PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record. To AVOID FINES return on or before date due. ' MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE 531282008 115‘.)an UV 'v vv 6/01 c:/ClRC/DateDue.p65-p.15 PARTICIPANT ATTITUDES REGARDING THEIR INVOLVEMENT IN INTENSIVE LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS By Michael Raymond Kovacic A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources Education and Communication Systems 2003 ABSTRACT PARTICIPANT ATTITUDES REGARDING THEIR INVOLVEMENT IN INTENSIVE LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS By Michael Raymond Kovacic According to Gardner, “the development of leaders is possible on a scale far beyond anything we have ever attempted.” This research focused on intensive leadership development programs conducted by the Michigan Farm Bureau and the Michigan Chamber Foundation. A mixed methods approach was used to examine the programs. Content analysis was used to gain a thorough understanding of each program by reviewing marketing materials, curriculum documentation, and other written materials. This analysis, along with interviews with the respective program facilitators, provided the basis for creation of the questioning route used to conduct seven focus groups with graduates from each program. Using the data gathered from the focus group discussions, a census survey was conducted for each program. A 75% return was achieved for the Farm Bureau program and over 60% for the Chamber program. Four constructs were created using a series of survey questions to statistically evaluate the overall outcome of each program. The Impact Construct is a measure of graduate attitudes regarding the overall impact the respective programs had on their ability to serve in a leadership role. The Application and Selection Construct consists of questions designed to gauge participant attitudes on issues associated with recruitment and selection. Similarly, the Delivery Construct measures participant attitudes regarding various teaching and program delivery techniques. Finally, the Involvement Construct combines various questions regarding the changes in leadership involvement prior to and following program graduation. Pearson’s Correlation was used to show application and program delivery are statistically correlated to program impact and involvement. Based on the findings from this research, the researcher offers the following proposed framework for an effective leadership development program: 1) Establish and communicate a clear mission that can be used to guide the development and delivery of an intensive leadership development experience. The mission should be clearly articulated to participants and their sponsors. 2) Utilize a rigorous and competitive recruiting, application, and selection process, designed to provide a clear understanding of program expectations. 3) Provide opportunities for participant input to plan and conduct the experience. 4) The curriculum should provide rigor and challenge. The following elements should be included: skill development, leadership theory, personality assessment, dynamic, hands-on learning techniques, vivid immersion experiences associated with issues in context of the expected leadership roles of participants, mediated reflection, networking and group discussion, and assignments between sessions. 5) Provide for ongoing support of program graduates. 6) Program coordinators must model the personal nature of leadership by demonstrating a high level of commitment and dedication to their program. Cepyn'ght by MICHAEL RAYMOND KOVACIC 2003 DEDICATION This dissertation is dedicated to my wife Marge, and sons Joe, Nick, and Steve, whose encouragement and support sustained my spirit and buoyed my determination. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my major professor and committee chair, Dr. Kirk Heinze, for his encouragement, support, guidance, and for challenging me throughout my doctoral program. Dr. Heinze knew the right time to ask for more effort and when to say, “A job well done!” His open door will long be remembered. I would also like to express appreciation to the members of my doctoral committee: Dr. Dave Krueger for his continuous advice and assistance with the research methodology, Dr. Steve Kaagan for his expertise on leadership, and Dr. Arlen Leholm for encouraging me to begin this journey, his knowledge of organizational development, and his infectious enthusiasm and support. A special tribute goes to Deb Schmucker and the Farm Bureau organization, and to Bob Thomas and the Michigan Chamber of Commerce, for allowing me to use their leadership development programs as the basis for my research. I appreciate their assistance with the research and for financial support for survey printing and mailing. Thanks also to the ProFILE and Leadership Michigan graduates who attended the focus groups and responded to the survey. Without their willing participation, this study would not have been possible. Several individuals were more than generous in sharing their time and talent with me for various aspects of this research effort. My thanks to Bruce Haas for assisting with analysis of the quantitative data, to Mike Farley for his countless hours of reading the manuscript and correcting my grammatical shortcomings, to my son Steve vi -‘nr’x‘ "I... " T... U- for transcribing tapes, and my son Nick for managing the collection and input of the survey data. I would like to say thank you to Dr. Murari Suvedi for encouraging me to pursue a Ph.D. and assisting with the research protocol. I would also extend my appreciation to Jodi Chambers, Nancy Burd, and Mary Pierce for their smiles, words of encouragement and support with the many details of mailing, printing and data management. Thanks to MSUE Director Maggie Bethel, and the Extension organization for giving me the encouragement and allowing me the time to pursue and complete this educational endeavor. I appreciate the sacrifice on behalf of my colleagues, especially Dave Ivan, who filled-in as Regional Director during my study leave, so that I could complete the dissertation and prepare for my defense. And a special thank you to Hal Hudson who blazed this trail a couple of years ahead of me and provided ongoing counsel and a manuscript to consult from time to time. I know this accomplishment would not have been possible without the support and understanding of the College of Agriculture and Natural Resources leadership and the entire Extension organization. And finally, deepest thanks to my family, Marge, Joe, Nick, and Steve, who sacrificed on numerous occasions so that I could spend time completing class assignments, pouring over data, and writing the dissertation. Your belief in me and ongoing love and support, along with that of our friends and family, sustained me throughout the last three and one-half years! I appreciate your understanding and encouragement! vii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................. xi LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................... xii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ............................................................................ 1 Michigan Farm Bureau ............................................................... 2 The Michigan Chamber Commerce ................................................ 5 Purpose of This Study ............................................................... 7 Importance of This Study ............................................................ 7 Research Objectives .................................................................. 8 Research Questions .................................................................. 9 Assumptions ........................................................................... 11 Limitations of the Study ............................................................. 12 Definition of Terms .................................................................. 13 Summary ........................................ 16 CHAPTER 11 REVIEW OF RELATED RESEARCH AND LITERATURE ......................... 17 Introduction ........................................................................... 17 What Is Leadership? ...................................................................................... 17 A New Way of Looking at Leadership ............................................ 23 Leadership Development Programs ................................................ 26 Adult Learning ........................................................................ 33 Leadership Development Program Structure ..................................... 37 Implications from the Literature Review .......................................... 39 CHAPTER HI RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ........................................................... 41 Introduction ........................................................................... 41 Content Analysis ..................................................................... 42 Qualitative Research ................................................................. 42 Focus Groups as the Qualitative Data Collection Method ............. 43 Rationale ..................................................................... 44 Focus Group Methodology ................................................ 45 Quantitative Survey Methodology ................................................. 48 Quantitative Data Collection ............................................... 53 Quantitative Data Analysis ................................................ 58 Conclusion ............................................................................ 62 viii CHAPTER IV FINDINGS ..................................................................................... 63 A. Program Descriptions and Demographic Data .............................. 63 ProFILE Program Description ............................................. 64 ProFILE Demographics .................................................... 71 Leadership Michigan Program Description .............................. 75 Leadership Michigan Demographics ..................................... 83 B. Focus Group Findings ........................................................... 89 ProFILE ...................................................................... 90 Leadership Michigan ....................................................... 98 C. Survey Data ....................................................................... 106 ProFILE ...................................................................... 107 Leadership Michigan ....................................................... 122 D. Key Topics ........................................................................ 136 Application and Selection .................................................. 136 Program Delivery ............................................................ 140 Support ........................................................................ 145 Community and Organizational Involvement ........................... 148 Demographic Differences .................................................. 152 Correlation of Delivery and the Application Process with Program Impact .............................................................. 153 Summary .............................................................................. 155 CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND RECCOMENDATIONS ........................................ 156 Program Value ........................................................................ 156 Critical Leadership Skill Development ........................................... 157 Application and Selection .......................................................... 163 Networking ........................................................................... 166 Teaching and Delivery Techniques ............................................... 168 Community and Organizational Involvement ................................... 171 Support ............................................................................... 173 Demographic Differences .......................................................... 177 Proposed Framework for an Intensive Leadership Development Program... 179 Suggestions for Further Research .................................................. 183 Author’s Reflections on Leadership Development ............................. 185 ix ;-—_-—.-—- —-—-m Til “—njy". In: : ...-n or APPENDICES ................................................................................. 189 A. Focus Group Questioning Routes ............................................. 189 B. Focus Group Letters of Invitation ............................................. 199 C. Focus Group Consent Form .................................................... 201 D. Census Survey Instruments ..................................................... 202 E. Census Survey Cover Letters ................................................... 217 F. Program Application Forms .................................................... 221 G. Open-ended Question Responses .............................................. 226 ProFILE Survey Question 11 .............................................. 226 ProFILE Survey Question 18 .............................................. 231 f? Leadership Michigan Survey Question 7 ................................. 236 i; Leadership Michigan Survey Question 14243 : Works Cited .................................................................................... 248 x 10 ll 12 LIST OF TABLES Evolving Models of Leadership ...................................................... 23 Comparison of Quantitative Questionnaires ...................................... 50 Response from ProFILE Graduates ................................................ 55 Response from Leadership Michigan Graduates ................................. 57 Correlational Descriptors According to LA. Davis .............................. 61 Correlation of ProFILE Application and Impact Constructs ................... 138 Correlation of Leadership Michigan Impact and Application Constructs. . .. 139 Correlation of ProFILE Impact and Delivery Constructs ....................... 142 Correlation of Leadership Michigan Impact and Delivery Constructs. . .. . 145 Correlation of Leadership Michigan Involvement and Impact Constructs. . .151 Regression Analysis for ProFILE .................................................. 154 Regression Analysis for Leadership Michigan ................................... 155 xi 10 ll 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 LIST OF FIGURES ProFILE Respondents by Gender .................................................. 71 ProFILE Respondents by Age ...................................................... 72 ProFILE Graduates by Level of Educational Attainment ....................... 72 ProFILE Respondents by Years of Farm Bureau Membership ................ 73 ProFILE Respondents by Main Farming Enterprise ............................ 74 ProFILE Respondents by Type of Business Organization ..................... 74 ProFILE Respondents by Class of Participation ................................. 75 Leadership Michigan Respondents by Gender ................................... 84 Leadership Michigan Respondents by Age ....................................... 85 Leadership Michigan Respondents by Level of Educational Attainment. . .. 85 Leadership Michigan Respondents by Race ...................................... 86 Leadership Michigan Respondents by Type of Employment .................. 87 Leadership Michigan Respondents by Income ................................... 88 Leadership Michigan Respondents by Year of Participation .................. 89 Initial Contact with ProFILE Participants ........................................ 107 Completing the Application Increased Expectations for ProFILE ............ 108 The ProFILE Application was Competitive ...................................... 108 The ProFILE Application Provides a Clear Understanding of Program Expectations .......................................................................... 109 Commitment to County FB Increased Because of Program Nomination. . 1 10 Networking is a Valuable Part of ProFILE ....................................... 110 xii ‘1-“ _; --.h ..r— I‘! ‘0 uni: 4-24 21 Learning About Agricultural Issues is a Valuable Part of ProFILE ........... 111 22 The ProFILE Bus Trip is Valuable ................................................ 112 23 Role Play and Group Activities are Effective Teaching Methods ............. 112 24 ProFILE Should Offer More Opportunities for Spousal Involvement. . . . . 113 25 The Goal of ProFILE is to Develop County Farm Bureau Leadership ....... 114 26 The ProFILE Program was Challenging .......................................... 114 27 Program Emphasis on Selected Topics for ProFILE ............................ 115 28 Length of ProFILE Program ........................................................ 116 29 ProFILE Impact on Selected Topics ............................................... 117 30 ProFILE Impact on Selected Topics ............................................... 117 31 ProFILE Impact on Selected Topics ............................................... 118 32 ProFILE Graduate Agreement on Selected Topics .............................. 119 33 Farm Bureau Involvement of ProFILE Participants Before and After Program Participation ............................................................... 120 34 ProFILE Graduate Community Involvement Before and Afier Program Participation ........................................................................... 121 35 ProFILE Follow-up Activities ...................................................... 122 36 Initial Contact with Leadership Michigan Participants ......................... 123 37 The Application Process Increased Expectations for Leadership Michigan. 123 38 Nomination for Leadership Michigan Increased Commitment to Employer. 124 39 The Leadership Michigan Application was Competitive ....................... 125 40 The Leadership Michigan Application Provided a Clear Understanding of Program Expectations ............................................................... 125 xiii 41 42 43 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 Leadership Michigan was Challenging ........................................... 126 Networking is as Valuable as Learning About Key Social and Economic Issues .................................................................................. 127 Learning About Issues is as Valuable as Improving Leadership Abilities... 127 Leadership Michigan Did Not Invest Enough Time Improving Leadership Abilities ................................................................................ 128 The Best Way to Learn About Leadership is Through Role Play and Group Activities ...................................................................... 129 Leadership Michigan Should Provide More Opportunities for Group Discussion ............................................................................. 129 The Goal of Leadership Michigan is More Community Involvement. . . . . 130 Program Emphasis on Selected Topics ........................................... 131 Length of Leadership Michigan Experience ...................................... 131 Leadership Michigan Impact on Selected Topics ................................ 132 Leadership Michigan Impact on Selected Topics ................................ 133 Leadership Michigan was a Key Influence in Decision to Change Employers ............................................................................. 134 Leadership Michigan was Key Factor in Promotion ............................ 134 Leadership Michigan Follow-Up Activities ...................................... 135 Involvement of ProFILE Graduates ................................................ 149 Involvement of Leadership Michigan Graduates ................................. 150 Average Number of Leadership Roles for ProFILE Graduates by Gender... 153 Impact Construct Means by Program ............................................. 160 xiv n i. ‘1":11‘.‘ “‘2" *—-‘.- -r - u CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION The bus arrives outside the meeting place, and a group of anxious men and women pile on board. As they form a line to board the aging transport, each member of the group tries desperately to contain a severe case of butterflies in his/her stomach. A hushed murmur interrupts the morning silence as a small contingent engages in brief discussions, while others exchange forced smiles and offer greetings to one another. The discussion increases, punctuated by an occasional outburst of laughter, as the bus pulls away from the curb and heads for its destination. Ten minutes later, with the bus now in complete silence, the driver turns into the driveway and stops just outside a tall, steel gate edged with barbed wire. The sign above the gate reads Southern Michigan Prison - Jackson. The heavy gate is the first visible symbol of what life is like without access to the outside world. Once the group is inside the administration building, there is time to further prepare for this unique, even frightening, encounter with the criminal justice system. This is just one of the unusual experiences participants in the Michigan Chamber Foundation Leadership Michigan program encounter as part of a nine-month program aimed at exposing future leaders to critical Michigan issues. While this may be one of the more exotic leadership development programs offered by business, government, and industry across Michigan, it is not uncommon for firture leaders to be exposed to a wide array of learning experiences, all designed to help them discover what it means to be on the front line serving in a leadership role. This dissertation will focus on leadership and leadership development programs in two Michigan settings. It will analyze the expectations of those who sponsor these programs and of those who participate in these training experiences. The ultimate goal of this research effort is to provide insights into the creation and delivery of leadership training experiences. This study will include data collection from two organizations conducting intensive leadership development programs: (1) the Michigan Farm Bureau, and (2) the Michigan Chamber of Commerce. An intensive leadership development program, as referred to in this study, is a program from 6 to 24 months long which involves participants in multiple sessions and generally focuses on skill development, networking, and exposure to industry and community issues. What are the structures of these programs and how do they compare? How do these programs attempt to teach participants the skills and knowledge leaders will need to meet the challenges of this new millennium? Have graduates become better leaders as a result of their participation? These are some of the questions this research will consider. Michigan Farm Bureau The American farmer did not fare well during the first two decades of the twentieth century. The disparity between farm and non-farm incomes widened and, despite the work of commodity organizations to lobby on both state and local levels, the depressed economic condition of US. agriculture saw little or no improvement. “It was evident that, if his lot in life were to change for the better, the traditionally independent farmer 'qffi'fih‘ ‘1.— : i’inni'il" ':“- ‘—‘—‘ “fl needed to join with others to solve the problems which were too monumental for any individual to address on his own” (Wilber, 2). In an effort to bring about positive change for the industry, “The American Farm Bureau was formed when farmer delegates fiom 30 states gathered at Chicago’s LaSalle Hotel on November 12, 1919” (American Farm Bureau Federation Website, 2001). The Michigan Farm Bureau was represented at this meeting in Chicago because it had formed earlier in the same year. “On February 4, 1919, the county agents and farmers from fifly- seven county farm bureaus met in the lecture room of the Horticultural Building at Michigan Agricultural College (now Michigan State University). According to Article II of the by-laws, ‘the object of this organization shall be to encourage, aid, and correlate means for concerted action in the solution of agricultural problems of state or national scope.’ Membership dues would be $50 a year for each county farm bureau, and individual farmers would pay nominal dues of fifty cents or one dollar” (Brody, 32-33). Today, the Michigan Farm Bureau is the state’s largest general farm organization, with over 175,000 family members in 68 county Farm Bureaus (Michigan Farm Bureau Website, 2003). According to the Michigan Farm Bureau 2002 Policy Book, “Farm Bureau is an independent, non-governmental, voluntary organization of farm and ranch families united for the purpose of analyzing their problems and formulating action to achieve educational improvement, economic opportunity and social advancement and, thereby, to promote the national well being. Farm Bureau is local, county, state, national and international in its scope and influence and is nonpartisan, nonsectarian and nonsecret in character. Farm Bureau is the voice of agricultural producers at all levels” (3). A major strength of the Farm Bureau organization lies in its ability to influence policy on the local, state, and national levels. Farm Bureau members lobby at all levels of government on issues of interest not only to the farm community, but also to all members of society. The F arm Bureau has policies covering issues such as tax reform, private property rights, the rural environment, economic growth, and the quality and safety of the food supply. With hundreds of members serving on local, state, and national boards of directors and the various committees and task forces necessary to maintain such an organizational structure, it is apparent why the Farm Bureau organization has placed a high priority on leadership development. While leadership training has always been a key area of focus for the organization, in 1990 the Michigan F arm Bureau created “ProFILE”- short for Project File - Farm Bureau’s Institute for Leadership Education. The Institute’s major objective is to develop management and leadership skills, provide teamwork opportunities, and instill pride in the agricultural industry and the F arm Bureau. Experiencing a mix of programmatic skill development, networking, and learning about the Farm Bureau organization and agricultural industry, ProFILE graduates invest 15 days over 15 months participating in this intensive leadership development experience. During the last 12 years, the organization has conducted seven Institutes, producing over 150 graduates. Numerous graduates serve in leadership positions on the county and state levels of the organization and in key positions within county government and throughout the state’s agricultural industry. The Michigan Chamber of Commerce “Speaking 3 future, that’s it,” the interviewer replied somewhat incredulously? “That’s leadership,” replied the Executive Director of the Michigan Chamber Foundation Leadership Michigan program. Upon further reflection, what first seemed like a somewhat shallow response to a very serious research question captures the essence of a the expected outcomes of this experiential training and leadership development program. By helping graduates gain a unique perspective on, and understanding of, the most l critical issues facing the state and providing them an opportunity to create a dynamic E network of business and civic leaders, graduates of Leadership Michigan are indeed L positioned to “Speak a F uture.’ " Leadership Michigan was created by the Michigan Chamber Foundation, a non-profit entity of the Michigan Chamber of Commerce, in 1988. Over three hundred individuals have graduated from the program. Many now serve as corporate CEO’s, public servants in state and local government, leaders of non-profit organizations, and as active volunteers throughout the state. Alumni value the experience for providing numerous benefits including leadership training, a chance to be part of a diverse group of current and future leaders, and an opportunity to expand their thinking outside the box about Michigan’s future. The Michigan Chamber of Commerce (hereafter referred to as “the Chamber”) was established in 1959 to represent employer interests by working to promote favorable conditions for the economic well being of the state. Programs and services are designed to monitor and analyze laws and regulations of interest to employers and to make the views of members regarding pending legislation known to local, state, and federal decision-makers. The Chamber conducts a variety of training and educational programs for members including conferences, seminars, and distance and on-line education. The Chamber works with individual members and their respective staffs to encourage ethical business practices and standards of conduct. The organization is also involved in the litigation of key issues of importance to job providers in the state (Michigan Chamber of Commerce Website, 2001). The Chamber has about 7,000 business, local chambers of commerce, and trade and professional associations who are members. This network of members spans all eighty- three Michigan counties and encompasses a broad cross-section of the state’s economy. The organization’s mission statement is. . .“to advance human progress through an economic, political and social system based on individual freedom, incentive, opportunity and responsibility. ” Similar to the Farm Bureau, the Michigan Chamber of Commerce recognizes the need for continuous leadership development to maintain healthy communities across the state. Leadership Michigan was created to enhance the skills and abilities of current and future leaders and to provide what Chamber President Jim Barrett describes as “a cadre of informed decision-makers who can help bring perspective to the debate surrounding Michigan’s future.” Purpose of This Study The overarching purpose of this study is to analyze the attitudes of intensive leadership development program graduates regarding how these programs have affected their ability to provide leadership within their respective organizations and communities. The researcher will also compare and contrast the graduates’ attitudes regarding participation in leadership development training and the outcomes they experienced. Importance of This Study Effective leadership must be present for an organization to be successful. This is one of the first ideas suggested by Bennis and Nanus in their book, Leaders - The trate 'es or Taking Change. Their primary thesis is that “Leadership is the pivotal force behind successful organizations” (2). The two authors contend that given the current challenges of our society the need was “never so great” for leadership training and development. Oakley and Krug, in their book Enlightened Leadership — Getting to the Heart of Change, note that “enlightened leaders nurture and encourage their people to be open, creative, innovative, and find what it takes to achieve their shared objectives. They bring out the best in people” (19). Given the critical nature of leadership to the success of an organization, this study of intensive leadership development programs is important because: A. To the researcher’s knowledge, no comprehensive, research-based study has been conducted examining the attitudes of graduates from these programs. B. The sponsoring organizations have a need and desire to evaluate the impact of these programs and explore changes as supported by the results of this study. C. The agricultural sector is undergoing significant transition. The need for dynamic leadership to guide this transition is critical to the future of the industry, in general, and to the Farm Bureau organization, in particular. D. Competition for volunteers on the local and state level is significant. The ability of Farm Bureau and the Chamber to attract the most effective leaders to invest time and energy in their programs could be significantly enhanced by providing effective, well-respected leadership development programs. E. Leadership is a common topic of discussion among community leaders. Many local leadership development programs have been in existence for several years. The results of this research may provide ideas that will enhance the effectiveness of these ongoing leadership development efforts. Research Objectives To address the purposes described above, the specific objectives of this study are: 1. To identify, analyze, and describe participant attitudes about experiences provided by the Michigan Farm Bureau ProFILE program and The Michigan Chamber Foundation Leadership Michigan program. 2. To identify the skills and abilities necessary to provide leadership within these organizations and in community service. 3. To compare the two programs with specific respect to the graduates’ attitudes identified in objective one and the necessary skills and abilities identified in objective two. 4. To examine selected demographic characteristics of leadership development program graduates. These characteristics are: age, gender, and level of educational attainment. Research Questions Major research questions designed to guide the collection and analysis of data for this study are (following each question, a notation indicates which of the four research objectives listed in the previous section align with that particular research question): A. What is the value of leadership development programs among program graduates? (Objective 1) B. What leadership skills do graduates of leadership development programs identify as being most critical to fulfilling their leadership roles? (Objective 2) C. Did participation in a leadership development program provide the opportunity to develop or enhance the skills identified in item B? (Objectives 1, 2 and 3) D. How do the attitudes of graduates regarding the process of program recruitment and selection compare with their attitudes toward the actual skills training they received? (Objectives 1 and 3) E. What are the attitudes of graduates of leadership development programs regarding the value of the opportunity to network with other participants and community and industry leaders compared to the value of actual leadership skills training they received? (Objectives 1 and 2) F. What experiences do graduates of leadership development programs value as “most effective” and what are the best methods to deliver these experiences? (Objective 1) G. Do the graduates of intensive leadership development programs increase their level of community and/or organizational involvement following participation in these programs? (Objectives 1 and 2) H. Is participant support a key factor in the level of programmatic impact reported by graduates of these programs? (Objective 1) 10 I. Is there a relationship between selected demographic characteristics (age, gender, and level of educational attainment) and the attitudes of participants in leadership development programs? (Objective 3) Assumptions This study will be subject to the following assumptions: 1. Participants in this study will provide true and candid observations of their involvement in intensive leadership development programs. 2. Participants in these intensive leadership development programs come from a variety of backgrounds and training. Therefore, their opinions regarding the skills acquired and experiences they received, as a result of participation, will reflect that diversity. 3. The focus group and survey techniques used to conduct this study have been used by other researchers and have been found reliable. It is assumed that similar results will be achieved with participants and sponsors of intensive leadership development programs. 11 Limitations of the Study This study will be subject to the following limitations: A. The data obtained will be limited to participants of two intensive leadership development programs and from content analyses of program materials. B. The responses expressed by participants will be limited to their judgment and experience serving in leadership roles in their respective organizations and local communities. Others in the organization may interpret the importance of certain skills and abilities differently. C. The training and experience gained by graduates of intensive leadership development programs will be subject to the level of skill and experience they had acquired prior to or following participation. This training and experience may reflect both positively and negatively on their evaluation of such programs. D. This study will be conducted using selected qualitative and quantitative research methods including focus groups and survey data collection and analysis. Therefore, it is subject to the limitations of these research techniques. 12 B. As Ary, Jacobs, and Razavieh (1996) suggest, advocates of qualitative research acknowledge the potential subjective perception and biases of both participants and the researcher with the results of these research techniques. Because of the researcher’s experience and familiarity with leadership development programs, a grounded-theory approach to data analysis was used. However, the author acknowledges this as a limitation of this research study. Definition of Terms The following terms are defined in the context in which they will be used in this study: American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBE). A national organization consisting of farm and ranch families who join their county Farm Bureau. County Farm Bureaus are independent organizations that collect their own dues and conduct local business through a County Farm Bureau Board of Directors. The county Farm Bureaus are organized by joining a state Farm Bureau that has an organizational structure similar to that of the counties. State Farm Bureaus, in turn, choose to federate with the national organization. “The Farm Bureau is an independent, non-governmental, voluntary organization of farm and ranch families united for the purpose of analyzing their problems and formulating action to achieve educational improvement, economic opportunity and social advancement and, thereby, to promote the national well 13 being. Farm Bureau is nonpartisan, nonsectarian and nonsecret in character” (Michigan Farm Bureau 2002 Policy Book). Michigan Farm Bureau (MFR). The statewide Farm Bureau organization which is organized into 68 county Farm Bureau’s to serve the needs of farm and rural families in Michigan. Michigan Chamber of Commerce. A non-profit association established in 1959 to represent employer interests by working to promote conditions favorable to economic development in Michigan. The mission of the Michigan Chamber of Commerce is to advance human progress through an economic, political, and social system based on individual freedom, incentive, opportunity, and responsibility. Intensive Leadership Development Programs. Any one of several leadership development experiences currently conducted by various local, state, and national organizations. These programs are from 6 to 24 months in length, involve participants in multiple sessions, and generally focus on skill development, networking, and exposure to industry, economic, and community issues. There are approximately ten intensive leadership programs conducted on a county basis. Examples of county-based programs are Leadership Shiawassee and Leadership Oakland. In addition, there are approximately two dozen others conducted by businesses, statewide associations, and various industry groups. 14 Leadership. “The true measure of leadership is influence - nothing more, nothing less” (Maxwell, 1991). For purposes of this study, leadership of a county Farm Bureau or within a community setting means providing the vision, the communication and organizational skills, and the influence needed to motivate a group of constituents to accomplish the vision. Leadership Michigan. An intensive leadership development program conducted by the Michigan Foundation. The program consists of eight to nine educational sessions held over a nine-month period. The sessions are held in a variety of locations across the state and focus on various social and economic issues. ProFILE . An acronym for Project FILE, which stands for the Farm Bureau Institute for Leadership Education, a 15-month, intensive leadership development program conducted by the Michigan Farm Bureau for young farmers between the ages of22 and 35. Attitudes. As used in the title of this dissertation, attitudes describe a mental position with regard to a fact or state and/or a feeling or emotion toward a fact or state (Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary). Specifically, the term is used to describe the “mental position” of intensive leadership development program graduates regarding their leadership training experience and how this learning experience has influenced their ability to practice leadership since program participation. 15 ROPES Course. A ROPES Course is a series of supervised individual and/or group challenges that can be used for recreational, educational, developmental, and therapeutic purposes. Summary In Chapter One, the researcher has provided an overview of this research effort with brief histories and descriptions of each of the participating organizations. A discussion of the purpose and importance of the study was offered, along with a list of the research objectives and research questions that were used to guide the collection and analysis of data. Finally, a list of assumptions and limitations of the study were offered for consideration, along with a definition of selected key terms. Chapter Two will provide a selected review of literature on the subjects of leadership, leadership development programs, and adult learning. 16 CHAPTER TWO REVIEW OF RELATED RESEARCH AND LITERATURE Introduction Chapter 2 is a review of recent research pertaining to leadership, leadership development, and adult learning. The thoughts and ideas derived fiom this review were used, in part, to structure (1) the questioning route for the focus group research used for this dissertation and (2) the census questionnaires administered to graduates of the ProFILE and Leadership Michigan programs. The review includes sections on the broad concept of leadership, an overview of leadership development programs, including a brief review of the concepts associated with adult learning, and a discussion of an evolving definition of leadership and its implications for training leaders in the twenty-first century. What Is Leadership? “Decades of academic analysis have given us more than 350 definitions of leadership” (Bennis and Nanus, 1985, p. 4). Leadership, as Conger (1992) suggests, “is a complex subject” (xii), one that would require volumes of literature review to cover in its entirety. In this first section, the researcher will review some of the more common theories of leadership to provide an overview of the subject and create a scholarly basis of understanding for the leadership development programs which are the focus of this 17 dissertation. After this overview, a more definitive look at an “evolving” model of leadership, or as McCauley et al. in The Handbook of Leadership Development (1998) suggest, “leadership as a distributed process shared by many,” will be undertaken. According to these authors, “Instead of thinking that each new idea of leadership ceases to exist as it is replaced by the next one, it is more helpful to think of every new idea as containing the previous ideas and building something new on them, using the older ideas as a base” (408). One of the most common definitions for the term leader is a person who has a following. This may seem obvious, but one is not able to broker influence or accomplish significant organizational goals without the support and effort of a group of followers (Lynch, 1993). John Maxwell (1998) suggests that, “If you don’t have influence, you will never be able to lead others” (11). According to Maxwell, the second law of leadership, “The Law of Influence,” reads “The True Measure of Leadership is Influence — Nothing More, Nothing Less” (11). Gardner (1990) supports the concept of influence as being critical to leadership: “Leadership is the process of persuasion or example by which an individual (or leadership team) induces a group to pursue objectives held by the leader or shared by the leader and his followers” (1). Leaders are defined in terms of their physical, material, or symbolic attributes, as well as the amount of power they possess, according to Etzioni (1964). He notes that coercive power rests on the leader’s willingness to apply physical sanctions or threaten his or her followers. Etzioni classified power as remunerative, based on the leader’s control over material resources and rewards, or normative, based on the allocation and manipulation of symbolic rewards and deprivations. Today, while power is still recognized as a means 18 ___....-_--. as.- F" 2. of leadership by some organizations, many leaders and their organizations have adopted a more participative approach to working with followers. Another way of understanding leadership is offered by Cox and Hoover (1992), who suggest that a leader is a person who possesses the greatest number of “desirable traits,” such as originality, imagination, ability to take risk, trust, alertness, knowledge, and persistence. The literature has many lists associated with the skills, abilities, and characteristics needed to be an effective leader. Among the most common skills listed are communication, speaking, listening, written communication, delegation and team building, planning and organization, the ability to effect change within an organization, timely decision-making, integrity, trust, vision, and recognition (Oakley and Krug 1991 , Bennis and Nanus 1985, Covey 1991, DePree 1989, Frigon and Jackson 1996). The elements of leadership, according to Blake and McCanse (1991), are conflict resolution, initiative, inquiry, advocacy, decision-making, and critique. All six are vital to the exercise of effective leadership and teamwork. Conflict, according to these researchers, can be either “disruptive” or, if handled properly, “creative and constructive” (l6). Conflict resolution is critical to leadership, and those who do it well evoke respect. Demonstrating initiative is often viewed as a necessary leadership trait. According to Blake and McCanse, “Initiative is the character and intensity of effort, or drive, supporting the action taken by an organization” (18). Inquiry allows a leader to gain access to the facts fiom a variety of sources, including those who are part of the team. A leader understands the value of inquiry and utilizes this skill by asking relevant questions. 19 “To advocate is to take a position, express one’s opinions, attitudes, ideas, and convictions” (20). The strength of a leader’s conviction is one way to evaluate his/her leadership abilities. How the individual advocates a position can be indicative of his/her leadership style when dealing with people. It is through decision-making that resources are applied to performance. It may involve individual decision-making, delegation of responsibilities to one or more individuals, or teamwork, where all available resources are brought to bear on making and implementing decisions. There are several ways to evaluate how team members solve problems as they seek to accomplish organizational goals. Critique is the key to this process. Effective critique requires interrupting an activity long enough to see alternative possibilities, and to anticipate and avoid any actions that may have adverse consequences. When critique is done effectively, the leader involves everyone in the process of decision-making and moves the organization forward by effectively accomplishing goals. (Blake and McCanse (1991, pp. 16-22). Frigon and Jackson (1996) discuss what they refer to as the building blocks of leadership. The authors focus their attention on leadership that is “competent, honest, forward thinking, inspiring, and successfirl” (2). Leaders who exercise their influence based on this model create an atmosphere of trust. They care about the contributions of each member of the team and build a bond with their followers based on honesty and a shared vision. Avolio (1999) uses the term “transformational leadership” to describe leaders who possess the skills to guide an organization. His Full Leadership Development model is based on the four I’s of transformational leadership. They are idealized influence, 20 describing leaders who set examples by showing determination, displaying extraordinary talent, risk-taking, and dedication to the cause. Inspirational leadership, which he refers to as providing meaning and challenge to an organization’s work, helping to create an optimistic future and high expectations among followers. The third I is intellectual stimulation, creating urgency on the part of followers by encouraging creative problem solving and the use of humor to stimulate new thinking. And the final I, individualized consideration, characterizes a leader as one who shows care and concern for the followers’ well-being through counseling and support. Kouzes and Posner, in The Leadership Challenge (2002), offer their version of leadership by suggesting five practices that a leader should strive to exhibit. They are: 1) Model the Way by clarifying personal values and exhibiting actions that support those values. 2) Inspire a Shared Vision of an exciting future and enlist others in the creation and support of accomplishing that vision. 3) Challenge the Process by seeking innovative ways to "change, grow, innovate and improve" (177). 4) Enable Others to Act through trust and the sharing of power and discretion. 5) Encourage the Heart through recognition and creating a spirit of community. This impressive 400 page book is based on research conducted by the two authors over many decades of asking leaders about their "Best Leadership Experiences" and follow-up interviews with others in the organizations these leaders were part of. The 21 outcome of this research suggests that not only can leadership be learned, but each of us, no matter where we are in the organizational hierarchy, have the opportunity to hone and develop leadership abilities. A popular leadership style receiving a great deal of attention in current theory is referred to as charismatic leadership. In the article “Charismatic Leadership: The Hidden Controversy,” Gibson, Harmon and Blackwell discuss six common characteristics of charismatic leaders. They include: 1) A high level of confidence in their own abilities 2) A vision of how to improve an organization 3) Extraordinary communication skills which are extremely effective when articulating a shared organizational vision 4) A strong work ethic 5) High energy and enthusiasm 6) A high level of commitment to their organization or cause Charismatic leaders also exhibit a high level of conviction about the correctness of their ideas for change, and generally are recognized as role models by their followers. Finally, the concept of the leader as a servant is common with regard to public service or in connection with non-profit boards and committees, but it is also a theme associated with business and industry. Herman Miller’s Max DePree (1989) says, “The art of leadership is liberating people to do what is required of them in the most effective and humane way possible. Thus, the leader is the ‘servant’ of his/her followers, and his/her primary goal is to remove the obstacles that prevent them from doing their jobs.” In short, leadership enables followers and their organizations to “reach their full potential” (XIX). 22 A New Way of Looking at Leadership In recent years, a somewhat different view of leadership has begun to emerge. Not one that is exclusive or supercedes other theories which have been offered in the past, but one that seeks to encompass and build on them by using the previous ideas as a base. “Leadership is now understood by many to imply collective action, orchestrated in such a way as to bring about significant change while raising the competencies and motivation of all those involved” (Bornstein and Smith, 281). Wilfied Drath (1998) suggests that as this new paradigm for leadership evolves, nothing useful will be left behind. For example, the concept of power and control is still useful because in some situations it may be the most effective leadership style for accomplishing a task. Drath uses the following table as a means of conveying what he views as the evolution of leadership. TABLE 1. EVOLVING MODELS OF LEADERSHIP Ancient Traditional Modern Future Idea of Domination Influence Common Goals Reciprocal Leadership Relationships Action of Commanding Motivating Creating inner Mutual Leadership follower’s follower’s commitment meaning making Focus of Power of the Interpersonal Self-knowledge Interactions of Leadership leader skills of the of the leader the group Development leader The Center for Creative Leadership — Handbook of Leadership Development (p. 408) 23 The concept outlined in the table above suggests we are moving from an mderstanding of leadership as practiced by individuals to one of leadership as a listributed process shared by many. As the world becomes smaller through global ransportation and technology, greater diversity of cultures and points of view will bring reople together as communities with a need to define goals from a unified, common >erspective. What seems to be needed to meet the complex needs of a modern society is a ban of leadership that engages differences and supports them in a creative and useful avay. To accommodate this new reality, leadership programs of the future will not only rain leaders, but will also focus on the idea of developing leadership (Drath, 408-410). In “A Leadership Approach for the New Millennium,” Outcalt and his associates offer heir perspective of creating leadership development programs for post-secondary :tudents. However, they are equally applicable for training all leaders. The article iroffers five elements that should be included throughout student leadership programs: ‘understanding the complexity and diversity of an interrelated system; critical reflecting ind learning with a commitment to the betterment of society; valuing differences; :mbracing inclusiveness; and practicing collaboration” (179). The literature has numerous references to the importance of “relationships” for the tractice of leadership. Wheatley, in Leadership and the New Science (1999), discusses juantmn physics and how it applies to relationships. According to this author, scientists row know that what we learned in elementary school about particles (neutrons and :lectrons) is not exactly the truth. The particles are actually energy sources that come nto being momentarily as a result of their interaction with other particles. Wheatley suggests that leadership can be likened to the workings of an atom; organizations 24 represent a new world of relationships where leadership is dependent on the relationships they have with others. She suggests the world of relationships is "rich and complex," and the task of a leader is to learn how to become a better listener and to respect the uniqueness of others because it will lead to stronger relationships. In the future, the "power in organizations will be the capacity generated by relationships" (Wheatley, 39). Heifetz (1994) also supports the notion of relationships and suggests that "relationships are derived primarily from trust" (106). According to Kouzes and Posner (2002), there are four essentials for strengthening relationships and creating a climate of trust and positive interdependence throughout an organization. They are: ensure self-leadership, provide choice, develop competence and confidence, and foster accountability. They suggest that by using these essentials, leaders can increase constituents’ beliefs in their own ability to make a difference. By acting as a coach and an educator, the leader provides support and encouragement for ongoing growth and development. In short, the leader creates an environment where the constituents become leaders themselves, and the result is what Senge (1990) calls a “leaming organization,” one in which the sum of the parts is greater than the whole (12). As Kouzes and Posner (2002) note, shared power results in higher job satisfaction and fulfillment, increased creativity, and the creation of an organization where leaders and constituents are mutually influenced by one another and where everyone’s influence increases. When leaders share power with others, "they are demonstrating profound trust in and respect for others abilities. When leaders help others grow and develop, that help is reciprocated” (287). 25 Are leaders born or made? Conger and Benjamin (1999) and others suggest the most common answer to this philosophical inquiry is both! Brungardt (1996) notes that those who are involved in the business of leadership development believe that at least a portion of the skills and abilities necessary to become a leader can be developed through instructional programs. One also has to assume the participants in these programs, along with their sponsoring organizations, agree that leadership abilities can be enhanced by participation in training and development programs. “Why else would 60% of this nation’s largest corporations offer some type of leadership training for their employees” (Brungardt, 89)? Most researchers are quick to acknowledge that personality, natural talent, and environment are also key factors in a leader’s success. Jay Conger (1992) agrees that genetics can be a major advantage for some leaders. However, his research suggests that training can play a vital role in leadership development. Gardner (1990) supports the notion that leadership can be taught, suggesting that “the development of leaders is possible on a scale far beyond anything we have ever attempted” (XV). Later, he dismisses the assertion that leaders are born, not made, as “Nonsense!” Leadership Development Programs “Developing leaders has been around since antiquity. From ancient Egypt there is evidence that preparing the pharaohs for leadership was a matter of importance to which great thought and analysis were devoted” (McCauley et al., 405). As our concept of leadership has changed over time, so has our approach to leadership development. Our view of leadership as being something one is born to assume has given way to an understanding that nearly everyone is placed in a leadership role from time to time. As 26 such, early leadership training was targeted at people assumed by birth to be destined for leadership roles. Once this limited view of leadership was transcended, a much broader, more democratic view of leadership training and development began to emerge. The military has long studied the concepts of leadership and leadership development. “From the day of its founding on March 16, 1802, West Point has grown in its size and stature, but it remains committed to the task of producing commissioned leaders of character for America’s Army” (US Military Academy website 2003). Browne and Cohn (1958) discuss how psychologists and sociologists became active in the scholarly debate of the human sciences and the study of leadership development in the early 1900’s. According to Stogdill (1974), the first research on leadership training took place in the early 1900’s and involved school children. The formation of leadership clubs and research involving student government provided opportunities to study training programs focused around “social purpose, initiative, and cooperation” (178). In the early 1950’s, Jennings studied two groups of 20 production supervisors engaged in leadership training and, at about the same time, Barnlund “demonstrated that trained leaders, in comparison to a control group, improved in leadership quality in group discussion, regulated participation more, and exhibited greater ability to resolve conflict in group discussion” (Stodgill 1974, 180). Conger (1992) suggests the resurging business environment of the 1960’s and 70’s was fueled, in part, by an enterprising group of entrepreneurs who drew widespread attention and prompted the business community to begin looking for ways to “grow” new leaders to fuel the economy. The result was an increased emphasis on leadership development and the creation of concepts such as the Managerial Grid. In 1970, the 27 Center for Creative Leadership was founded in Greensboro, North Carolina, and is today one of the largest institutions in the world focusing solely on leadership. Every year, some 20,000 managers and executives, educators, government administrators, and community service and volunteer leaders attend the Center’s programs. One of the easiest ways to distinguish among leadership development programs is to divide them into two broad categories: those which are conducted outside the context of the participants’ organizational role and those which Dr. Frank Fear (2001) refers to as natural, i.e., those which are conducted within the context of the participants’ organization and role. According to Fear, both have validity in preparing individuals for leadership roles. While natural programs can focus on real work situations and provide practical application almost immediately, they ‘can also be so narrow in their approach as to stifle creativity. Outside programs may provide more breadth of experience, but they may lack a connection to the need for workplace application. So, as with many training and professional development programs, the key is identifying expectations and designing programs that fit the balanced needs of participants and their organizations. Jay Conger (1992) offers a more research-based typology for program classification in his book, Learning to Lead. Conger suggests four approaches to leadership development programs. The first is personal growth, which assumes that for leaders to be effective they must have a profound understanding of their personal dreams and abilities. Once they have developed an understanding of self, they can concentrate on creating organizations that treat others as human beings and make the workplace an environment that encourages commitment and trust. 28 Conger’s second approach to leadership development is through conceptual understanding. Proponents of this approach use models and case studies to encourage future leaders to think deeply about the theory of leadership. The responsibility to actually practice the art of leadership, based on this theory, is left to the participants and their organization after the teaching is complete. The third approach is leadership development through feedback. Many of these programs are built around feedback instruments designed to provide an assessment of various leadership skills and abilities. By providing a benchmark to work fiom, participants can be coached as a result of peer and subordinate feedback to improve their overall abilities to lead. The final leadership development program approach researched by Conger is skill building. Perhaps one of the most common approaches, this method attempts to identify key leadership skills and provides the training and practice necessary to achieve an acceptable level of mastery for each skill. Because newer definitions of leadership involve more complex skills, this approach has become more difficult to teach. However, many training programs are still focused on skill development, e. g., Avolio’s transformational leadership model discussed earlier. One area of keen interest for this researcher as it relates to leadership development and training programs has to do with the participant selection process. According to Smith and Peterson (1988) and Conger and Benjamin (1999), the selection process is critical to the success of leadership development programs. “An element connecting the training of individuals with the culture of many organizations is that nomination of an individual to attend a particular course is treated as a symbolic statement. . .the impact of the course 29 may have little to do with its content (Smith and Peterson 1988, page 164).” The authors suggest that clear selection criteria should be established and adhered to for the program to have the desired impact on an organization. Gardner (1990) also discusses the importance of the nomination and selection process. “Programs that bring young potential leaders together for a shared experience have an effect over and above the nature of the particular program. Just the fact of having been singled out has a motivating effect, and contact with peers may have considerable impact” (167). Conger (1992) suggests successful leadership training programs must be designed to include four key elements. The first is the development of leadership skills, discussed earlier in this literature review. According to Conger, experience provides ample opportunities to hone and improve skills, but this haphazard approach to skill development leaves too much to chance. Training can formalize the process and ensure that leaders receive exposure to critical skills early in their leadership life, rather than allowing chance to be the teacher. The second critical element for leadership development is training designed to enhance the leamer’s conceptual abilities. Conceptual thinking allows leaders to think strategically about both the current situation and the future of their organization. While a significant portion of this ability comes from native intelligence and contextual experience, formal training, through case study and coursework, can encourage the development of a more analytical approach to problem solving and decision-making. Creating programs that tap into participant needs and interests and build self-esteem is the third element of a successful program, according to Conger. These components are linked to a leader’s own motivation to lead and formulate vision. Selecting the right 30 individuals, those with the desire and motivation to lead and to enhance their leadership abilities, is an important factor. Programs must also provide training experiences designed to help participants clarify and develop their personal interests. Confidence- building exercises, coupled with feedback on individual strengths and weaknesses, can help build self-esteem and assure training programs are appealing to the individual interests of participants. Finally, helping potential leaders identify ineffective interpersonal behaviors and providing the motivation and support to eliminate or overcome their impact on successful leadership is the fourth of Conger’s elements of a successful leadership development program. Through feedback, leaders can develop more effective interpersonal skills and overcome behavioral obstacles to leading. The Center for Creative Leadership has identified three elements which distinguish successful leadership development programs from those that fail. They are assessment, challenge, and support. “When we look at any type of [leadership] development experience — from training programs to job assignments — we find that they are most effective when all three elements are present” (McCauley et al., 1998). Assessment is important because it provides program participants an understanding of their strengths and weaknesses and their current leadership performance. When an experience provides open and honest feedback on how one is doing, and what he/she might do to improve, this critical self-reflection can lead to a better understanding of the situation and provide a learning opportunity. Challenging experiences force individuals outside of their comfort zone. These experiences require participants to question their current skill set, frame of approach, and leadership practices. People feel challenged 31 when they encounter experiences that are beyond their current capabilities or flames of reference. Dealing with conflict, overcoming a hardship, and confronting a new situation--each can provide a sense of challenge. Research at the Center for Creative Leadership suggests, that through “a formal leadership program, participants have the chance to step back from day-to-day routine and develop a deeper understanding of their preferences, strengths, and blind spots” (15). And finally, support, in the form of cont messages from instructors, classmates, and perhaps most importantly, the participants’ sponsoring organizations, is critical for long-term impact from a leadership development experience. “[Support] is needed to help them maintain a positive view of themselves as people capable of dealing with challenges, who can learn and grow, who are worthy and valuable” (15). Burke, writing in the American Society of Training and Development guide, mag Works — Training and Development Practices (1997), supports the elements suggested by Conger and McCauley and her colleagues that separate successful leadership development programs from those which are not. According to Burke, successful programs are multi-dimensional in their approach to teaching about the complex topic of leadership. Those programs which result in changes in skills, attitudes, and behaviors of participants include several types of leadership development activities including: assessment through feedback; mentoring through networking with colleagues, peers, and others; experiential learning opportunities; skill, organizational, and issues learning, closely associated with the context in which the participant will be fulfilling a leadership role; and finally, intellectual activities designed to increase the philosophical knowledge of participants. 32 “Successful leaders are learners. And the learning process is ongoing, a result of self- discipline and perseverance. The goal each day must be to get a little better, to build on the previous day’s progress” (Maxwell, 1998, 24). The leadership literature almost universally affirms that a key characteristic of outstanding leaders is the willingness and ability to be a life-long learner. Adult Learning Malcolm Knowles suggests there are two models of learning: [pedagogical, from the Greek paid, meaning child, and andragogical, from the Greek aner, meaning adult, which Cookson (1998) suggests is the “art” of helping adults leam.] The major difference between these two approaches is the recognition that children are dependent learners. That is, they depend on the “teacher” to make all of the decisions regarding what will be learned, how it will be learned, and if it is learned. Adults, on the other hand, are viewed as independent learners. They like to choose what to learn and how to learn it. Based on these assumptions, adults should be involved in the process of planning and conducting what they will learn (Daugherty and Cadwalader, OSU Extension Bulletin T-8202). Qualitative research by Houle is generally sited as the seminal work in the area of adult motivation for learning (Cookson, 1998, 212). Houle describes three types of adult learners: 1) goal oriented, 2) activity oriented, and 3) learning oriented. Learners who approach the acquisition of knowledge from a goal-oriented style, according to Houle, are seeking to increase their knowledge to meet a specific objective which they have clearly defined prior to engaging in a learning activity. Houle’s research and the subsequent work of others such as Tough, Boshier and Collins, suggest this is the most common 33 orientation for adult learners. Adult learners who are activity oriented participate in training and development programs “primarily for the sake of activity itself” (Cookson, 1998, 213). Their motivation may be to earn recognition or escape boredom. These learners generally exhibit minimal interest in the actual content of a training program. However, they are generally engaged with other participants for the social interaction and stimulation of being around others who have similar interests. The third type of adult learners, by Houle’s definition, are those who are learning oriented and interested in pursuing learning for its own sake. For adults with this orientation, it is very natural to enroll in training and development programs as a routine part of their leisure time activities. In 1979, Tough used a series of qualitative interviews to confirm the typology offered by Houle more than a decade earlier. While Houle suggests adults will approach learning fi'om one of the three orientations, Tough believes adults often approach learning from two or more orientations. According to Tough, “(1) some learners start with an awareness that they want to do something and seek out learning activities that provide needed knowledge and skills; (2) some learners start with a basic curiosity and seek learning to broaden their awareness and understanding related to the topic or issue in question; and (3) some learners start with a decision to spend some extra time on learning, deciding subsequently what they will learn during that time” (Cookson, 1998, 213) Birkenholz (1999) provides a brief overview of four adult learning theories. The first is the behaviorist theory, founded on the belief that learning is a direct result of a “connection between a stimulus and a response” (22). According to supporters of this 34 theory, learning is manifested by a desire to change behavior, and what one learns is determined by what is happening in the learner’s environment. Trainers who are influenced by this orientation spend considerable time designing the proper environment where the learner will experience reinforcement and develop the desired behaviors. The second, cognitive learning theory, was proposed by Gestalt learning theorists. Those who view adult learning fi'om a cognitive orientation believe that learning results fi'om internal insight and that control of the learning process flows fiom the individual rather than the environment. The humanist theory is based on research by Maslow and Rogers (Birkenholtz, 23). This orientation relies on Maslow’s Hierarchy of Human Needs to explain the motivations behind adult learning behavior. The humanist approach suggests that adult learners desire personal involvement in what and how they learn, that learning is the result of self-initiative, and that adult learners are motivated by an “intrinsic desire to achieve one’s fullest potential” (Birkenholz, 23). The fourth major adult learning theory, according to Birkenholz, is social learning theory. “This orientation suggests that adults learn through observation, and upon reflection, will imitate or modify their own behavior accordingly” (25). The social learning theory incorporates concepts from each of the three previous theories in that proponents of this approach to adult learning believe learning is a direct result of the interaction between adults and their environment. According to Birkenholz, this theory appears to provide an explanation of how adults acquire specific work or civic roles such as leadership, management, and mentoring. Knowles offers five areas of consideration in his andragogical model for adult learners: 35 l ‘I ulna- o a. a . . Humans move from total dependency at birth toward increasing self- directedness. However, even highly skilled, self-directed learners occasionally want to learn new knowledge or skills beyond their previous experience and can be dependent learners. . Human beings enter into a learning situation with varied backgrounds. Effective adult learning environments utilize this diversity and create opportunities for mentoring relationships between individuals and small group interaction. . Individuals vary in their orientation to learning. Adult learners may be more subj cot-centered, or they may be more task-centered in their approach to learning a new skill or activity. For independent learners, these differing orientations should be accommodated by individualized learning plans tailored to their life situations. . Humans are ready to learn those things they perceive will be useful to them. . Individual learners experience both external and internal motivation. However, for adults, internal motivation is often a more potent force. The Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service suggests the following considerations with regard to teaching adults. First, involve adults in planning what they will learn. Spend time at the beginning of a training session discovering what they know and expect to gain fiom an experience. Create a people-centered learning environment that is positive and values participation. Allow learners to become acquainted with one another and encourage questions. Structure the learning environment to bridge the gap between current and new knowledge, attitudes, or skills. Provide ample opportunity for 36 “”7"?" participants to practice what they are learning through discussion, role-playing, demonstration, and practice (Daugherty and Cadwalader, OSU Extension Bulletin T- 8202) The concepts of adult learning, discussed in this literature review, are important considerations for individuals and organizations designing leadership development experiences. The following review of program structure will reveal additional research supporting these findings. ._ -.__._._.__.. h_. .-_ h "‘ ,1 ‘ . u r Leadership Development Program Structure “Leadership development refers to any form of growth or development in a person’s life cycle that encourages, improves or promotes his or her leadership potential” (Brungardt, 83). Many leadership development program organizers recognize that formal programs are critical for creating an awareness of what leadership is, but a substantial amount of actual leadership development occurs through experience. Most researchers, including Conger and Brungardt, agree that training programs require a mix of lecture, discussion, case study or analysis of current work-related issues, role-play, group activities, feedback and coaching, networking with key leaders and other participants, exposure to key issues, and ongoing evaluation in on—the-job or laboratory settings. Such activities not only stimulate the learning process, but they also provide opportunities to gain experience working with others that can be closely aligned with the leader’s environment. Kaagan (1998) suggests the primary text for the study of leadership development should be the shared experience of pro gram participants The range of activities designed to meet the criteria of experiential training approaches includes activities, 37 mes, computer simulations, outdoor adventures, and more. These activities usually cus on trust, communication, listening-skills, cooperation, decision-making, teamwork, oblem solving, creativity, planning, and conflict resolution. While participants can rrn a great deal from each other, it is critical for the facilitator to encourage participants carefully reflect on what they do together and to assure that a connection is made tween the learning experience of the classroom and the leadership needs of the real )rld. Research by Giber, Carter, and Goldsmith (2000) supports the notion that action uning--learning by doing through hands-on experiences tied to organizationally—based oj ects--is the most effective method for leadership development training. They rveyed over 350 companies involved in leadership development programs and found 3 overwhelming majority (73%) identified experiential training as the preferred :thod, ahead of feedback and networking with key leaders and successful executives. To be truly effective, future intensive leadership development programs must include :ments from each of Conger’s four approaches: personal growth, conceptual derstanding, feedback, and skill development. Organizations need to recognize the rg—term investment required to develop the depth of knowledge and experience cessary to learn the skills, abilities, and behaviors required to successfully serve in a tdership role. Given this assumption, programs must involve multiple sessions curring over an extended period of time. Pre- and post-contact, along with innovative ining techniques, will be also be key features. Such programs will allow in-depth rdy and group interaction followed by ample time for reflection by participants and re in their leadership environment to integrate learning with experience. Support and 38 . fi‘ ._.:...._-..-.“.1 ? fi‘iL r feedback from others in the organization, especially those in current leadership roles, are critical for the nurturing and growth of young leaders (Conger 180-181). Implications from the Literature Review As discussed earlier in this chapter, intensive leadership development programs of the future must offer numerous approaches that provide learners an opportunity to collectively share in the learning experience. These programs will focus on trust, feelings, sharing of group resources, open communication, and effective interaction those results in developing the ability to influence the collective creation of a worthwhile vision. Perhaps Ramsay says it best when she notes that future leadership development initiatives “promote ‘leaderful’l community organizations, based on the premise that many or all members share responsibility for leading the organization and developing the capacity needed to address issues of community concern”(5). The ProFILE and Leadership Michigan training programs each have elements supported by the literature. However, as Kaagan (1998) notes, the elements must be presented in the proper context and in the proper sequence in order to have the desired effect. Does the collective experience of the ProFILE and Leadership Michigan graduates reflect these elements? Have graduates of these two programs been able to develop the ability to provide effective leadership on the job and in their communities? Both programs recruit participants by inviting them to complete an application and participate in a screening and selection process. The literature suggests this selection ' A leaderful organization is one in which “leadership roles and responsibilities are shared and distributed as widely as possrble” (Vandenberg and Sandmann, 1995:7). 39 ..——-— *‘-4—-—‘-HAS 4‘4 -h a“ ‘r'. a a process is a critical aspect of program effectiveness. Do the experiences of these graduates support this concept? According to the Center for Creative Leadership, successful programs focus on developing such capacities as self-awareness, systemic thinking, and creativity. These characteristics are often labeled personal development, and this development unfolds over time. The literature suggests that to maximize the effectiveness of a leadership development program, it must include a variety of challenging experiences, participants must feel supported by their colleagues and sponsors, and the program must provide participants with ongoing assessment and feedback. Success also depends on participants having the ability and desire to learn and improve their leadership abilities. To date, no research-based evaluation of either the F arm Bureau ProFILE program or the Michigan Chamber Foundation Leadership Michigan program has been conducted. In addition, other organizations are seeking research-based information that will assist in the creation and operation of effective leadership development programs. As such, this literature review provides a strong research foundation for exploring the programmatic impact of these two leadership training experiences and developing a fi'amework for future leadership development programs. 40 ‘ ""7"! CHAPTER THREE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Introduction To gain an understanding of leadership development programs, it was critical for the researcher to hear first-hand the experiences of those involved. Qualitative research offered this opportunity because it involves gathering information through observation, interviews, and documentary analysis. This technique can produce “vivid and richly detailed accounts of human experience” (Ary, Jacobs and Razavieh, 491). It was just as critical for the researcher, and the supporting organizations, to gather and analyze data that could be generalized to entire populations. To accommodate this expectation, the researcher also used quantitative techniques, including a statistical analysis of survey data. This mixed methods approach created a rich body of data and support for the conclusions cited in Chapter 5. To accurately describe the perceptions of ProFILE and Leadership Michigan graduates, it was essential to follow proper research protocol throughout the study. Copies of the research proposal, including proposed methodology, along with the focus group questioning routes, survey instruments, recruitment and questionnaire cover letters, and consent forms were submitted to the University Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects (UCRIHS). What follows is a review of the research methodology used to complete this dissertation. 41 Content Analysis Initial research for this study was completed through content analysis of the various leadership development program materials for the two programs that are the focus of this dissertation. Program agendas, brochures, participant notebooks, and documentation used by program sponsors were obtained from each of the sponsoring organizations. As T suggested by Berg (2001), major categorical themes were developed as a means of sorting the materials to identify patterns, relationships, commonalities, and differences between the programs (238-253). The major categories included: program goals and ‘. 4' 1 I l 1 i l a I 1 i l objectives; length of program and number of sessions; major topics/themes or program format; and program benefits or outcomes for participants. Coding was completed in the margins of the various documents provided by program sponsors. Additional information about program expectations and content was gleaned from unstructured interviews and phone discussions. Additional information was added to the text as a result of reviews by program coordinators of the initial drafts of the program descriptions during the writing of this dissertation. Qualitative Research Qualitative research involves gathering information through observation, interviews, and documentary analysis. This technique can produce “vivid and richly detailed accounts of human experience” (Ary, Jacobs and Razavieh, 491). This level of understanding is particularly useful when one is attempting to gain insight with regard to the context and depth of understanding behind people’s thoughts and experiences. Marshall and Rossman describe qualitative inquiry as research that “values and seeks to discover 42 participants’ perspectives on their worlds, views inquiry as an interactive process between researchers and the participants, is both descriptive and analytic and relies on peoples’ worlds and observable behavior as the primary data” (9). According to David L. Morgan, qualitative methods are especially useful for exploration and discovery and excel at interpretation by giving the researcher an understanding of why things are the way they are and how they got that way. Qualitative research seeks to understand human and social behavior from the “insider’s” perspective and is intensively personal. As such, supporters of this research approach acknowledge the potential subjective perception and biases of both participants and researcher associated with the results (Ary, Jacobs and Razavieh). Focus Groups as the Qualitative Data Collection Method According to Richard Krueger, “focus groups are particularly appropriate when the goal is to explain how people regard an experience, idea or event” (Focus Groups 2'“I Editiop, 8). Perceptions and attitudes relating to programs are developed, in part, by interaction with other people. The focus group presents a more natural environment because others influence participants just as they do in real life. When questions are asked in a group environment and skillfully probed by a trained moderator, the results are “candid portraits of participant perceptions” (Krueger Focu_s Groups 2"d Edition. 11). In addition to those noted above, Krueger and Morgan suggest that other advantages of focus groups include: -Focus group discussions have high face validity. The technique is easily understood, and the results seem believable to those using the information. 43 "Pf-"h.” ‘ Results are not presented in complicated statistical charts but, rather, in lay terminology. -Focus groups can provide in-depth information when investigating complex topics or motivational behavior. When the goal is to discover information of a complex nature or a mix of attitudes, knowledge, and past experiences, then focus groups can provide the researcher with a tool that “is uniquely suited to the task” (Morgan Successful Focus Groups, 16). Rationale Leadership is a complex topic, and the programs designed to help individuals develop the skills and abilities to lead are equally complex. As noted above, Morgan believes focus groups are particularly suited to exploring complex topics. He goes on to say that context and depth help the researcher develop a better understanding of the meaning behind people’s thoughts and experiences. Because the group has opportunities to explore topics together, focus groups get at complex topics by encouraging participants to express sirrrilar views and investigate ideas that differ as well. Krueger believes focus groups present a more natural environment than other research techniques because participants are influencing and influenced by others—just as they are in real life. This study is designed to explore attitudes of the participants. The researcher is seeking a methodology that will allow for an exchange of ideas and the ability for the researcher to hear and understand the full meaning of participants’ words and thoughts. By utilizing focus groups to discover participant attitudes along with observation and 44 review of existing data about intensive leadership development programs, the researcher was better equipped to develop the follow-up quantitative surveys and to interpret the data gathered by this mixed methods research methodology. Focus Groups Methodology Using data generated by content analysis and interviews with program planners noted earlier in this chapter, the researcher wrote detailed descriptions for each program (see Program Content in Chapter Four) and, along with information gathered from the literature review, developed a moderator guide and interview schedule for focus group interviews involving participants from each program (See Appendix A). The moderator guide was reviewed by staff fiorn each of the-programs and members of the researcher’s Dissertation Committee for face and content validity. While many of the questions were the same fi‘om one interview to the next, some were tailored to fit the particular programmatic features of each organization and the unique responses provided by graduates during each of the seven focus group interviews. A purposeful sample was used to recruit four focus groups with graduates of Farm Bureau ProFILE. The groups consisted of six to eight participants each and were held in the Michigan cities of St. Johns, Caro, Harrison, and Kalamazoo to accommodate the geographic distribution of ProFILE members. The sample was also based on a desire to achieve balance between gender, year of program graduation, and type of farming operation. Participants for the focus groups were recruited by an initial letter (See Appendix B) and a follow-up phone call from the researcher. A post-card reminder and, in some cases, an email message (where applicable) were sent to confirm participation. 45 ‘r—ha—v-—“>MCA .- 1 ‘ r . I A similar methodology was used to recruit graduates of Leadership Michigan for three focus groups held in Lansing, Grand Rapids, and Detroit. In this case, selection criteria included geographic location, year of program participation, nature of employment (public or private sector), gender, and race. Recruiting groups for the Chamber proved more difficult than for Farm Bureau, and the final mix of participants was not as diverse as would have been ideal. n ‘ ~‘fi. The focus groups lasted between 1.5 and 2 hours, and no remuneration was given to participants except in the case of the Grand Rapids session, where parking reimbursement ‘_ m‘__.—_‘-.- - . . was offered to participants. A tape recorder was used at each of the interviews to capture the complete text of the discussions, and an assistant moderator provided support to the researcher who personally conducted the interviews. The only exception to this was the ProFILE Focus group in Kalamazoo where a faculty member of the Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources Communication and Education Systems served as moderator to assure the results were not biased by the familiarity of participants with the researcher who was involved in the creation of the program. Results fiom this final ProFILE focus group were virtually the same as the previous three focus groups. In addition to tape recording the interviews, the moderator and/or assistant moderator took brief notes during each session to provide what Emerson, Fretz, and Shaw (1995) call general impressions and feelings of the discussions (34). These jottings were used to make detailed fieldnotes immediately following each interview session and, along with the tape recordings, complete transcripts of each interview. As suggested by Emerson et al. in Writing Ethnoggphic Fieldnotes, the researcher and moderator did not discuss the interviews with anyone except each other prior to completing each set of fieldnotes (41). 46 A brief survey instrument was used to collect demographic data from all graduates who participated in the focus group interviews. The items collected by survey included age, gender, leadership positions held, years associated with the sponsoring organization, level of education, year of graduation from the program, and other leadership development experiences. The instrument recorded a history of when leadership experiences occurred in relationship to participation. in the intensive leadership development experience. In addition to the items listed above, a series of slightly differing demographic questions were used for each organization based of the differing needs of the Farm Bureau and the Chamber. Information about the type of main enterprise on the participants farming operation, along with a description of the type of farm business structure was collected from ProFILE graduates. Graduates of the Leadership Michigan program were asked to provide information about their type of employment, level of income, and race. The consent form used for participants in the focus groups is included in Appendix C. Full transcripts fiom each of the seven focus groups were typed using MS Word. Analysis of the interviews was completed utilizing QSR NVivo computer software. Following the concepts of open coding from Berg, the researcher read all of the transcripts to formulate a specific and consistent set of questions to screen the data and establish categories and themes to aid in the coding process. As suggested by both Morgan and Krueger, major concepts were identified by their tendency to surface in response to different questions. Using these codes along with codes created for each question, the transcripts were reread and categories and themes were used to create nodes for coding within the software package. Additional information was added to the various 47 nodes from literature review, interviews with program coordinators, and the content analysis of program materials. In addition to coding, the researcher followed a grounded theory approach of making a set of theoretical notes about concepts and ideas that were useful in developing the survey questions used for the quantitative research and final report. This detailed process of data analysis and the firnctionality of NVivo allowed the researcher to selectively retrieve information from each of the interviews and compare common ideas and themes from one interview to the next. Quantitative Survey Methodology Once the focus groups and data analysis were complete, the next step was to prepare for the quantitative research by obtaining the mailing lists, developing survey instruments and cover letters, and securing financial support for questionnaire mailing from each sponsoring organization. Because both programs have a relatively short list of graduates and the sponsoring organizations were willing to assist with the costs associated with mailing, the decision was made to utilize a census sample for each. Contact was made with both organizations, and the researcher requested assistance with developing an accurate mailing list for each group. The Farm Bureau sample included 157 participants fi'om seven graduating classes. Because nearly all the program graduates were current Farm Bureau members, the task of updating this list involved only a few phone calls and minor changes. The Leadership Michigan sample size was 296 graduates from 15 classes. This population has a higher tendency to change employment and location. The Chamber sent emails, postcards, and individual letters to graduates in an attempt to create the most 48 ‘1 .r. .... accurate list possible. The result was less than 5% return for insufficient address on the initial mailings and follow-up contacts for each program. Design of the instruments followed recommendations described by Dillrnan (1978) and suggestions from the researcher’s Dissertation Committee and faculty of ANRECS. The instruments are included in Appendix D. The title of both instruments is the same and was chosen to correspond with the research project title as approved by UCRIHS: Attitudes of Participants Regarding Their Involvement in Intensive Leadership Development Programs. The title, name of sponsoring department, and the university are all at the top of the first page, along with a brief set of directions for completing the questionnaire. The surveys were divided into sections baSed on findings fiom the focus group research and literature review, and designed to capture key data about the respondents and their leadership development experience. Table 2 on the next page provides a side by side comparison of the two instruments. Section 1 contains a single question regarding who made initial contact about applying for the program. Section 2 utilizes a four-point scale of Disagree, Somewhat Agree, Agree, and Highly Agree to indicate the level of agreement with a series of four statements about the application process for the programs. This scale was chosen for the bulk of the survey because the terms are easy to understand and provide a continuous level of option for response fi'orn total agreement to total disagreement. This format involving actual word association as opposed to a numerical scale is also more descriptive, in the opinion of the researcher. Section 3 utilizes the same four point scale and contains seven statements about program goals and delivery techniques. 49 .__-..__.._..-- _. —o . J - TABLE 2. COMPARISON OF UANTITATIVE UESTIONNAIRES Questionnaire Section ProFILE Leadership Michigan Section 1 Initial Contact (lQuestion) Initial Contact (1 Question) Section 2 Application Process Application Process (4 Questions) (4 Questions) Section 3 Program Goals and Delivery Program Goals and Delivery (7 Questions) (7 Questions) Section 4 Training emphasis on Training emphasis on specific skills/topics specific skills/topics (10 Questions) (8 Questions) Section 5 Program duration Program duration (1 Question) (1 Question) Section 6 Program Impacts and County Program Impacts, Farm Bureau Involvement Community Involvement, (14 Questions) and Career Change . (12 Questions) Sections 7 - 10 for the Farm Bureau and community Not Applicable because of ProFILE Survey leadership before and feedback from focus groups/ following pro gram data captured as part of participation section 6 (Various options by list) Section 11 for ProFILE Alumni/follow-up activities Alumni/follow-up activities and Section 7 for (4 Questions) (4 Questions) Leadership Michigan Open-ended Question View of leadership change as View of leadership change as a result of program a result of program participation? participation? Demographic Gender, age, educational Gender, age, educational Information attainment, length of Farm attainment, race, type of Bureau membership, main employment, income level, farming enterprise, business year of Leadership Michigan structure, year of ProFILE graduation gaduation Open-ended Question Additional thoughts about Additional thoughts about program/ideas/suggestions program/ideas/suggestions for improvement for improvement The fourth section addresses the amount of time each leadership program devoted to specific topics and/or skills that were addressed as part of that program. An option was 50 150 available to add additional topics. This section utilizes a three point scale: Devote more time, Just right, and Devote less time. Section 5 utilizes a similar scale to address 3e question of the duration or length of time for the entire leadership development xperience. The two questionnaires vary somewhat in Section 6. In the case of the F arm Bureau ’roFILE instrument, this section contains 14 statements addressing the overall impact of ne program on the graduate’s individual leadership skills and his/her involvement in the Iounty Farm Bureau. This instrument also contains four additional sections (7-10) .esigned to capture information about actual participation in the Bureau and community rvolvement before and after program participation. Section 6 of the Leadership dichigan instrument is similar in that it also contains a series of statements about rogrammatic impact and community involvement. In addition, it contains two tatements regarding career change following participation in the program. These last wo questions about career change were included at the request of the Chamber. The eason for altering this part of the instrument for the Leadership Michigan program was ased on feedback from the focus groups. Many Leadership Michigan graduates simply efirsed to complete the sections on involvement because they could not remember the xact dates of their involvement. Based on this feedback from respondents during the cons groups, items E, F, and I were developed to capture information regarding program .npact on community involvement. Rather than asking for specific activities and when nvolvement occurred, the researcher asked respondents to simply indicate whether or not rey felt program participation resulted in increased levels of community involvement. 51 Section 7 of the Leadership Michigan instrument and Section 11 for ProFILE are similar in that they each contain a series of four statements about follow-up activities for alumni of the respective programs. The four-item (Disagree, Somewhat Agree, Agree, Highly Agree) scale is utilized for this section as well as section 6. Both instruments then follow with an open-ended question about participant views regarding the concept of leadership and if it changed as a result of completing the program. Both survey instruments next use a series of seven questions to collect demographic data on respondents. Common questions for this part of the instrrnnents include: gender, age, level of educational attainment, and year of program graduation. The Leadership Michigan survey also requests information about race, type of employment, and level of income. ProFILE respondents were asked to indicate the number of years they have been Farm Bureau members, the main enterprise on the farming operation they participate in, and the type of business organization they participate in. Both instruments conclude with an open-ended section soliciting any additional thoughts about program changes or enhancements. Questions for the instruments were developed based on data gathered from the focus groups, literature review, and review of other instruments utilized for university- sponsored studies of leadership. The sponsoring organizations also contributed questions of interest based on their need for program evaluation. The instruments were evaluated for both face and content validity utilizing members of the researcher’s dissertation committee and faculty of the sponsoring department. Validity is “the extent to which an instrument measures what it is supposed to measure” (Ary, Jacobs and Razavieh 1996, 262). Each instrument was also individually reviewed by a panel of staff fiom the 52 respective sponsoring organization. Suggested changes from both internal and external reviewers were incorporated into the final documents. Data collection for the quantitative research portion of this study followed the suggested guidelines outlined by Dillman (197 8). In order to make data collection more orderly, the researcher chose to send the ProFILE mailing approximately four weeks before the Leadership Michigan mailing. This precluded the task of managing follow-up mailings and data entry for both groups at the same time. Quantitative Data Collection Data collection procedures were similar for both organizations. The initial mailing included a cover letter (see Appendix E) signed by the researcher, a self-addressed stamped return envelope, and the questionnaire. The cover letter, using sponsoring department letterhead, explained the purpose of the study, requested respondent cooperation, assured confidentiality, requested a timely return, and expressed appreciation for participation in the study. As an incentive to encourage return of the questionnaire, respondents were informed that when their survey was returned, they would be entered into a drawing for $50 cash. Code numbers were used on the questionnaires and return envelopes to facilitate follow-up procedures. The initial mailing for the Farm Bureau group was delivered to the US. Postal Service office in East Lansing on April 24, 2003. On May 1, exactly one week after mailing the initial packet, a follow-up postcard was sent to all ProFILE graduates who had not yet responded, indicating a questionnaire had been sent and their response was important to the study. They were also offered the opportunity to have a second packet sent if they 53 had misplaced or did not receive the initial mailing. Appreciation was expressed to those who may have sent their questionnaire in during the time the postcard was in the mail. On May 15, three weeks after the initial mailing, a second packet was mailed to all non- respondents reminding them of the researcher’s desire for their participation in the study and encouraging their participation. The letter was similar to the initial letter. However, it did acknowledge the earlier mailing, apologized if the respondent had already mailed his/her questionnaire, and expressed appreciation if that was the situation. Table 3 lists the date questionnaires were received, the number received for each day, and the response rate by day. Questionnaires were date stamped the day of arrival, recorded by code number, and filed according to control number for data entry at a later date. The first questionnaires arrived on April 21. From the initial mailing of 157 questionnaires, 118 were returned prior to the cut-off date of May 30, 2003, a response rate of 75.2%. 54 TABLE 3. RESPONSE FROM PROFILE GRADUATES Frequency Cumulative Frequency Percent Valid 96 Cumulative 96 21 -APR-2003 10 10 8.5 6.4 6.4 22-APR-2003 5 15 4.2 3.2 9.6 23-APR-2003 1 1 26 9.3 7.0 16.6 24-APR-2003 12 38 10.2 7.6 24.2 25-APR-2003 7 45 5.9 4.5 28.7 28-APR-2003 8 53 6.8 5.1 33.8 28-APR-2003 8 61 6.8 5.1 38.9 29-AP R-2003 4 65 3.4 2.5 41 .4 30-APR-2003 9 74 7.6 5.7 47.1 01-MAY-2003 4 78 3.4 2.5 49.7 02-MAY-2003 4 82 3.4 2.5 52.2 03-MAY-2003 4 86 3.4 2.5 54.8 05-MAY-2003 4 90 3.4 2.5 57.3 Valid MAY-2003 1 91 .8 .6 58 07-MAY-2003 2 93 1 .7 1 .3 59.2 MAY-2003 1 94 .8 .6 59.9 10-MAY-2003 3 97 2.5 1 .9 61 .8 12-MAY-2003 2 99 1 .7 1 .3 63.1 13-MAY-2003 1 100 .8 .6 63.7 “MAY-2003 5 105 4.2 3.2 66.9 15-MAY-2003 5 1 10 4.2 3.2 70.1 16-MAY-2003 1 1 1 1 .8 .6 70.7 17-MAY-2003 2 1 13 1.7 1.3 72 23-MAY-2003 1 1 14 .8 .6 72.6 24-MAY-2003 2 1 16 1 .7 1 .3 73.9 27-MAY-2003 1 117 .8 .6 74.5 30-MAY-2003 1 1 18 .8 .6 75.2 Missing 39 157 24.8 24.8 100 Total 157 100 55 As noted earlier, data collection for the graduates of Leadership Michigan followed a similar format as outlined above for ProFILE. The initial mailing was delivered to the US Postal Service on May 13, 2003, and the follow-up postcard was mailed on May 20. The one difference in follow-up procedures for this group was the use of an email notice sent on May 27 to all graduates who had not responded. As noted below, email addresses were not available for all Leadership Michigan graduates. Email was used for the Leadership Michigan group because the Chamber of Commerce had an accurate list of email addresses for more than 75% of program graduates and because this group is accustomed to regular use of the intemet for communication. The email notice did increase the flow of returns for a few days and resulted in eight corrected addresses. An initial packet was mailed for a second time to this group of eight. Two weeks after the email, the second questionnaire packet was mailed to all non-respondents. Table 4 lists the date questionnaires were received, the number received for each day, and the response rate by day. As with the ProFILE data collection, questionnaires were date stamped the day of arrival, recorded by code number, and filed according to control number for data entry at a later date. The first questionnaire arrived on May 16. From the initial mailing of 296 questionnaires, 178 were returned as of the cut-off date of June 25, 2003, a response rate of 60.1%. 56 TABLE 4. RESPONSE FROM LEADERSHIP MICHIGAN GRADUATES Frequency Cumulative Frequency Percent Valid 96 Cumulative $6 16-MAY-2003 1 1 .6 .3 .3 17-MAY-2003 6 7 3.4 2.0 2.4 19—MAY-2003 16 23 9.0 5.4 7.8 20-MAY-2003 6 29 3.4 2.0 9.8 21-MAY-2003 22 51 12.4 7.4 17.2 22-MAY-2003 17 68 9.6 5.7 23.0 23-MAY-2003 75 3.9 2.4 25.3 24-MAY-2003 7 82 3.9 2.4 27.7 27-MAY-2003 15 97 8.4 5.1 32.8 MAY-2003 2 99 1 .1 .7 33.4 MAY-2003 5 104 2.8 1.7 35.1 30-MAY-2003 7 1 1 1 3.9 2.4 37.5 31 MAY-2003 8 1 19 4.5 2.7 40.2 02~iUN-2003 9 128 5.1 3.0 43.2 03-JUN-2003 1 129 .6 .3 43.6 Valid 04-JUN-2003 5 134 2.8 1.7 45.3 05-JUN-2003 4 138 2.2 1 .4 46.6 MUN-2003 4 142 2.2 1 .4 48.0 07-JUN-2003 1 143 .6 .3 48.3 09-Jun-2003 2 145 1.1 .7 49.0 10-JUN-2003 1 146 .6 .3 49.3 11-JUN-2003 2 148 1.1 .7 50.0 12-JUN-2003 1 149 .6 .3 50.3 134010-2003 5 154 2.8 1.7 52.0 “JUN-2003 4 158 2.2 1.4 53.4 164014-2003 5 163 2.8 1.7 55.1 17-JUN-2003 2 165 1.1 .7 55.7 18-JUN-2003 2 167 1.1 .7 56.4 ”JUN-2003 3 170 1.7 1.0 57.4 20-JUN-2003 4 174 2.2 1 .4 58.8 23-JUN-2003 2 176 1.1 .7 59.5 25-JUN-2003 2 178 1.1 .7 60.1 Missing 118 296 30.5 39.9 100 Total 296 100 S7 Quantitative Data Analysis The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 11.5 was used in analyzing the survey data. Response codes for all items on the questionnaires for both groups were first entered into an Excel database. Once data were verified for accuracy, they were transferred to SPSS. If more than one entry was made for any given item, the first item in the list was used. In both cases, control numbers were used to verify year of program graduation, and corrections were made where the incorrect year was selected by the respondent. Data analysis for ProFILE began on June 4 and for Leadership Michigan on June 25. In both cases, one of the first items of analysis was to compare early and late respondents to determine if there were any differences between the two to control for non-response error. A group was created containing the first 40 respondents based on date of returned questionnaire and a second group of the last 40 respondents for each program. A comparison of items by section of the respective survey revealed no differences between these groups. Therefore, the findings can be generalized to the entire populations (Miller and Smith, 1983). Based on the returns of 75.2% for ProFILE and 60.1% for Leadership Michigan, and the confirmation that no significant differences existed between early and later respondents, the decision was made, in consultation with members of the researcher’s Dissertation Committee, to suspend any firrther follow-up and declare the remaining graduates from both groups, 39 for ProFILE and 118 for Leadership Michigan, as non-respondents. The next step in data analysis was to determine the reliability of the various constructs used for analysis of the data. Reliability is the extent to which an instrument yields 58 consistent results (Ary et al., 1996). Reliability of the instruments was established by using the coefficient alpha, one of the internal consistency measures of reliability. This procedure measures “the inter-item consistency, or homogeneity, of the items” (Ary et. a1 1996, 238). Based on the original research questions stated in Chapter One, a series of four constructs was created to examine the data in relationship to the questions. Similar constructs were created for each program. Programmatic differences resulted in somewhat different questions used in the creation of the constructs for the two programs. The first construct, referred to as the Application Construct (P) for ProFILE, contains items 2 a, b, and c. These items address the participant’s attitudes about the application process used in gaining admission to the program. The items inquire as to whether the application increased expectations for the program, if the participant felt the process was competitive, and if the application materials provided a clear understanding of program expectations. The reliability of this construct for the Farm Bureau survey is .65. A similar construct was created from the Leadership Michigan data and includes items 2 a, b, c, and d. The items are nearly identical to those used for the ProFILE construct, with the addition of an item which asks whether participants feel they have a higher commitment to their employer because their employer nominated them for the program. The Application Construct (LM), for Leadership Michigan, has a reliability of .49 which is lower than desirable, but, for purposes of comparison between the two programs it will be used to show a relationship between the application process and program impact. The second construct is referred to as the Delivery Construct and consists of items from the surveys which address the type of programmatic delivery techniques used to teach leadership. The Delivery Construct (P), includes items 3 a, b, c, and (1. These 59 items ask Farm Bureau graduates to provide feedback on the relative value on programmatic impact of networking, learning about issues and the farm bureau organization, and role play and group activities. The reliability of the Delivery Construct (P) is .68. The items for the Delivery Construct (LM) include 3 a, b, c, and f and address similar relationships regarding the various instructional and experiential methods used during the Leadership Michigan program. The reliability of the Delivery Construct (LM) is .58. The key construct for data analysis was created to examine the programmatic impact of these two, intensive leadership development programs. The Impact Construct uses the majority of items in Section Six fi'om each questionnaire. These items ask respondents to provide their attitudes about the amount of cOnfidence they gained as a result of program participation, the amount of increased skill development they have experienced, and how they have utilized the training to impact their communities. The Impact Construct (P) contains items 6 a - 1 from the ProFILE survey and has a reliability of .798. For Leadership Michigan, the Impact Construct (LM) contains items 6 a - i and has a reliability of .80. Finally, an Involvement Construct was created for each program. Since the data on involvement were collected in a slightly different way for each program, the constructs were created differently as well. For Leadership Michigan, items 6 e, f, and i were removed from the Impact Construct (LM), and a separate construct called Involvement Construct (LM) was created. This construct is only used as a means of comparing community involvement to impact. These items examined whether or not participants feel their involvement in the community increased following program participation, if 60 they believe they are more politically active since graduation, and if he/she has used the knowledge gained from program participation to influence issues in the community. The Involvement Construct (LM) has a reliability of .72. The remaining items in the Impact Construct (LM) 6 a — d, g and h have a reliability of .70. For ProFILE, the Involvement Construct (P) was created by taking the number of items checked in item 7 (Farm Bureau involvement before graduation) and comparing them to the number of items checked in item 8 (Farm Bureau involvement after graduation) to create a measure of change. The same procedure was completed by using items 9 and 10 to determine the amount of change for community involvement. Using Pearson’s Correlation, the amount of change for Farm Bureau involvement and for community involvement is compared to the Impact Construct (P) to determine correlation. Because the involvement questions are not paired for purposes of creating a construct, there is no test of reliability. The results of construct analysis are reported in Chapter Four using descriptors created by J. A. Davis (1971). Table 5 depicts the Davis model for correlation descriptors. TABLE 5. CORRELATIONAL DESCRIPTORS ACCORDING TO J. A. DAVIS Coefficient Description .70 or higher Very Strong Association .50 to .69 Substantial Association .30 to .49 Moderate Association .10 to .29 Low Association .01 to .09 Negligible Association The majority of quantitative data used for this dissertation is reported as frequency of group means. In addition to the construct analysis discussed above, a regression of the Pearson Correlation is used to demonstrate further the relationship between participant 61 attitudes regarding the application and selection process, program delivery techniques, and impact. T-tests were used to evaluate the level of change in involvement by men and women in the ProFILE program and to evaluate differences by age, gender, and educational attainment for both programs. The final section in Chapter 4 uses the constructs discussed above to support the key findings of this research and complete a comparison between the two programs. Using data fi'orn both the qualitative research portion of this study and the quantitative research, the author provides an analysis of the key findings and supports each with quotes fi'om the focus group research. Using nodes created during data analysis and key word searches, NVivo was used to sort the data from each of the seven focus groups, providing a detailed list of all data associated with each of the four constructs. Conclusion Chapter Three provides an overview of the research methodology used to conduct this study. The chapter discusses the researcher’s decision to use a mixed methods approach, outlines the procedures involved in both the qualitative and quantitative portions of the study, and provides detail on how the data were analyzed. Chapter Four will provide a detailed description of study findings. 62 CHAPTER FOUR FINDINGS Qualitative data was analyzed using QSR NVivo version 2.0 and survey data using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 11.5. Content analysis of existing program materials, interviews with program coordinators and other staff, and historical records were used to construct the program descriptions. Findings are presented in four sections as follows: 0 Section A - Program Descriptions and Demographics 0 Section B - Focus Group Findings 0 Section C - Survey Data 0 Section D - Key Topics. Data in each section is presented for ProFILE first, followed by similar data for Leadership Michigan. Section D — “Key “Topics” includes: Application and Selection, Delivery Techniques, Support, Involvement, Demographics, and Impact. The final topic presents findings fi'om a regression of correlation between impact, application and selection, and delivery. A. Program Descriptions and Demographics Section A will provide a detailed description of each program including history, recruitment and selection process, structure, curriculum, and delivery techniques. This will be followed by a summary of the demographic data collected as part of the survey research. 63 ProFILE Program Description ProFILE was created by the Michigan Farm Bureau in 1989 to provide a more in-depth leadership training opportunity for a select group of current and potential Farm Bureau leaders. The main focus of the program is to create a group of leaders who will become more active in their county farm bureaus and local communities by “developing management and leadership skills, providing teamwork opportunities, and creating pride among graduates for the agricultural industry and F arm Bureau” (ProFILE Brochure, 2002). The program utilizes a mix of skill development, networking, learning about key agricultural issues and the Farm Bureau organization, along with a national bus tour visiting three or four states and the American Farm Bureau Federation to accomplish its goals. The first class graduated in March of 1991, and seven classes have been held since, graduating over 150 individuals from the program. Each class is comprised of approximately 25 men and women between the ages of 22 and 35. In the years since the prograrn’s inception, recruitment has become more difficult, and as a result, these initial parameters have been relaxed. However, the organization has remained committed to a stable, established nomination and application process. The program is conducted on a two-year cycle, and every other year, during the fall, county F arm Bureaus are given the opportunity to nominate participants. To be considered, a candidate must be nominated by his or her local organization. The one exception to this policy occurred during the first three classes when the organization’s Distinguished Young Farmer and Outstanding Young Farm Woman award recipients were invited to participate by virtue of their selection for these awards. This policy was 64 discontinued once the program became established. While the county Farm Bureau board makes the actual nomination, potential candidates are contacted by state Farm Bureau staff members, county Farm Bureau board members, local county Farm Bureau Office Managers, ProFILE graduates, and others. Regardless of the initial contact, potential nominees are instructed to contact their county Farm Bureau to secure nomination. County Farm Bureaus subrrrit their nominations directly to the state program coordinators who then send a letter of invitation to the prospective candidates, inviting them to make application to the program. The application form, a copy of which is included in Appendix F, is designed to obtain demographic information about the candidate along with a history of F arm Bureau and community involvement. Applicants are also asked to provide a written account of why they are interested in the program and how they will use the training to impact agriculture and their communities. In addition to the application, the letter of invitation provides potential candidates an overview of the program, outlines expectations for the amount of time program participation will require, and provides detail on the participant’s financial commitment. Participants are responsible for a $300 program fee which is billed in two installments of $150. In most instances, the county Farm Bureau agrees to cover this fee. While this program fee only covers a small portion of the total cost, Farm Bureau staffers believe it is important to have a participant fee as a way of creating a higher level of commitment to the program and accountability of participants to their county organization. The remaining costs for program operation are covered from the state organization’s general fimd. 65 Participant selection is completed by the program coordinators based on geographic distribution, gender, type of farming operation, and overall strength of application. An attempt is made to achieve some level of diversity among participants. However, in many years, the number of applications is just enough to meet the desired number of participants. Final selection is made sometime near the first of December, and successful candidates are notified approximately 45 days before the first session. The ProFILE experience consists of six to seven events (some adjustments have been made from class to class over the years) conducted over a lS-month period beginning with a one-day orientation meeting held between mid-January and early February of the program’s first year. This session provides participants an opportunity to meet one another, set personal goals and objectives for their participation in the program, and establish group goals. A brief F arm Bureau organizational history lesson is provided along with an overview of what is to come during future sessions of the program. Over the years, this session has included a personal profile assessment using the Meyers- Briggs Type Indicator, DISC, or similar assessment tool. During the focus group discussions, this opportunity to assess personal strengths and weaknesses and learn about various leadership and personal work styles was noted as a very useful part of the program. The group also meets with various Farm Bureau leaders including the organization’s president. The second session for ProFILE is conducted in conjunction with the organization’s three-day Young Farmer Leaders Conference held during March each year for roughly 200 young farmers from across the state. The pro gram features professional speakers and workshops on current agricultural practices, management techniques, personal growth, 66 and the F arm Bureau organization. ProFILE participants are given the freedom to select from the multiple offerings and encouraged to spend time networking with participants, speakers and conference leaders. Prior to the conference, ProFILE members meet to strengthen their public speaking skills and learn more about current issues facing the industry. Session Three focuses on the development of team-building skills with training opportunities designed to offer participants a chance to hone their communication, listening, and interpersonal skills. This two-day program has involved a number of speakers over the years from within the Farm Bureau organization and from external organizations as well. During Class Three, participants were housed at the Michigan State University Extension 4-H youth camp, Kettenun Center near Cadillac, and given the opportunity to participate in a ROPES course. Feedback fi'om members of this class during the focus group discussions indicated this experience was memorable and of high impact. Other items covered during this session have included public speaking, working with the media, international agriculture, team goal setting, and how to bring about group consensus. During the first five classes, a summer picnic for participants and their families was held in an attempt to involve spouses and create an opportunity for contact between the participants during the busy smnmer months on the farm. Attendance for this one-day social event was generally something less than 70% and, while those who participated gave it a satisfactory evaluation, program organizers were disappointed with the outcome. During Class Six, a substitute for the picnic, a one-day educational program designed only for participants, was held in late June at the Farm Bureau Center in Lansing. The 67 agenda focused on key agricultural issues such as farmland preservation and international agriculture. The Director of the Michigan Department of Agriculture and the Dean of the College of Agriculture and Natural Resources at Michigan State University also met with the group during this session. This program was repeated with a similar agenda for the seventh class as well. The next time participants gather is in the late fall or early winter. The focus of this fifth session is to look at organizational structures and examine how leaders work with groups and committees to accomplish organizational goals. This two-day meeting has typically been held in Lansing to take advantage of the opportunity to visit with members of the legislature, governmental departments such as the Michigan Department of Agriculture and the Department of Environmental Quality, and to learn about the work of the Farm Bureau Public Affairs Division. Workshops on time management, teamwork, conflict resolution, and other skill development have all been on the agenda for this session. During the last two classes, this fifth session has been expanded and divided in two to provide additional time for study of the governmental relations work of the Farm Bureau. A one-day session in early October, just prior to the fall harvest, has been held in Lansing with a focus on visits with legislators and a tour of the Capitol. This program has also featured a simulation about the federal government called “Congressional Insight,” conducted by staff of the American Farm Bureau Federation. These later classes have met again in mid-December for two days to participate in the skills training noted earlier and to prepare for the following session. 68 A highlight of the ProFILE program (93% of graduates agree or strongly agree that it is a valuable part of the program) is a week-long national bus tour. Stops on the tour have included visits with county farm bureaus, the offices of the American Farm Bureau in Chicago or Washington DC, and agribusinesses including the world headquarters of John Deere, the Chicago Board of Trade, Purina, and Monsanto, to name just a few. The participants are treated to an overnight stay with host families as part of one of the county Farm Bureau visits. The goals of this trip are to provide participants an opportunity to learn about the scope and influence of the total Farm Bureau organization, gain a greater perspective about the agricultural industry, learn about organizational structures outside of Michigan, and experience big city life in either Chicago or Washington DC. In addition, a week together on a bus is an excellent Way to develop networking skills and create lifelong fiiendships. When this tour has taken the east coast route, it has also offered participants a chance to do a little sightseeing in our nation’s capitol. The ProFILE experience comes to an end with a weekend gathering for soon-to-be graduates and their spouses at an upscale Michigan facility such as the Grand Traverse Resort, Amway Grand Plaza Hotel in Grand Rapids, or the Renaissance Center in Detroit. This festive atmosphere provides the backdrop for an enjoyable social event designed to celebrate with family and friends. The program begins with a reception where graduates can reminisce about their time together during the past 15 months and network with their fellow classmates and spouses. The agenda features an encore video production shot over the course of the program, including footage of each participant’s family and farming operation. A wrap-up speaker challenges graduates to remember the program’s overall 69 goal of encouraging them to utilize their leadership talent to be active participants in their county Farm Bureau and local community. In addition to the actual sessions, ProFILE participants are expected to do some homework between sessions. As noted earlier, training associated with speaking in pubic is one of the key areas of skill development. Beginning around the half-way mark, each session has time allotted for six to eight members of the class to each give a seven- to ten- minute speech which is then evaluated by the other members of the class. One of the early homework assignments is to write and prepare this speech for presentation at a future meeting. Participants are supplied with copies of the Farm Bureau history book at the first session and encouraged to read it in anticipation of further discussion at the second session. Another homework assignment is to attend a meeting of a local county Farm Bureau board of directors and another local government or civic group board meeting to witness leadership in action and to prepare to share observations when the group explores organizational structures. These assignments help bridge the time between meetings and encourage learning outside the sessions. Another unique part of the program is a visit by the program coordinators to each participant’s farming Operation. During the 15-month program, each participant plays host to one of the program coordinators. This visit is structured to provide time for discussion about program expectations and individual leadership goals, to meet the participant’s family, and to shoot video of individual farming operations for use in the wrap-up video. This visit underscores the commitment Farm Bureau makes to leadership development and the value the organization places in the ProFILE program and its graduates. 70 ProFILE Demographics Demographic data were collected relative to: gender, age, level of educational attainment, years of membership in the Farm Bureau, main enterprise on the farming operation, type of business organization, and year graduated from ProFILE. The range of N for ProFILE demographic data is 117 - 118. Figure 1 depicts ProFILE graduates by gender. Males comprise 76.3% (N =89) of the respondents while females represent 23.7% (N=28). Figure 1. ProFILE Respondents by Gender N = 118 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 1 0% 0% Female Male Only I graduate (.9%) is less than 25 years of age, while 14.5% (N=17) are in the range of 25 to 29. One quarter or 25.6% (N=30) are 30 to 34, and 21.4% (N=25) are 35 to 39 years of age. The largest group of respondents, 40 (34%), include those 40 to 44, and 3.4% (N=4) are 45 to 49 (Figure 2). 71 Figure 2. ProFILE Respondents by Age N = 117 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 1 5% 1 0% 5% 0% 3.4% Under25 25t029 30to34 351039 40to44 45to49 Nearly 42% have earned a Bachelor’s degree (N=49). The smallest category includes those who have obtained a Master’s degree, with just 1.7% (N=2). Twenty point five percent (N=24) attended some college, but did not earn a degree, 12% (N=14) earned an Associate’s degree, and 23.9% (N=28) finished their formal education with a high school diploma (Figure 3). Figure 3. ProFILE Graduates by Level of Educational Attainment N = 117 Master's Degree Bachelor's Degree 72 As indicated in Figure 4, 3.5% (N=4) have been Farm Bureau members for less than 3 years. 9.4% (N=11) from 4 to 6 years, 13.7% (N=16) item 7 to 9, 17.9% (N=21) from 10 to 12, and 16.2% (N=19) from 13 to 15 years. Thirteen point seven percent (N=16) have been members 16 to 18 years, 11.1% from 19 to 21, and 14.5% (N=17) for 22 or more. Figure 4. ProFILE Respondents by Years of Farm Bureau Membership N=117 20% _ a 173% 16.2% 13.7% , 13.7% 7 143% 11.1% 15%» 3.5% 5% - 0% 3or 4106 7109 1010 1310 1610 1910 220r less 12 15 18 21 more Graduates were asked to identify the main farming enterprise on farm they work. Thirty point five percent (N=36) are engaged in a cash crop operation, 16.9% (N=20) are active in a dairy farming enterprise, and 16.1% (N=19) identified livestock as the mainstay of their farming operation. Fruit farms comprise 5.1% (N=6) and nursery/landscape/floral represent 2.5% =3). Twelve point seven percent (N=15) indicate they are no long farming, and 12.7% (N=15) are involved in some other type of farming enterprise. Among those who identified “other”, cash crops and livestock was identified by 6 participants, and fi'uit and vegetable by 2. Others that were mentioned included various combinations of the main enterprises already identified, and one that raises horses (Figure 5). 73 Figure 5. ProFILE Respondents by Main Faming Enterprise N=117 30.5% 6 \‘ Q \ 3 \0 ..e’ a «s ,. f a" as .e 0“ 0,3 0 0‘» 4g“ 3:) ‘x Just over one-third (N=43) farm as sole proprietors, and the next largest group are involved partnership operations (29.7%). Slightly more than 15% (N=l8) are involved in corporations, while farm employees represent 4.2% (N=5). Fifteen respondents who are no longer farming were instructed to skip this question and three more chose not to respond (Figure 6). Figure 6. ProFILE Respondents by Type of Business Organization N=118 74 The final demographic item identifies the year of the ProFILE class which the graduates participated in. Just over fifteen percent (N=18) participated in the first program, 19.5% (N=23) in class two, 13.6% (N=16) graduated fiom class three, and 14.4% (N=17) in both classes four and five. Eleven percent (N=l3) completed their ProFILE experience as part of class six, and 11.9% (N=14) in class seven (Figure 7). Figure 7. ProFILE Respondents by Class of Participation N=118 25% 19.5% 20% 1k .7 . . , 7 7 15% 715.3% 13.6% 14.4% 14.4% 77 77 ,7“; ,3, :WW 7 1 1.0% 1 1.9% 10%— , .- , 5% 0%- 1991 - 1993 - 1995 - 1997 - 1999 - 2001- 2003 - Class 1 Classz Class 3 Class4 Closes Class6 Class7 Leadership Michigan Program Description Leadership Michigan was created in 1988 by the Michigan Chamber Foundation to offer participants opportunities for personal and professional growth. Leadership Michigan marketing materials list the following program goals: 1) To provide opportunities for participants to learn about the challenges and opportunities facing the state of Michigan and encourage collaborative solutions to deal with these issues. 75 2) To inspire participants to become more active in community and statewide efforts that will make Michigan a better place to live. 3) To challenge participants to become more aware of themselves and their state and to maximize their leadership potential. 4) To provide participants networking opportunities with a diverse group of individuals that will strengthen their personal and organizational clout (Leadership Michigan Brochure, 2002). These program goals are accomplished through a series of community-based experiences planned by program coordinators to provide hands-on learning about key issues affecting the state. The program gives graduates an opportunity to network with each other as well as with key leaders fiom both the public and private sectors. Graduates also have a chance to sharpen a select list of leadership skills including communication, media relations, and appreciating diversity. In recent years, increased emphasis has been placed on interpersonal skill and team-related skill development. Each class consists of approximately 25 men and women fi'om a host of different backgrounds, including business and industry, state and local government, and the non- profit sector. Participants have included employees from the Big Three automakers and other major employers such as Consumers Energy, Steelcase, and Dow, small and medium employers including Kellogg Community College, Detroit Public Television, Two Men and A Truck, and Monitor Sugar, as well as independent self-employed entrepreneurs. Through 2002, 15 classes have been conducted with over 300 total graduates. 76 The program is operated annually with applications accepted from individuals during the first two months of the calendar year. The application provides information about program benefits and participant expectations, along with a brief agenda including dates and locations for each meeting. In addition to seeking demographic information and a brief educational and employment history, the application also requires two letters of recommendation. A series of four questions provides program organizers additional information about the nominee’s community and professional accomplishments, his or her expectations for the program, and what the potential participant views as some of the most significant challenges facing the state. The application also requires a signature of commitment from both the applicant and his/her employer as a demonstration of their desire to dedicate the time and energy needed to fully participate in the program. A copy of the application is included in Appendix F. The Michigan Chamber Foundation provides program support which covers a majority of the administrative overhead. For the 2002 class, participant tuition of $3,250 covered the bulk of actual expenses associated with program operation. The tuition covers speaker fees, program materials, meals, and accommodations for overnight sessions. Participants are responsible for their own transportation and expenses associated with travel to and from the sessions, which are held from Ann Arbor to Marquette. In nearly all cases, employers cover the tuition and fees for attendees. For those who are employed by a non-profit and the self-employed, all or a portion of these costs may be born by the participant. Partial scholarships for non-profit candidates are available. 77 Participant selection is completed by the program coordinators based on geographic distribution, gender, race, type of employment, and overall strength of application. An attempt is made to achieve a mix of backgrounds, gender, and experience. However, in many years, the number of applications is just enough to meet the desired number of participants. Final selection is made in early March with notification mailed to successful candidates approximately three to four weeks prior to the first class in mid-April. The first of eight classes is held in Traverse City for two days with the theme of History and Orientation. The agenda features a welcome fi‘om the program coordinator and a three-hour leadership workshop by professional Teambuilder Penny Griffith. The workshop is designed to develop a working relationship between participants, with an emphasis on learning about themselves, interpersOnal communication skills, and leadership styles. A presentation and discussion about Michigan history, along with a keynote speech by Michigan-based Futurist Ed Barlow, helps participants consider the future in relationship to the state’s past. The program provides time for participants to meet one another, engage in plenty of conversation about the topics, and learn about Traverse City and the surrounding area. Session 2, held in May, focuses on Government and Politics. The program takes place in downtown Lansing, which provides an opportunity for visits to the State Capitol, state lawmakers, and various departments of state government. The program has featured different presenters over the years and is designed to give exposure to key legislative and governmental leaders. The program for session two also affords participants an opportunity to hear about major issues currently under consideration in the legislature. A portion of the program focuses on the role of lobbyists in the policy process and features 78 Chamber staffers, organizational lobbyists, and representatives from multi-client lobbying firms. For many years, this session included audience participation in a video- taping of Of the Record, a weekly statewide public television program focused on Michigan politics, and a follow-up discussion with Senior Capitol Correspondent Tim Skubik about the role of the media in politics. Originally a two-day session, in recent years this “media” session has been eliminated in order to shorten the session to one day and to allow additional time for workshops on personal goal setting and team building exercises. In June, Leadership Michigan class members take to the streets of Jackson where they get a first-hand look at the criminal justice system by engaging in a police ride-along. Session 3 is considered by many graduates to be the most memorable of the program because, in addition to the inside look at life fi'om behind the windshield of a police cruiser, participants also visit one of three state prisons in Jackson. This two-day program begins with an overview of the Michigan criminal justice system and includes detailed briefings about the unique experiences participants will encounter. While inside the prison, class members have a chance to tour the facilities, meet and discuss issues with inmates, prison guards, and management, and eat in the prison cafeteria. During debriefing sessions, participants have an opportunity to engage in discussions about their experiences and the impact of the criminal justice system on the greater society. Other topics considered during this session have included: the impact of crime on the victim, community policing and juvenile crime, criminal activity associated with drugs and alcohol, and the advent of drug courts in Michigan. The 2001 and 2002 agendas have 79 been adjusted to allow time to participate in a “Personal Life Vision Exercise” conducted by a graduate of the Leadership Michigan Class of 2000. The program reaches its half-way point with a trip to Marquette, in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula, to learn about the state’s rich natural resources and environment. Held in August until 1998, and in July since then, Session 4 provides a glimpse of the challenges and opportunities of Northern Michigan and has, over the years, featured tours to the Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore, a float trip on the Menominee River, and a visit to the Maritime Museum and Lighthouse. During the initial years of the program, a key environmental issue was solid waste. The program included a tour of the Marquette County Landfill and a follow-up discussion with Michigan Department of Natural Resources staff about solid waste regulation. In the mid-nineties, the focus turned to the state’s fishing industry with a visit to a commercial fishery and fish-processing facility, including a discussion with members of the Michigan Fish Producers Association. During recent years, topics have included water quality and forestry issues along with developing a greater understanding of the production of wood products, fi'om logging to paper production. Tours have included stops at Champion International, Wisconsin Electric Power’s Hydro Operations at Cowboy Lake, and a logging operation owned by Louisiana Pacific. A mainstay of this session for all 15 classes has been the consideration of the economic impact and environmental concerns of open-pit rrrining. Each class has toured the Cleveland Cliffs mining operation and learned about recapturing the land following extraction of iron ore. As with all classes, evening meals and free time are planned to allow ample discussion among participants. These conversation opportunities 80 are designed to stimulate networking and encourage consideration of collaborative solutions. Prior to 2002, Session 5 was held in September and explored the issue of education, with visits to inner city schools and discussions with school administrators and representatives from the Michigan Department of Education. During the first several years, the program was held in Flint. It focused on exploring issues related to elementary and middle school education, e.g., early intervention, school-based management, multi- age classrooms, and the role of the business community in supporting education. In 1998, the program moved to Kalamazoo and since that time the discussion topics have included vouchers, technology, school to work, the MEAP Test and Merit Scholarship Award, early childhood development, schools of choice, and more. In all cases, the program featured a mix of local school officials and educational leaders from state government. In 2002 this session was held in October. For the October 1991 session, “Health Care — An Overview of Affordability, Availability, Quality, and Delivery” was the title of the opening presentation by Peter Pratt from Public Sector Consultants. While the speakers have changed over the years, and this session on health care was moved to November in 2002, the focus on the critical issues of affordability and availability of health care has been a mainstay of this session. The program has always been held in Ann Arbor, with a tour of the University of Michigan Medical Center, affording participants an opportunity to view some of the most state-of-the-art facilities in the world. Presentations have sparked heated discussion among participants on topics such as health care reform, cost containment, medical ethics, tort reform, the right to die, and state-of-the-art medical technology. Originally a 81 two-day program, the time frame was reduced to one day in 2000, and a presentation was added to address the importance of health and fitness to leadership. The seventh topic for consideration by Leadership Michigan grads is economic development, and the site is Grand Rapids. Tours of Steelcase University, Amway Corporation, and the Grand Rapids Southeast Economic Development Association’s work in East Town, and along Wealthy Street, have provided hands-on, experiential learning about economic development and its potential impact. This two-day session, held in September in 2002, and in November prior to that, has featured presentations about the role of non-profits, corporate philanthropy, the state’s economic strategy, land use, and rural development. Recent classes have participated in a simulation, The Monopoly Game, based on social inequality and economic disparity. In 2002, this program was moved to September to coincide with the Chamber’s Future Forum and, following a half day session on the topics of emotional intelligence, diversity, and employee training and development, Leadership Michigan members were mainstreamed into the Forum. The two-day Forum program is designed to create public discourse between business leaders, state lawmakers, and community leaders on issues pertaining to Michigan’s econorrric growth and quality of life. Detroit provides the backdrop for the final session of the Leadership Michigan experience. Held in December, soon-to-be graduates gather to learn about working with the media. This final, two-day program has included tours of the Detroit Free Press and/or Detroit Public Television, discussions about ethics in journalism, and a worksh0p on balancing personal, business, and public life. The major portion of Session 8 is devoted to learning interviewing techniques, complete with an on-camera practice 82 session. The program featured a personal goal-setting workshop in 2001 and has offered some classes an opportunity to experience the arts with a play or cultural event at the Fox Theater. A graduation ceremony provides recognition and closure for graduates and has, in some years, offered an opportunity for family participation. The Chamber recognizes the need to support graduates and provide an avenue for further networking and exposure to issues. As a result of this recognition, an attempt has been made to maintain contact with Leadership Michigan alumni and to plan activities for their continued involvement in Chamber events. During the late 90’s, a golf outing was created as a means of providing a social event to bring alumni together and encourage ongoing networking between graduates from all the previous classes. The event is also a fundraiser, with proceeds supporting non-profit scholarships for the program. The dates and locations of current Leadership Michigan sessions are provided to alumni via email, and graduates are encouraged to attend selected sessions for dinner and the evening program. These alumni activities have not met the expectations of the Chamber. Participant involvement has been moderately successful at best. During the focus groups, graduates indicated a desire to be active in alumni events but noted busy schedules, limitations on travel, and timing issues as reasons for their lack of involvement. Leadership Michigan Demographics Demographic data were collected fi-om respondents for gender, age, level of educational attainment, race, type of employment, income level, and year graduated from Leadership Michigan. The N range for Leadership Michigan demographic data is 160 - 177. Figure 83 8 depicts Leadership Michigan graduates by gender. Males comprise 57.6% (N=102), while females represent 42.4 % (N=75). Figure 8. Leadership Michigan Respondents by Gender N=177 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 0% Female Male Only 2 graduates, or 1.1%, are between the ages of 26 and 30, while 9.1% (N=16) are 31 to 35. Eight and one-halfpercent (N=15) are 36 to 40 and 21% (N=37) are 41 to 45 years of age. The largest group of respondents, 47 (26.7%) includes those 46 to 50. One- fifih (37) are between the ages of 51 to 55 and 8.5% (N=15) are 56 to 60. Four percent (N=7) are over 60 years of age (Figure 9). Figure 9. Leadership Michigan Respondents by Age N =176 30% 26.7% 25% i m 21.0% 20% -~ - ~ - - 15% - — r , - ~ 9.1% 10% - — 8'57" 5%- 26 to 3110 36 to 41 to 46 to 51 to 56 to Over 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 60 When asked about their highest level of educational attainment, the single largest group, 81 respondents (46%), indicated they earned a Masters degree. The smallest category (N=3) obtained an Associate’s degree (1.7%). Nearly 3% (N=5) have attended some level of college but did not earn a degree, while 40.9% (N=72) earned a Bachelor’s degree and 8.5% (N=15) have completed a PhD. (Figure 10). Figure 10. Leadership Michigan Respondents by Level of Educational Attainment N = 176 46.0% 50% 40% - 30% ~ 20% — 10% -* 0% - 740.9% Associate's Degree Bachelor's Degree Master's Degree Ph. D. 85 The great majority of Leadership Michigan participants are White/Caucasian (N = 147 or 85%). African Americans constituted 12.7% (N=22) of program respondents (Figure 11). Figure 11. Leadership Michigan Respondents by Race N = 173 100% 80%e—r- ~- ~ ~ — ~ ~ ~~ —-~ 60% -_.__ —-- *- - ~ -———'~— ~-- --~ A —— , 40%7'_‘1“2—T”; * *’ * “ * ** ,1 * * ' “C ”r i 2322 i ' 1H“? " . "Tar” 7E ____ “ -’ ba¢ “\5’ {6’9 é’° 0 Q 0 0‘? f q’Po Ty C? e e \ #5.? $9 ‘99 gy ,9 Graduates were asked to identify the sector of the economy in which they were employed. Sixty-Five point nine percent are engaged in business and industry, while 8.5% (N=15) work in government. Eleven point nine percent (N=21) identified the non- profit area. Thirteen point six percent (N=24) indicated other. These included health care, retirement, consulting, and self-employed to name a few (Figure 12). 86 Figure 12. Leadership Michigan Respondents by Type of Enployment N = 176 70% _!_65.9_%___,,_, ,v 60% 7 *- 50% ~ , 40% - 30% ~ , , , 0 20% _ 8.5% “79% 13.61. , , 0% - l - l . Business Government Non-profit Other Current income levels tended toward the high end. One point three percent (N=2) earn less than $25,000, while .6% (N=1) is in the $25,000 to $40,000 range. Eight point eight percent (N=14) have an income of between $40,001 and $55,000, and 8.1% (N=13) have incomes between $55,001 and $70,000. Those with an annual income of $70,001 to $85,000 comprise 9.4% (N=15) of respondents and the group with incomes between $85,001 and $100,000 comprise 16.9% (N=27). There are 12.5% (N=20) in a range of $100,001 and $125,000, and those with incomes between $125,001 and $150,000 represent 13.8% (N=22) of the total. The largest group of respondents earn in excess of $150,000 at 28.8% (N=46). Eighteen respondents declined to respond to this item (Figure 13). 87 Figure 13. Leadership Michigan Respondents by Income N = 160 20% _ 7 7 7 16.97% 7 7 77 7 77 150/. _- , , 12.5%, 13:87', , 8.8% 78.1%77 9.4% 7 The final demographic question requested information regarding the class of the Leadership Michigan program fiom which respondents graduated. Class 1, 4.5% (N=8), Class 2, 6.2% (N=11), Class 3, 6.8% (N=12), Class 4, 4% =7), Class 5, 5.1% (N=9), Class 6, 9% (N=16), Class 7, 7.3% (N=13), Class 8, 5.1% (N=9), Class 9, 6.2% (N=11), Class 10, 3.4% (N=6), Class 11, 6.8% (N=12), Class 12, 5.1% (N=9), Class 13, 9.6% (N=17), Class 14, 11.3% (N=20) and Class 15, 9.6% (N=17) (Figure 14). 88 '1 '5 Figure 14. 6 9 6 'a gd‘gd’cp’gvi’ s'e‘e'x‘ '5 5 he sessessss Leadership Michigan Respondents by Year of Participation N = 177 11.3% ,5 s a e e o e o c- 6 'a 9 5 9 9 9 9 9 9 Q «0 ‘0 ‘0 §O \‘ O o“ o“ s es" s“ .95" \ B. Focus Group Findings Findings are presented in a summary narrative format based on the questioning route used to conduct the focus groups. Findings will be presented first from the ProFILE focus group research, followed by those from Leadership Michigan. QSR NVivo was used to query the data for each question, and content analysis techniques were used to identify major ideas for each. A summary of the responses, by question, is provided below. 89 ProFILE 1) What is your most vivid memory of the ProFILE experience? The most common response to this top-of-the-mind question, used to open each focus group discussion, was the people we met and networking By more than two to one, graduates recall the conversations, fellowship, and time spent with peers as being the most vivid recollections they have of their intensive leadership development experience. Most commented about how these fiiendships have had a positive impact on their involvement in Farm Bureau and noted that contact with class members continues through ongoing phone calls, visits, and interaction at a variety of Farm Bureau events. Skill development, especially communication skills, along with the bus trip constitute the next most frequent responses. ProFILE graduates have vivid memories of the speeches they were required to present and of the impromptu “table topic” meeting openers that were an ongoing part of the program. Other skills mentioned were teamwork, exercises designed to encourage risk-taking, conflict resolution, and etiquette training. The bus trip was discussed seven times during the four Farm Bureau focus groups and was noted for providing opportunities to learn more about the F arm Bureau organization, the overnight stays with host families, gaining insight into the agricultural industry, and networking with peers from other states and classmates. Experiential activities were also among the most often discussed topics in response to this question. Graduates mentioned the toolbox (a small wooden toolbox that was given to participants at the first meeting and filled with various leadership books throughout the course of the program) as a memorable part of the program that many still use on a routine basis. Activities such as the tinker toy teamwork exercise, the ROPES course at 90 Kettunen Center, the floor ring exercise, and the Wizard of OZ wrap-up were also discussed. Other items discussed in the context of this opening question included learning about the Farm Bureau organization, meeting key leaders from the agricultural industry, developing a better understanding of state government, and completing a self-assessment using Meyers/Briggs, DISC, or some other personality profile. When asked in a follow-up question to reflect on their most enjoyable experiences, ProFILE graduates discussed networking and friendships, after-hours discussions with classmates about their farming operations, and the bus trip. A final, follow-up question probed for memories of the most useful experiences of graduates. Public speaking was the most common response, closely followed by networking and discussion with classmates, learning about personality styles, and expanding knowledge of Farm Bureau and the agricultural industry. 2) What are your memories about the application and selection process? The most common response to this question was “long” Most remember the application as something that required some time to complete, viewed program selection as a competitive process, and hoped they would be chosen to participate. Several discussed “doing their best” when completing the application. However, some, who were nominated for more recent classes viewed contact from their county Farm Bureau as assurance they would be chosen to participate. In general, those who felt the application and selection process was competitive indicated they had a higher level of expectation for the program--a concept which is supported by Gardner and others in the literature. There 91 was some curiosity expressed about what exactly program organizers were looking for on the application. Participants who were inquisitive about the motives behind specific questions indicated they “read between the lines” when completing their individual applications. One of the most interesting discussions was initiated by a young farmer who became a participant in ProFILE as a result of being named the state Outstanding Young Farmer. This participant recounted how he began the program with little enthusiasm because it had been a gift. He felt there was little or no expectation on behalf of the local Farm Bureau. This topic was discussed at great length, and the final consensus was that the connection to and expectation of the county Farm Bureau increases participant enthusiasm for and commitment to the experience. When asked, on a follow-up question, to describe their feelings on the day the letter of acceptance arrived, ProFILE graduates indicated they were happy to be chosen, anxious to find out who else would be in their class, and diligent in entering session dates into their calendars. Most participants expressed appreciation for the support and encouragement they received from the county Farm Bureau for being nominated and for sponsorship by the local organization. 3) How did you learn about the program? Most ProFILE graduates were first contacted by their county organization. This may have been a direct contact by the county office manager, a member of the county board, or by way of a letter from the local organization. Program graduates are also key ambassadors for ProFILE, along with the state organization’s Regional Representatives. 92 4) Did you or someone else within your family have concern about the amount of time you spent participating in the program? The amount of time devoted to ProFILE, 15 days over 15 months, is generally viewed as just right. While some participants feel additional time could be devoted to certain tapics, most would contend that the time away from their family and farming operation is the most difficult obstacle to overcome. Words like “opportunity, chance of a lifetime, and growth experience” were used to describe how they were able to convince themselves and others that participation was worth spending time away from home. Most focus group discussions regarding the time commitment to ProFILE focused on the bus trip and being away for five days. During all four focus groups, there was agreement that sessions were not scheduled during the peak times for farm work and, by spreading sessions over fifteen months, they were able to cope with the constraints of their family and farming operations. Some female graduates of the program were particularly concerned about spending time away from young children. They generally relied on their extended family to fill-in during their time away fiom home. There were some graduates who indicated a particular challenge dealing with parents and/or partners regarding the extended time away for the bus trip. In two instances, participants indicated they did not participate in the trip because of a conflict with their partner over being away for five consecutive days. Others expressed a belief that having a partner and/or larger farming operation with one or more employees made scheduling time away easier. Some participants indicated their family’s long history of Farm Bureau 93 involvement and ProFILE participation was viewed as a new and exciting opportunity which should be encouraged. 5) Was the ProFILE experience challenging or rigorous by your standards? There was considerable discussion over the word “rigorous” during the focus groups. In general, most participants agreed the program was challenging, but they would not describe their experience as rigorous. Common words used to describe the program were “stimulating, powerful, informative and effective.” While the leadership abilities of participants were recognized as diverse, all groups came to the conclusion that program instruction was effective and challenging for participants, but not overwhelming for those with limited leadership experience. 6) What skills did you learn or enhance as a result of ProFILE participation? The most fi‘equent response, offered as the number one item by nine participants during the focus groups, was communication skills--with public speaking the most discussed skill. Listening skills and working with the media were also mentioned during these discussions about communication. Teamwork was high on the list of ProFILE responses, along with delegation, conflict resolution, and consensus building. Others that were mentioned more than once were vision, risk-taking and problem-solving, and creativity. A key concept that was explored by three of the four focus groups was the idea that the ProFILE program is a “package” of experiences that develops over time. Groups discussed how each session of the program built on previous sessions and how their 94 confidence to engage in the various training activities and in leadership roles “back home” grew as well. While some individual leadership skills, such as risk-taking and decision-making, are not treated as specific items of instruction, graduates believe these skills are developed as a result of interaction with peers, speakers, and staff. The result is increased confidence as a leader, which for many is realized months after their ProFILE experience has concluded. 7) What leadership skills do you think should have received more emphasis or increased time on the agenda? The most often mentioned item in response to this question was conflict resolution. Many participants expressed great concern over'dealing with difficult issues and conflict in their leadership roles. They believe that additional training in consensus building and conflict resolution would be a key program improvement. The second most discussed item on this list was additional time spent practicing communication skills, especially public speaking. Parliamentary procedure and how to run effective meetings, organization skills and time management, and effective communication with public officials were also suggested topics during these discussions. 8) What is the best way to teach leadership? ProFILE graduates said experiential learning is the best way to teach leadership to adult learners. Common themes during these discussions were learning-by-doing modeling, practical/applied teaching techniques, and hands-on experiences. There was also considerable discussion about the value of bringing together a diverse group of 95 individuals who are ready to learn and tackle new challenges. Each focus group spent time discussing the value of learning from one another and the importance of networking as a group of learners. A key question addressed in two of the groups was “Can the complex topic of leadership actually be taught and how much is learned through experience?” As this discussion unfolded, consensus was reached in both groups that ProFILE serves to “prime the pump” by exposing participants to concepts and leadership skills. However, experience in the context of a leadership role is required for a leader to actually grow and develop. Other topics discussed included: development of confidence as a result of participating in an intensive leadership development experienCe, gaining knowledge about key industry issues, meeting and learning from industry leaders, and building “fun” into the program. 9) How have you applied what you learned? Increased involvement in the Farm Bureau organization and local community was discussed and confirmed by nearly all participants in each of the focus groups. The only exceptions to this were three focus group participants who have left the farm and pursued different career paths. Participants also indicated they use the skills and information they gained through the program everyday: in their personal lives, the work on the farm, and in community activities. The concept of gaining the self-confidence to be more involved in leadership roles was also frequently discussed in response to this question. Many added that gaining a better understanding of the Farm Bureau organization--and of what 96 their role could be in Farm Bureau--gave them added confidence and has resulted in more involvement on the local and state levels. Other topics covered during these discussions included: personal and organizational vision, stronger commitment to the agricultural industry and Farm Bureau, greater willingness to take risks, and improved communication skills. 10) Looking back, has your idea of leadership changed since participation in the program? A majority of respondents indicated their basic concept of leadership had not changed. However, the following responses were provided by one or two participants: developing a greater appreciation for the need to delegate with confidence, looking at the “big picture,” understanding that leaders are not always the people who are in front of a group, and the need for continuing to develop knowledge and understanding of industry issues and leadership skills. 11) Is there anything else you would like to offer regarding our discussion? Most graduates expressed appreciation for the opportunity to participate in the program. A few indicated they would like to see an advanced ProFILE program developed for graduates of the current program. Others indicated they would like to see more opportunities for their spouses to be involved in the program. Creation of an alumni program was also a t0pic of discussion during this wrap-up portion of the focus groups. 97 Leadership Michigan 1) What is your most vivid memory of the Leadership Michigan experience? The most vivid memory for most Leadership Michigan graduates is the opportunity to travel throughout the state and gain first-hand experience learning about current issues. The criminal justice session was the most often discussed topic at each of the three Leadership Michigan focus groups. Graduates offered vivid memories of participating in drug busts with members of the Jackson police force, of their encounters with individual prisoners inside the Jackson Prison, and of the discussions they had with prison guards, wardens, and police officers. They also have vivid recollections of the trip to the Upper Peninsula to learn about the state’s natural resources and the environment. Topics from this session which sparked considerable discussion included recycling and solid waste, forestry, and mining. Many participants indicated this was their first opportunity to visit the state’s Upper Peninsula and how unaware they were of the economic vitality of the region. Other sessions mentioned during this initial part of the Leadership Michigan focus groups were health care, state government, and education. These sessions, while not creating the vivid memories of the previous two, were most often noted for the intellectual discussions that resulted between classmates and presenters on topics such as medical ethics and the right to die, the challenges of inner city schools, and the role of the media in elections and public policy. Networking and fellowship were a close second in creating a lasting impression on the graduates of this leadership development program. Many focus group participants discussed the value they place on the network of contacts created as a result of participation in the program and how they have used that network in both their 98 professional and personal lives. Conring together once a month to learn about a key social and/or economic issue and than having an opportunity to engage in an intellectual discussion with peers is remembered by many graduates as a key outcome fi'om the program. The final vivid memory referred to at more than one of the focus groups was the presentation by Futurist Ed Barlow. Many graduates found this presentation to be a challenging experience which encouraged them to think “outside” of their normal business routine. In a follow-up question, focus group participants were asked to recount their most enjoyable experiences associated with Leadership Michigan. Networking and developing fiiendships, along with the opportunity to travel all across the state, were the most common responses. And finally, in response to the question about their most useful experiences, exposure to a wide variety of current social and economic issues, learning about and witnessing state government in action, and having the opportunity to hear expert speakers such as the F uturist-Ed Barlow and Professional Business Coach-Barry Demp were most fiequently mentioned. 2) What are your memories about the application and selection process? The majority of Leadership Michigan graduates did not express any concern over gaining admission into the program. They felt the application was not difficult, and, in many cases, asked if anyone who applied was not accepted into the program. Many participants were of the opinion their company had paid for a spot in the program and notification by their organization meant they would be accepted. Most viewed the 99 application as something they had to complete, but only to provide background information for program organizers. Some voiced the opinion that it is more difficult to gain entry into local Chamber programs such as Leadership Detroit or Leadership Kalamazoo. While many participants believe this has a negative impact on their expectations for the program, others felt it had little impact on their expected outcomes. One of the key discussions, which occurred during each of the focus groups, was about the signal that is sent internally, within a sponsoring organization, when a person is selected to participate in Leadership Michigan. Many companies have an annual commitment to sending one or more participants, and many graduates indicated it is an honor to be selected by their company. In some cases, selection is viewed as a “rite of passage” into the management ranks of organizations. At two of the focus group sessions, an interesting discussion was held on the topic of selection. In these cases, a Human Resources Manager, or member of the organization’s top management team, had chosen a participant without consulting with the nominee’s immediate supervisor. This resulted in a lack of support for the participant, created additional stress leading up to and following each session, and meant little or no expectation for using the knowledge and experience gained as a result of participation. The general consensus of Leadership Michigan graduates is that the application and selection process could be improved. Suggestions made during the focus groups included: providing additional information about the program as part of the application process, developing an enhanced marketing effort which could result in more applications and greater competition, and Chamber officials conducting routine visits to sponsoring organizations to discuss program expectations and encourage support of graduates. 100 3) How did you learn about the program? The vast majority, more than double the responses of any other contact, indicated that this information originated from the participant’s sponsoring organization. While many indicated the contact came from their immediate supervisor, others were given information by their human resources department, by a mentor within their organization, or, in some cases, the initial contact came from someone else within the organization who was a former participant. Initial contact by a graduate‘who was not part of the nominee’s organization was discussed in three instances. Learning about the program as a result of a Chamber mailing or publication was mentioned twice. 4) Did you or someone else within your family or sponsoring organization have concern about the amount of time you spent participating in the program? Being away from family was the greatest concern expressed by Leadership Michigan graduates about the amount of time required to participate. Missing sporting events, leaving a spouse with all the responsibilities of caring for a home and family, and dealing with the special challenges of being a single parent were echoed at each of the three focus group discussions. At the same time, most participants agreed the program made efficient use of time and could not accomplish its goals through a reduced schedule. Approximately one-half of the participants felt additional time for key sessions such the one on state government and economic development would improve the program. A similar number felt additional time should be devoted to skill development. In some situations, participants were faced with an immediate supervisor who was not supportive of their time away from the job. In one case, a graduate employed in sales 101 was fired as a result of time away from the job to participate in the program. However, the vast majority of participants indicated their organization was very supportive of time away and that provisions were made by employers to cover work-related responsibilities. While concern was expressed about the time commitment, the general consensus of participants is that two days a month is manageable and the ideal format for this type of experience. Recent changes in format have resulted in an occasional one-day session. This was a topic of discussion at two of the three focus groups. The opinion was split on the desirability of this approach to program delivery. While one-half of the participants like the idea of having a session with the flexibility of returning home for the night, others expressed dissatisfaction with traveling an extended distance for a one-day program. According to this group, it is difficult to adequately cover a topic in one day, and they question the impact of this format on networking and group collaboration which are viewed as key program outcomes. 5) Was the Leadership Michigan experience challenging or rigorous by your standards? No participants in the focus groups expressed a belief that the program was rigorous. Many would describe their experience as challenging or stimulating, but stopped short of saying it pushed them outside of their comfort zone, an expectation they felt should be part of such an experience. One of the focus groups reached consensus that a more rigorous program should be developed, with additional time devoted to skill development. According to this group, such an enhancement would be needed for the 102 program to move to the “next level.” Members of this group indicated the breadth of Leadership Michigan is good, but suggested it needs additional depth to be more effective. 6) What skills did you learn or enhance as a result of Leadership Michigan participation? Networking was identified by roughly 50% of the focus group participants as a key skill that was developed or enhanced by participation in Leadership Michigan. Gaining a greater appreciation for the big picture by learning about issues was the second most common item, and communication skills, including working with the media, listening, and more effectively speaking on key issues, was also one of the top items mentioned. Other skills that were discussed by more than one of the focus groups included teamwork, valuing diversity, and risk-taking. As with ProFILE, a key outcome of program participation that was explored by each of the Leadership Michigan focus groups during this part of the discussion was increased self-confidence. 7) What leadership skills do you think should have received more emphasis or increased time on the agenda? Because skill development is not a major focus of Leadership Michigan, this question sparked some discussion about the role of skill building within leadership development programs. Many participants felt the program’s focus on issues and networking was a good match for the experienced leaders who are often recruited for the program, while others felt additional emphasis should be placed on skill development. This discussion 103 also gave rise to dialog about the overall programmatic mission for Leadership Michigan. Two of the three groups came to the conclusion that additional effort should be undertaken to clarify the program’s mission and goals, and to communicate them to recruits, participants, and sponsors. One group suggested creation of a Leadership Michigan 11, designed for emerging leaders, with a greater emphasis on learning about the basics of leadership. It was suggested this program could be required for younger, less experienced participants, prior to their participation in the current program. Skills identified for greater program emphasis were conflict resolution, learning how to more effectively network, and influencing public policy. 8) What is the best way to teach leadership? ' The literature on adult learning suggests that mature learners want to be involved in the process of deciding what they want to learn and believe that training programs should be highly interactive. Leadership Michigan graduates affirmed these concepts, and the consensus of focus group participants suggests the highly experiential delivery methods of the program are very effective. Most value group interaction and networking and believe visiting community sites and meeting with civic and industry representatives results. in a greater understanding of the key issues. Many participants also indicate they have developed a greater awareness for the need of life-long learning to be an effective leader. A key finding fi'om these discussions is that, for many participants, the learning resulted in awareness but has not translated into action. One of the groups had an in- depth discussion about the need for a more overt attempt on the part of the Chamber, and 104 program leadership, to encourage graduates to utilize the knowledge and confidence gained through participation to increase community involvement. This group believes such a “call to action” has the potential of motivating graduates and enhancing the overall impact of Leadership Michigan. One suggestion from this group was to establish an expectation that participants engage in a service project as part of the program. Another suggestion was for the Chamber to create statewide work-groups of Leadership Michigan graduates, and other interested parties, to continue the dialog and coordinate action on the key issues that comprise the program’s agenda. 9) How have you applied what you learned? Common responses to this question included increased confidence, greater awareness of the issues, and, in a few cases, more political involvement. In general, this question was covered during previous discussions and this was a topic of some concern on the part of Leadership Michigan graduates. Many believe the program is excellent at creating awareness and building friendships, but they feel the need for more support and encouragement to apply what they learned during the program. Some feel the lack of clear expectations on the part of their employer has diminished their enthusiasm following graduation. They discussed how returning to the pressures of family and work deterred them from increased civic involvement. Others feel a need for ongoing information from the Chamber about the key issues as a way to support and encourage increased community involvement. Two major suggestions were made during each of the focus group discussions. The first was to increase Chamber efforts to create an active alumni group through ongoing 105 communication, creation of a website, and, as mentioned earlier, statewide issue work- groups. The second is for a clearer program mission and more communication with sponsoring organizations about expected outcomes. 10) Looking back, has your idea of leadership changed since participation in the program? (Author’s note: This was the one of the last questions and there was very little response.) The general consensus is that graduates’ thoughts about the concept of leadership have not changed in a significant way. However, some feel they developed a broader concept of what leadership is and how important it is to take a broad view of issues in an attempt to see “the big picture” before advocating a position. 12) Is there anything else you would like to offer regarding our discussion? Most focus group participants indicted they thought it was a great experience and they hoped the program would continue. Several indicated that the current alumni events were not conveniently scheduled; thus they could not participate. A few suggested more options for alumni events, geographically located across the state, with a focus on “issue updates.” C. Survey Data Section C provides a review of data collected by survey. A question-by-question analysis of data is presented in both narrative and graphic formats for ProFILE, followed by a similar presentation of the Leadership Michigan questionnaire data. 106 ProFILE 1) Who first made contact with you about applying for ProFILE? The Michigan Farm Bureau Regional Representatives most often (35%) make the initial contact with prospective participants. Members of the county board account for 23.1% of the initial contacts, and County Farm Bureau presidents 12.8% (Figure 15). Figure 15. Initial Contact with ProFILE Participants N = 117 0 40.,“ ”a- .ML, 35% — - -- ¥kfl 30% ——- 7 ~ . - . 25% 20% — 15% — 10% — 5% — 0% — 7.7% 7.7% County County County ProFILE Regional State Other Board President Secretary Graduate Rep. Board Member Member 2a) Completing the application increased my expectations for ProFILE. Three-fifths agree or highly agree (61.6%) completing the application increased their expectations for the program (Figure 16). 107 Figure 16. Completing the Application Increased Expectations for ProFILE N = 112 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 2°” 7.1% 10% ~ ‘ 7 - 0% Disagree Somewhat Agree Highly Agree Agree 2b) I feel that the application process was competitive. One-half of the graduates (N = 55) agree or highly agree the application process is competitive. Forty-six point seven percent somewhat agree (N = 64) and 4 (3.6%) disagree (Figure 17). Figure 17. The ProFILE Application Process was Competitive N = 110 50% 46.4% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 7.3% Disagree Somewhat Agree Highly Agree Agree 108 2c) The application materials provided a clear understanding of program expectations. Over two-thirds (68.2%) agree or highly agree with this statement regarding the clarity of application materials. Twenty-seven point three percent (N = 30) somewhat agree, and 4.5% disagree (Figure18). Figure 18. The ProFILE Application Provides a Clear Understanding of Program Expectations N = 110 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 1 0% 0% Disagree Somewhat Agree Highly Agree Agree 2d) 1 have a higher commitment to my county Farm Bureau because they nominated me for ProFILE. Nearly two-thirds (65.7%) agree or highly agree they have a higher commitment to their county organization because of their nomination (Figure 19). Figure 19. Commitment to County FB Increased Because of Program Nomination N = 111 50% 40% r 30% r 20% - 10% _ 0% r Disagree Somewhat Agree Highly Agree Agree 3a) The opportunity to network with a diverse group of young farmers was just as valuable as program instruction. Over 90% ( N = 109) agree or highly agree that networking is a valuable part of the program (Figure 20). Figure 20. Networking is a Valuable Part of ProFILE N = 116 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Disagree Somewhat Agree Highly Agree Agree 110 3b) Learning about agricultural issues was just as valuable as improving my leadership skills. Eighty-three point six percent (N = 97) of ProFILE graduates agree or highly agree that learning about issues is a valuable program benefit (Figure 21). Figure 21. Learning About Agricultural Issues is a Valuable Part of ProFILE N = 116 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 1 0% 0% 49.1% 2.6% Disagree Somewhat Agree Highly Agree Agree 3c) The bus trip to visit other states and the American Farm Bureau was a valuable part of the program. Over 90% (N = 92) of the ProFILE graduates agree or highly agree the bus trip was valuable (Figure 22). 111 Figure 22. The ProFILE Bus Trip is Valuable N = 109 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 1 0% 0% 57.8% Disagree Somewhat Agree Highly Agree Agree 3d) The best way to learn about leadership is through role play and group activities. Nearly 8 out 10 (N = 101) agree or highly agree that role play and group activities are effective teaching methods (Figure 23). Figure 23. Role Play and Group Activities are Effective Teaching Methods N = 116 70% 80% 50% 40% 30% 20% 1 0% 0% 57.8% Disagree Somewhat Agree Highly Agree Agree 112 3e) Additional opportunities for spouses to participate would be a valuable addition to the ProFILE experience. Just over half (56%) of the graduates agree or highly agree that additional spouse- inclusive activities would be a valuable change to the current program. Over 28% somewhat agree and 15.5% disagree (Figure 24). '—'fi Figure 24. ProFILE Should Offer More Opportunities for Spousal Involvement 40.5% 28.4% T Disagree Somewhat Agree Highly Agree Agree 31) The goal of ProFILE is to develop future leaders who will become more active in their county Farm Bureau. Most ProFILE graduates (85.3%) agree or highly agree with this goal statement (Figure 25). 113 Figure 25. The Goal of ProFILE is to Develop County Farm Bureau Leadership N = 116 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 49.1% 0.9%) Disagree Somewhat Agree Highly Agree Agree 3g) The ProFILE experience was challenging. Slightly more than seventeen percent highly agree and 61.2% (N = 71) agree the program was challenging. Twenty-three participants somewhat agree (19.8%) and 1.7% disagree (Figure 26). Figure 26. The ProFILE Program was Challenging N = 116 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 1 0% 0% Disagree Somewhat Agree Highly Agree Agree 114 4) In your opinion, which of the following topics/areas need to be emphasized / deemphasized to strengthen the ProFILE Program? Conflict resolution was the only topic to receive a majority of responses indicating the amount of time should be increased (52.6%). Forty-nine point one percent of respondents indicated public speaking should receive more emphasis. Emphasis on each of the other topics -- teamwork, listening skills, risk-taking, delegation, parliamentary procedure, Farm Bureau organizational information, and agricultural issues was just right according to the majority of graduates. Additional topics that were suggested by one or two graduates included: govemment/civics, interaction with the local community, critical thinking, negotiation skills, project management, conducting business by phone, how to run a meeting, and planning and organizational skills (Figure 27). Figure 27. Program Emphasis on Selected Topics for ProFILE N =114 - 116 80% 70% 60% 50% lMoreTlme 40% IJustRIght 30% ElLessTime 20% 10% 0% s 4' a as a s e s a g s s s a? s .8 .8 a Q g Q0 l? 3' \99 q” 37 \ ° '3 9 o ~49 o 0 ‘9 " «1‘ no 4' Q- 9 e 43" s 4’? ‘s v Q cg O L 115 5) The duration/length of the ProFILE program (approximately 15 days over 15 months is: too long, just right, too short. The vast majority of participants (87%) feel the program length is just right (Figure 28). Figure 28. Length of ProFILE Program N = 116 1 00% 80% 60% 40% 20% 3.6% 0% Too Long Just Right Too Short Question 6 is comprised of a series of statements about various impacts of the ProFILE program. For brevity, the author has combined the responses into the following four tables. Two-thirds agree or highly agree (66.9%, =79) their listening skills improved following program participation. Nearly three-quarters (72.8%) agree or highly agree they are more effective speakers. Eighty—six point four percent (N = 102) agree or highly agree that ProFILE helped them become more confident in their public speaking abilities, and 82.2% agree or highly agree they are better able to function as a member of a team (Figure 29). 116 Figure 29. ProFILE Impact on cTcs - 18 70% l Disagree E1 Somewhat Agre I Agree '3 HMyArLrsL 10% Better More More Better Listener Effective Confident Team Speaker Speaker Member Over two-thirds are more confident when dealing with conflict in a group setting (N = 86) and 59.3% agree of highly agree their delegation skills improved through ProFILE. One hundred and five graduates (89%) agree or highly agree they have a greater appreciation for the contribution of others in a group setting (Figure 30). Figure 30. ProFILE Impact on Selected Topics N = 118 80% 70% - 60% , , 50% I Disagree 40% 7 7 1:] Somewhat Agree . . I Agree 30% « Lg Highly Agree More Confident Improved Greater with Conflict Delegation Appreciation of 0111er Views ll7 Nearly 8 out of 10 believe they are more effective when serving as the chairperson of a meeting and more than 80% are more confident when serving as a chairperson. Over 90% agree or highly agree their confidence as a leader improved by participating in ProFILE. When asked if their understanding of leadership improved, 22.9% highly agree and 61% agree (Figure 31). Figure 31. ProFILE Impact on Selected Topics N = 117 -118 l Disagree 7 El Somewhat Agree I Agree El Highly Agree More Effective More More Improved Chairperson Confident Confident Understanding Chairperson Leader of Leadership Finally, nearly three-quarters of the respondents indicated they attended one or more county Farm Bureau meetings to report on their ProFILE experience (N = 92). Seventy- two point nine percent believe their county Farm Bureau benefited from their program participation and virtually all would recommend the program to another young farmer (Figure 32). 118 Figure 32. ProFILE Graduate Agreement on Selected Topics N = 117 -118 80% 7— m- ,L,,L,,,. 70% E 07359;; A l ‘0 Somewhat Agree I Agree leeway: l 50%« 40%4 Li 30% - 20% . j _ l 10% - 0%i ———1 Reported to County FB Would County FB Benefited Recommend ProFILE to a Peer Questions 7 and 8 asked respondents to indicate their involvement in a selected list of Farm Bureau leadership activities. before (question 7) and after (question 8) their ProFILE experience. Figure 33 provides a graphic depiction of this data. Involvement substantially increased following participation in ProFILE on state Farm Bureau committees, county policy development committees, and other county committees, including the Promotion and Education Committee. Involvement as an officer of the county board tripled, as did chairing the Promotion and Education Committee. Leadership as an officer of the county Farm Bureau Board increased nearly four-fold. Involvement as a county board member and as a member of the county Young Farmer Committee increased slightly. The only leadership activity that had no level of increase was serving as the chair of the local Young Farmer Committee. 119 Figure 33. Farm Bureau Involvement of ProFILE Participants Before and After Program Participation N = 118 State Committee membership reported in Figure 33 includes: Policy Development, AgriPAC, Promotion and Education, Young Farmer, State Annual Rules Committee, and various commodity committees. A similar pair of questions assessed community involvement before (question 9) and after (question 10) ProFILE participation. In general, community involvement (Figure 34) substantially increased for this group of leaders following participation. Church board membership increased from 29 to 34. Leadership as an officer on a church board or council increased from 11 to 20 and the number of church board committee chairs increased from 10 to 24. School board membership stood at 1 prior to the program and was 8 after. One participant served on a county board of commissioners prior to the program, and 4 were elected after. There were 2 township officials before and 13 after, while 8 served on their township zoning 120 and planning board before their ProFILE experience and 25 following ProFILE. No participants were members of a county zoning and planning board before though 5 were after. Fourteen were members of a local service organization such as Lions, Kiwanis, or Rotary before and 22 after. Nine served as an officer of a service organization before and 18 after. The only area to experience a decline following ProFILE participation is serving as a 4-H or scout leader, dropping from 41 before, to 36 after. Participation in other community leadership roles nearly doubled, rising from 19 to 37. Other leadership roles included: county fair board, F F A alumni, fire department, various local and state commodity boards, soil conservation district board, Farm Credit, Farm Services Agency, community foundation, and the local co-op board. Figure 34. ProFILE Graduate Community Involvement Before and After Program Participation N = 118 I Before I After 121 Question 11 asked participants about their interest in follow-up activities. Nearly 60% agree or highly agree they would participate in an annual reunion. Nearly 70% would prefer alumni events to be more social in nature, while roughly one- third would prefer such activities to include additional leadership training. Eight out of ten graduates believe the County Farm Bureau has provided opportunities for graduates to utilize what they learned participating in ProFILE (Figure 35). Figure 35. ProFILE Follow-up Activities N = 117 -113 l Disagree El Somewhat Agree I Agree III Highly Ages Attend Alumni Alumni Co. FB Annual Events Events Utilized Reunion Social Training Training ,_I In addition to the items detailed in Figures 15 — 35, two open ended questions were included in the questionnaire. The questions and responses are in Appendix G. Leadership Michigan 1) Who first made contact with you about applying for Leadership Michigan? The largest single group to make contact with potential participants was employers (44.4%). The second most common contact was made by alumni (28.1%). The Chamber was the initial contact for 9%, and other contacts, consisting of contact through a local 122 leadership program, friends and/or colleagues, a mailing, the media, and personal research, accounted for 18% of the responses (Figure 36). Figure 36. Initial Contact with Leadership Michigan Participants N = 177 50% 45% - 40% — 35% — 30% 7 28.1% 25% ~ 20% _ 18.0% 15% < 10% - 5% - 0% - 44.4% 9.0% G'aduate Employer Chamber Other 2a) Completing the application increased my expectations for Leadership Michigan. Fifty-four point one percent agree or highly agree the application increased expectations while an additional 34.3% somewhat agree (Figure 37). Figure 37. The Application Process Increased Expectations for Leadership Michigan N = 172 80% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Highly Agree 123 2b) 1 have/had a higher commitment to my employer because they nominated me for Leadership Michigan. Nearly one-half (49.6%) agree or highly agree that nomination increased their commitment to the nominating employer. Twenty-eight point eight percent somewhat agree, and 21.6% disagree (Figure 38). Figure 38. Nomination for Leadership Michigan Increased Commitment to Employer N = 153 13.7% Disagree Somewhat Agree Highly Agree Agree 2c) I felt the application process was competitive. 28.3% agree or highly agree the application was competitive and another 41.6% somewhat agree. Nearly one in three disagree (Figure 39). 124 Figure 39. The Leadership Michigan Application was Competitive N =166 41.6% 25.3% Disagree Somewhat Agree Highly Agree Agree 2d) The application materials provided a clear understanding of program expectations. Over three-quarters agree or highly agree the application was clear and another 22.4% somewhat agree (Figure 40). Figure 40. The Leadership Michigan Application Provided A Clear Understanding of Program Expectations N = 170 62.4% 60% , 22.4% 1b ‘3 e\ 1144 14.1% 10% T o T 0% _ 1.2 I . Disagree Sonnwhat Agree Highly Agree Agree 125 3a) The Leadership Michigan experience was challenging. Nearly two-thirds agree or highly agree the experience was challenging. Twenty—eight point one percent somewhat agree and 8.4% disagree (Figure 41). Figure 41. Leadership Michigan was Challenging N= 178 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 48.9% Disagree Somewhat Agree Highly Agree Agree 3b) The opportunity to network with other Leadership Michigan participants was just as valuable as learning about key social and economic issues. According to the literature, networking is a valuable part of a leadership development experience. This is supported by more than 8 out of 10 graduates of Leadership Michigan (See Figure 42.) 126 Figure 42. Networking is as Valuable as Learning About Key Social 8: Economic Issues N =177 60% ' 52.5% 50% , , , 0 40% 7 7 7 7 7 7 33.9%. 30% - , , 2°." 1029 10% - , ' ° 0% . . Disagree Somewhat Agree Highly Agree Agree 3c) Learning about key social and economic issues was just as valuable as improving my leadership skills. Learning about issues is also a valued part of the Leadership Michigan program. Nearly 90% agree or highly agree (Figure 43). Figure 43. Learning About Issues Is as Valuable as Improving Leadership Abilities N =177 60% 50%j 40%1~ 30%1 20%. 10%“ 0%- Dlsagree Somewhat Agree Highly Agree Agree 127 3d) We did not spend enough time developing leadership abilities as part of my Leadership Michigan experience. Forty point five percent (N = 72) would agree or highly agree that additional time should be invested in skill development. Another 36% somewhat agree and 23.6% disagree (Figure 44). Figure 44. Leadership Michigan Did Not Invest Enough Time Improving Leadership Abilities N = 178 40% 35.0‘L 30% 20% 10% 0% Disagree Somewhat Agree Highly Agree Agree 3c) The best way to learn about leadership is through role play and group activities. Just over 27% or 48 agree or highly agree. Nearly one-half somewhat agree that role play and group activities are good leadership training techniques. Nearly one-quarter disagree (Figure 45). 128 Figure 45. The Best Way to Learn About Leadership is Through Role Play and Group Activities N = 176 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 1 0% 0% 48.3% 21.6% Disagree Somewhat Agree Highly Agree Agree 31') Additional opportunities for discussion with my Leadership Michigan classmates about key social and economic issues would have enhanced my Leadership Michigan experience. Nearly one-half agree or highly agree that additional time for peer discussion would enhance the program (49.5%). Thirty-five point eight percent somewhat agree and 14.8% disagree (Figure 46). ' Figure 46. Leadership Michigan Should Provide More Opportunities for Group Discussion N = 176 50% ' 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 39.8% Disagree Somewhat Agree Highly Agree Agree 129 3g) The goal of Leadership Michigan is to encourage participants to become better- informed, active members of their community. The vast majority of graduates (over 90%) agree the goal is increased community involvement (Figure 47). Figure 47. The Goal of Leadership Michigan is More Community involvement N =178 Disagree Somewhat Agree Highly Agree Agree 4) In your opinion, which of the following topics/areas need to be emphasized ldeemphasized to strengthen Leadership Michigan? Leadership Michigan graduates identified two areas -- conflict resolution (52.9%) and risk-taking (48%) -- for increased program emphasis. Emphasis on the remaining topics: public speaking, working with the media, learning about key social and economic issues, personal coaching, and networking, was about right according to the most participants. However, nearly 30% of respondents felt additional time could be invested in each of these areas (Figure 48). 130 Figure 48. Program Emphasis on Selected Topics N =170-175 I More Time I Just Right El Less Time 5) The duration/length of Leadership Michigan (approximately 16 days over 8 months) is too long, just right, or too short? The overwhelming majority (90.4%) believe the amount of time is just right (Figure 49). Figure 49. Length of Leadership Michigan Experience N =178 100% 90.4% 80% 60% — 40% ~ 0 h 204* 33% 5.6% 0% r Too Long Just Right Too Short 131 Question 6 provided respondents an opportunity to evaluate the impact of Leadership Michigan on a series of program impacts. Figure 50 provides detail on 5 areas of impact. Over thirty-eight percent agree or highly agree their confidence increased when dealing with the media and another 37.8% somewhat agree. Nearly one-quarter disagree. Over 30% percent agree or highly agree they are more confident dealing with group conflict, while an additional 45.6% somewhat agree. Twenty-four percent disagree they are more comfortable in conflict situations. Seventy-one percent believe their employer benefited from their involvement in Leadership Michigan and another 20% somewhat agree. More than sixty-four percent agree or highly agree their confidence as a leader increased and 28% somewhat agree. Finally, 41.1% agree or highly agree they increased their level of community involvement as a result of program participation, while 34.9% somewhat agree. Nearly one in four disagreed (Figure 50). Figure 50. Leadership Michigan lnpact on Selected Topics N = 170-175 50% 50% A“- _- 40% ‘7' w I Disagree 30% .... -_ 0 Somewhat Agree I Agree 20% q a Highly Aer a. 10% . z * - J , 0% . g Group Employer Confidence Increased Conflict Benefited as a Leader Community Involvement I32 Figure 51 provides detail on a similar set of impact questions from section 6 of the questionnaire. Twenty-two point six percent agree or highly agree they are more politically active, 29.3% somewhat agree and 40.8% disagree. Forty-two point six percent agree or highly agree they have utilized the network of contacts they made during the program, while 33% somewhat agree. Roughly one-quarter disagree. When asked if they have a better understanding of key social and economic issues following Leadership Michigan, nearly 90% agree or highly agree. Forty-two point seven percent agree or highly agree they have used their knowledge of issues to influence decisions and another 39.3% somewhat agree. Nearly 90% would recommend Leadership Michigan to a peer or colleague (Figure 51). N =177-173 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 1 0% 0% - 0.in D Somewhat Agree I Agree Cl Highly Agiee Used Network Issues Iswes Politically _ Influenced — I Understand - Recommend Program to Peer 133 6k. If you changed employers following Leadership Michigan, the program experience was a key influence on the decision to change. A vast majority disagree (88.2%) with this statement (Figure 52). Figure 52. Leadership Michigan was a Key Influence in Decision to Change Employers 88.2' 100% A 80% 60% 40% 20% 5.9% 0% Disagree Somewhat Agree Highly Agree Agree 6L) If you received a promotion following Leadership Michigan, the program experience was a key factor in receiving the promotion. A majority disagree (62.8%) and 26.9% somewhat agree (Figure 53). Figure 53. Leadership Michigan was a Key Factor in Promotion N = 78 62.8% 26.9% 7 20% 10% 0% . Disagree Somewhat Agree Highly Agree Agree 134 Question 7 requested feedback regarding follow-up activities. Figure 54 provides detail regarding alumni events. Forty-six point three percent agree or highly agree they would attend an annual reunion and 32.2% somewhat agree. Thirty- eight point seven percent would prefer alumni events to be more social in nature, with an additional 31.2% somewhat in agreement. More than one-half agree or highly agree that alumni activities should include leadership training, with another 32.1% somewhat in agreement. Six out of 10 agree or highly agree alumni events should focus on learning about issues and another quarter somewhat agree (Figure 54). Figure 54. Leadership Michigan Follow-Up Activities N =168-177 -____L_-,_-,_‘,_L_,,W I Disagree 30% 25% Cl Somewhat Agree 20% I Agree 15% . 10% I Highly Agree 5% 0% Attend Alumni Alumni Alumni Annual Events Events Events Reunion Social Training Isue Oriented 135 D. Key Topics Section D provides additional analysis on key topics identified in the research questions used to guide this dissertation. The topics will be presented in the following order: application and selection, program delivery, support, involvement, and demographic differences. Finally, the application and selection process and program delivery will be correlated to program impact using regression analysis. Application and Selection As noted in Chapter Two, research by Smith and Peterson (1988) and Conger and Benjamin (1999) suggests the application and selection process is critical to the success of leadership development programs. During the design of the focus group questioning routes, one of the key questions pertained to the application and selection process. The importance of this area to program design was made clear by one ProFILE participant. “My wife and I were the distinguished young farm couple of the state of Michigan one year, and that is how I got enrolled in ProFILE. I won the opportunity as a result of this state competition. I really feel, looking back today, that the pe0ple who had a county Farm Bureau pick them. . .came with a better attitude toward the program and probably got more out of it in the long run.” This participant went on to say that he felt he did experience growth from the program, but that it took a while for him to understand the value of the program and to make a dedicated commitment to the experience. This discussion continued for more than ten minutes, and other members of the group supported this notion of great impact from the support and expectation created by their county Farm Bureau. 136 Section two of the ProFILE survey contained four items regarding the application and selection process. Sixty-one point six percent agree or highly agree the application process increased their expectations for the program. Fifty percent agree or highly agree the application was competitive, and 68.2% agree or highly agree the application provided a clear understanding of program expectations. On the topic of nomination, 65.7% believe they have a higher commitment to their county Farm Bureau because their local organization nominated them for the program. The first three items contained in section two of the ProFILE survey were combined to form the Application Construct (P), as defined in Chapter Three. When taken as a whole, the Application Construct (P) provides an indication of the overall impact of the application and selection process on the attitudes of a given participant. Using Pearson’s Correlation to measure correlation between the application and selection process, and overall programmatic impact, the researcher found a positive correlation (r = .280) at the P < .004 level. Based on descriptors by Davis (1971), .28 is a low level of correlation. This coefficient indicates that participant attitudes regarding the two items, application and impact, are statistically correlated to one another and that as the level of agreement increases on factors associated with the application and selection process, so does the level of impact from participation in ProFILE (See Table 6). 137 TABLE 6. CORRELATION OF PROFILE APPLICATION AND IMPACT CONSTRUCTS. IMPACT APPLICATION Pearson Correlation 1 .280(“) IMPACT Significance (2-tailed) . 0.004 N 117 107 Pearson Correlation .2800") 1 APPLICATION Significance (2-tailed) 0.004 . N 107 108 “ Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). During the Leadership Michigan focus groups, the same key question was used to encourage discussion about the application and selection process for the program. In most cases, employers nominate and sponsor participants and thus the commitment is similar to that of ProFILE graduates to their county Farm Bureau. However, based on discussions at each of the three Leadership Michigan focus groups, many felt that once a company indicates it will sponsor an employee, the application process is only a formality. During one of the focus groups, this thought was supported by a participant. “I had a check, and that was what they needed. There was a slot for our company.” However, during this same focus group discussion, the importance of being chosen by the company to participate was noted by another participant. “At our company it [being selected for this type of program] means you have arrived in the management world. . .just being in the program is a sign that you have value as a manager or potential manager.” 138 Section two of the Leadership Michigan survey also probed for thoughts about the application and selection process. Slightly more than 54% of respondents agree or highly agree the application increased expectations for Leadership Michigan When asked to indicate if the application process was competitive, 28.3% agree or highly agree, 41.6% somewhat agree, and nearly one-third, 30.1%, disagree the application was competitive. Three quarters of the participants felt the application materials provided a clear understanding of program expectations, and nearly one-half agree or highly agree they developed a higher commitment to their employer because of program nomination. Using the Application Construct (LM) to determine if a similar correlation exists between participant attitudes regarding the application and selection process and program impact for Leadership Michigan, the researcher found a positive correlation (r = .429) at the P < .0 level. This level is somewhat higher than the correlation for ProFILE and is considered a moderate association by Davis (1971) (See Table 7). TABLE 7. CORRELATION OF LEADERSHIP MICHIGAN IMPACT AND APPLICATION CONSTRUCTS. iMPACT APPLICATION Pearson Correlation 1 .429(“) iMPACT Sig. (2. tailed) . 0 N 164 139 Pearson Correlation .429(**) 1 APPLICATION Sig. (2- talled) 0 . N 139 146 " Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-taiiedL 139 Program Delivery For each of the seven focus groups, the opening series of questions was designed to gauge what participants remember about the programs and to gain insight about the most effective teaching/learning methods from the perspective of graduates. The most discussed topics during this opening series of questions for the ProFILE focus groups were: networking and learning from each other as a group, experiential learning activities (including teamwork exercises), individual speeches, and problem- solving activities, the week-long bus trip, learning about personal and individual strengths and weaknesses through personality profile assessment, gaining a better understanding of the F arm Bureau organization, and building confidence. “The memories I wrote down, although there were many, were the people. Those relationships we made and then became cemented on that [bus] trip we took. Those relationships, and when you’re farming you don’t have a lot of time for networking with other young farmers, but for me, it was that support system that resulted from the friendships I made. Even though many of them are distant, it’s a neat legacy, I guess, I took from the program.” Ninety-four percent of respondents indicated they agree or highly agree that networking was as valuable as program instruction. The ProFILE experience has included a variety of experiential leaning, teamwork and group interaction experiences over the years. These activities were discussed numerous times during the focus groups. “We had a scavenger hunt at Crystal Mountain Resort, and it was an awesome experience because people had to put their heads together and come up with a resolution!” The public speaking workshops were viewed as critical by most ProFILE participants, especially the individual speeches. “The speaking skills that 140 were brought out in those taped speeches. I still take that tape out and look at it from time to time. I use those skills all the time.” During Class Three, a ROPES course was used to provide additional opportunities for developing interpersonal and team building skills. “I remember the time we were at Kettunen Center, and we had those outdoor activities, climbing over a wall and the trust fall and whatever. A whole new group of leaders emerged during this activity. . .[it was very useful to see how the] whole group interacts and is able to use that to get the task done. . .” Over 79% agree or highly agree the best way to learn about leadership is through role play and group activities. The week-long bus trip is a key element of the ProFILE program. This activity was the most often mentioned item when asked about the most vivid memory of the ProFILE experience. Nearly 93% of respondents agree or highly agree the bus trip was a valuable part of ProFILE. The networking, the time spent with host families, and the opportunity to broaden individual perspectives about Farm Bureau and the agricultural industry were the most often discussed topics associated with this experience. One of the most useful experiences discussed by many of the focus group participants was the opportunity to explore and learn about different personality traits. “For me it was undoubtedly the ability to better understand other personality types and try to be able to deal with them. [Before ProFILE] I had had some leadership experience, but I perhaps accomplished a lot with. . .brute force, intimidation! To be able to learn how to be more tactful in my approach and how to listen to people and understand why they had their point of view. . .that was [the most valuable part] for me.” Eighty-nine percent agree or highly agree they have a greater appreciation for the contribution of others following the program. 141 The Delivery Construct (P) was created using the first four items in Section Three of the ProFILE questionnaire as a means of evaluating the effect of program delivery on program impact (See Chapter 3). These items focused on networking, learning about agricultural issues, the bus trip, and role play and group activities as effective learning techniques. At (r = .499) Pearson’s Correlation is positive, indicating that program delivery is moderately correlated to impact at the P < .00 level (Table 8). The more .‘ ”-4—- -.. ' I . positive a participant’s attitude about the various delivery items, the higher his/her agreement the program had impact on his/her leadership abilities and involvement. 5; TABLE 8. CORRELATION OF PROFILE IMPACT AND DELIVERY CONSTRUCTS IMPACT DELIVERY Pearson Correlation 1 .4991") Sig. (2-tailed) . 0 IMPACT N 117 108 Pearson Correlation .499L“) 1 Sig. (2-tailed) 0 . DELIVERY N 108 109 “ Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). The topics receiving the most discussion during the opening series of questions of the Leadership Michigan focus groups were: the people and networking, learning about current issues by visiting different sites across Michigan, classroom sessions by the Futurist Ed Barlow, personal coach Barry Demp, and the Monopoly Game, and learning about the State Chamber of Commerce and getting to know Chamber staff. The following 142 paragraphs provide insight regarding these memories from the perspective of Leadership Michigan graduates. Once again, the relationships developed between members of the individual classes and the opportunity to network with a diverse group of people ranked very high on the list of outcomes from this intensive leadership development program. “I am better informed (because) I see all sides of an issue. I see it from a personal, work related, society related viewpoint. Networking with my classmates after each experience was a bonus. We all had a point of view, and the diversity of our backgrounds is what made our discussions so interesting and educational.” Over 86% agree or highly agree ‘iM-I‘h" . r.“ - .-.— . ‘an .p ....“ 54“ networking is as valuable as learning about issues. Slightly less than one-half (49.5%) of respondents agree or highly agree they would benefit from additional time to discuss issues with their classmates. And nearly 36% somewhat agree more time for discussion would be beneficial. Visiting the various areas of Michigan and spending time seeing, hearing about, and experiencing current issues, such as criminal justice in Jackson, health care at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, and natural resources in the Upper Peninsula, provide some of the most vivid memories for Leadership Michigan graduates. These hands-on learning experiences receive high marks from graduates of the program. “It broadened my perspective and opened my eyes to the interdependency of our social, [and] political environment, and professional systems. Travel throughout the state was fun and educational.” From the prison visit: “You gain a perspective to look at things from different eyes. Just to see the people sitting across from you at the prison and to come to the understanding that maybe the only difference between you and them was 143 opportunity and discipline. And to realize that maybe that is why they ended up in there and you didn’t. I will always remember that.” Nearly 90% agree or highly agree that learning about issues is just as valuable as improving leadership abilities. Many participants during the focus groups commented on the presentations by Ed Barlow and Barry Demp and made reference to the Monopoly Game as key learning activities. These speakers were described as being “unique” and the game as being r “hands-on and experiential.” These three experiences were viewed as being more ! memorable because they were “out- of-the—box” and “particularly useful sessions.” l When asked on the survey if they agreed that role play and group activities are the best L methods to learn about leadership, 27.6% agree or highly agree while an additional 48.3% somewhat agree. The role of the program coordinator was discussed during the Leadership Michigan focus groups. “Well, I learned from Phil [the program coordinator], I learned a ton from him. Just how he ran the meetings and set things up to encourage discussion by the group, and about the Chamber itself. That was useful for me.” Using four items from Section Three of the Leadership Michigan survey, the researcher created the Delivery Construct (LM). Pearson’s Correlation was used to statistically evaluate the correlation between participant attitudes regarding program delivery and program impact. For Leadership Michigan, delivery is positively correlated (r = .511) to impact at the P < .00 level (See Table 9). Based on the Davis descriptors, this would be considered a substantial association (See Table 5, Chapter 3.) The more positive a participant’s attitudes about the various delivery items of networking, learning 144 about social and economic issues, and degree of program challenge, the higher his/her agreement that the program had impact on his/her leadership abilities and involvement. TABLE 9. CORRELATION OF LEADERSHIP MICHIGAN IMPACT AND DELIVERY CONSTRUCTS IMPACT DELIVERY Pearson Correlation 1 .51 1 (") Lflfl- (Z-talled) . 0 IMPACT N 164 181 Pearson Correlation .511(*') 1 Sig. (2-tailed) 0 . DELIVERY N 161 175 ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). Support According to The Center for Creative Leadership, if trainees are not supported by others who offer confirming messages and encouragement, they may view their personal grth and development as an overwhelming experience. “It [support] is needed to help them maintain a positive view of themselves as people capable of dealing with challenges, who can learn and grow, who are worthy and valuable (McCauley, et al., 1998). There are significant differences between the two programs studied with regards to support. One of the key goals of the Farm Bureau ProFILE program is to develop future leaders for the organization’s county Farm Bureau structure. In contrast, the Chamber has no such goal for graduate involvement in its programs following participation in Leadership Michigan. This results in limited support for some graduates of the Chamber 145 1" ‘ “HF-TT-a-"T ' program and may explain some of the differences in the level of impact reported by graduates of Leadership Michigan compared to ProFILE. During the ProFILE focus groups, participants routinely discussed how they used the training received during the program to pursue increased leadership roles in their county Farm Bureau. This increased level of involvement was supported by the survey data. “ProFILE gave me more opportunities in Farm Bureau leadership and helped me take on more challenges. I think it is an excellent program for young farmers to develop ’9 leadership skills and apply them. Seventy-three percent of respondents agree or highly agree, and an additional 23.7% somewhat agree, that their local Farm Bureau benefited fiom their participation in ProFILE. On a similar question, participants were asked to consider if they viewed their county Farm Bureau as a place to utilize what they learned participating in ProFILE. Over 18% highly agree, 57.6% agree, and 16.1% somewhat agree. Three questions near the end of the survey were designed to gauge the need for follow-up support and participant interest in alumni activities. Over 60% agree or highly agree, and 31.6% somewhat agree, that they would participate in an annual ProFILE reunion. Seven of ten (70%) agree or highly agree alumni activities should be more social in nature, with 22.9% somewhat in agreement. And finally, more than one-third agree or highly agree they would prefer alumni activities to be more leadership development training opportunities, with 42.6% somewhat in agreement that these activities should include more training. In contrast, Leadership Michigan graduates have little or no connection with a grassroots, local organization. Employers tend to fill the role. However, the level of 146 expectation for programmatic impact varies widely among sponsoring organizations. “I originally looked at the time and thought there are only so many hours in the day. . .I just said to myself, ‘the company is supporting this and they want me to go. I am going to make the most of this opportunity’.” However, there were others who felt little or no support from their employer. “My boss, [who didn’t actually nominate this person for the program] complained every time I had to go for a couple of days. [I was nominated by] the Vice President, so it was a little annoying to have to deal with [my immediate supervisor who] was a bit obnoxious [about my participation]. Others in the focus groups echoed similar concerns over the lack of support by supervisors, colleagues, and peers who did not understand why they were not afforded the same opportunity for personal growth. “I think some people were a bit envious that you got the opportunity to go and they didn’t.” They also talked about coming back from the sessions and not having any real expectation on the part of their employer to report on what they learned or how it might be applied to their work. The Leadership Michigan questionnaire asked participants if they believed their employer benefited from their participation in the program. Over 71% agree or highly agree, while an additional 20% somewhat agree. Nearly 43% agree or highly agree they have used the knowledge gained during the program to influence issues. Nearly 40% somewhat agree and 18% disagree they have used this knowledge to influence issues. Nearly 41% have not increased their level of political involvement, and one in four said they have not increased their level of community involvement. Four questions were used to assess the need for follow-up activities for graduates of Leadership Michigan. Just over 18% highly agree, 28.2% agree, and 32.2% somewhat I47 agree they would participate in an annual reunion. Should alumni activities be more social in nature? Nearly 4 out of 10 agree or highly agree, and 32.1% somewhat agree. Over one-half agree or highly agree they would like more leadership development training as part of alumni activities, and 31.2% somewhat agree. Finally, 62.1% agree or highly agree they would like additional opportunities to learn about key social and economic issues as part of an alumni experience; another 25% somewhat agree. As discussed in section B of this chapter, focus group participants suggested a variety of follow-up activities such as a Leadership Michigan II experience, ongoing discussion and action groups associated with selected issues on a statewide basis, and class service projects. Community and Organizational Involvement Each of the surveys provided program graduates an opportunity to indicate changes in their level of involvement on the community or organizational level following participation in their respective programs. On the ProFILE survey, participants were given a list of leadership positions within the Farm Bureau organization and the community. They were asked to check those they were involved in prior to participation in the program and those they were involved in following participation. The researcher did a comparison between the levels of involvement prior to and following the program. Prior to ProFILE, participants were involved in an average of 2.1 Farm Bureau activities. Following the program, this increased to 3.6 leadership activities for each graduate. Community leadership increased from 1.3 positions to 2.2 following ProFILE graduation (Figure 55). 148 Figure 55. Involvement of ProFILE Graduates N = 118 I Before ProFILE III After ProFILE Average Number of Average Number of Leadership Positions Leadership Positions held in the Farm held in the Community Bureau The program appears to have had some effect on the level of involvement in both Farm Bureau and the community. As one respondent on the open-ended questions of the survey indicated, “ProFILE gave me the confidence to step into leadership positions.” The researcher used Pearson’s Correlation to test for correlation between program impact and increased levels of involvement following participation in ProFILE by creating an Involvement Construct (P) as discussed in Chapter Three. No statistically significant correlation was found regarding participant attitudes regarding program impact and subsequent involvement for ProFILE graduates. The researcher did not use the list method for comparing before and after levels of involvement by Leadership Michigan graduates because of feedback received during the focus groups. A series of four statements was used to provide graduates an opportunity to indicate their level of community involvement. It should be noted that the Chamber 149 has no expectations for Leadership Michigan graduate involvement in Chamber activities. Figure 56 provides detail on Leadership Michigan graduate involvement. Figure 56. Involvement of Leadership Michigan Graduates 45% -Li,_,_ ~»— ~7— -* W 7 7 , ,7., L, -— 77* a 40% - 35% 30% I Disagree 25% ~ Cl Somewhat Agree I Agree I Highly Agree 20% - 15% 10% 5% - 0% - Increased More Used the Used Involvement Politically Network of Knowledge in My Active Contacts Gained to Community Influence Issues The level of increased involvement was fairly consistent across all categories. Forty- one percent agree or highly agree they increased community involvement, 34.9% somewhat agree, and 24% disagree. Nearly 30% are more politically active since their Leadership Michigan experience and an additional 28.7 somewhat agree. More than 4 of 10 disagree they are more politically active. More than 42% agree or highly agree they have used their contacts since graduation, 33% somewhat agree, and nearly one-quarter disagree. And finally, 42.7% of graduates either agree or highly agree they have used the knowledge they gained through the program to influence issues, 39.3% somewhat agree, 150 and 17.9% disagree. “My awareness of political and social issues has been greatly enhanced.” Maturation, other leadership experiences, and training activities could influence these findings. Using the four items from Section Six of the Leadership Michigan survey, the researcher created the Involvement Construct (LM). Pearson’s Correlation was used to statistically evaluate the correlation between participant attitudes regarding increased involvement and program impact. For Leadership Michigan, involvement is positively correlated (r = .620) to impact at the P < .00 level (See Table 10). Based on the Davis descriptors, this would be considered a substantial association (See Table 5, Chapter 3.) The more positive a participant’s attitudes about increased involvement, the higher his/her agreement the program had impact 0n his/her leadership abilities. TABLE 10. CORRELATION OF LEADERSHIP MICHIGAN INVOLVEMENT AND IMPACT CONSTRUCT S IMPACT DELIVERY Pearson Correlation 1 .620(“) _S_ig. (2-tailed) . .000 IMPACT N 164 164 Pearson Correlation .6200") 1 fig. (2-tailed) .000 . DELIVERY N 164 172 “ Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). 151 Demographic Differences This research effort found no statistical differences between the demographic characteristics of respondents and their responses, with the exception of the level of Farm Bureau and community leadership involvement following program graduation between male and female respondents in the ProFILE program. Using the various constructs and the T-test to statistically evaluate differences between age, gender, and levels of educational attainment, no other statistical differences were found. As mentioned above, both female and male participants increased their level of leadership activity in the Farm Bureau and in the community following graduation from the program. However, females exhibited a higher level of increase in both the Farm Bureau and the community, and the increaSed level of Farm Bureau leadership involvement for women was statistically significant. The level of Farm Bureau leadership prior to ProFILE was 2.0 activities for each female participant; following ProFILE, it increased to 4.18 activities. For males, the level was 2.18 activities before their ProFILE experience, and their leadership involvement in the Farm Bureau increased to 3.51 activities after ProFILE. With respect to community leadership, females were involved in 1.25 activities prior to their ProFILE experience, and this increased to 2.39 activities after graduation. For males, the level of community leadership involvement began at 1.3 activities for each male and increased to 2.16 following graduation. Based on a t-test, the level of increased involvement by females in Farm Bureau is statistically significant (Figure 57). 152 Figure 57. Average Number of Leadership Roles for ProFILE Graduates by Gender N = 89 Males and 28 Females 4.5 4 «L 3.5 «e 3 at _ - r“ '— r I Males ~-_~ c1 Females f Farm Bureau Farm Bureau Community Community Involvement Involvement after Involvement Involvement After Before ProFILE ProFILE Before ProFILE ProFILE Correlation of Delivery and the Application Process with Program Impact Once the data analysis was complete, a final statistical analysis was conducted utilizing a regression of three constructs. Impact (P) was used as the dependent variable, and Application (P) and Delivery (P) were the independent variables for ProFILE. A similar regression was completed for the lrnpact Construct (LM), the Application Construct (LM) and the Delivery Construct (LM) for Leadership Michigan. This statistical analysis was undertaken to extrapolate additional evidence regarding the importance of these two critical areas to the creation and delivery of intensive leadership development programs. For ProFILE, this regression showed that both application and delivery are statistically significant, with delivery more important to impact than application. As shown in Table 11, program delivery is moderately correlated (b = .433) to impact at the P < .00 level. 153 Application has a low level of correlation through regression analysis (b = .246) to impact at the P < .006 level. TABLE 11. REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR PROFILE Coefficients(a) Unstandardlzed Coefficients Standardized Coefficients Model Beta T Sig. 8 Std. Error (Constant) 1.217 .242 5.034 .000 1 DELIVERY .079 .016 .433 4.933 .000 APPLICAT .056 .020 .246 2.806 .006 a Dependent Variable: IMPACT The analysis for Leadership Michigan attitudes yielded similar results. Both program delivery and the application process are correlated to impact, with delivery exhibiting a stronger correlation. For Leadership Michigan graduates, program delivery is positive and has a moderate correlation (b = .477) to impact at the P < .00 level, and application is positively correlated at a moderate level (b = .346) to impact at the P < .00 level (See Table 12). 154 TABLE 12. REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR LEADERSHIP MICHIGAN Coefficients(a) Unstandardlzed Coefficients Standardized Coefficients Model Beta T Sig. B Std. Error (Constant) .201 .256 .783 .435 1 DELIVERY .461 .072 .447 6.422 .000 APPLICAT .378 .076 .346 4.969 .000 a Dependent Variable: IMPACT Summary Chapter Four has provided a detailed analysis of the findings from both the qualitative and quantitative research conducted for the ProFILE and Leadership Michigan programs. The author has provided comparative findings associated with the key topics of application and selection, program delivery, support, involvement, demographics, and impact. Chapter Five will offer conclusions and recommendations for each of the research questions posed in Chapter One. The conclusions and recommendations will incorporate key findings from both the literature review in Chapter Two and this chapter. 155 CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSIONS AND RECCOMENDATIONS Chapter Five will provide conclusions and recommendations for each of the research questions offered in Chapter One, beginning with program value and continuing with critical leadership skill development, program application and selection, networking, teaching and delivery techniques, involvement, support, and finally demographics. The chapter will conclude with a conceptual framework for an intensive leadership development program along with leadership development reflections by the author. Program Value Research Question A: What is the value of leadership development programs among program graduates? Despite differences between the two programs studied, the research indicates that graduates of these programs value their training. Even among those who were somewhat critical of their experience, most (nearly 100% for ProFILE and 89% for Leadership Michigan) would recommend it to another. Over 90% of ProFILE graduates agree or highly agree their confidence as a leader improved as a result of participation. “[ProFILE] really gave me a boost and the encouragement to take on additional challenges within Farm Bureau and other organizations too.” A majority of Leadership Michigan graduates also agree the program gave them increased confidence; however, it is somewhat less positive when compared to ProFILE. Nearly 65% of Leadership 156 Michigan respondents agree or highly agree their level of confidence as a leader increased following participation in the program. “[Leadership Michigan staff] do a good job of exposing you to the key issues, and when you find yourself in a leadership situation dealing with a similar issue, that confidence gives you the courage to make a difference.” Recommendations Regarding Program Value Because an overwhelming majority of graduates from both programs placed a relatively high value on their intensive leadership development experience, the author will provide two general recommendations that could have applicability for both programs. 1. Clearly define the program mission and goals and communicate these expectations to the members of each class, and to their sponsors, on a continuous basis. 2. As suggested in the literature regarding adult education, such programs should provide opportunities at the beginning of each class for participants to discuss their expectations for involvement in an intensive leadership development experience and make adjustments to program agendas which reflect this participant feedback. Critical Leadership Skill Development Because research questions B and C both pertain to the identification and delivery of skills training, the researcher has chosen to combine the two for this discussion. 157 Research Question B: What leadership skills do graduates of selected leadership development programs identify as being most critical to fulfilling their leadership roles? Research Question C: Did participation in a leadership development program provide the opportunity to develop or enhance the skills identified in the previous research question? Skill development for both groups is considered valuable, although the actual skills vary from group to group. For ProFILE, program organizers have been very deliberate in their approach to skill development as an integral part of the overall program mission. This most likely is a result of the program’s focus on training emerging leaders. When asked to identify the most important skills addressed, this group of young farmers indicated public speaking, conflict resolution, risk, and listening as the most important skills. Teamwork and delegation were considered somewhat less important than the previous four items; however, a vast majority of respondents encouraged maintaining the current programmatic emphasis on both topics. The data from ProFILE respondents also suggest that skill development occurred as a result of program participation. Graduates have more confidence when practicing these leadership skills and have increased their involvement because of enhanced mastery. It appears program organizers should consider finding ways to increase the level of training and development associated with both public speaking and conflict resolution, since these topics were identified by 50% or more of respondents as areas that should receive additional emphasis. 158 There are some Leadership Michigan graduates who are not as positive about their program experience. 7.4% disagree and 28% somewhat agree their level of confidence as a leader improved. This trend is fairly consistent throughout the data, with some questions actually receiving a majority of responses in the somewhat agree and disagree categories. One of the key factors, indicated by graduates who found less value in the program, was a belief that program focus and mission were not clear. According to one graduate, “I am not sure they [program organizers] are clear on the mission for Leadership Michigan. The breadth of the experience seems pretty good, but the depth is not. Because you are spread so far, you don’t get much depth. To be an effective leader, you’ve got to understand what is going on in the state, but you also have to have leadership skills. So, maybe there is conflict about mission.” During each of the three Leadership Michigan focus groups, there was discussion about the expected program outcomes and the balance between networking, skill development, and learning about issues. Some participants were in favor of a balance, while others indicated they were more interested in networking and learning about issues. According to the survey, 40.5% of participants agree or highly agree increased time developing leadership abilities would be valuable. An additional 36% somewhat agree. The level of experience prior to Leadership Michigan participation was one key factor in how graduates viewed the topic of skill development. A second factor was the initial expectation of individual participants as they entered the program. During one of the focus groups, significant time was spent discussing the need to clearly define program outcomes and do a better job of recruiting the right people based on these expectations. According to this group, the mix of emerging and more experienced leaders made for rich 159 discussions, but the leadership development needs of the two groups vary too widely to be accommodated in a single program, a conclusion reached by the researcher as well. The Impact Construct, discussed earlier, is a measure of the various items in question six of each questionnaire, items which measure programmatic impact. Impact Construct means were created by collapsing the interval data into three groups. A response of disagree was assigned the number 1, somewhat agree the number 2, agree was assigned 3, and highly agree, 4. The low group represents respondents who had a combined mean score on the items in the Impact Construct of 1.0 to 1.99. The middle group had mean scores of 2.0 to 2.99, and the high group mean scores of 3.0 to 3.99 (Figure 58). Figure 58. Impact Construct Means by Program Leadership Michigan ProFILE 73.5 65.2 2.6 Low Middle High Low Middle High For ProFILE, nearly 1 in 4 identified their impact as high and 97.4% as moderate to high. For Leadership Michigan, nearly 1 in 5 experienced high impact, while 80.4% experienced moderate to high impact. The difference between the two groups on the levels of low impact (2.6% for ProFILE and 15.2% for Leadership Michigan) underscores the conclusion that there is a significant group of Leadership Michigan graduates who experienced less impact. For Leadership Michigan graduates, the desire for skill development was not as clearly communicated. Participants in this program have more diverse backgrounds and enter the program with a wider array of experience and training. The mission of the program has changed somewhat over the years with varying degrees of emphasis on skills training. The suggestions by some graduates to consider a more restrictive admissions process, or the creation of an entry level program designed for more emerging leaders, with an emphasis on skill development, could have merit. However, the desire for some level of skill development within the existing program structure is evident in the findings. Over 50% of Leadership Michigan respondents would like to have additional emphasis on conflict resolution, and 46.1% feel there is a need for more training or experience associated with risk-taking. Media training, personal coaching, interpersonal skills, and public speaking were discussed during the focus groups and received support for continuation. As would be expected, given the lack of emphasis placed on skill development, Leadership Michigan graduates are less positive about the level of skill development that occurred from program participation. This is a topic that should receive some consideration by the Chamber and is reflected in the recommendations below. 161 Recommendations on Skills Training for ProFILE 1) Consider incorporating additional exercises into the curriculum associated with consensus building and conflict resolution. 2) Provide additional opportunities for participants to practice public speaking. Consider requiring each participant to plan for, and make, a presentation to his or her County Farm Bureau Board of Directors about their ProFILE experience during the final two to three months of their program experience. Recommendations on Skills Training for Leadership Michigan 1) Review the mission and goals for Leadership Michigan and decide the role skill development will play in the overall program. Clearly communicate these goals to prospective participants. 2) As Conger (1992) suggests, skill development should be a central element of an effective leadership development program. If the Chamber program planners desire to limit the amount of focus on skill development, they should consider requiring all program applicants to demonstrate evidence of skill mastery by: a) Being graduates of a community leadership development program or a similar experience b) Demonstrating sufficient work and/or community involvement experience on the program application to meet the requirements for skill mastery c) Create another Leadership Michigan program targeted at entry level leaders with emphasis on skill development. Another avenue to consider would be some combination of recommendations a-c. 162 3) As suggested above, skill development should be a central element of the Leadership Michigan experience. If the Chamber chooses to implement recommendation b above, program coordinators should consider sharpening the focus of the skills training for the current Leadership Michigan program on the key topics of communicating with the media, consensus building and conflict resolution, and risk-taking. Application and Selection Research Question D: How do the attitudes of graduates regarding the process of program recruitment and selection compare with their attitudes toward the actual skills training they received? The findings strongly support the importance of the application and selection process to the overall success of an intensive leadership development program. For ProFILE, participants indicated they felt a higher commitment to their county Farm Bureau because their local organization nominated them for the program. They also indicated the application provided them with a clear understanding of the commitment they would be required to make if selected to participate and of the program expectations. The Application Construct (P) showed strong correlation with programmatic impact, a correlation which was reinforced through regression analysis. The findings also suggest that the Farm Bureau should maintain and seek ways to increase the role of the County Farm Bureau in the application process. While initial contact with participants can be from any number of personnel associated with the organization, maintaining the central role of the County Farm Bureau as the only source 163 of nominations is critical for ongoing program success. Willi only 50% of respondents agreeing or highly agreeing the application process is competitive, it would seem more emphasis on recruitment is warranted. Increased competition could result in a more diverse group of participants and greater expectations on the part of those selected for the program. The findings clearly suggest the Leadership Michigan application and selection process could be improved. This has the potential for improving the overall programmatic impact of Leadership Michigan and could lead to a more dynamic group of participants. During the focus groups, participants indicated an “it’s a gimme” attitude regarding entry into the program. Only 28.3% of respondents on the survey agree or highly agree the application is competitive, just 50% agree or highly agree they have a higher commitment to their employer because they nominated them to participate in the program, and just over 50% believe the application increased their expectations for the program. As Gardner (1990) suggests, “just the fact of having been singled out has a motivating effect...” The correlation of the Application Construct (LM) with the Impact Construct (LM) supports Gardner’s conclusion and suggests increased emphasis by the Chamber on the rigor of the application and selection process has the potential to improve program results. Recommendations on Application and Selection for ProFILE 1) Implement procedures that will ensure consistent involvement of the County F arm Bureau in the nomination of participants. Consider having the County President or a member of the County Farm Bureau Executive Committee make contact with 164 potential candidates and ask them to complete the application. Once accepted into the program, implement a follow-up procedure from the County Farm Bureau, confirming their involvement and reinforcing the expectations of the county organization in the successful candidate’s completion of the program. 2) Increase recruiting efforts through additional marketing and the use of membership lists and county boards to identify eligible potential participants. Consider using graduates as ambassadors for recruiting future participants. Recommendations on Application and Selection for Leadership Michigan 1) Increase the effort to recruit cooperating employers to nominate candidates for Leadership Michigan. Consideration should also be given to building a strong base of support with the local Chambers, currently conducting programs on the community level, as another avenue for recruiting candidates for Leadership Michigan. Increasing the number of candidates will result in increased competition, a potentially stronger pool of successful participants, and as the research suggests, higher program impact. 2) Consider conducting the current Leadership Michigan program every other year. This would allow for an additional year of recruiting for each class and, for employers who are struggling with funding on an annual basis, it would afford the opportunity to spread the expense over two budget years. If the Chamber decides to pursue creation of a second program, as suggested in Recommendation 2 in the Skills Development section above, the two programs could be conducted on an every-other-year rotation. 165 - “-r.‘ are. Qr—z‘anq‘ a. .. ... ., . 3) The Leadership Michigan Program Coordinator should consider planning regular visits with all employers who nominate participants for the program as a way to inform them of the critical importance of the nomination process to the success of the program and as a means of strengthening the employer’s role in supporting graduates. (See similar recommendation in the Support section below.) 4) Consider a more rigorous and lengthy application and selection process. This could be accomplished by increasing the number of questions on the application, conducting personal interviews with potential candidates as part of the selection process, and/or requiring additional training and/or experience for program entry. Networking Research Question E: What are the attitudes of graduates of leadership development programs regarding the value of the opportunity to network with other participants and community and industry leaders compared to the value of actual leadership skills training received by participants? The findings indicate that networking is an extremely valuable part of these intensive leadership development programs. For ProFILE, 94% or respondents indicated that they feel networking is as valuable as program instruction, and over 83% indicated discussing issues with classmates, program instructors, and others was as valuable as program instruction. Leadership Michigan graduates also demonstrated strong support for inclusion of networking opportunities in their leadership development experience. Over 86% said networking was just as valuable as program instruction, and nearly 50% indicated they would like additional time to discuss issues with their classmates. 166 Networking is a critical component of a successful intensive leadership development program. It is a valuable lifelong skill that all leaders should continue to develop because of the critical role it plays in gaining access to information and insights on critical issues and the political landscape. As noted in Chapter Two, Gardner (1990) is clear on the value of networking: “Programs that bring young potential leaders together for a shared experience have an effect over and above the nature of the particular program. Just the fact of having been singled out has a motivating effect, and contact with peers may have considerable impact” (167). Both programs appear, from the findings, to be doing an excellent job of encouraging networking between participants and others who are involved in organizing and presenting their respective programs. Recommendation on Networking 1) To assure networking remains a high priority, both Farm Bureau and the Chamber should review their overall program agendas, considering each key issue (such as land use, economic development, the enviromnent) and leadership development topics (such as communication skills, conflict resolution, and risk) to assure that ample time is provided for debriefing, group networking, and discussion on each of these key topics. Allowing adequate time for meals, breaks, and after-hours discussion is also an excellent way to promote networking. 167 Teaching and Delivery Techniques Research Question F: What experiences do graduates of leadership development programs value as “most effective” and what are the best methods to deliver these experiences? Program delivery has a moderate to substantial association with the overall impact of an intensive leadership development program. For ProFILE graduates, the strength of the correlation between the Delivery Construct (P) and the Impact Construct (P) was .499. This group of intensive leadership development graduates believes that hands-on, experiential learning is extremely effective. Nearly 80% of respondents felt the best way to learn is through role-play and group activities. The group was also very positive about the week-long bus trip (over 92% of respondents called it a valuable part of their ProFILE experience) and the reinforcing effect this trip has on the various skills and abilities that are covered during the earlier parts of the program leading up to the trip. Allowing plenty of time for group interaction and discussion is also viewed as a critical element of a successful program. The individual speeches are extremely valuable according to ProFILE graduates, as are the personality profile exercises. These elements of the current program i.e., the bus trip, group networking and discussion, individual speeches, and learning about personality styles and the participant’s own strengths and weaknesses, should remain key parts of the ProFILE program. As noted earlier, ProFILE is viewed as a “total package” by many graduates, a program that helps develop skills and build confidence over time and through experience. The Center for Creative Leadership identifies a challenging curriculum as one of three critical elements needed for a successful program. Conger (1992) and others also suggest 168 that experiential training techniques are the most effective means for reaching adult learners. Researchers, including the author, believe leadership development unfolds over time through a process that integrates various experiences and embeds those experiences in an organizational context where emerging leaders can practice in a supportive environment. The success of the Leadership Michigan program, in exposing its graduates to the critical social and economic issues of the day, is one of the key lessons to learn from this intensive leadership development program. Research, discussed earlier, at the Center for Creative Leadership, suggests that challenging experiences, those that force participants outside of their comfort zone and expose class members to new and unique situations, situations that change their frame of reference, are critical elements of effective leadership development programs. The findings suggest that Leadership Michigan provides this creative learning environment for its graduates. The correlation between the Delivery Construct (LM) and the Impact Construct (LM) is .511, a substantial association according to Davis (1971). Key elements in the delivery of Leadership Michigan which are considered valuable by graduates and should remain as part of the program curriculum are networking and discussion of the issues. Another main element of Leadership Michigan program delivery is the keynote speakers, many of whom are considered “experts.” These include Futurist Ed Barlow, and Personal Coach Barry Demp. Both speakers are positively viewed by graduates because they are able to glean valuable material from these presentations that is useful in their daily lives. Once again, the concept of hands—on, experiential learning is considered effective and valuable I69 in gaining the level of understanding and experience needed to achieve greater leadership proficiency. Recommendations for ProFILE Regarding Program Delivery 1) 2) Additional time should be allocated in the ProFILE agenda for case study and experiential learning associated with teamwork, consensus building, and conflict resolution. This could include a daylong experience with floor exercises and/or a ROPES Course. Include one or two issue-based experiences that result in immersion of participants in the actual learning situation. For example, provide an opportunity for participants to study land use by visiting the Old Mission Peninsula and to learn about brownfield redevelopment in an urban center such as Detroit or Grand Rapids. A second example could involve learning about hunger and food assistance programs, such as Food Stamps or Aid to Dependent Children, by visiting soup kitchens, urban neighborhoods, and/or accompanying local Extension Educators on a Family Nutrition Program (FNP) home visit or sitting in on a group series meeting. Recommendation for Leadership Michigan Regarding Program Delivery 1) Additional time should be allocated in the Leadership Michigan agenda for case study and experiential learning associated with teamwork, consensus building, and conflict resolution. The Monopoly game is one activity which is currently part of the curriculum that graduates identify with and achieves the desired impact 170 suggested by this recommendation. This could include a daylong experience with floor exercises and/or a ROPES Course. Community and Organizational Involvement Research Question G is: Do the graduates of intensive leadership development programs increase their level of community and organizational involvement following participation in these programs? ProFILE graduates, as a group, were quite active in leadership positions within the Farm Bureau and their communities prior to their participation in the program. This is most likely one of the reasons they were recruited and nominated by their county organization to participate in ProFILE in the first place. However, it appears participation in ProFILE increased that level of involvement in both community and the Bureau. While maturation and other leadership development experiences could have some role in this increased level of involvement, the findings strongly suggest that the program had an impact on the decision of graduates to increase their level of involvement. The research also suggests that because this is a captive program of the Farm Bureau, one of the key benefits to the sponsor is an increased level of commitment to the sponsoring organization (65.7% of respondents agree or highly agree they have a stronger commitment to their county organization because they nominated the participant for ProFILE, and another 27.9% somewhat agree). While the level of increased community involvement for Leadership Michigan graduates is not as dramatic, participation in the program seems to result in more active participation in community leadership. Over 41 % of respondents agree or highly agree 171 they have increased their level of involvement in the local community following Leadership Michigan participation, 28.9% believe the program has increased their level of political activity, and 42.6% believe they used the knowledge they gained, through Leadership Michigan, to influence community issues. One of the reasons Leadership Michigan graduates may not have shown a higher level of increased involvement could stem from confusion about the overall mission of the program. One suggestion might be to clearly communicate this expectation during recruitment and program delivery, and especially at graduation. By establishing this level of accountability, program coordinators could create a higher sense of purpose within graduates which may, in turn, result in greater levels of involvement following participation. Another suggestion, made during one of the focus group discussions, is to include a group service project as one of the elements of program delivery, to reinforce the importance for graduates to use their leadership abilities and energy to impact the greater community. The researcher believes the findings suggest that an intensive leadership development program can, if properly structured, with clearly communicated expectations by the sponsor, result in increased levels of organizational and community involvement on the part of program graduates. Recommendations for Leadership Michigan Regarding Community Involvement by Program Graduates 1) As suggested earlier, clearly define the mission of Leadership Michigan to include expectation for community involvement on the part of program graduates. 172 Continuously communicate organization expectations during recruitment, program delivery, and at graduation to the participants and their sponsoring organizations. 2) Consider adding a service project activity to the program agenda. This could be achieved on an individual basis, in small groups between sessions on a geographic basis around the state, or as a total group project during one the regular sessions. Examples of how other leadership development training efforts have met this requirement include: spending a day working at a Habitat for Humanity project, working at a food bank or other human service provider, and/or by individual class members providing their expertise, such as legal advice or health screening, on a volunteer basis for a day in their local community. Support Research Question H. Is participant support a key factor in the level of programmatic impact reported by graduates of these programs? Another key difference between these two leadership development programs is the level of support which the respective sponsoring organizations appear to provide to graduates. The Farm Bureau has an advantage over the Chamber simply because of the captive nature of participants who are all members of a local county Farm Bureau organization. The Chamber program is attempting to train leaders for the larger community, and the task is more difficult because there is little or no tie-in with a similar support structure. As discussed in the literature review, one of the three key elements, identified by The Center for Creative Leadership for a successful program, is support of 173 program participants during and after the actual training takes place. The Chamber has attempted to provide some level of support through an alumni program; however, these graduate activities have been mildly successful at best. ProFILE respondents do consider their county Farm Bureau a key source of “support.” Over 76% agree or highly agree that their county Farm Bureau was a place to utilize what they learned while participating in ProFILE. There is little doubt the level of expectation and commitment created by the county organizational structure provides the support which the literature suggests is critical for a successful program. The author believes this support may well be the key factor in why the levels of increased involvement between the two programs are higher for ProFILE graduates. Continued effort on the part of the county Farm Bureaus in the nomination process, during the actual training program, and following graduation is a key advantage of the Farm Bureau program and one that should be maintained and enhanced. In contrast, Leadership Michigan graduates do not experience nearly as high a level of support during their leadership development experience. In fact, in some cases, because of others at their place of employment, graduates of this program may actually experience a non-supportive environment. Graduates, during the focus groups, reported supervisors who were concerned about time away from the job for the monthly sessions, colleagues who were envious of the fact that they were not selected, and, in some cases, job responsibilities that did not allow graduates to utilize the knowledge or skills gained from their Leadership Michigan experience. It is the author’s opinion that one of the key factors that could result in greater impact from Leadership Michigan would be to enhance 174 the level of support from both participant sponsors and the Chamber in the form of meaningful follow-up and alumni activities for graduates of Leadership Michigan. Recommendations for ProFILE Regarding Participant Support 1) 2) 3) Continue to encourage county Farm Bureau support of ProFILE graduates. Consider communicating with county leadership about the importance of continued support for graduates and the need for ongoing county expectation for involvement on the part of graduates. Consider providing an annual ProFILE alumni activity of a social nature to continue the networking and create additional avenues for graduate support by the state organization. Consider publishing a newsletter once or twice a year designed to demonstrate the involvement of ProFILE graduates in the Farm Bureau and their local communities. This will serve to encourage continued contact between graduates and provide motivation and support for all graduates to fulfill the program’s mission of increased involvement. Recommendations for Leadership Michigan Regarding Participant Support 1) As suggested earlier, implement a schedule of periodic visits with sponsors of leadership Michigan program participants. The goal for such visits should be: A) Increase the level of recruiting B) Increase sponsor knowledge of the overall program mission 175 2) 3) 4) C) Educate sponsors of the critical nature of sponsor support for successful program outcomes D) Provide information about how employers can provide participant support. Consider providing an annual Leadership Michigan alumni activity of a social nature to continue networking and create additional avenues for graduate support by the State Chamber organization. Because the current effort to combine alumni activities with existing classes has proven ineffective, it may be worthwhile to offer this separately from current classes as a stand-alone event only for graduates. For graduates who are associated with the business community, seek ways to involve them in local and or statewide Chamber activities either through membership and/or involvement on committees and other leadership roles within the organization. Consider development of “Issues Teams” targeted at key social and economic issues. Ongoing communication with each team could be done through newsletters, Team Forums, or via email to maintain continuing education of graduates on current issues. The ultimate goal for each team would be to influence the policy debate on any given issue from time to time as the Chamber and/or the team deems necessary or desirable. 176 ...-(Are. ".3 ‘.. Demographic Differences Research Question I: Is there a relationship between selected demographic characteristics (age, gender, and level of education) and the attitudes of participants in leadership development programs? The author found very little evidence of demographic differences between graduates of the ProFILE and Leadership Michigan programs. In the case of ProFILE, this may be because the pool of members in the Farm Bureau is relatively homogeneous. The organization is composed of predominately white, middle class members who have experienced a similar rural community background. The differences between various commodities and geographic regions of the state do result in some level of diversity, but in comparison to the general population, these differences are relatively minor. The difference in the level of increased leadership exhibited among male and female graduates of the ProFILE program is a significant finding. Agricultural families and the Farm Bureau organization have, over the years, tended to be male dominated and conservative in their approach to politics and the community. This is changing, with significant increases in female involvement and leadership throughout the agriculture sector, and perhaps ProFILE mirrors this trend. Given the reality of only 28 female respondents to the ProFILE survey (out of a total N of 118, or 23.7%), the findings suggest the Farm Bureau can have a greater impact on the development of female leaders by continuing to support the ProFILE experience and increasing efforts to recruit more females for participation. Leadership Michigan graduates did not show any significant statistical variation based on gender, age, level of educational attainment, or race. These findings may have been 177 impacted somewhat by the lack of sufficient numbers to perform a statistically valid test, particularly as it relates to race and level of educational attainment; however, the findings did not suggest any differences based on demographics for this program. One suggestion for Leadership Michigan organizers would be to consider increasing the effort to diversify the ethnic balance of program participants, especially as it relates to the Hispanic and African American populations. Perhaps the good news from this finding is that intensive leadership development efforts can have an equally positive impact on all participants, a finding which also underscores the belief that leadership can be taught, provided the sponsoring organization is willing to invest the time and effort into creating a meaningful program. Recommendation for ProFILE Regarding Demographic Differences 1) Increase efforts to recruit female and minority participants for the ProFILE program. This will provide additional diversity among participants and could lead to a richer level of experience for all participants. An added benefit would be that it may also increase the repository of leadership available to the organization. Recommendation for Leadership Michigan Regarding Demographic Differences 1) Increase efforts to recruit a more diverse group of participants for each class, especially as it relates to more representation from the African American and Hispanic communities. 178 Proposed Framework for an Intensive Leadership Development Program Based on the literature review, the findings of this dissertation on the ProFILE and Leadership Michigan programs, personal experience, and class work completed during the pursuit of this degree, the author offers the following general fiamework for an effective intensive leadership development program. 1) Organizations desiring to create and sponsor an intensive leadership development program must first establish a clear understanding of why they want to train leaders, whom they wish to recruit for the program, and what the overall mission and outcomes of such a program will be. While diversity can lead to rich discussion between participants, excessive breadth of leadership experience among participants can create challenges for curriculum development that meets the needs of all participants. Because leadership development unfolds over time, these organizations must also be prepared to invest the time, effort, and money such a program will require assuring the training has profound and lasting impact on participants. 2) Clearly articulate the overall programmatic mission (noted in item one above) and continuously communicate it to current and potential participants along with their sponsoring organizations and/or supervisors. 3) Utilize a rigorous and competitive recruiting, application, and selection process, designed to provide a clear understanding of program expectations. The selection process should include a complete explanation of the program agenda, a thorough written application, screening, and if possible, a personal interview as a means of establishing accountability and increasing participant expectations. Organizations 179 4) 5) should be prepared to market the program in such a way as to create a sufficient pool of applicants. Pursuant to cited research associated with adult learning, during the initial meeting of each class, time should be allocated on the agenda for a thorough discussion of participant expectations for the program. Based on this discussion, program topics, site visits, and keynote speakers should be added to the program as accommodations in response to participant goals for the program. This will increase individual and group responsibility for creating a program designed to meet the empowerment needs of adult learners. The curriculum should provide both rigor and challenge for participants. Based on the level of experience participants have when entering the program, the following elements should each be considered critical for a successful experience: A) Appropriate skill development to include: 0 Public speaking 0 Listening skills 0 Conflict resolution 0 Consensus building 0 Personal and organizational goal setting 0 Delegation 0 Risk 0 Problem solving a Teamwork 180 B) Learning about the theory and philosophy of leadership and group interaction should be incorporated into an intensive leadership development experience; however, delivery via lecture and/or videotaped presentation should be limited. When possible, incorporate group discussion, case studies, and experiential exercises that lead to discovery learning related to these and other topics by participants. C) Opportunities should be afforded participants to explore their personal leadership strengths and weakness and to learn about the dynamics of differing personalities. DISC, True Colors, and/or MBTI could serve this purpose along with ample time for group interaction around this topic. D) Dynamic, hands-on learning techniques including leadership games, E) experiential exercises, case studies, and networking and discussion between participants, presenters, and program coordinators should be considered the most effective means of program delivery. An effective leadership development program should expose participants to current and, when feasible, future issues and challenges they will be facing in their leadership roles. Utilizing on-site visits and vivid immersion experiences designed to provide participants an opportunity to witness these issues first-hand and to experience the practice of leadership by role-models are the best teaching methods. These should be challenging experiences that force participants outside of their comfort zone and expose class members to new and unique situations, situations 181 6) 7) that change their frame of reference and result in a deeper understanding of the topics. F) Allow ample time within the scheduled agenda for mediated reflection, to include debriefing and discussion between participants and presenters, following each program segment. G) Schedule “free” time during and following meals, breaks, and alter-hours to allow participant interaction and networking. This opportunity for additional informal individual and group reflection gives participants the opportunity to practice leadership in the context of group interaction. The program curriculum should provide “assignments” for individuals and/or small groups between sessions, designed to reinforce ongoing learning and practice of the skills, knowledge, and leadership techniques covered during formal sessions. These activities help to bridge the gap between sessions and encourage ongoing leadership development which reinforces the importance of life-long learning. Create ongoing support venues for participants and graduates of intensive leadership development programs. The research is clear: leadership development is a long-term process which requires ongoing reinforcement and accountability. Where possible, built-in organizational structures can provide a network of ongoing support. For other situations, alumni activities, employer expectations and encouragement, along with ongoing peer contact and support can make the difference between a training experience that is considered fun and enjoyable and one that goes beyond the experience and changes lives. 182 8) Program coordinators should have a high level of commitment and dedication to managing their respective program. Going the extra mile to conduct personal visits, to meet family and colleagues of individual graduates, to personally deliver portions of the program, and to send notes of encouragement and support to participants all reinforce the personal nature of leadership. Modeling this human side of leadership development can have significant impact on participant outcomes. Suggestions for F urther Research A topic as complex as leadership development is impossible to cover within the perimeters of an individual dissertation. As the author listened to program graduates, engaged in dialog with members of the Dissertation Committee, and completed data analysis, a variety of areas for further study began to emerge. The following is a list of suggested topics for further research: A. Complete a similar mixed-methods research study of corporate leadership development programs. Both programs involved in this study were sponsored by non-profit organizations. Captive programs, conducted by for-profit organizations, have the potential of providing an interesting set of comparison data. B. A more in-depth research study focused on support structures for graduates of intensive leadership development programs. The benefits of 183 support are well documented by the work of this researcher and others. Research designed to identify what specific support structures are most effective and how they are best implemented would provide valuable information to leadership development program sponsors. . Conduct a thorough research study on the delivery techniques, impact, and effectiveness of mediated reflection in relationship to intensive leadership development program outcomes. . A study of the attitudes of intensive leadership development participant sponsors could provide further evaluation of programmatic impact from the view of those who support such involvement. . Conduct research to further examine the various factors of mediated reflection, networking, issues education, delivery methods, application and selection techniques, as related to leadership development programs. . A mixed-methods study of young farmers within the Farm Bureau organization, who have not participated in ProFILE, could yield a control group to compare with the findings of this study. . Replication of this study every three to five years could be used as a means of further improving these programs and confirming the findings. 184 H. This study could be replicated with other non-profit intensive leadership development programs across the country. Author ’s Reflections on Leadership Development Leadership is a deeply personal experience for both the leader and the follower. Perhaps one of the most enlightening realizations for me has been that leadership development is also a deeply personal experience. That experience begins when an individual decides to become a student of leadership. The initial invitation to participate, the application and selection process, and the initial contact, as well as the programmatic experience and follow-up support, must all reflect this deep commitment to the human side of leadership. For a program to have its desired impact, attention to detail must be given to each and every aspect, from marketing materials to alumni activities. I am equally intrigued by the hyperbole over “new age” leadership development programs. After studying the literature, listening to graduates talk about their experiences, and analyzing the data, the conclusion I have reached is, there is no “magic bullet " for leadership development. Successful programs that result in changing the lives of participants provide opportunities for; skill development, personal reflection, interaction between and among participants, program facilitators, presenters, and recognized leaders, and create an environment designed to increase community awareness and industry knowledge. The key outcomes of such programs are a broader view of community and greater confidence on the part of graduates. 185 Relationships are built on trust and confidence, both of which are developed over time. On numerous occasions, I listened to graduates share their observations about how their experience unfolded over the course of a program, resulting in increased confidence and leadership ability far greater than was evident at the time. I have referred to this concept, of cumulative program impact, as a “package.” The whole of the experience results in a greater impact than the sum of its individual parts. Trust and confidence are not simple topics which can be taught in a classroom setting or dealt with in an afternoon session. By creating an environment for continuous group interaction, intensive leadership development programs provide participants the time, challenge, and encouragement to create a community of discovery in harmony with the principles of adult learning theory. Leadership does not occur until action is taken and, in most cases, that action requires sacrifice on the part of the leader and his or her family. It requires a commitment to life— long learning about issues, about the dynamics of group interaction, and about organizational structures. It requires time invested attending meetings, engaging in dialog, and completing community service projects and activities. Leadership development program recruitment and selection should be designed to identify candidates who are willing to make the sacrifice to use what they will learn. A program of challenge and rigor will underscore the need for courage and commitment to community service. The critical need for support from peers, sponsors, and family is often overlooked by program organizers. With so much focus on recruiting an adequate pool of candidates and conducting the program itself, it is easy to understand how this can happen. My experience suggests little or no effort is typically invested in creating support networks designed to meet the specific needs of program graduates. Built-in organizational 186 structures can provide some measure of graduate support; however, additional consideration should be given to this major aspect of a successfirl program. As noted in the conceptual framework, alumni activities, ongoing contact between graduates, issues-oriented task forces designed to increase knowledge and foster organizational action, coupled with high employer/sponsor expectations can all be designed to meet the support needs of graduates. In my opinion, leadership is best described as the ability to achieve a critical mass of skills, abilities, confidence, and commitment to action; all focused on a commonly-shared goal. In some cases, that critical mass rests with a single individual. At other times, it is manifested among a small group of leaders, and, as we are increasingly recognizing, the critical mass may also emerge within the broader context of an entire community of leaders. The latter is perhaps the greatest revelation of all for this researcher. The list of skills and abilities which can contribute to the mass and be exercised by “leadership” is endless. In most leadership situations, only a small fraction of these skills and abilities will be needed. Leadership rises and falls based on its ability to exert a critical mass of the right skills and abilities, at the right time, to meet the current needs of a given community. Intensive leadership development programs must also achieve this critical mass. Successful programs must devote time to learning theory, practicing skill development, experiencing issues, reflection, and networking. Effective programs achieve a common bond between participants that increases confidence and results in a community of leaders. The right mix, or critical mass, is best determined by recruiting participants with shared interests and a similar breadth of experience. Because networking, trust, and 187 camaraderie are critical for program impact, sponsors must set clear expectations for programmatic outcomes and recruit participants who will match those expectations. Leadership development is not so much about teaching leadership as it is about creating an environment for participant discovery. Adult learners want to control what they learn, when they learn it, and how they learn it. Experiential exercises, on-site visits, and group interaction all provide opportunities for “learning-by—doing.” Effective program facilitation requires engagement in these activities and the subsequent discussion. The most effective time to introduce leadership theory is in the context of this group interaction. Leadership is based on deeply personal relationships built around trust, understanding, confidence, and commitment. These relationships take time to develop and require continued nurturing to be sustained. Leadership development requires a similar commitment of human and organizational resources. With regard to my own career, I look forward to additional opportunities for developing the relationships and making the necessary commitments which will result in the creation of effective leadership development programs based on the findings of this research. 188 Appendix A. Questioning Route for Farm Bureau ProFILE Focus Groups Date: Time: Location: Welcome: Good Altemoon, I am Mike Kovacic a Ph.D. student at Michigan State University studying leadership and leadership development programs. I am working with Michigan Farm Bureau to examine the attitudes of ProFILE graduates regarding the program. With me this aftemoon is Deb Schmucker. She will be taking some notes and assisting me with this focus group. You were selected to participate in this focus group because of your participation in ProFILE and your leadership in Farm Bureau. Ground Rules of our Discussion 1) We are asking for your candid opinions, what you say will not be used to determine whether or not the program will continue to be offered by Farm Bureau. Rather, it will be used to make modifications and improvements that will assure the most effective leadership development experience for future participants. We want to hear the good and the not so good and please feel comfortable to express your candid thoughts knowing that your confidentiality will be maintained. If, for purposes of making the final dissertation readable, I decide to quote someone, I will contact you and obtain permission to use your name with the quote. Most likely direct quotes will be used; however, they will not be attributed to any source. 2) There are no right or wrong answers to our questions. You don’t need to necessarily agree with others, but we do ask that you listen respectfully as others share their views. This is a discussion, not a debate and we want to hear all the thoughts and ideas of individual members of the group. If there is a question that you really don’t have any opinion on, or you feel your thoughts have been expressed by someone else, don’t feel as though you need to add to the discussion, just for the sake of weighing in with your voice. In some cases, we will be trying to determine the consensus of the group however, total agreement is not necessary. 189 3) 4) 5) 6) You will notice that we have a tape recorder set up in the middle of the table. One of Deb’s tasks this aftemoon/evening is to make sure the tape recorder is working and to change the tapes. We are using the tape recorder because my memory just isn’t quite good enough to remember all the great thoughts and ideas that you will offer here today. Again, no names will be included in the final report without your consent, so you can be assured that your comments will be kept confidential. Please keep in mind that we are just as interested in negative comments as we are in positive comments. At times, the more constructive thoughts and ideas are the most helpful. So, please don’t let the tape recorder impact your participation. If you have a cell phone or pager, I would ask if at all possible, you turn it off. I understand you all have families and businesses that require your monitoring and involvement. If you must keep your cell phone on, please set it to vibrate and if you are called during the discussion, I would ask that you simply leave the room, handle your call and return as soon as possible. We have name tents here in front of us this afternoon. They help me to remember names, but they can also help you. If you want to follow up on something that someone has said, or give an example, feel free to do so. Please don’t feel as though you have to respond to me all the time. What we are trying to encourage is a conversation between you and the other members of the group about these questions. I am here to ask the questions, keep us on track and listen, and to make sure everyone has a chance to share. We’re interested in hearing from each of you. So if you are talking a lot, I may ask you to give others a chance. And, if you are not saying very much, I may call on you for your thoughts or opinions. We just want to make sure we have a chance to hear the perspectives of everyone. Finally, please feel free to get up and get more refreshments if you would like. We are going to run for one and one-half to two hours depending on how vocal you are. If you need to use the rest rooms, they are located 190 Opening Question Deb, if the tape recorder is rolling, let’s begin with the first question. 1) Let’s find out a little more about each other by going around the room one at a time. Tell us where you are from, what kind of farming operation you have and when you graduated from ProFILE. (Have topic’s for intro on flip chart) 2) Thank you, now each of you has a piece of paper and a pencil we provided, please take a moment and write down a couple of the most vivid memories you have of your participation in ProFILE. We will give you a couple of minutes to think about this and record your answer. (PAUSE) Now, let’s have a discussion about those experiences. Who would like to begin this discussion? a. As discussion dies down. . .What if I were to ask this question in another way? What do you remember as the most enjoyable Leadership Michigan experience? b. And finally. . ..What was your most valuable or useful experience? Next, I would like for us to explore some thoughts about the structure of the program. 3) Let’s talk about the application and selection process. a. What do you remember about it? b. Do you think the fact that you had to apply for and be selected added prestige or set a level of expectation on your behalf for the program? c. What was your feeling the day the letter of acceptance arrived? 4) How did you learn about the program? 5) Did you have any apprehension about spending 15 days away from home to participate in ProFILE? a. Did your family or business partners have any concerns? b. In retrospect, do you think 15 days was the right amount of time for such a program? Was that too much? Too little? 191 Next, I would like for us to spend some time discussing program content. 6) Would you characterize the instruction and ProFILE experience as rigorous by your standards? 7) What key leadership skills did you learn or enhance as a result of your participation in ProFILE? a. I am going to share a list of the common leadership skills, some of which you have already identified. Are there any additional skills you learned about during ProFILE? 8) What do you think is the best way to teach young farmers how to be leaders? 9) What expectations did you have for the program that were not met? 10) Are there specific skills or aspects of leadership that you felt were not adequately covered during your ProFILE experience? Let’s spend the next few minutes discussing the impact ProFILE has had on you personally. 11) How have you applied what you learned? 12) Looking back, has you idea of leadership changed since participation in ProFILE? If so, in what way? 13) Is there anything else anyone would like to offer regarding ProFILE or our discussion? 192 Wrap-up Statement We certainly want to thank you for your participation in this focus group. If you are interested in the results, I hope you indicated that interest on your consent form. If you did not, you can indicate your interest before you leave by stopping at the registration table where someone will assist you with the change. Are there any questions about today’s discussion or my research project? Is there anyone who did not fill out the brief demographic questionnaire when they arrived? (If so, have them stop and fill one out before they leave) Pass out Business Cards and invite additional feedback! Again, thank you for your participation. Good afternoon. 193 ...;Lao-v Appendix A. Questioning Route for Leadership Michigan Focus Groups Date: Time: Location: Welcome: Good Afternoon, I am Mike Kovacic a doctoral student at Michigan State University studying leadership and leadership development programs. I am working closely with the Michigan Chamber of Commerce to examine the attitudes of Leadership Michigan graduates regarding the program. With me this aftemoon is Carrie Preston. She will be taking notes and assisting me with this focus group. You were selected to participate in this focus group because of your participation in Leadership Michigan and your leadership role with your employer and in the community. Ground Rules of Our Discussion 7) We are asking for your candid opinions. What you say will not be used to determine whether or not the program will continue to be offered by the Chamber. Rather, your thoughts and opinions will be used to make modifications and improvements that will assure the most effective leadership development experience for future participants. We want to hear the good and the not so good and please feel comfortable to express your candid thoughts knowing the strictest confidentiality will be maintained. If, for purposes of making the final dissertation readable, I decide to quote one or more you by name, I will contact you and obtain permission to use your name with the quote. Most likely direct quotes will be used; however, they will not be attributed to any source. 8) There are no right or wrong answers to our questions. You don’t need to necessarily agree with others, but we do ask that you listen respectfully as others share their views. This is a discussion, not a debate and we want to hear all the thoughts and ideas of individual members of the group. If there is a question that you really don’t have any opinion on, or you feel your thoughts have been expressed by someone else, don’t feel as though you need to add to the discussion, just for the sake of weighing in with your voice. In some cases, we will be trying to determine the consensus of the group however; total agreement is not necessary or even desirable. 194 9) You will notice that we have a tape recorder set up in the middle of the table. One of Carrie’s tasks this afternoon is to make sure the tape recorder is working and to change the tapes. We are using the tape recorder because my memory just isn’t quite good enough to remember all the opinions and ideas you will offer here today. Again, no names will be included in the final report without your consent, so you can be assured that your comments will be kept confidential. Please keep in mind that we are just as interested in negative comments as we are in positive comments. At times, the more constructive thoughts and ideas are the most helpful. So, please don’t let the tape recorder in any way inhibit your participation. 10) If you have a cell phone or pager, I would ask if at all possible, you turn it off. I understand you all have families and job responsibilities that require your monitoring and involvement. If you must keep your cell phone on, please set it to vibrate and if you are called during the discussion, I would ask that you simply leave the room, handle your call and return as soon as possible. 11) We have name tents here in front of us this afternoon. They help me to remember names, but they can also help you. If you want to follow up on something that someone has said, 0r give an example, feel free to do so. Please don’t feel as though you have to respond to me all the time. What we are trying to encourage is a conversation between you and the other members of the group about these questions. I am here to ask the questions, keep us on track and listen, and to make sure everyone has a chance to share. We’re interested in hearing from each of you. So if you are talking a lot, I may ask you to give others a chance. And, if you are not saying very much, I may call on you for your thoughts or opinions. We just want to make sure we have a chance to hear the perspectives of everyone. 12) Finally, please feel free to get up and get more refreshments if you would like. We are going to run for one and one-half to two hours depending on how conversational you are. If you need to use the rest rooms, they are located 195 Opening Question Carrie, if the tape recorder is rolling, let’s begin with the first question. 8) Let’s find out a little more about each other by going around the table one at a time. Tell us where you are from, who your employer is and your title, along with your community involvement and finally when you graduated from Leadership Michigan. (Have topics for intro on flip chart) 9) Thank you, now each of you has a piece of paper and a pencil we provided, please take a moment and write down a couple of the most vivid memories you have of your participation in Leadership Michigan. We will give you a couple of minutes to think about this and record your answer. (PAUSE) Now, let’s have a discussion about those experiences. Who would like to begin this discussion? a. As discussion dies down. . .What if I were to ask this question in another way? What do you remember as the most enjoyable Leadership Michigan experience? b. And finally. . ..What was your most valuable or useful experience? Next, I would like for us to explore some thoughts about the structure of the program. 10) Let’s talk first about the application and selection process. a. What do you remember about it? b. Do you think the fact that you had to apply for and be selected added prestige or set a level of expectation on your behalf for the program? c. What was your feeling the day the letter of acceptance arrived? 11) How did you learn about the program? 196 12) Did you have any apprehension about spending 16 days away from home and your job to participate in Leadership Michigan? a. Did your family or immediate supervisor have any concerns? b. In retrospect, do you think 16 days was the right amount of time for such a program? Was that too much? Too little? Next, I would like for us to spend some time discussing program content. 13) Would you characterize the instruction and Leadership Michigan experience as rigorous by your standards? 14) What key leadership skills did you Ieam or enhance as a result of your participation in Leadership Michigan? a. I am going to share a list of the common leadership skills, some of which you have already identified. Are there any additional skills you learned about during Leadership Michigan? 8) Leadership Michigan is focused in two key areas; skill development and networking around key social and economic issues. In your opinion, would you say the balance between skill development and learning about issues is; a) about right, b) not enough time spent on skill development or c) not enough time spent on issues and networking. 12) What do you think is the best way to teach future leaders how to be leaders? 13) What expectations did you have for the program that were not met? 14) Are there specific skills or aspects of leadership that you felt were not adequately covered during your Leadership Michigan experience? 197 Let’s spend the next few minutes discussing the impact Leadership Michigan has had on you personally. 15) How have you applied what you learned? 13) Looking back, has you idea of leadership changed since participation in Leadership Michigan? If so, in what way? 14) Is there anything else anyone would like to offer regarding Leadership Michigan or our discussion? Wrap-up Statement We certainly want to thank you for your participation in this focus group. If you are interested in the results, I hope you indicated that interest on your consent form. If you did not, you can indicate your interest before you leave by stopping at the registration table where someone will assist you with the change. Are there any questions about today’s discussion or my research project? Is there anyone who did not fill out the brief demographic questionnaire when they arrived? (If so, have them stop and fill one out before they leave) Pass out Business Cards and invite additional feedback! Again, thank you for your participation. Good afternoon. 198 Appendix B. Sample ProFILE Focus Group Invitation Letter ANRECS College of Agriculture & Natural Resources Room 410 Agriculture Hall Michigan State University East Lansing, MI 48823 January, 14, 2003 XXXX, The Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources Education and Communication Systems at Michigan State University is conducting a research project in cooperation with Michigan Farm Bureau related to the perceptions of participants who have graduated from leadership development programs such as ProFILE. The purpose of this research is to analyze the attitudes of graduates about how these programs have affected their ability to provide leadership within their organizations and communities. The research will compare and contrast the attitudes of graduates from two different programs sponsored by Michigan Farm Bureau and the Michigan Chamber of Commerce Foundation. As a graduate of the ProFILE program, your insight will help provide valuable feedback regarding the effectiveness of the program and assist in the development of future leadership training programs across the state. The research methods being used to collect data for this project are individual & focus group interviews. A short questionnaire will also be completed by all participants as a means of collecting demographic information. I would like to invite you to participate in a focus group discussion with other graduates of ProFILE. Should you choose to participate in this research, you can expect to spend between one & one- half to two hours in a focused discussion regarding what you learned about leadership and how you have applied this knowledge in your work, community activities, and/or participation in Farm Bureau. The focus group will be held Wednesday, February 12, 2003 at the Kalamazoo County Farm Bureau Office beginning at 1:15 pm. You participation in this research is entirely voluntary. You may elect not to answer any questions, or to discontinue your participation at any time during the interview. Your comments and opinions about the leadership development program you participated in or its sponsor will be held in the strictest confidence. Your privacy will be protected to the maximum extent allowable by law. I hope that you will accept this invitation to participate. Both MSU and Farm Bureau will benefit and you will have an opportunity to give back to the program by providing useful information that will be used to improve ProFILE for future participants. 1 will call in a few days to discuss any questions your might have about this research and to confirm your participation. Better yet, if you are an email user, drop me a note at Micm@msue.nrsu.edu confirming your willingness to attend and I will follow-up via the intemct. Thank you for your consideration and I look forward to discussing your involvement in this important research project. Sincerely, Mike Kovacic Regional Director MSU Extension 199 Appendix B. Sample Leadership Michigan Focus Group Invitation Letter ANRECS College of Agriculture & Natural Resources Room 410 Agriculture Hall Michigan State University East Lansing, MI 48823 XXXXX, Recently you were sent a yellow postcard from Bob Thomas of the Michigan Chamber of Commerce regarding a study of Leadership Michigan being conducted by the Chamber and Michigan State University. I am a 1991 graduate of Leadership Michigan and have been working the Chamber to complete this study. I hope you will take a couple of minutes to read this email and learn more about this effort to gain a deeper understanding of leadership, leadership development training, and the impact of the Leadership Michigan program. The purpose of this study is to gain a thorough understanding of the perceptions of participants who have graduated from leadership development programs such as Leadership Michigan through analysis of their attitudes about how these programs have affected their ability to provide leadership within their organizations and communities. In addition to our work with the Chamber, the research will also conrpare and contrast the attitudes of graduates from the Michigan Farm Bureau ProFILE program. As a graduate of Leadership Michigan, your insight will help provide valuable feedback regarding the effectiveness of the program and assist in the development of future leadership training programs across the state. The research methods being used to collect data for this project are qualitative in nature and involve individual & focus group interviews. In addition to the actual interviews, a short questionnaire is conrpleted by all participants involved in the interviewing process as a means of collecting demographic information. I would like to invite you to participate in a focus group discussion with other graduates of Leadership Michigan. Should you choose to participate in this research, you can expect to spend between one & one-half to two hours in a focused discussion regarding what you learned about leadership and how you have applied this knowledge in your work, community activities, and/or participation in the Chamber. The focus group will be held Wednesday, March 12, 2003 at the Michigan Farm Bureau located on West Saginaw Highway in Lansing, beginning at 9:00 8.111. You participation in this research is entirely voluntary. You may elect not to answer any questions, or to discontinue your participation at any time during the interview. Your comments and opinions about the leadership development program you participated in or its sponsor will be held in the strictest confidence. Your privacy will be protected to the maximum extent allowable by law. I hope that you will accept this invitation to participate. Both MSU and the Chamber will benefit and you will have an opportunity to give back to the program by providing information that will be used to improve Leadership Michigan for future participants. 1 will call in a few days to discuss your involvement in this research effort or please take a moment now to respond to this email regarding your participation. Thank you for your consideration and I look forward to your involvement in this important research project. Sincerely, Mike Kovacic, Research Associate Michigan State University 200 ' . we," Appendix C. Focus Group Consent Form The Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources Education and Communication Systems at Michigan State University is conducting a research project related to the perceptions of participants who have graduated from leadership development programs conducted by the Michigan Farm Bureau and the Michigan State Chamber Foundation. The purpose of these interviews is to analyze the attitudes of graduates about how these programs have affected their ability to provide leadership within their respective organizations and communities. The research will also compare and contrast the attitudes of graduates across the sponsoring organizations and analyze the program delivery models, offering insight on their perceived effectiveness for training future leaders. You participation in this interview is entirely voluntary. You indicate your voluntary agreement to participate by signing this consent form. You may elect not to answer any questions, or to discontinue your participation at any time. Your comments and opinions about the leadership development program you participated in or its’ sponsor, will be held in the strictest confidence. Your privacy will be protected to the maximum extent allowable by law. I have read and understand the above, and, by signing this form, I voluntarily agree to participate in this interview. Date Signature Address City Zip Please send me an executive summary of the completed report. Email can save substantial copying and postage costs. Send my summary by email to me at this email address: Questions regarding this interview Questions about your rights as a or study should be directed human subject of research should be to the attention of: directed to: Dr. Kirk Heinze, Chairman Ashir Kumar, M.D.,Chair ANRECS UCHRIS Michigan State University Michigan State Univeristy Room 409 Agriculture Hall 202 Olds Hall East Lansing, MI 48824-1039 East Lansing, MI 48824-1046 (517)355-6580 (517)355-2180 Or Mike Kovacic @ 517/355-8469 201 Appendix D. ProFILE Survey Instrument Control Number: Attitudes of Participants Regarding Their Involvement in Intensive Leadership Development Programs Michigan State University Department of Agriculture & Natural Resources Education and Communication Systems This survey is designed to assess the Farm Bureau ProFILE program. The data will be used to provide an overall understanding of how participants are impacted by the program. Please read the survey questions and provide as complete and accurate answers as possible. 1. Who first made contact with you about applying for ProFILE? (check only one) County Farm Bureau Secretary County Farm Bureau President County Farm Bureau Board Member ProFILE Graduate ' State Board Member Regional Representative Other (Please specify) UClDDEJClCl 2. Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements about the ProFILE application process: (circle one) a) Completing the application increased my expectations for ProFILE. Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Highly Agree b) I feel that the application process was competitive. Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Highly Agree c) The application materials provided a clear understanding of program expectations. Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Highly Agree 202 d) I have a higher commitment to my county Farm Bureau because they nominated me for ProFILE. Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Highly Agree 3. Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements about the ProFILE training program: (circle one) a) b) d) g) The opportunity to network with a diverse group of young farmers was just as valuable as program instruction. Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Highly Agree Learning about agricultural issues was just as valuable as improving my leadership skills. Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Highly Agree The bus trip to visit other states and the American Farm Bureau was a valuable part of the program. Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Highly Agree The best way to learn about leadership is through role play and group activities. Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Highly Agree Additional opportunities for spouses to participate would be a valuable addition to the ProFILE experience. Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Highly Agree The goal of ProFILE is to develop firture leaders who will become more active in their county farm bureau. Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Highly Agree The ProFILE experience was challenging. Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Highly Agree 203 4. In your opinion, which of the following topics/areas need to be emphasized / deemphasized to strengthen the ProFILE program? Devote Just Devote more time right less time a. Teamwork El E] i: b. Listening Skills Cl [:1 Cl C. Public Speaking 13 C] C] d. Conflict Resolution D C] D e. Risk Taking C] :1 E] f. Parliamentary Procedure C1 El D g. The Farm Bureau Organization [:1 D C] h. Agricultural Issues El El :1 i. Delegation Cl C] a j. Other (Please specify) El Ci :1 5. The duration/length of the ProFILE program (approximately 15 days over 15 months) is: Too long Just right Too short 6. Please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statements about the impacts of the ProFILE program on your leadership skills. (circle one) a. I am a better listener when serving in a leadership role. Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Highly Agree b. I am a more effective public speaker. Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Highly Agree c. I am more confident when speaking in a group setting. Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Highly Agree (1. I am better able to function as a member of a team. Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Highly Agree e. I am more confident when dealing with conflict in a group setting. Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Highly Agree 204 My delegation skills have improved. Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Highly Agree . When working in a group setting, I have a greater appreciation for the contributions of others. Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Highly Agree . I am more effective when serving as the chairperson for a meeting. Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Highly Agree I am more confident when serving as the chairperson for a meeting. Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Highly Agree My county Farm Bureau has benefited from my participation in ProFILE. Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Highly Agree . I increased my confidence as a_ leader through participation in ProFILE. Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Highly Agree I improved my understanding of leadership as a result of participation in ProFILE. Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Highly Agree . I visited my county Farm Bureau Board one or more times to report on my ProFILE participation. Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Highly Agree . I would recommend ProFILE to another young farmer. Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Highly Agree 205 Please check all that apply for guestions 7, 8, 9 and 10. 7. What positions did you held within Farm Bureau prior to your participation in ProFILE? (Note: If you held a particular position both before and after your participation in ProFILE, please check that position for both Question #7 and Question # 8.) [31301313013131] County Board Member County Board Officer (President, Vice President, Third Member) Young Farmer Chairperson Promotion & Education Chairperson Member of the Young Farmer Committee Member of the Promotion & Education Committee Member of the County Policy Development Committee Member of another County Farm Bureau Committee Member of State Committee. Please specify committee 8. What positions have you held within Farm Bureau following your participation in ProFILE? UDDUDDUDD County Board Member County Board Officer (President, Vice President, Third Member) Young Farmer Chairperson Promotion & Education Chairperson Member of the Young Farmer Committee Member of the Promotion & Education Committee Member of the county Policy Development Committee Member of another county Farm Bureau committee Member of State Committee. Please specify committee 206 9. What community leadership positions did you hold prior to your participation in ProFILE? (Note: If you held a particular position both before and after your participation in ProFILE, please check that position for both Question #9 and Question #10.) [30000000130130 Church board or council Officer on my church board or council Committee chair for my church Member of my local school board County Commissioner Elected Township official Township planning or zoning board County planning or zoning board Member of service organization (such as Kiwanis, Rotary, Lions, J aycees) Officer of a service organization 4—H / Scouts / other youth group leader Other. Please specify 10. What community leadership positions have you held since your participation in ProFILE? DDDDDDDUDUUU Church board or council Officer on my church board or council Committee chair for my church Member of my local school board County Commissioner Elected Township official Township planning or zoning board County planning or zoning board Member of service organization (such as Kiwanis, Rotary, Lions, Jaycees) Officer of a service organization 4-H / Scouts / other youth group leader Other. Please specify 207 11. Please indicate your agreement/disagreement with the following statements about ProFILE follow-up activities. (circle one) a) I would participate in an annual ProFILE reunion. Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Highly Agree b) I would prefer alumni activities to be more social in nature. Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Highly Agree c) I would prefer alumni activities to be more leadership development training opportunities. Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Highly Agree (1) The county Farm Bureau has provided me opportunities to utilize what I learned participating in ProFILE. Disagree Somewhat Agree Agree Highly Agree Did your view of leadership change as a result of your participation in ProFILE? Please explain. 208 Demographic Information 12. Please indicate your gender D Male 0 Female 13. Please indicate your age U Lessthan25 Cl 40to44 D 25t029 Ci 4Sto49 i:i 30to34 Cl 50to 54 D 35 to 39 Cl 55 and over 14. What is your highest attained level of education? 0 High School Graduate 0 Bachelor’s Degree El Some College B Master’s Degree 13 Associate Degree Cl Ph. D. 15. How many years have you been a member of Farm Bureau? El Lessthan3 D 131015 E! 4 to 6 D 16 to 18 Cl 7 to 9 CI 19 to 21 Cl 10to 12 Cl 22 or more 16. What is the main enterprise on the farming operation you participate in? (check only one) 0 Cash Crops D Vegetable Cl Livestock D Nursery/Landscape/Floriculture Cl Dairy Cl Ino longer farm 0 Fruit 0 Other (please specify) 17. What type of business organization do you participate in? E] Sole proprietorship Cl Corporation in Partnership 0 I am a farm employee 18. What year did you graduate from ProFILE? C1 1991— Class 1 D 1999 — Class 5 D 1993 — Class 2 El 2001— Class 6 D 1995 — Class 3 D 2003 -— Class 7 C1 1997 -— Class 4 209 Please use this space to provide additional thoughts you have regarding your ProFILE experience or ideas and suggestions you have that would improve the ProFILE program. Thank you for completing this survey. Please return the completed survey in the self-addressed, stamped envelope to: Mike Kovacic 109 Manchester Drive DeWitt, Michigan 48820 210 Appendix D. Leadership Michigan Survey Instrument Control Number Attitudes of Participants Regarding Their Involvement in Intensive Leadership Development Programs Department of Agriculture & Natural Resources Education and Communication Systems This survey is designed to assess the Michigan Chamber of Commerce Leadership Michigan program. The data will be used to provide an overall understanding of how participants are impacted by the program. Please carefully read the survey questions and provide as complete and accurate answers as possible. 1. Who first made contact with you about applying for Leadership Michigan? (check only one) 1:] My employer [:1 A former graduate of Leadership Michigan E] Someone from the Chamber of Commerce . D Other — Please list Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements about the Leadership Michigan application process: (check one) a) Completing the application increased my expectations for Leadership Michigan. C] Disagree [:1 Somewhat Agree E] Agree E] Highly Agree b) I have/had a higher commitment to my enrployer because they nominated me for Leadership Michigan. D Disagree D Somewhat Agree 1:] Agree 1:] Highly Agree c) I felt the application process was competitive. E] Disagree 1:] Somewhat Agree 1:] Agree E] Highly Agree (1) The application materials provided a clear understanding of program expectations. 1:] Disagree 1:] Somewhat Agree 1:] Agree 1:] Highly Agree 211 3. Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements about the Leadership Michigan program: (check one for each statement) a) The Leadership Michigan experience was challenging. 1:] Disagree D Somewhat Agree 1:] Agree 1:] Highly Agree b) The opportunity to network with other Leadership Michigan participants was just as valuable as learning about key social and economic issues. I] Disagree [:1 Somewhat Agree 1:] Agree [:1 Highly Agree c) Learning about key social and economic issues was just as valuable as irrrproving my leadership abilities. C] Disagree 1:] Somewhat Agree D Agree C] Highly Agree d) We did not spend enough time developing leadership abilities as part of my Leadership Michigan experience. [I Disagree El Somewhat Agree 1:] Agree D Highly Agree e) The best way to learn about leadership is through role play and group activities. D Disagree [:1 Somewhat Agree 1:] Agree 1:] Highly Agree 1) Additional opportunities for discussion with my Leadership Michigan classmates about key social and economic issues would have enhanced my Leadership Michigan experience. C] Disagree 1:] Somewhat Agree [:1 Agree 1:] Highly Agree g) The goal of Leadership Michigan is to encourage participants to become better informed active members of their community. I] Disagree Cl Somewhat Agree 1:] Agree [:1 Highly Agree 4. In your opinion, which of the following topics/areas need to be emphasized I deemphasized to strengthen Leadership Michigan? Devote Just Devote more time right less time a. Public Speaking El E] El b. Conflict Resolution D 1:1 1:1 c. Risk Taking [:1 1:] Cl (1. Working with the Media D [j [:1 e. Key Social and Economic Issues 1:] 1:] E] f. Personal Coaching [:1 E] D g. Networking 1:] D D h. Other — Please Specify E] E] [I] 212 5. The duration/length of Leadership Michigan (approximately 16 days over 8 months) is: 1:] Too long 1:] Just right 1:] Too short 6. Please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statements about the Impacts of Leadership Michigan on you. (check one item for each statement) a) I am more confident when dealing with the media. 1:] Disagree [:1 Somewhat Agree [3 Agree D Highly Agree b) I am more confident when dealing with conflict in a group setting. E] Disagree E] Somewhat Agree [:I Agree 1:] Highly Agree c) My employer has benefited from my participation in Leadership Michigan. D Disagree D Somewhat Agree 1:] Agree [:1 Highly Agree d) I increased my confidence as a leader through participation in Leadership Michigan. 1:] Disagree I] Somewhat Agree D Agree [:I Highly Agree e) I have increased involvement in my community as a result of participation in Leadership Michigan. 1:] Disagree 1:] Somewhat Agree E] Agree 1:] Highly Agree 1) I am more politically active as a result of my Leadership Michigan participation. D Disagree El Somewhat Agree [:1 Agree D Highly Agree g) I have used the network of contacts I made during participation in Leadership Michigan. D Disagree E] Somewhat Agree 1:] Agree I] Highly Agree h) I have a greater understanding of the key social and economic issues facing the state as a result of my participation in Leadership Michigan. C] Disagree [:1 Somewhat Agree C] Agree 1:] Highly Agree i) I have used the knowledge I gained during Leadership Michigan to influence key social and economic issues in the community. D Disagree 1:] Somewhat Agree [:1 Agree CI Highly Agree j) I would recommend Leadership Michigan to a colleague, peer, or friend. 1:] Disagree 1:] Somewhat Agree 1:] Agree 1:] Highly Agree 213 k) I have changed employers since my participation in Leadership Michigan. [:1 Yes [:1 No (Go to item 1) If you answered yes to item k, please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statement: Your Leadership Michigan experience was a key influence on your decision to change employers. 1:] Disagree CI Somewhat Agree 1:] Agree [:1 Highly Agree 1) I have received a promotion since my participation in Leadership Michigan. D Yes 1:]. No (Go to question 7) If you answered yes to item 1, please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statement: Your Leadership Michigan experience was a key factor in receiving the promotion. E] Disagree 1:] Somewhat Agree D Agree D Highly Agree Please indicate your agreement/disagreement with the following statements about Leadership Michigan follow-up activities. (check only one for each item) a) I would participate in an annual Leadership Michigan reunion. [:1 Disagree D Somewhat Agree I] Agree 1:] Highly Agree b) I would prefer alumni activities to be more social in nature. E] Disagree E] Somewhat Agree [I Agree E] Highly Agree c) I would prefer alumni activities to be leadership development training opportunities. E] Disagree [:1 Somewhat Agree [:1 Agree 1:] Highly Agree d) I would prefer alumni activities to be focused on learning about key social and economic issues. [:1 Disagree D Somewhat Agree E] Agree [:1 Highly Agree 214 How has your view of leadership changed as a result of participation in Leadership Michigan? Please explain. kmraphic Information (Please check only one box for each item) 8. Please Indicate your gender. 1:] Male E] Female 9. Please indicate your age. [I 25 orunder CI 36-40 [:1 51-55 [2126-30 [341-45 [356-60 [331—35 [146-50 DOver60 10. What is your highest attained level of education? 1:] High School Graduate 1:] Bachelor’s Degree E] Some College 1:] Master’s Degree D Associates Degree D Ph.D. 11. Please indicate your race. 1:] African American [3 White/Caucasian [:1 Asian & Pacific Islander 1:] Bi-racial 1:] Hispanic [:1 Multi-racial D Native American 215 12. Are you employed in: E] Business and Industry 1:] Government U Non-profit Association [:1 Other: Please specify 13. Please indicate your current income level 1:] Below $25,000 [:1 $85,001 to $100,000 [:1 $25,000 to $40,000 1:] $100,001 to $125,000 [3 $40,001 to $55,000 C] $125,001 to $150,000 1:] $55,001 to $70,000 [:1 Over $150,000 [:1 $70,001 to $85,000 14. What year did you graduate from leadership Michigan? [I 1988—Classl E] 1995—Class8 L] 1989-Class2 [J l996-Class9 E] 1990—Class3 E] 1997—Class 10 [j l991—Class4 E] l998—Classll [j 1992-Class5 E] l999-Class 12 E] l993—Class6 E] 2000-Class 13 E] l994—Class7 B 2001—Class 14 2002 - Class 15 Please use this space to provide additional thoughts you have regarding your Leadership Michigan experience or ideas and suggestions you have that would improve the Leadership Michigan program. Thank you for completing this survey. Please return the completed survey in the self-addressed, stamped envelope to: Mike Kovacic 109 Manchester Dr. DeWitt, Michigan 48820 216 Appendix E. Sample ProFILE Questionnaire Cover Letter April 24, 2003 XXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXX Dear XXX, We need just 15 minutes of your time to complete the enclosed questionnaire and provide your thoughts about the Michigan Farm Bureau ProFILE program. Your assistance with this project is greatly appreciated and will support my effort to complete requirements for the degree of PhD. at MSU and help Farm Bureau learn more about the impact of this program. The Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources Education and Communication Systems at Michigan State University is conducting a research project in cooperation with Michigan Farm Bureau related to the perceptions of participants who have graduated from leadership development programs such as ProFILE. The purpose of this research is to analyze the attitudes of graduates about how these programs have affected their ability to provide leadership within their organizations and communities. The research will compare and contrast the attitudes of graduates from two different programs sponsored by Michigan Farm Bureau and the Michigan Chamber of Commerce. As a graduate of the ProFILE program, your insight will help provide valuable feedback regarding the effectiveness of the program and assist in the development of future leadership training programs across the state. Several ProFILE graduates supported an earlier phase of this research by participating in a series of focus group discussions. Utilizing their feedback, we have developed the enclosed questionnaire to gain a deeper understanding of what this group of graduates told us about their ProFILE experience. If you were part of that group, we say thank you and encourage your continued support of this effort by completing and returning the enclosed questionnaire. For Michigan Farm Bureau to effectively plan for future leadership training efforts, your participation in this study is essential. Please take a few minutes to complete the questionnaire and return it in the enclosed self-addressed stamped envelope by Friday, May 2, 2003. Completing and returning the survey indicates your consent to be part of this research project. Your participation is voluntary and you may decline to answer any given question. Be assured that your responses will remain confidential. The return envelope and questionnaire have an identification number that enables your name to be checked off the mailing list when the questionnaire is returned. The envelope will be discarded and the identification number will only be used to monitor response rates. The confidentiality of your response will be maintained to the maximum extent permissible by law. If you have questions regarding this study, please don’t hesitate to contact me at 517/290-7784 or by e-mail at kovacicm@msue.msu.edu. If you have any questions about the rights of human subjects in research, direct your inquiry to Ashir Kumar, Chair, Michigan State University Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects, 517/355-2180. 217 I appreciate your support and involvement in this research effort. As an added incentive, when we receive your completed questionnaire, your name will be placed in a drawing for $50 as a small token of my appreciation for your time and effort. Thanks again for your participation in this research effort. Sincerely, Mike Kovacic Graduate Student in Agriculture and Extension Education 218 Appendix E. Sample Leadership Michigan Cover Letter May 13, 2003 First Name, Second Name Address City, State ZIP Dear First Name, We need just 15 minutes of your time to complete the enclosed questionnaire and provide your thoughts about the Michigan Chamber of Commerce Leadership Michigan program. Your assistance with this project is greatly appreciated and will support my effort to complete requirements for the degree of Ph.D. at MSU and help the Chamber learn more about the impact of this program! The Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources Education and Communication Systems at Michigan State University is conducting a research project in cooperation with Michigan Chamber of Commerce related to the perceptions of participants who have graduated from leadership development programs such as Leadership Michigan. The purpose of this research is to analyze the attitudes of graduates about howthese programs have affected their ability to provide leadership within their organizations and communities. The research will compare and contrast the attitudes of graduates from two different programs sponsored by Michigan Farm Bureau and the Michigan Chamber of Commerce. As a graduate of the Leadership Michigan program, your insight will help provide valuable feedback regarding the effectiveness of the program and assist in the development of future leadership training programs across the state. Several Leadership Michigan graduates supported an earlier phase of this research by participating in a series of focus group discussions. Utilizing their feedback, we have developed the enclosed questionnaire to gain a deeper understanding of what this group of graduates told us about their Leadership Michigan experience. If you were part of that group, we say thank you and encourage your continued support of this effort by completing and returning the enclosed questionnaire. For the Michigan Chamber to effectively plan for future leadership training efforts, your participation in this study is essential. Please take a few minutes to complete the questionnaire and return it in the enclosed self-addressed stamped envelope by Friday, May 29, 2003. Completing and returning the survey indicates your consent to be part of this research project. Your participation is voluntary and you may decline to answer any given question. Be assured that your responses will remain confidential. The return envelope and questionnaire have an identification number that enables your name to be checked off the mailing list when the questionnaire is returned. The envelope will be discarded and the identification number will only be used to monitor response rates. The confidentiality of your response will be maintained to the maximum extent permissible by law. If you have questions regarding this study, please don’t hesitate to contact me at 517/290-7784 or by e-mail at kovacicmaizmsuemsuedu. If you have any questions about the rights of human 219 subjects in research, direct your inquiry to Ashir Kumar, Chair, Michigan State University Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects, 517/355-2180. I appreciate your support and involvement in this research effort. As an added incentive, when we receive your completed questionnaire, your name will be placed in a drawing for $50. cash as a small token of my appreciation for your time and effort. Thanks again for your participation in this research effort! Sincerely, Mike Kovacic Graduate Student in Agriculture and Extension Education 220 Appendix F. ProFILE Application Form 2002 MICHIGAN FARM BUREAU ProFILE Participant Application Form Date of 1. Name: Birth: Age: 2. Address: County: 3. City: Zip Code: Phone: 4. Highest Grade or Colleg Short Courses or Degree e other Specialized completed: Major: study 5. Name of spouse, If married: Age: Number of Names(s) Age(s) Children: ' : (Click below to continue) 6. Type and size of farming operation: 7. Other farm or related business enterprises: 8. What are your goals for your farming operation? 9. List youth organization participation and offices/awards achieved. (FFA, 4-H, other school activities, etc.) ORGANIZATION LEADERSHIP ROLE/AWARD 10. List agricultural organization participation and offices/awards achieved. (Farm Bureau, Commodity organizations, Soil Conservation Service, Farm Credit, etc.) ORGANIZATION 221 LEADERSHIP ROLE/AWARD 11. List community and church activities in which you currently participate or have participated in the past. _ ORGANIZATION LEADERSHIP ROLE/AWARD 12. What are your short and long term leadership goals? Long-term Farm Bureau leadership goals? 13. Why do you want to participate in ProFILE? (Please write a paragraph or two about your desire to participate and how you feel this will help you reach your goals.) 14. Please list any additional information you would like to have considered as part of your application for ProFILE. Thank you for taking the time necessary to complete the ProFILE application. Applications will be screened with final selections completed by December 15, 2001 E-mail completed application by December 1, 2001 to: ProFILE Nominations ProFILE@mail.michfb.com Michigan Farm Bureau P.O. Box 30960 Lansing, MI 48909 222 LEADERSHIP MICHIGAN — 2003 APPLICATION Before submitting an application, please read the following requirements to be certain of your full participation: 0 Participants must attend at least seven sessions in 2003: April 10” & 11" ................................. Kalamazoo (Required) May 8 .............................................. Lansing June 12"I & l3” ................................. Jackson July 17” & 18“I .................................. .Marquette September 10“ ................................... Traverse City September 11tll & 12"I .......................... Traverse City (Required) Public Policy Forum October 2"l & 3'” ............................... Grand Rapids November 6tll .................................... Ann Arbor December 4" & 5" .............................. Detroit 0 Tuition is $3250. including a non-refundable $100 application fee, and is due by April 10, 2003. Tuition includes hotel accommodations, meals, speaker fees, and program materials. (Special arrangements for tuition payments can be made on an individual basis to accommodate budgeting needs. Limited scholarships available; contact Leadership Michigan for guidelines). If you cannot fulfill these requirements at this time, please delay your application until you are able to make this commitment. General Information Name First Last Middle Name Preferred Organization Business Address Number Street City Zip County Business Phone ( ) Business Phone ( ) Home Address Number Street City Zip County Home Phone ( ) Email Social Security Number‘ Race“ Birth Date“ How did you learn about Leadership Michigan? I"This information is requested to achieve a diverse group representative of the state’s population and to obtain security clearance by law enforcement officials for the June session. 223 Leadership Michigan Application-Continued Employment Present Title Date Began Briefly describe your present responsibilities or activities: Professional, Community or State Involvement Please list, in order of importance to you (civic, political, social, professional or other activities): Organizations Official Positions Held Dates Held How much time each month do you commit to community, civic, professional, or other organizations? On a separate sheet, please answer the following questions (Please limit answers to a total of two pages): A. What do you consider your greatest professional accomplishment? Your greatest professional challenge? B. What is your greatest personal or community accomplishment? Your greatest personal or community challenge? C. What do you hope to gain from your Leadership Michigan experience? D. In your opinion, what are the three most significant challenges facing Michigan in the next 10 years? 224 *5? r' o'- Leadership Michigan Application-Continued Letters of Recommendation Applicants must submit two letters of recommendation to: Leadership, 600 S. Walnut St. Lansing, MI 48933. Letters of recommendation should describe the applicant’s leadership qualities and his or her potential to impact the local community and or state. Commitment I understand the purpose of Leadership Michigan and if selected, will devote the necessary time and energy to complete the program. I realize that if I cannot fulfill the requirements at the beginning of this application, I will not complete the program. I have the cooperation of my employer, whose signature below verifies his/her understanding of my attendance requirements. Applicant’s Signature Date . Employer’s Signature Date Please submit your application, a $100 non-refundable application fee, and letters of recommendation postmarked by March 1, 2003 to: Leadership Michigan, 600 S. Walnut St., Lansing, MI 48933. A professional photo is requested upon acceptance to the program. Please notify staff of any dietary restrictions or special accommodations required due to disability. Leadership Michigan is a program of the Michigan Chamber Foundation 600 S. Walnut St. Lansing, MI 48933 1-800-748-0266 foundation@michamber.com www.michgmbercom 225 Appendix G. Responses to open-ended questions from the census surveys are presented verbatim from the returned questionnaires. Question 11 — ProFILE Survey “Did your view of leadership change as a result of your participation in ProFILE? Please explain?” - “No, My View of Leadership didn’t change. I believe my effectiveness as a leader improved. My effectiveness as a county board member and my willingness to take on committee assignments increased greatly.” - “Yes, I liked how it encompassed many aspects of leadership such as public speaking, etiquette, working with groups and conflict resolution.” - “No, but this was a valuable training tool that helped me sharpen skills I already had.” ifuw‘ .. .. ..-. - “Effective leaders work with people to get things done, rather than trying to do things alone.” - “Yes, there was a lot of learning and growth that I had to do.” - “Yes, very definitely. Although most of my activities have been centered around my local church, rather than in Farm Bureau. Most Farm Bureau activities are structured around couples, and as a single adult I feel very much like a third wheel; at most F.B. functions.” - “Yes, my view of leadership has changed. I am now more confident in front of people. I am more willing to take on new positions. It has helped me with my job to be a better leader and speaker.” - “Yes, I have taken on more leadership roles since ProFILE.” - “A little, in that a good leader also needs to help develop other’s leadership skills.” - “l. Developed patience as I had to work with others with n_o leadership skills. 2. Also became a community “voice” for agriculture and as a result receive phone calls for “ag perspective on local issues.” 3. Have developed an intense dislike for people with unethical business practices (self-serving, hidden agendas etc.). - “Yes, I already had leadership skills but I learned how to put them to use in a different setting, i.e.being younger than all other board members and understanding my opinion counts.” 226 - “Yes it gave me confidence to work as a team with people and develop goals, ideas etc., and work on them. Also gave me tools to address issues that affect agriculture today and work on those things.” - “My view of leadership changed in that I am more willing to step forward to get the job done so to speak, if need be. I think I also learned not to overextend and do a better job in the things I’m doing, maybe encouraging others to take a job I would have done so I can concentrate on the things that matter most to me at that time.” - “Yes, I realized that a leader can affect how well an organization can be or not be. Also, that a leader doesn’t have to do everything, but organize and delegate people to get '1'” things done. A leader has to follow up and oversee that things are getting done, and if conflicts arise, be able to ‘read’ people and assign them projects, committees etc., where they will work and enjoy.” - “It gave me a more focused view of leadership.” "1"— - “No. My skills were more refined through ProFILE. I always knew what leadership was all about. My skills were rough, and I needed to improve in order to take on more responsibilities. ProFILE gave me that opportunity.” - “Yes, a much more comprehensive and ‘real world’ insight after completing ProFILE.” - “Became Co. F.B. President for 3 years.” - “It hasn’t changed much of the things I did before. I have become a better speaker and not scared to talk to large groups of people. There was plenty to learn about the farms of other classmates and how different one farm is to the next. I thank you for the time I had in ProFILE.” - “Yes, mostly from observations of other ProFILE participants.” - “I realized that a good leader is sometimes silent, and not the focus of attention. By listening to others in the group and encouraging their input to the whole of whatever organization you are involved in is truly the way to be a strong leader. I was very disappointed that I was not able to use my ProFILE skills to the fullest for my county FB, simply because we sold our farm. I wish there could be room for “farmer’s at heart” who are still knowledgeable on the issues even after they are no longer cleaning up after the cows!!!” - “No, it just shows different types of leadership styles.” - “Helped me see the big picture of how Farm Bureau members working together. Can make changes in our communities and county! Then even more teamwork will create changes in state and national policies.” 227 - “Better handle on how to get everybody to work together and how different types of people to work together also needs to be a team approach. Very good learning of all the different types of ways to lead.” - “No, I have always been in a leadership role in any organization I have belonged. To get the most out of anything, strong involvement is key. Getting volunteers to volunteer is a huge challenge for any member organization thus those who do usually are funneled into leadership positions.” - “I would say no, my view of leadership remained the same. However, my ability to lead, with self confidence, was improved. My understanding of a leader’s responsibilities F was also improved.” - “No just expanded on what I had received in high school and college.” i ll - “No, but I feel more comfortable in a leadership role.” g - “Yes, by understanding what leadership responsibilities are, not just being able to .1.- listen, communicate, delegate, resolution of issues. But, including such things as team building, involving as many members, volunteers as possible, recognizing those that are participating for projects well done, also recognizing and helping solve proj ects that aren’t accepted positively. Realizing being in a leadership role isn’t always a popular position with difficult decisions to be made. Allowing others to shine, stepping back at times, giving as many people an opportunity to advance at whatever level of involvement they want.” - “I have a lot more confidence in myself now as a leader and am a better speaker in front of people.” - “Yes, I saw the purpose of leadership as an opportunity instead of only a responsibility. I believe one is more willing to give of themselves when they have experienced that they do have skills and ideas others affirm as valuable. ProFILE helped me to see I could be a useful partner in a leadership position and cause change and make a difference at any level of leadership from personal goal setting to a Board of Directors member.” - “I found that most people have leadership skills if they work hard to use them and make the most of any experience they are in. Looking for positions when confronted with negative people was also something I gained an appreciation for.” - “I think I am more confident in leadership roles. I used to be the type that just listened and never said much. Now I tend to give my opinion more without being worried what others think.” - “It made me appreciate others in leadership positions more and enhanced my leadership skills.” 228 - “Yes, Through ProFILE I realized that I can be an effective leader, and that leaders lead, and don’t control a group.” - “Yes — There are leaders who are not highly visible in a group — silent leader. Good leadership doesn’t mean doing everything yourself!” - “ProFILE gave me the confidence to step into leadership positions. In giving you the tools you would need as a leader and allowing you to ‘act out’ leadership roles with peers of your age really helped. Leadership didn’t seem so overwhehning when you had knowledge of how to deal with certain situations.” - “Yes, I think so, I gained a better understanding of how I could influence the organization through my participation on committee’s, and later, as county President, my abilities to appoint committees would determine the success or failure of our county farm bureau.” - “Yes, I become county pres. Township planning comm.. State F FA Alumni Board, Mason F F A Alumni Pres., I guess ProFILE brought out the leader in me and showed me how to use it.” - “Yes, leadership isn’t one person doing it all. Now one person can oversee everything. There are several versions of leadership. ProFILE showed that to me. It also showed me my strengths and my weaknesses.” - “Yes, you need to be a well rounded person in order to be a good leader.” - “Yes, ProFILE taught me that I am a leader in ag. Industry whether I want to be or not. Therefore, when someone asks questions (like a newspaper) try to help them out in a positive complete way.” - “Yes, a leader needs to be a better listener, and take the view of others more seriously.” - “ProFILE showed me that strong leadership and commitment to any project is essential.” - “My view of leadership didn’t necessarily change that much. I found more confidence in using my skills. I have always been pretty even keel with my relationships with people. It has probably helped me to realize getting other people involved is critical for the health of any board or organization. I feel comfortable in helping other people develop their leadership roles and then watching them shine. ProFILE did help me with learning how the meeting should flow and run. My memories of ProFILE are good, but don’t remember very many details from 10+ years ago.” - “Yes, I view leadership roles as a very important way of helping to influence your community around you.” 229 w_.._.. - “Yes, it gave me the tools I needed to be effective and successful. I enjoyed leading. It increased my self-esteem greatly.” - “Yes, I learned what role of leadership I am best at and how to plan and carryout a meeting. The public speaking was a valuable part of the experience.” - “I never really thought of myself as a leader before ProFILE. ProFILE opened my eyes to a lot of things in addition to providing the basic building blocks for strong leadership skills. I was required to have a public speaking class to graduate HS. 1 never got comfortable with public speaking until I went through ProFILE. It helped to build a confidence that was never there before. (I still get nervous sometimes, but it’s not the fi'ozen in fear type!) - n i" - “Once completed with the ProFILE program I was asked to be on every committee known to Farm Bureau and it got to a point that I was burnt out and at this point I have not been involved in any programs.” “It could of only got better.” Inmate-401.5”:— sa-‘J. _ . v O . . , ' _' I “I feel my view didn’t change but how I approach a leadership situation probably did.” - “I developed an understanding of Farm Bureau and the opportunities to be active.” “Not really. I have been placed in leadership roles at an early age (4-H, etc.) and have been the “leader” since. ProFILE helped to refine my skills for future tasks.” - “ProFILE gave me more opportunities in Farm Bureau leadership and helped me take on more challenges. I think it is an excellent program for young farmers to develop leadership skills and apply them.” - “Yes, ProFILE gave me the leadership skills needed to become a leader. To be a good leader, you need to understand how to listen and react to challenging situations. By completing the course it gave me confidence to use what I learned to be effective. Before ProFILE I thought leadership meant that you had to have plenty of experience chairing committees and being in special positions. After ProFILE I learned that I could use my skills and others to help lead.” - “Somewhat, because it made me aware of my style of leadership and how to utilize my strengths. I also learned how to improve on my weakness.” - “Yes, I used to view the formation of committee (or any group) as involving people who “volunteered”, Now I view committees by, what is the goal of the group, what do you want from the committee, and who is best equipped to carry out that goal and I’m I ready to take on the job. I view committee assignment with more of “critical eye” before accepting any position.” 230 Question 18 - ProFILE Survey “Please use this space to provide additional thoughts you have regarding your ProFILE experience or ideas and suggestions you have that would improve the ProFILE program.” - “All in all, I think ProFILE is a strong benefit to everyone that participates. The commitment of time is difficult, but doable, however increasing the amount of time required could be a hardship on participants.” - “It was a wonderful experience. I hope it continues.” - “Being nominated by someone else would be very important to beginning the course with the proper mindset and expectations.” - “I think ProFILE is a very good service that Farm Bureau should continue to provide.” 'JQ-IA‘Il-"AQ-v—‘r {awn—2“»? ~ 1 l - “I would highly recommend my agricultural minded F .B. members to participate. I found it as a usefiil tool and have many, many fond memories of my time with ProFILE. - “More legislative training.” - “1 . Would appreciate advanced/update meetings/educational opportunities. 2. Wouldn’t mind some business education that could work with farms (Texas A&M program). 3. Would be good for several of our Alumni to attend the Texas A&M program (exchange) to learn from and implement their ideas. Holstein foundation also has great leadership program. 4. Would like to see a newsletter with leadership updates, business tips for ag, needs of ProFILE grads, upcoming dates, legislative action requests, etc. Thanks.” - “ProFILE was a great experience and still when I encounter others fiom my ProFILE group we know each other and can chat. It might help to keep members in touch through an address exchange or annual get together but it is hard for farmers to take time off. I benefited greatly from the diverse speakers and opportunities we had though at the time thought I was probably wasting my time.” - “It was a great program and I would recommend it to anyone.” - “It was a valuable experience for me. I still rely on skills I learned during my ProFILE experience. I have always been glad I participated in ProFILE.” - “As a wife and mother, ProFILE gave me the opportunity to step away from my family and experience something on my own and know that I could do it. It also encouraged me to take a more active interest in other farming activities and opportunities such as building our compost business and dealing with people in the media, and advertising a product. 231 - “My ProFILE experience was excellent. It helped me in public speaking, how to be a good listener, and the whole Farm Bureau organization (how it started, how it works, and the things it does). Besides the leadership skills, getting to know others that are in the same boat as you are was excellent. You make friends that you can work and communicate with at Farm Bureau functions.” - “I know that this program has helped polish my skills, and for that I am very grateful. The fiiends I have met and things I have learned will be a part of me for a long time. My hope is some day I will be able to pass it on! How about ProFILE II!” - “Very valuable, life changing experience for me. A good basis of ‘civil mindedness’ i? that has been built on in ensuing years.” - “It is kind of hard to remember after all these years.” - “ProFILE gave me a better view of different opportunities and how much we are the same. We all have ideas but you have to try them before you know if they will work out. We are all risks-takers every day. ProFILE helped us to see we that facet of leadership.” F8 ;71'-. ‘ LI u _ Hf, 3‘39” - “ProFILE is Awesome. Leadership and direction was the best. Really helped a lot in past year standing in front of Zoo people in .Townhall meetings. for hog barn. We need to get more young people in ProFILE and do it quick.” - “ ProFILE was defiantly a very rewarding experience for me. I went on to become a sales rep for many Veterinary Pharmaceutical companies and my FB connections, as well as skills obtained in ProFILE helped me to service my customers to the best of my ability. I was also fortunate to have MSU as a part of my client base, and I feel the admin/staff took me a lot more seriously as a large animal information source because of my F B background. I also interviewed and was hired by the Dept. of Agriculture as the 1St Vet Tech MDA had ever employed. I feel my ProFILE skills were key in helping me through the interviewing/hiring process and work experience. I bled hogs on many farms with many MDA vets, and having ProFILE, FB background was profound in the way I was accepted by the farm community.” - “It was overall a great experience.” - “I enjoyed the whole thing. When we went on the bus trip. I wish we could have spent more time, staying with other FB members overnight. Like we did when we were in Kentucky. That was a great experience.” - “I feel that my experience in ProFILE was very valuable in developing my self confidence. The areas I believe I would have gained additional benefits would have been in more public speaking and more development in my listening skills. We did not have enough impromptu. public speaking. I still struggle to keep my thoughts together when I’m put on the spot.” 232 - “I would recommend it to anyone not just to become a better person but to meet other young farmers.” - “My ProFILE experience was a quality and exciting one. As always time was and is a factor. Planning the meetings sometimes didn’t always use our time as completely and wisely as possible. Multiple days meetings seemed to work better than one day events. More public speaking training should be included, even though for some it can be uncomfortable, the more practice in front of a group, usually the more at ease the speaker should become. As always information on topics is a must.” - “Very good program and good leaders who did a very good job of leading the class. Would like to see something on negotiation skills. Negotiating is a key element of farm and life.” - “ProFILE was a great learning experience and I made a lot of friends. I would recommend the program to anyone.” - “I often look back to my ProFILE experience whether for information and skills or just for the firn times, good memories and friendships developed. It was a chance for me to develop myself personally as opposed to always being associated as one of a couple (which is good, too). I probably would never have sought out this leadership training for myself and I will always be grateful it was made available to me thru my local Farm Bureau. Please keep offering this type of leadership development.” - “Had it not been for the award and the invitation to participate in ProFILE I probably would not have filled out the application to participate. I t was an excellent experience and I sill pull out the resources that we received to guide me. My husband and I no longer farm — we are not even regular members any longer but only associates. It was a valuable experience.” - “I think that it was one of the best experiences I have had in Farm Bureau.” - “I felt it was very worth while for me and opened up many opportunities that I was not aware of. The people I met in ProFILE and since are some of the most bright, innovative agriculturalists in the state and it has been an honor to work with them. I have great respect for the program and MF B staff and would recommend it to any aspiring young farmer with leadership aspirations.” - “Though I am no longer farming, or involved with F arm Bureau to any extent, I am still grateful for the opportunity of being involved in ProFILE. ProFILE and the people involved with it helped me to improve as a leader, but more importantly it helped me to improve as an individual. Thank You!! Keep up the Good work!” - “Excellent Program! I would recommend it to anyone!” 233 - “I think this is an excellent program, and would recommend it to anyone interested in improving their leadership skills. I’m not sure that I would recommend changing anything, but I would like to see either the program opened up or a similar program developed for older participants. One thing that I have observed over the years is many people will try to take charge, but only a few know how to lead.” - “I truly feel that there is always learning to be done. That’s why I marked devote more time in some area’s. As far as length of time, it was just right for a “first” session. With the additional opportunities for spouses, I feel its wonderful but some people might be more restricted with spouse there. Myself it would be great!” - “I enjoyed it. I thought it was first rate.” - The Farm Bureau staff make excellent teachers. I have probably tried to pattern some of my leadership skills after theirs. One thought I have now is how to manage time. You can become very involved (over involved) to the point that you are doing a balancing act. I need to learn to say “no” to some of the opportunities or activities. It is not always easy to do.” - “Sorry this is late in getting back to you. , Hope you are still able to use the information. Still benefiting from my ProFILE lessons! One of the best times in my life. It was just what I needed at the time.” - “I enjoyed the experience and would recommend it to others interested in developing their leadership skills.” - “I wouldn’t be where I am today or have accomplished so much in such a short time without the ProFILE experience. I learned A LOT from the daytime sessions, but I made some lifelong fiiends from the evening activities. (Who needed sleep!) I have relied on these contact people for many types of information over the years. (I’m biased, but I think we had the best group!) - “Some of the people in my group were wasting Farm Bureau’s time and money. I would like to see the application process looked at more closely. But all in all it was very worthwhile for me. I thank Farm Bureau for the opportunity.” - “I had a positive experience going through ProFILE, I just have two thoughts 1)Have a better selection process, don’t just take whoever will participate (It happens) 2)Don’t over load the graduates with committee assignments, we volunteer and true leaders will participate at their own speed.” 234 u...- A. w, .r "-17".-‘“ 2????"— _‘A - “The ProFILE program was an opportunity for me to gain confidence in myself. I believe it help me believe in myself and know that I can take leadership roles in my community. Thank you for the ProFILE opportunity.” - “The ProFILE experience was extremely worthwhile. I gained many leadership skills from participating and it helped to foster life long friendships among the participants. I have also witnessed the impact this program has had on other young farmers completing the program very useful and worthwhile.” - “It was a great experience to be a part of, and the relationships that I made are still intact today. There are lots of great people out there to meet and get to know, ProFILE is a great way to get off the farm, which we all need to do more, and build these relationships. Don’t stop the program, it was great.” - “I think ProFILE is an excellent program and just wished more young farmers had the same opportunity that I had experienced.” - “This was an excellent program. I applaud the Farm Bureau for developing the ProFILE program. I really can not think of anyway the program could be approved. It was a very good experience for me and I would hope that it continues for others.” 235 Question 7 - Leadership Michigan “How has your view of leadership changed as a result of participation in Leadership Michigan? Please explain.” - “I realize that one particular leadership style is not necessarily better or worse than another and that various leadership styles are necessary within an organization to motivate and/or influence its people. I think I’ve become more understanding of leadership styles that are different than mine and have tried to either improve characteristics of leaders I’ve met and admire, or eliminate characteristics that I thought I might possess and viewed as negative or unflattering in others I’ve met in the program.” - “No, I am not saying the program was not good, I’m just saying my views did not change.” - “My view has changed of leadership only from the aspect of obtaining a better understanding and appreciation of how various social and economic issues impact on one’s leadership.” - “I got value because Leadership Michigan exposed me to issues. The scope and breadth of the experience is very good. The classes and development of the Leadership Michigan alumni as an activist group, is lacking. Leadership Michigan alumni should be more involved in what happens in our state.” - “Initially I went into the program viewing it as a way for the Chamber to generate money, since corporations must pay for employees to participate. I didn’t think there would be much value. But the program actually does a great job of providing an overview of key issues impacting Michigan and acts as a tool for networking.” - “More positive perspective on numerous issues.” - “My participation verified the views I already had — you can’t make a leader. The person either is or isn’t of the mindset.” - “Leadership can be subtle involvement. Not just one of aggressive type a behavior.” - “It broadened my perspective and opened my eyes to the interdependency of our social, political environmental and professional systems. Travel throughout the state was fun and educational.” - “I don’t know that it has changed but certainly enhanced. Understanding that there is no “defined mold” when it comes to leaders and their respective leadership styles. The recognized diversity was enlightening.” 236 - “Minor change - sought out Leadership M1 for contacts and development of a focused understanding of MI economy/politics.” - “Anyone can develop into a leader — you don’t need money.” - “I recognize that a single voice — or a small number of voices — can actually have a profound impact on public policy. I recognize how extremely important strategic communication and public relations is in the development of public policy. “The squeaky wheel gets the grease.” - “No — very active before and since in leading and following in volunteer community and political roles. What has changed is my level of knowledge about industry/ technology/ resources across the state.” - “Primary change has been related to community involvement as a citizen and business leader. My interest level and involvement at the community level is much higher than it would have been without the Leadership Michigan experience. This experience was ideal in preparing me for my current role as site/business manager.” - “Yes, More aware, better informed, see both sides of an issue, think about subject matter from a personal, work related, society related, view point, networking with my classmates after each experience was a bonus. We all had a point of view and the diversity of our backgrounds is what made our discussions so interesting and educated.” - “Yes, the aspect that we live in a very global society with limited resources and connections (relationships) is very important.” - “My view of leadership has not changed a great deal; it was very important to me both before and after the experience. The most valuable part of Leadership Michigan for me was the experiences of other industries and situations around the state and the networking.” - “Networking is great — But continuing education is always best for me. I’d like to see alumni events formed in education opportunities with highly respected speakers - for example => Plante and Moran has an executive series that it conducts for clients and prospective clients in Troy facility of MSU I believe — Awesome execs telling stories/histories of success and failures — definitely worth exploring.” - “My view of leadership changed due to dealing with the diverse Leadership Michigan participants and realizing the complexity of the social and economic issues that were addressed during the sessions. I believe it helped me to be a better listener and to recognize a “big picture” when it came to making leader-type decisions.” - “No — I have always been leadership oriented and worked on those skills -— it enhanced and reinforced it.” 237 - “Leadership Michigan opened my eyes to look at issues from all perspectives. Understanding issues from all perspectives has made me a better leader, husband, employee and member of my community. I’m sure that when I have children it will help me be a better father as well.” - “I have a much more complex world view and a much better sense of why the rate of change in govt. is good.” - “Leadership comes in all sizes and shapes. My perception of leadership is broader ’9 now. - “I may have once thought that “leading” involved teaching based on my own experiences. Now, my leadership qualities encompass the masses . . . . I really think Leadership Michigan taught me to think more about how any decision can “trickle down” or affect so many different social and economic issues.” - “My view of leadership hasn’t changed. I did develop a greater appreciation for what influences our economy and state political system.” - “It has not change. Much of what I was taught, I already knew.” - “Leadership Michigan provided me with exposure to talented individuals engaged in extremely diverse careers. They consequently also had very diverse leadership styles which was very educational for me.” - “Increased awareness of social and economic issues and the roll of diversity in the success of industry/business.” - “To understand better that leadership is only effectively exercised when you have the respect of the individuals and teams you hope to lead. That can only be accomplished by building trust, which in turn, is highly dependent on personal values such as honesty and integrity.” - “I came away with positive views of most of the speakers and participants with whom our Leadership Michigan group came in contact. As a result, I have confidence in the political and business leaders who run our state. I would prefer that some other organization with less bias ran what I feel is essentially a very good concept.” - “It hasn’t changed much because my program was less about Leadership and more about key issues. The program needs to become: A) Better-balanced. A conservative, Republican view was ALWAYS presented with no differing perspectives. Very, very narrow. Diversity was down-played. I would invite others to join if those areas were improved.” 238 - “I participated back in 1995, since which time I have had the opportunity to participate in many other leadership development activities. Hard to say what was attributable to Leadership Michigan.” - SSNOPQ - “It hasn’t. However, after a local leadership program I was involved in, I recognized that leaders are “doers.” They decide to become involved, decide to work toward solutions, and give of themselves freely. Leadership Michigan reinforced this belief.” - “As I indicated, 1 was in the original class. As a result, over the years I, as president of our company, sponsored no less than nine participants fi'om our ranks. All benefited from the experience greatly in their career development. Having since retired (kind of) I would do the same all over again — great learning experience.” - “I am more sensitive to views of others and seek out different perspectives before formulating my own position on issues.” ‘1, ms 1:1. its” fiLAhé”; 9‘ fi‘lianmj I . I - “Leadership Michigan helped me see how the principles of leadership and community involvement can be applied to a much wider (state wide) perspective.” - “The experience demonstrated the value of examining issues from a variety of perspectives - perspectives that are all valid and must be understood to be appreciated.” - “I do not want to be part of a program where controversial “public” perception issues are dominant. During my experience “diversity” was way-way to prominent a topic and it was a turn off. There were over “clicky” groups of participants, therefore reducing “networking” and “teambuilding” opportunities. Leadership roles among our group — were always given on diversity. . ..not the true leadership of the group. Much like society, this always fails. Roles and leadership positions. . . much like employment. . . should “always” go to the most qualified and capable of implementation without prejudice.” - “Broader perspective of problems and social/economic/health/environmental systems in Michigan and the USA. - “Very helpful in deepening my knowledge for decision making.” - “Yes, Leadership is more than simply holding public office or an executive position in business. Leadership implies moving opinions to cause a change in an organization or community.” - “No, still as fascinated about the influence great leaders can have.” - “I am more confident as a leader.” -“Role of legislator is greatly challenged by many regional/social/economic issues.” 239 - “Not a lot of change.” - CCNOSQ - “I don’t think the leadership Michigan experience teaches leadership skills. The benefits of leadership Michigan are focused on key social and economic issues in the state and networking. This affords participants the opportunity to act upon those issues personally and professionally — if it fits into the parameters of that person’s job. There are plenty of potential leaders whose skill set/job opportunities are not suited to social and economic change.” - “More willing to speak in public and with friends about social and economic issues and support political organizations that further feed on democracy while restraining movements toward socialism.” - “It feels like it was a long time ago so it’s hard to remember or identify what Leadership Michigan specifically did for me. It was a good program.” I - “Not really” - “A true and good leader maintains a positive attitude.” - “The power and benefit of interacting with other leaders across industries, nonprofit, and government organizations is critical for an already good leader to become a great leader. Leadership is both natural for people and learned. Leadership Michigan provides important additional learning about leadership.” - “More involved.” - “Leadership is about influence and commitment, not where you are in the organization.” - “I have a broader view and better understanding of all the topic areas covered in the leadership Michigan program. I also found it fascinating to hear both sides of an argument and the reasoning behind individual opinions.” - “The main thing is that you can never spend too much time trying to see from all points of view before making a leadership decision that affects others in your organization.” - “Not to a large degree, but that in all likelihood is due to my age and experiences.” - “More diverse viewpoints are taken into consideration.” 240 - “Leadership Michigan was a very good experience for me as a mid-level corporate manager. Through the experience I was able to become more aware of the many complicated issues facing the state of Michigan and business community. I believe the program provides in depth insight while challenging the participants to reach higher expectations in both career and community. I am now an executive vice president and frequently use what I learned in the program.” - “It broadened my perspective.” - “I have a more broad-based understanding of state-wide issues.” - “Yes, only as I better understand the challengers facing state and community leaders. I also find myself even more disturbed by some of the actions (and inactions) by the Michigan legislature as well as the govemor’s office.” - “I expected more training and less lectures. Locations visited excellent networking exceptional.” - “No, not really. . . however, it has enhanced my leadership and broaden my horizons.” - “My view of leadership has become broader and more “complete” because of my experience with Leadership Michigan. The caliber and variety of participants in the program, I have found, is excellent, and the breadth and scope of topics covered provides a unique opportunity for demonstrating exemplifying leadership skills.” - “I see leadership as more holistic concept. It’s not just about motivating and leading those around you — its about using your knowledge of community and state issues to affect change. I believe this is a responsibility. Also, leadership is something that evolves as you grow and change.” - “I was nominated as the outstanding graduate of my community leadership academy. I thought this was quite an honor. I learned that many problems facing our community are common to others. I learned patience and the need to place myself in others shoes.” - “Leadership Michigan provides a holistic approach and shows the inter-relatedness of all business, environment, social and economic climates. Being a leader means being a leader in all of those areas.” - “The true value of this program for me personally was to broaden my knowledge beyond my immediate local community to the issues of the region and the state. I receive other components (media training, public speaking, etc. from my employer) and don’t feel these add that much value.” - “I became aware of less flagrant styles of leadership and learned skills re: being more subtle and using quiet persuasion. I was inspired by the program and people involved.” 241 - “I am applying for Leadership Florida as a result of this program.” - “I attended {another leadership development experience] which was a more developed program involving alumni in planning and networking so I made comparisons (that’s good and bad) and offered suggestions after the completion of Leadership MI based on my experience with both programs. The department was not open to suggestions. They were very defensive. I offered to be on the planning committee but was never approached. Seemed to be comfortable to stay with the same program year after year. The program needs a n overhaul, many things were wonderful, but some things were not needed.” - “My view of leadership changed just a bit. . . for the most part, I learned that in order to be an effective leader of others, I first need to take control of my own life and really determine where I want to be now and in the future.” - “Prior to participating I knew nothing about the program.” - “I was very technology focused prior to Leadership Michigan. My entire career has been focused on providing technical solutions for corporate business units. Leadership Michigan broadened my horizons by providing an in-depth look at issues facing Michigan. It also allowed me to network with folks that work outside of my sector. It was a Great Experience.” - “My leadership view have not changed; however, I have a better understanding of the state and various programs i.e., school system in Flint and major industry in the UP.” - “Yes, I have realized that leadership skills require a broad knowledge of many topics, not just one discipline.” - “No — prior to Leadership Michigan it was clear to me that networking and an understanding of key social economic issues were a part of leader’s tool kit. Leadership Michigan was beneficial in broadening my network of contacts, knowledge of Michigan specific issues from the point of view of the private sector. I am a government employee.” 242 “yaw ~r 2m; ‘1 Question 14 - Leadership Michigan “Please use this space to provide additional thoughts you have regarding your Leadership Michigan experience or ideas or suggestions you have that would improve the Leadership Michigan program. - “Will the results of the survey be shared with us?” - “I believe Leadership Michigan should only accept those that have completed local leadership program before participating. This would make Leadership Michigan more of a graduate program. I’d also be willing to work on a “joint” Michigan and Leadership Ohio session with 1 day in Monroe (or Ann Arbor) and the other in the Toledo area or Cleveland. I’m a grad of both. We need to pull and keep the Alumni connected.” .tzw-IFi-l - “I felt Leadership Michigan focused on an entry level manager, rather than more senior leadership. I think people newer to management probably gain the most from it. However, the program is trying (or was) to market itself to more senior managers, but the curriculum seemed too basic for more senior people. If it is to be for more senior people, there should be less emphasis on social/educational/economic issues and focus more on leadership development.” - “Meet with Govemor’s. roundtable of industry leaders.” - “My leadership Michigan program was based on the assumption that I was eager to climb the corporate ladder and read all the latest management books. Too much emphasis was placed on personal goal setting and personal Visioning. There were no hard core skill development programs. The field trips provided a great experience for most of the class. I had already seen most of the places and program. When a new experience was presented to me I enjoyed it and learned. Early “Leadership Michigan” classes were jam packed with Michigan leaders. I doubt my class will achieve at the same level. I question how competitive and selective the program truly is at this point. An annual program waters down the quality of the class. Applications should be taken once every 3 to 5 years. It should be an exclusive club with hard core training.” - “I’d like to see more emphasis on leadership. What characteristics make a great leader and various leadership styles? It might be helpful for the Chamber to explain exactly where the money goes to. So that participants view as an investment their employers are making in them.” - “Program needs to increase the numbers of people who have been through local leadership programs — a natural progression.” - “I think Leadership Michigan was far more beneficial to me on a personal basis, and less so to my employer. Local leadership programs are more visible to the employer and therefore probably have more value to them.” 243 - “Everyone has certain highlights in their lives that are engrained and most memorable. The fact that I was able to have this experience and the corresponding learning, and continue to do so with the network that was created as well as ongoing involvement, is priceless!” - “Leadership Michigan is an excellent program but is fairly biased because of Chamber affiliation. Should have full time staff focus! The program attracts very young participants. Shoots way to low on age/position and is easy to get into. It is not a place/program highly desired. Fun agenda may be too high! Our class way overdid personal coaching. Runtime - Important but is was dominant theme. Needs high profile leadership to promote. Seems to be a side band of chamber.” - “Form teams of Leadership Michigan alumni who want to work on selected issues so they can meet regularly to problem-solve and advocate for progress in our state by eliminating barriers and/or educating/mobilizing residents. They could develop a “stick to it strategy” that would help keep important Michigan projects on track despite governmental changes. This, of course, would be an option for graduates of the program. They might be called the “Leadership Michigan Action Group.” - “Best experiences were the challenging discussions we had as part of our Leadership Michigan experience — some formal but many informal during social and meal times.” - “Currently retired, and out of the loop. So no longer using experience in a professional way. At the time thought the experience was excellent.” - “Keep the program a 2 day — overnight — event for 6 to 8 months. Anything less will cost the class to much of “experiencing” what the program is all about. Each session is valuable and a great learning experience. However, the networking and team spirit of classtime is what stays with you. It is what the “experience” is all about. If you miss out on the networking/ debriefing time (evening between the 2 days) you miss the chance to develop fiiendships. It is a great lesson in socializing and becoming a team.” - “Put in more leadership skills training that is “out of the box.” Make each session a unique experience.” - “I think that Leadership Michigan could provide a good opportunity for alumni to become up-to-date on current state issues after we have elections — (Social and meet the new administration). - “Leadership Michigan was an excellent experience that I fully support. I think it achieves a great balance between issues and solutions. It provided a wonderful forum for discussing different opinions. Don’t over extend the Leadership to overwhelm the Michigan part of the experience. Leadership training is available from many sources; traveling the state and learning about it is not.” - “I continue to rave about this experience. Terrific!” 244 - “I think this was a great program and have asked others to join. The current economy will hinder other companies, maybe even ours, to participate this year.” - “This most worthwhile program needs to be marketed by T.V. and newspaper. Become the thing to do. The networking for me wasn’t so much with classmates. Other doors opened because awareness was broadened and confidence gained.” - “I truly enjoyed my Leadership Michigan experience, but the geography covered by the participants does not lend itself to networking after you have completed the class. Also, I found it very offensive to be inundated with funding requests after I had completed the class.” - “Program is exceptional learning experience. Unfortunately there is no Leadership Michigan vehicle to sponsor graduates or create a network to leverage graduates in their respective communities. We need an approach that “jump starts” involvement or participation in political initiatives on a local or state level.” - “Since I was in Class #2 a lot of things in the program may have changed. It was a good personal experience for me and I enjoyed it. However, there was not a lot of focus on leadership skill development. One idea on how to do this might be to focus on problem solving key issues in the state and learning from that experience. I felt a little isolated being 1 of 2 people from north of Grand Rapids. More regional representation would be good.” - “I would think a survey similar to this given at the end of each class year would be helpful it has been too long ago for me to comment on the above accurately. A survey like this should be given when all the ideas and memories are fresh.” - “Participation in Leadership Michigan has forever changed my outlook on social and political issues. I would love to do it all over again.” - “I believe that Leadership Michigan has changed greatly since the early years — where there was little or no emphasis on leadership but only on exploration of various political and social issues. I value my experience for what it was--a shapshot of issues and people I do not normally encounter. For that it was insightful but not particularly ongoing in nature. I have since participated in the American Leadership Forum which was much more focused on leadership as a valued quality. The two programs were dramatically different but each had a role.” - “I would like to have seen more interaction with group members in time of current event discussions and how others view those events as they unfold. We live in a more and more complex world and we need to share our views of not only events in this country and how they affect us, but also how it is perceived that events in other parts of the world affect us. Other opinions are quite helpful in terms of understanding how and why public opinion shifts.” 245 - “There needs to be a follow-up program (e.g., “leadership Michigan 2) where alumni can actually put in place the concepts discussed. There would be synergy within such a diverse group that would greatly enhance our effectiveness versus “going it alone.” - “Excellent program. Meeting with and being able to interview or have lunch/breakfast, etc with CEO’s etc. would be a good addition. A little more insight into the private sector one-on-one.” - “It was a wonderful experience. I gained a much deeper understanding of the issues facing us — to me, this was the greatest personal value.” - “We need more activities that give graduates a chance to continue to network. Also, utilize the resources of alumni to a greater extent.” - “I never realized how much I took for granted living in Detroit of what Michigan was and had to offer. I have visited additional cities in Michigan due to this program.” - “The class experience was something I looked forward to because they were all interesting, fun and I enjoyed my classmates. Rather than a leadership program, it felt more like a get to know major issues facing Michigan class. While I learned a great deal about these issues, I did not feel like I developed necessary leadership skills or training that I expected and thought I could apply within my company. However, I do feel more informed about how the issues affecting Michigan have direct and indirect impacts on my job and community.” - “Please provide more time for networking.” - “My experience with Leadership Michigan was very positive and lasting. Part of the reason is because of the dynamics of the people involved — staff and participants, alike. We, as alumni, need to continue to make this valuable program both meaningful and enjoyable to ensure it remains desirable. The Chamber needs to put adequate resources into it as well. There is no reason Leadership Michigan can’t be one of, if not the best, programs of its kind in the country.” - “Leadership Michigan quite honestly is one of the best programs I’ve ever been involved in. The program provided great opportunities to develop relationships between participants to enhance all of our learning experiences - I would now feel comfortable calling upon any of my classmates. I also feel I grew as a human being and enhanced my ability to see issues from many angles which in turn, I think, has made me a more effective leader.” - “I had hoped that more opportunities would occur for state level leadership as a result of my graduation.” 246 - “A session on diversity or statewide race relations would have been beneficial in dispelling misconceptions of urban and rural communities.” - “It was a wonderful experience — any lack of networking is due to my own lack of effort. However, I would be comfortable contacting classmates. I would like a follow-up session or sessions to see how we are progressing - either a reunion or additional sessions would be great.” - “Involve alumni at cities you visit. Have them plan activities in their areas. They know the hot issues in their community. Invite alumni to their area meetings. Ask alumni to sponsor/host evening events. This promotes networking and you really learn about issues in casual settings, not planned dinner with speakers. Your evening with legislatures is a good idea but the session in Lansing could be expanded. Time allowing, 1 would be happy to talk with you or the committee.” - “Its wonderful as is.” - “A great experience that broadened me and has made me a better citizen of our state. My awareness of political and social issues has been greatly enhanced.” - “More alumni programs - maybe a collaborative web site where alumni can stay in touch. Make up sessions for those that could not attend one of more of the sessions. Keep it going — my time in the program was a cherished experience. I have a concern that this type of program could fall victim to the downturn in the economy. Perhaps more publicity can keep it strong. I keep thinking that many aren’t aware that this program exists such as the autos, their suppliers, etc. The program seems to be low cost for the benefits.” - “I will never forget it — opportunity of a lifetime! I really learned how the broader picture fits together - prisons, natural resources, health care, etc.” 247 WORKS CITED American Farm Bureau Federation, Farm Bureau Policies-2001 American F arm Bureau Federation Website Arent, Gale L., “21“" Century Leadership Program Proposal for Michigan Agriculture and Natural Resources Industries” (2001). Ary, Donald, & Jacobs, Lucy Cheser, & Razavieh, Asghar, Introduction to Research in Education - Fifth Edition. Orlando: Harcourt Brace College Publishers, 1996. Avolio, Bruce J., F_ull Leadership Development. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 1999. Bassi, Laurie J., & Russ-Eft, Darlene, Whgt Work_s - Training and Development Practices - Leadership Development. Alexandria, VA: American Society of Training & Development, 1997. 'll‘. Bennis, W. & Nanus, B., Leaders — The Strategies for Taking Charge. New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1985. Berg, Bruce, L., Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences. Needharn Heights: Allyn & Bacon, 2001 Birkenholz, Robert J ., Effective Adult Lfllming= Dansville, IL: Interstate Publishers, Inc., 1999. Brungardt, Curt, “The Making of Leaders: A Review of the Research in Leadership Development and Education.” The Joumpl offldership Studies, 3.3 (1996): 81-95. Blake, R., & McCaanse, A., Le_adership Dilemmas - Grind Solution; Austin: Gulf Publishing, 1991. Block, Peter, Stewardship — Choosing Service Over Self-Interest. San Francisco: Barrett-Koehler Publishers, 1996. Bogardus, E. S., Le_aders gird Legdership. Appleton - Century — Crofts, 1944. Brody, Clark L., In the Service of the Farmer. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 1959. Center for Creative Leadership Development, The, Hpapdbgk of Leadership Development San Francisco: Jossey—Bass, 1998. 248 Conger, Jay A., Leamingto Lea_d_. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1992. Cookson, Peter 8., Program Planning for the Training and Continuing Education of Adults-North American Perspectives. Malabar, Florida: Krieger Publishing Company, 1998. Covey, Stephen R., Principle Centered Leadership. New York: Fireside-Published by Simon & Schuster, 1991. Covey, Stephen R., The Seven Hgbits of Hi ghly Effective People. New York: F ireside-Published by Simon & Schuster, 1990. Cox, D., & Hoover, J., Eidership when the Heat’s On - New York, McGraw -— Hill, 1992. l Daugherty, Renee A. & Cadwalader, Donna S., The Volunteer Teacher Series: Teaching Adults. Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service Bulletin T-8202 DePree, Max, L_epdership is an Art. New York: Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, Inc., 1989. Dillman, D.A., Mail and Telephone Surveys: The Total Design Method New York, John Wiley & Sons Inc., 1978 Drath, Wilfred, H., “Approaching the Future of Leadership Development, The Center for ermve Leadership-Handbook of Leaflership Development (403-432). J ossey-Bass, Inc., 1998. Emerson, Robert M., F retz, Rachel 1., Shaw, Linda L., WritinLEthnogrpphic Fieldnotes. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1995. Etzioni, A., Modern Organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1964. Fear, Dr. Frank, Professor, Michigan State University Department of Resource Development. Personal interview by author, 13 April 2001, East Lansing, MI. Frigon, Normand L., Sr. & Jackson, Harry K., In, The Leader — Developing the Skills & Personal Qu_alities Yor_i Need to Lead Effectively New York: American Management Association, 1996. Giver, David, Carter, Louis, Goldsmith, Marshall, Linkage Inc.’s Best Practices in lflldel‘ShIQ Development Hpmlbook San Francisco: Jossey—Bass, 2000. 249 Greenbaum, Thomas L., The Handbook for Focus GroupfiRemrch. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 1998. Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K.H., Management of Organizationpl Behyior: Utilizing HumangResources. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice — Hall, 1977. Kaagan, Stephen S., Leadership Lesson_s_. Lanharn, Maryland: University Press of America, 1997. Kouzes, James M. & Posner, Barry Z., The Leadership Chaflleng_e_. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1995. Krueger, Richard A., Focus Groups — A Practical Guidefor Applied Research Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 1994. Krueger, Richard A. & Casey, Mary Anne, Focus Groups — 3rd Edition. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2000. LeCompte, Margaret D. & Preissle, Judith, Ethnoggaphy and Qualitative Desigp in Educgtional Research. San Diego: Academic Press, 1993. Lynch, Richard, lfldl — How Public gnd‘Nonprofit Managers can Bring Out the Best In Themselves and Their Organizations. San Francisco: J ossey - Bass Publishers, 1993. McCauley, Cynthia D., Moxley, Russ S., Van Velsor, Ellen, The Center for Creative Leadership Development Hafllbook of Leadership Development. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1998. Marshall, c. & Rossman, G. 13., Desi in ualitative Re_s_e_arch — I" Edition. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 1995. Maxwell, J.C., The 21 Ir‘refutgble ngs of Leadership. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1998. Merton, Robert K., Fiske, Marjorie, Kendall, Patricia L., The Focused Interview. New York: The Free Press, 1990. Michigan Farm Bureau, Policy Book — 2001. Michigan Farm Bureau Website Miller, L.E. & Smith, K.L., “Handling Nonresponse Issues.” — Journal of Extension September 1983, 21(5): 45-50. Morgan, David L. (1993). Successful Focus Groups — Avaancing the Stpte of the Art Newbury Park: Sage Publications, 1998. 250 Morgan, David L. & Krueger, Richard A., The Focus Group Kit - Volumes 1-6. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 1998. Northouse, Peter G., Leadership Theory and Practice — 2"d Edition. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2001. Oakley, E. & Krug, D., Enlightened Leadership — Gettingto the Heafl of Change. New York: Fireside — Simon, 1991. Outcalt, Charles L., Faris, Shannon K., McMahon, Kathleen N., “A Leadership Approach for the New Millennium: A Case Study of UCLA’s Bruin Leaders Project.” NASPA Journal 38.2 (Winter, 2001): 178-188. Posner, Barry Z., Kouzes, James M., “Ten Lessons for Leaders and Leadership Developers.” The Journal of Leadership Studies, 3.3 (1996): 3-10. Ramsay, Kristin Marie, Sustainable Community Leadership Development: Leadership and Leaming in Two Michigan Communities--Master of Science Thesis East Lansing: Michigan State University, 1997. Senge, Peter M., The Fifth Di§cipline. New York: Doubleday, 1990. Shepard, Robert, Your Farm Burea_u Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt Publishing, 1996. Shepard, Robert, Training Director, American Farm Bureau Federation Phone interview by author, 22 March 2001, East Lansing, MI. Smith, Peter B., & Peterson, Mark F., Leadership, Organizations and Culture London: Sage, 1988. Stogdill, Ralph M., H_andbool_< of Leadership — A Survey of Theory anjd Research. New York: The Free Press, 1974. Terry, Robert W., flhentic Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1993. Ulrich, D. & Lake, D., Organizational Capability. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1990. Waldron, Mark W., Moore, George A.B., Helping Adults Legn — Course 11ng for Adult Learners. Toronto: Thompson Educational Publishing, Inc., 1991. 251 Wilber, Donna, In The Service of theLarmer-Pfiart II. Lansing: Michigan Farm Bureau, 1994. Yin, R. K., _C_a_se Study Research. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1984. 252 rm “1'9 m"? ”H