENTS 33 Left hemisphere 100.12 24.09 54 148 Right hemisphere 95.76 23.15 44 151 K-12 4999- SUPERINTENDENTS 47 Left hemisphere 108.45 20.04 55 154 Right hemisphere 89.40 20.79 45 55 I50 SUPERINTENDENTS 40 Left hemisphere 112.93 17.56 82 150 Right hemisphere 84.00 21.33 42 133 HOAEN SUPERINTENDENTS 7 Left hemisphere 91.71 21.36 70 132 Right hemisphere 105.57 21.28 65 129 TOTAL GROUP: 146 Left hemisphere 105.97 21.22 54 154 Right hemisphere 91.40 22.31 42 151 99 provided by Intermediate School District organizations to school districts would encompass analytical, technical. problem-solving and planning/administering activities. Most homogeneous to the total group mean are the four-year higher education presidents (N=7) had a mean left score of 103.29 (18.80 standard deviation [80]) closest to the total group mean. Two-year higher education presidents (N=12) had a mean of 99.00 (22.68 SD), school superintendents of larger (5000+) school systems (N=33). a mean of 100.12 (24.09 SD). while school superintendents of smaller districts (N=47) of varying size had a mean of 108.45 (20.04 SD). Two-year higher education presidents had the highest right-brain mean score, 100.33 (25.35 SD). and four-year presidents were second highest with a mean score of 97.00 (17.05 SD) in contrast to a total group mean of 93.30. Educational service (ISD) superintendents had the lowest right dominance mean (84.00; 21.33 SD); 5000+ superintendents exhibited a mean of 95.76 (23.15 SD). while smaller district superintendents (4999-) had 89.40 (20.79 SD). From these data it appears that two-year presidents tend to differ more among themselves, as shown by the largest standard deviation (25.35 SD). The higher education groups are small in number and therefore make statistical tests for significance impossible. In the analysis of the mean raw scores. ISD superintendents. as a group. have a greater tendency to be more left—brain dominant than do any of the other chief administrator groups: A difference of 28.93 100 points between their mean left and right-brain scores tilts in favor of a left-brain style. Two-year presidents exhibit only a 1.33 point difference in mean score between left and right dominance, suggesting a greater tendency for more balanced or whole-brain thinking. All groups show considerable variance within groups with standard deviations for left—brain dominance ranging from ISD superintendents with 17.56 SD to 24.09 SD for 5000+ superin- tendents. A similar range is present for right-brain dominance: Two-year presidents exhibit the greatest variance with 25.35 SD and four-year presidents, the lowest with 17.05 SD. Again, the small numbers in higher education groups limit statistical testing. The total group mean scores for Cerebral/Limbic (abstract/concrete mental processes) dominance, reported in Table VII. show a similar strong balance of Left/Right means: Left mean (L:). 104.77; Right mean (R:). 93.30; Cerebral mean (0:). 103.46; and Limbic mean (LM:). 94.98. The group with the highest cerebral dominance is the two-year presidents with a mean of 113.17 (10.47 SD). and second. the 5000+ superintendents, with 104.39 (15.78 SD). The only mean below 100 for cerebral processing was the four-year presi- dents. with 97.29 (9.29 SD). Only one group, four-year presidents, demonstrated a limbic dominance with a six point difference in favor of limbic processing (C: 97.286 versus LN: 103.000). All other groups exhibit differences which 101 TABLE VII NEANS FOR CEREBRAL/LIHBIC BRAIN DONINANCE SCORES 0F CHIEF EDUCATIONAL ADHINISTRATDRS IN NICHIGAN. 1981 STUDY GROUP N = 146 STANDARD GROUP N: AEAN DEVIATION NINIAUN NAXIAUN 4-YEAR HIGHER ED PRESIDENTS 7 CerebraT 1eve1 97.29 9.29 81 111 Limbic 1eve1 103.00 16.33 83 122 2-YEAR HIGHER ED PRESIDENTS 12 CerebraT 1eve1 113.17 10.47 90 127 Limbic TeveT 86.17 8.67 77 107 K-TZ 5000+ SUPERINTENDENTS 33 CerebraT 1eve1 104.39 15.78 77 130 Limbic 1eve1 93.39 20.04 57 132 K-12 4999- SUPERINTENDENTS 47 CerebraT 1eve1 100.77 14.15 70 130 Limbic TeveT 97.09 17.18 60 135 ISD SUPERINTENDENTS 40 CerebraT 1eve1 101.68 12.55 77 130 Limbic 1eve1 95.25 13.89 68 123 NOHEN SUPERINTENDENTS 7 CerebraT 1eve1 90.57 12.49 74 108 Limbic 1eve1 106.71 19.52 80 138 TOTAL GROUP: 146 CerebraT 1eve1 102.20 14.14 70 130 Liebic 1eve1 95.60 16.92 57 138 indicate cerebral preferences, and are listed here in descending order of difference: Two-year presidents, 27 points; 5000+ superintendents, 11 points; ISD superintendents and superintendents of smaller districts. both with six points. In professional training workshops. individuals are helped to recognize meaningful differences in the raw dominance scores when there is a difference of 20 points between the two R/L or C/LM scores. Table VIII reports the frequency distribution and percentages of dominance scores 102 for the total Chief administrator group. Fifty percent of the total population had balanced cerebral/limbic scores (less than 20 points difference). Forty-four percent of the chief population were left dominant. while 35 percent were balanced in left and right processing. TABLE VIII FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTIONS AND PERCENTAGES 0F BRAIN DONINANCE RAN SCORES RELATIVE NEIGHTINGS (DIFFERENCE OF 20 POINTS BETNEEN R/L DR C/L CHIEF EDUCATIONAL ADHINISTRATORS 6 LEVELS N = 146 LEFT/RIGHT freq- CEREBRAL/LIMBIC freq- HEIGHTINGS uency 4 HEIGHTINGS uency 4 ngg CerebraT D to +20 29 .20 0 to +20 41 .28 +21 to +40 21 .14 +21 to +40 26 .18 +41 to +60 20 .14 +41 to +60 12 .08 +61 to +80 14 .10 +61 to +80 8 .05 +81 to +100 6 .04 +81 to +100 0 0 +101 to +120 3 .02 +101 to +120 0 0 Right Limbic 0 to ~20 22 .15 0 to ~20 32 .22 ~21 to ~40 19 .13 ~21 to ~40 18 .12 ~41 to ~60 6 .04 ~41 to ~60 8 .05 ~61 to ~80 3 .02 ~61 to ~80 1 .01 ~81 to ~100 3 .02 ~81 to ~100 0 0 ~101 to ~120 0 0 ~101 to ~120 0 0 SUNNARY RIGHT/LEFT: SUNNARY CEREBRAL/LINBIC: 8a1anced: 51 .35 8a1anced: 73 .50 Left Dominant: 64 .44 Left Dominant: 46 .32 Right Dominant: 31 .21 Right Dominant: 27 .18 103 Final analysis of the Dominance Raw Scores reveals a more precisely stated weighting of brain dominance than the Profile Codes. and continues to demonstrate that Chief administrators are characterized by a predominantly left-brained style. _ggled Scores for the Four Brain Dominance Quadrants The four Scaled Scores--Left Cerebral. Left Limbic. Right Limbic. and Right Cerebral-~provide the numeric quantities that form the Profile Codes. These continuous variables have been analyzed by computing group means and standard deviations for each of the four quadrants. These data. along with the range, were plotted on circular graphs and resulted in a visual representation of the "degree of tilt" for comparison with each of the administrator groups. MANOVAs were conducted between all administrator groups in the study. as well as between three educational level groups of chief. academic. and finance administrators, in order to test for significant differences. CHIEF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATORS Figure 9 exhibits the composite graphs of scaled scores for higher education chiefs. The four-year presidents (N=7) are represented by a whole brain profile (1111)--all four quadrants are in the "prefer" range of 67 to 100+. The strongest quadrant for this group is the limbic left with a group mean of 84.14 (22.18 SD). focusing on administrative, organizational. conservative. planning. and controlling processes. The visual depiction also demonstrates the 104 UPPER LEFT A r-mr mam toucmou rrrsnoms D UPPER RIGHT Lodcal CEREBRAL MODE imaginative Analyzer Synthesizer Mathematical Artistic Technical Holietlc Problem Solver Conceptuallaer Mn; 11.429 lean. 15.000 Range: 92 - 53 Range: 9r - 51 s = 12.139 5 = 20.322 LEFT RIGHT MODE MODE hen; 04.143 lean; 71.000 Range: 3911'!“ Range: 09 - 63 s - . s 8 0.405 Controlled interpersonal Conservative Emotional Planner Muelcel Organizational Spiritual Adminietretive 7...“, LOWER LEFT B LIMBIC MODE C LOWER RIGHT UPPER LEFT A 2-YEAR mom soucmou "worms D UPPER RIGHT Mm CEREBRAL MODE mm..." Analyzer Syntheeizer Mathematical Artletic Technical Holletlc Problem Solver COMOPWIUZOI' lean: 11.011 mean: 92.167 Range: 102 ~ 53 Range: 131 ~ 54 s = 10.159 3 8 20.219 LEFT RIGHT MODE MODE hen: 11.000 m 2.151:1 ; ~ 45 ‘ ' 2'2“ 11“.... .. mos Controlled interpereonei Coneervetlve Emotional Planner Mueicel Organizational Spiritual Adminietretive ‘i’elker LOWER LEFT B LIMBIC MODE C LOWER RIGHT FIGURE 9: COMPOSITE SCALED SCORES FOR HIGHER EDUCATION PRESIDENTS 105 weighting toward limbic dominance as reported earlier in the raw dominance scores (C:97.29; LM: 103:00). the highest limbic score in the chief study group. The two-year presidents (N=12) are triple dominant (1121). with the highest group mean being in the right cerebral quadrant. 92.17 (26.22 SD). This group had the highest cerebral (C: 113.17) and highest right (R: 100.33 dominance means of this chief group. The score in the cerebral right quadrant reflects strong usage of conceptual, synthesizing. holistic. and imaginative processes. Figure 10 exhibits the composite profile of scaled scores for K-12 superintendents. These two groups reflect different conditions of complexity: superintendents of districts of 5000+ (1121) have the complexities of structure and constituency groups; superintendents of the out-of- formula group (2111) contend with complexities of funding stability and constituency groups. Both groups are triple dominant, with the least preferred quadrant being the one dealing with interpersonal and intergroup processes: the group mean of 5000+ superintendents (N=33) is 61.27 (20.52 SD). and that of superintendents of smaller districts (N=47) is 60.32 (14.80 SD). This quadrant also reflected the lowest group means for higher education presidents (4-year: 71.00; 2-year: 58.75). The most dominant quadrant for 5000+ superintendents is the right cerebral (85.33; 27.27 SD). representing concept- ualizing. synthesizing. holistic and imaginative approaches; 106 D R~12 soooo SCHOOL SDPERIRIENDERTS CEREBRAL MODE UPPER LEFT A Logical Analyzer Mathematical Technical Problem Solver ban: 13.303 Range: 132 - 32 s . 20.322 LEFT MODE ~00: 10.121 Range: 117 - 32 s '- 22.790 Controlled Conservative Planner Organizational Administrative LOWER LEFT B LIM BIC MODE ll~12 our-or-rouuu salooL surtmlaroms CEREBRAL MODE UPPER LEFT A D Logical Analyzer Mathematical Technical Problem Solver ~01): 11.340 Range: 114 ~ 32 s t 17.901 LEFT MODE “011: 05.150 W: 141 ° 33 O 3 22.030 Controlled Conservative Planner Orge nlzetlonal Administrative LOWER LEFT B C LIMBIC MODE FIGURE 10: COMPOSITE UPPER RIGHT imaginative Synthesizer Artistlc Holistic Conceptualizer lean: t5.333 Range: 141 - 29 s . 21.213 RIGHT MODE ~00: 51.213 MO: 120 r 21 s = 20.522 interpersonal Emotional Musical Spiritual Talirer LOWER RIGHT UPPER RIGHT irna ginetive Synthesizer Artistlc Holistic Conceptuallzer ~00: 14.234 Rage: 134 ~ 30 s I 24.729 RIGHT MODE ”011: 50.319 Range: 35 r 35 S 3 14.131 Interpersonal Emotional Musical Spiritual Tailter LOWER RIGHT SCALED SCORES FOR K~12 SUPERINTENDENTS 107 the 4999- superintendents are most dominant in the limbic left quadrant (85.76; 22.84 SD). utilizing planning. administering, controlling, and organizing approaches to work. Both groups exhibit cerebral dominance (5000+: 104.39; 4999-: 100.76). though the degree of difference between cerebral and limbic is not dramatic. and is influenced by the interaction present in triple dominance. Figure 11 displays the profile patterns of educational service superintendents (N=40) and women superintendents (N=7). Though the size of the women's study population is not statistically reliable. it is worth examining for tendencies to compare with a recent Herrmann study of women chief executives. The ISD superintendents' profile indicates triple dominance (1121). with the least preferred quadrant being the right limbic (54.68). low use of interpersonal. verbal. and intuitive processes. The group mean for the most preferred quadrant was 88.68 in the left limbic. a high preference for organizing. administering. planning, and controlling. 0f the total chief study group, these superintendents had the highest left dominance mean score, 112.93. The standard deviation (17.56 SD) for this left dominance score indicated a tighter spread of scores within that group than any of the others. As with the other groups. the cerebral/limbic dominance is fairly balanced. with the strong left limbic quadrant (88.68; 16.73 SD) offsetting the lower mean in the UPPER LEFT A Logical Analyzer Mathematical Technical Problem Solver ban: 01.175 Range: 120 - 40 s I 20.050 LEFT MODE lean: rt.rls Range: 123 - 03 s . 15.725 Controlled Conservative Pie nner Organizational Administrative LOWER LEFT B UPPER LEFT A Logical Analyzer Mathematical Technical Problem Solver hen: 50.000 N07190: 35 ° 20 S = 23.005 LEFT // MODE hen: 01.114 Range: 110 - 40 s 8 21.430 Controlled Conservative Planner Organizational Administrative LOWER LEFT B FIGURE 1]: 1 (113 150 SUPERINIENDENIS CEREBRAL MODE LIM BIC MODE C MEN SUPERINTENDEN 15 D CEREBRAL MODE \ \\‘ ”'>>" "" \ V/ \\\ / §\\// /. .. ,/ LIM BIC MODE C COMPOSITE SCALED SCORES FOR ISD SUPERINTENDENTS D UPPER RIGHT irna glnetive Synthesizer Artistic Holistic Conceptualizer ~00: 11.000 ”09¢: 120 ° 30 S 3 23.449 T11C3I11T MODE hen: 04.015 Range: 00 ~ 21 S ' 10.140 interpersonal Emotional Musical Spiritual Talker LOWER RIGHT UPPER RIGHT imaginative Synthesizer Artistlc Hoflsflc Conceptualizer Ringe: 116 - 60 s = 20.952 FIICSTI'T MODE hen: 13.000 Range: 102 - 30 s 8 20.092 interpersonal Emotional Musical Spiritual Talker LOWER RIGHT AND WOMEN 109 right limbic quadrant (54.68; 16.74 SD), the standard deviations indicating similar spreads in scores. The women superintendent group exhibits a much different "tilt" of dominance profile than the other five groups. They too are triple dominant (2111). but with the dominance being in the right hemisphere (L: 91.71; R: 105.57). In this group there are two quadrant means which can be seen as highest: left limbic (87.71; 21.44 SD) and right cerebral (86.00; 20.95 SD). In the repulsion/attraction concept of the Fourfold model. this diagonal dominance interaction is remarkable because of the mental forces it puts in conflict: the controlling, conservative, and safe-keeping needs of the left limbic quadrant typically interacts with the imagin- ative, intuitive, risk-taking preferences of the right cerebral quadrant--the planful, step-by-step approach must struggle with a desire to rely on hunches when solving organizational problems. This combination of dominance interaction may be a source of internal stress for this particular group of chiefs. Of all the groups. the women have the strongest mean score for the right limbic. interpersonal quadrant (73.00). Twenty Questions is one section of the HBDI that is used as a supplementary look at an individual's safekeeping and risk—taking tendencies. The left mode of thinking would represent a safekeeping tendency with its strengths in planning. analyzing logically, controlling and Judging. The right mode of thinking represents the risk-taking tendency 110 through its use of intuition, speculating on the over-all picture. and the use of seemingly irrelevant material in solving problems. The questions in this section represent "right" or "left" value laden issues. intended to obtain further information on preferences for creative/intuitive/ risk-taking approaches versus ordered/disciplined/safe— keeping approaches to problem-solving. In the total group of Chief administrators 60 percent scored a preference for safe-keeping; 18 percent, for risk-taking; and 22 percent for a balanced approach. MANOVA tests were conducted on the five chief groups of chief administrators. Table IX reports that the null hypo TABLE IX NANDVA TESTS OF SIGNIFICANCE FDR CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR GROUP N=1N NULTIVARIATE TEST USING NILKS LANBDA Source of Hypothesis Error Significance Variation F 0F 0F F Chief Groups .90339 20.00 398.94 .583 UNIVARIATE TEST FOR THE CHIEF GROUPS NITH (5.123) D.F. Hypothesis Error Significance Variable NS IS F F SSLC 215.69443 383.00892 .11981 .610 SSLL 280.37346 457.78818 .61245 .691 SSRL 262.91061 286.22465 .91855 .471 SSRC 600.60089 615.12038 .91640 .435 111 thesis was supported at the <.05 level with no significant differences between the study groups. Herrmann's research has demonstrated repeatedly that persons are attracted into professional/vocational clusters according to brain dominance patterns; these clusters take on "tribal" likenesses. Mintzberg (1976) noted that typically. individuals will gravitate toward occupations that offer an opportunity for that person to perform in his or her area of mental preference, thus providing the opportunity to utilize competencies. Herrmann (1986) has noted that over time. occupations have tended to standardize the work elements involved in the performance of those occupational tasks. and therefore. it is natural that people gravitate toward the kinds of job opportunities "that allow them to use their preferred modes of knowing in ways that contribute to their success and fulfillment" (p. 20). In most cases this provides for similar dominance profiles to "cluster" together in work settings. and in professions and trade groups. Table X reports the top eight Key Descriptors of the Chief Administrator group. organized in descending order according to the frequency with which they appeared within each group. Clusters are apparent. "Logical" was the most frequently occurring key descriptor in all five groups. "Rational". "Holistic". and "Analytical" also appeared as key descriptors in all five. All but holistic are left cerebral indicators. "Controlled", "Intuitive." and "Verbal" were the next most frequently occurring descriptors. The * indicates 12l2 Surya» .PaOVLCLu ..owuoam .Pocovuoco .nopwouou ..ovucoaaom .poovmaa .aaoao mg» c, wouompom aouavaomou aox oco cases: as» mouoovuc_ . .aouavaumou on» Co u_wu acoauoau ozu ounovucv armogucoaoa c. meouuup asp "cowuocopaxm .maoocou_=¢*m we» .aovooa .o>.uou.uco=c .u__one>m ._oovuoeogu~e "can: maouq'aumou >ox nouoo—om apucoaaoaw mmom a; o>wuo>aomcoo .o on ..acuod .n om Lonemogsc>m .m cm ammcmogsc>m .@ an uo__oascoo .9 an Deuce-co .9 LL s>csoszomcoo .h ox.m¢ o>,s.=sc_ .3 oz s>essozo .5 oz m>cc~oau .A on _.ocs>pac< .L om..¢ .mnau> .o o¢.m¢ .onao> .o o¢.m¢ ..nco> .u 84 .sco_so¢ .o o¢.mx o>rseasc_ .0 on ..occ>_.c¢ .m as ao_poLccoo .n 94 Psocs>_oc< .0 oz .LoNPmoccc>m .0 LL ns_.oascoo .m ox o_sm__o= .. um _~o_s>_oc< .. o«.4a o>cuessc_ .. ox.m¢ o>.se=sc_ .. o«.s¢ _onao> .. mm so__oLccoo .m 04 ..coesom .m an ..co'saz .m as Poses>_.=< .m om ocsmc.o= .m on Amoco_c.« .~ om .oesm,_o: .N am .o_smc_o= .N om ocsm_.o: .~ on ._~corsox .N on ..ocooL ._ on ..uLoon .. on _.oPooL ._ as _au_ooL .. on _.oLooL .. 9.": E.uz mm": m.uz A": om. Lo ~.-x +ooom ~_-z em _= ¢>-~ em _= a»-. mucoucoucwaoaam coco: nevus—axe am. u z m4m>w4 Amx x m4m

.05 level of significance. TABLE XIII NANDVA TESTS OF SIGNIFICANCE FOR THREE ADMINISTRATOR GROUPS CHIEF AONINISTRATORS--ACADENIC AND FINANCE ADHINISTRATORS N=1fl IULTIVARIATE TEST USING NILKS LAHBDA Source of Hypothesis Error Significance Variation F 0F 0F F Type of Adninistrator by institution Level 1.23314 12.00 336.300 .259 UNIVARIATE TEST FOR TYPE BY LEVEL NITN (3,130) D.F. Hypothesis Error Significance Variable AS RS F F SSLC 135.90184 455.44365 .29841 .826 SSLL 111.4524? 361.4365? 2.11589 .101 SSRL 523.8019? 482.03850 1.08686 .351 SSRC 1343.33206 590.03561 2.21515 .083 123 Small study populations in the higher education administra- tors no doubt have placed serious limitations on the tests for significant differences. The analysis of the Scaled Scores, Key Descriptors, and Twenty Questions have provided the following observations. Four-year higher education presidents and top level administrators: Differences were found in the left cerebral and right limbic quadrants; the previous analysis of the data has demonstrated that finance officers are more dominant (98.43) in left cerebral processing than chiefs (71.49). Finance officers also showed the least preference (42.43) for the right limbic quadrants, where both the chiefs (71.00) and academics officers (81.80) showed a preference for this quadrant. Two-year higher education presidents and top level administrators: Differences were found in the left cerebral, left limbic, and right cerebral quadrants. Again, finance officers were markedly higher (98.231 in group mean in the quantitative, analytic left cerebral quadrant. Presidents (92.167) and academics officers (83.909) were highest of the synthesizing, conceptualizing quadrant. The finance officers' group means were markedly dominant (93.615) in the organizing, controlled left limbic quadrant, compared to presidents (71.000) and academics officers (74.182). K-12 public school superintendents and top level administrators: Differences were found in the left cerebral, right limbic and right cerebral quadrants. Finance officers 124 .had a group mean (88.080) and key descriptors which demonstrate primary dominance in the left cerebral quadrant compared with chiefs (73.303) and academics (62.040). In the right limbic--"people"--quadrant, academics superintendents (71.240, "low prefer") and chiefs (61.273, "high use") were higher than finance administrators (49.480, "low use"). Academics administrators had a "high prefer" mean (82.480) in right cerebral, compared with the "low prefers" of the chiefs (71.800) finance administrators (67.560). INDEPENDENT VARIABLES Herrmann notes in his studies (1985) that cultural differences have an impact on brain dominance-~30 percent of individual differences are due to nature; 70 percent, to culture. Some Of his studies in the general population indicate that there are more differences between people living in rural and urban environments than there are between people in different countries in those same environments (1985). However, similar occupations seem to have similar brain dominance patterns, no matter what country they are in. This study chose three "cultural" variables and examined them for any significant differences in brain dominance patterns, using the Scaled Scores of the Chief Administrator population. The discrete variable, Community Size, was tabulated by chief groups into four categories: Urban (1), Suburban (2), Small City (3), and Rural (4). Figure 14 reports the frequencies and percentages of the Chief Administrator 125 mm=c¢o >==hm >m mmm>h >h~zaztco mo mmc : In 1983 Case Western University held a symposium on the Executive Hind involving 15 authorities on management and organizations. They sought to better understand the unique mental ingredients that support the executive's ability to manage the dynamics of an organization. Since the early 70$, Edgar Schein of Sloane School of Hanagement--HIT has been studying the career development of senior executives of American organizations in order to identify the key elements that attract persons to their work, called Career Anchors. In 1976 Ned Herrmann, Director of Management Education for General Electric, began developing a brain dominance self-survey instrument which has since been highly validated; 150,000 instruments have been completed to date, building a rich data base of brain dominance patterns as they are related to work. There has been only limited research done on the brain dominance patterns of t0p level educational administrators. This professional group of pe0ple are going to be key players in leading education through the inevitable organizational and instructional changes which bring us to a new century. I am a doctoral candidate in the Department of Higher Education Administration at Michigan State University. I have been actively engaged for the past twelve years in the study and dissemination of information about brain research and how it relates to learning and educational settings. For the past two years I have been working with brain dominance as it pertains to management and leadership behaviors in organizations. Given your key administrative position, I would like to include you in my study of top level public education leaders/administrators in the State of hichigan. Your participation would require only 10-15 minutes to fill out the Herrmann Brain Dominance Instrument and return it to me. In return for your participation, I will score your HBDI and send your consolidated score sheet back within the week, including interpretive materials. If you wish, I will be glad to send a summary of the findings of this study at its completion. After the scoring procedure, your instrument will be entered into a database by number, thereby insuring your anonymity. If you are willing to participate in this research project, please sign the enclosed stamped consent/response card and return as soon as possible. Please indicate if you would like to receive the summary of findings. I will immediately send the H801 to you upon receipt of your response. Thank you for participating in this important study. Sincerely yours, l€w4 APPENDIX A:2 CONSENT CARD mtmtawm wesromse roam A oescmmve sum or TTIE mm mmmmce rim-m If mum “INSERT” I freely consent to take part in a scientific study being conducted by Mrs. Leslie Messman under the supervision of Dr. Max R. Raines, Professor--Higher Education Administration and Curriculum at Michigan State University. The study has been explained to me and I understand the explanation that has been given and what my participation will involve. I understand that I am free to discontinue my participation in the study at any time without penalty. I understand that the results of the study will be treated in strict confidence and that I will remain anonymous. Within these restrictions, results of the study will be made available to me at my request. I understand that, at my request, I can receive additional explanation of the study after my participation is completed. Signed Date ltiS APPENDIX A:3 INTRODUCTION TO THE INSTRUMENT Please fill in all the blanks on the enclosed survey form, including the I of years of Chief Administrative Exeperience and the 8 of students your institution serves. Before beginning the HBDI, please scan the back of the second page to clarify the meaning of terms as they relate to this instrument. Simply answer each question as it relates to your own experience in life--work, home, leisure. Some further explanations on certain sections are as follows: Section IV: Mork Elements ‘Do not exceed 4 choices in any one category.“ This means that you are to rate each work element with a 5, A, 3, 2, or 1. However, do not use more than 4 5‘s, 4 3'5, etc. Section VI: Hobbies Interpret 'Hobbies' as the types of activity you prefer to do outside of work time. Section IX: Adjective Pairs Be sure not to leave any of the pairs unmarked. Thank you for participating in this study. I will score your instrument and send the results to you with interpretive materials within a the week. Please return your HBDI in the enclosed, stamped envelOpe.' 1456i APPENDIX B FOLLOW-UP LETTER APPENDIX B THANK YOU LETTER Dear