PMacIntyre Thesis Ch1 2 3 Jan2014

Running Header: A QUANTITATIVE CORRELATIONAL RESEARCH 1
A Quantitative Correlational Research Study of Leadership Development
For Women Engineers
By
Phyllis MacIntyre
University of Phoenix
January 2014
Table of Contents
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 5
Background to the Problem 7
Statement of the Problem 12
Purpose of the Study 14
Significance of the Study 14
Significance of the Study to Leadership 15
Nature of the Study 16
Research Questions 18
Theoretical Framework 21
Definition of Terms 25
Assumptions 27
Limitations 28
Delimitations 28
Summary 29
CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 30
Management Education 32
Leadership Education 36
Engineering Leadership Education 37
Elements of Learning Leadership 40
Reflective Learning 40
Situated Learning 41
Experiential Learning 43
Executive coaching 44
Gaps in the Literature 46
Summary 47
CHAPTER 3: METHOD 49
Research Design 49
Appropriateness of Design 50
Research Questions 51
Population 52
Sampling Frame 53
Informed Consent 54
Confidentiality 55
Geographic Location 55
Data Collection 56
Data Analysis 57
Research Question One 57
Research Question Two 58
Research Question Three 59
Research Question Four 60
Research Question Five 61
Validity and Reliability 63
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
REFERENCES 67
APPENDICES 83
Appendix A: Theoretical Framework 84
Appendix B: Table 1 Summary of Literature Reviewed by Search Topic 85
Appendix C: Informed Consent: Participants 18 years of age or older 86
Appendix D: Confidentiality Statement 88
Appendix E: Permission Letter from the Publisher 88
Appendix F: Participant Questionnaire 91
Appendix G: Email Invitation to Participants 93
Appendix H: Leadership Behaviors Organized by Leadership Practice 95
Appendix I: Premises, Recruitment and Name USE Permission 98

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
The shortage of leaders to meet the needs of business and government organizations is a
dominant issue in Canadian organizations (Calnan & Levac, 2009; Henein & Morissette, 2006).
Henein and Morissette (2006) described the lack of leadership education and developmental
pathways for future leaders in Canada as a national “leadership deficit” (p. 196). Leadership is a
process that takes place over a period of years. One remedy to improve the supply of leaders is to
provide more leadership education to support professionals in their leadership development;
professionals develop leadership through a combination of learning. According to Ely and Rhode
(2010), leadership development is the combination of experiential learning with program
components for learning conceptual frameworks of leadership, practice to integrate and apply the
skills of leadership, self-discovery of one’s leadership identity, support through coaching and
mentoring to sustain the leader’s growth, and a community of practice that renews and promotes
leadership (Henein & Morissette, 2006). Crumpton-Young, McCauley-Bush, Rabelo, Meza,
Ferreras, Rodriguez, Milan, Miranda, and Kelarestani (2010) defined engineering leadership as
follows: “the ability to lead a group of engineers and technical personnel responsible for
creating, designing, developing, implementing, and evaluating products, systems, or services”
(p.10). Evidence of the increase of women leaders in US organizations showed slightly more
than one half of the management and professional positions are held by women (Catalyst,
2011c). In the engineering profession, the influence of women in leadership roles is less in
evidence (Calan & Levac, 2009). In this research study, the subject of leadership development
will focus on a population of women engineers. The purpose of the quantitative correlational
study is to profile the leadership of women engineers licensed in the province of British
Columbia by using the Leadership Practices Inventory to operationalize leadership and explore
association to levels of education, executive coaching, years of engineering practice, and the
location of practice as rural versus urban. For women engineers, the path of leadership
development includes barriers that male engineers do not experience. Although Calnan and
Levac (2009) documented the existence of a gender balance in the environmental and chemical
engineering specializations, among licensed professional engineers in 2010, only 10.5% were
women (p. 22). The Canadian Council of Professional Engineers (CCPE) is the national
organization of the provincial and territorial associations that license engineers CCPE surveyed
engineers and asked the following qualitative question; “What is the vision of success you would
like to see for women engineers in Canada?” The intent of the survey was to capture engineers’
perceptions about women leaders in their workplace situations. The survey responders numbered
2,432 with 58.8% women and 41.2% men; they revealed that women engineers want leadership
education (Calnan & Levac, 2009, p. 4). Noteworthy in the survey was the expectation that
women engineers sought guidance in leadership within the profession. Research on university
engineering education will show the progress to include courses and activities for leadership
development in undergraduate programs (Crumpton-Young, McCauley-Bush, Rabelo, Meza,
Ferreras, Rodriguez, Milan, Miranda, & Kelarestani, 2010). For women engineers already in
practice, they look to engineering associations and affiliated societies for leadership education
that advances their leadership in professional practice.
This study describes the leadership for a sample of women engineers licensed in the
province of British Columbia. The interplay of gender stereotypes in the fields of engineering
and business, will not dominate this study; rather, the study describes leadership education as the
combination of learning and development that fostered leadership development for a population
of women engineers. The participants will assess their leadership practices and a correlational
analysis will associate their leadership to levels of education programs, executive coaching, years
of professional practices, and location of practice in terms of rural or urban. The study concludes
with recommendations for leadership education that supports the leadership development of the
study population.
Background to the Problem
Kaagan (1999) defined leadership development as the process of teaching leadership and
suggested a mix of learning activities that promoted a safe, shared, adult learning experience. He
taught leadership that began with substantive learning of leadership theory followed by applied
practice through a curriculum of learning activities. The learning activities integrated Schon’s
(1983) model of reflection-in-action that introduced professionals to tools for learning more
disciplined thinking through reflection and inquiry. By teaching leaders to use these skills, they
learning to pause and examine their assumptions, reflect on individual experience, and share and
test their assumptions with others, and reconstruct an experience for future learning (Senge,
Kleiner, Roberts, Ross, & Smith, 1994; Bolman & Deal, 2003). This process of critiquing and
reexamining is a post-modernist way of learning in which the leader examines his or her
narrative of a situation and uses multiple perspectives to develop different ways of thinking
about future encounters. Leonard (2003) described the implications of postmodernism for
leadership development as follows:

A postmodern approach to leadership is necessary situationally based. The
implication for leadership development programming is that it is important to include
elements that help participants examine their grand narratives, assumptions, and
metaphors that may obscure more creative and adaptive solution and sense making.
(p. 11-12)
This postmodernist approach supports the developmental nature of leadership as a process of
learning that connects leaders to the experience of leadership, moving from the metaphor of
personal narrative to the reality of connecting and relating as a leader. This way of learning
represented a significant advancement in leadership education, as individual learning combined
cognitive and emotional thinking (Goleman, Boyatis, & McKee, 2002). For example, leadership
development programs integrate postmodernist approaches when the curriculum includes skill
development for the leader to communicate through dialogue and conversation. Sloan (2006)
referred to the learning space of dialogue as follows: “Dialogue acknowledges that each person,
no matter how brilliant or able, still sees the world from a different perspective and that there are
other credible and legitimate perspectives that can inform that view.” (p. 104). Instruction that
contributes to learning these skills include executive coaching and mentoring from senior leaders
in the profession (Griffiths & Campbell, 2009; Joo, Sushko & McLean, 2012). For engineers
whose education emphasized technical and analytical skills, learning dialogue skills will prepare
them for the multi-faceted demands of professional practice (Adams, Evangelou, Dia de
Figuerrdo, Mousoulides, Pawley, Schifellite, Stevens, Svincki, Trenor, & Wilson, 2011).
Engineers who chose a career with corporate or government employers are likely to learn
dialogue in leadership development programs that are a combination of in-house training,

executive coaching, continuing education, and university executive management programs
(Hannum, Martineau & Reinelt, 2007; Sloan, 2006).
The global economy changed business in the decade of the 1990s to an extent that
increased the competition of engineering services. Bonasso (2001, 2002) foresaw the challenges
that globalization presented for engineers who were perceived as only technical problem-solvers.
He argued that technology applications had broader social and cultural implications and a
complexity that was not present in earlier times. He proposed that engineers communicate and
lead by speaking publicly about new technology, by contributing to the debates, and by visibly
adapting to new value systems on international engineering projects. Bonasso (ibid) believed
engineers made more than physical contributions and that engineers had to take the lead and
change perceptions of their public role.
One response to the global competition of engineering services was an increase in the
engineers who specialized in one area of engineering. A specialization increased the engineer’s
technical expertise, while at the same time it narrowed the engineer’s focus, rather than
broadening the engineer’s mindset to the global context of business. During the 1990s,
engineering graduates came unprepared for the challenges of the global economy because
engineering practice required additional skills in cultural diversity, cross-disciplinary teamwork,
and leadership, topics not addressed in university engineering education. In large technology
organizations, structural changes facilitated an individual’s adaptation to the cross-disciplinary
nature of work during this period (Moss Kanter, 1997). At Texas Instruments, the organization
stripped away the hierarchy to create cross-functional teams that provided opportunities for
women to advance through developmental assignments and to strengthen cross-disciplinary
action (Foust-Cumming, Sabatini & Carter, 2008).
Farr and Brazil (2009) characterized the impact of globalization on engineering practice
as negative and disruptive (p. 3) and proposed that engineers develop leadership capability
through a combination of training, experience, and career growth. University educators
recognized the different demands that engineers faced, as a result engineering curriculum began
to expand to include leadership development. Since 1995, Pennsylvania State University (PSU)
offered a minor in engineering leadership development in the undergraduate degree. Schuhmann
(2010) reviews the curriculum of the model for engineering leadership development at PSU. The
curriculum objectives included the addition of skill development in communication, project
planning, management, organizational leadership, economics, and marketing. Learning outcomes
addressed technology management, shared leadership in teamwork, creativity, innovation, and
critical thinking. In the program, student engineers experienced the diversity of a global,
engineering team, made possible through partnerships between PSU and engineering schools in
Morocco and Hungary. The curriculum for engineering leadership combined a mix of applied
sciences, engineering, entrepreneurship, and cultural studies that provided a virtual team
experience through the Internet technology of Skype. The curriculum at PSU advanced
engineering leadership education, although Schuhmann (ibid) lamented the subjectivity of the
curriculum. The subjectivity related to the engineering faculty whose prevailing views dominated
the curriculum (p. 68).
Crumpton-Young, McCauley-Bush, Rabelo, Meza, Ferreras, Rodriguez, Milan, Miranda,
and Kelarestani (2010) defined engineering leadership as follows: “the ability to lead a group of
engineers and technical personnel responsible for creating, designing, developing ,
implementing, and evaluating products, systems, or services” (p. 10). The authors conducted
surveys of engineering students and of professional engineers to document their awareness of
leadership skills and attributes. The students’ priorities for learning leadership were skill
development in communication and problem solving and they showed a keen awareness of the
leader’s roles of setting the example and representing the group. Professional engineers were
confident in problem solving, team leadership, and the ability to listen to others, and they
reported benefits of leadership training in “soft skills” and “people skills” (p. 18). The report
summarized the leadership development programs offered by major industry employers like
NASA, Lockheed Martin, National Instruments, Raytheon and General Electric. These industry
employers developed leadership programs that included active learning and practice in
communication, interpersonal relations, and problem solving across functions and businesses
(ibid). In the leadership development programs offered by university engineering departments,
the curriculum combined technical and business courses that prepared the students for
engineering in the global business context.
Reyes and Galvez (2011) provided an example of increasing complexity in engineering
practice. In civil engineering projects, the complexity included integration of multiple disciplines
into the team, with leadership that enables all team members to share knowledge, adapt to new
technologies, and practice sustainability (p. 28). In Canada, Reeves (2010) expanded the
leadership capability to included social responsibility; that is, a role for engineers to lead public
policy debates on the impact of new technology on Canadian society. Adams, Evangelou, Dia de
Figuerrdo, Mousoulides, Pawley, Schifellite, Stevens, Svincki, Trenor, and Wilson (2011)
recommended advances in engineering education that instilled awareness and sensitivity to the
complexities of engineering practice. The authors encouraged additional engineering education
in the following: divergent thinking and inquiry of multiple perspectives, recognition of
connections across disciplines, and the ability to generate relationships and mediate differences
with stakeholders.
Although leadership courses and activities improved in undergraduate engineering
education, little or no attention surfaced in the engineering profession for practicing engineers
(Crumpton-Young, McCauley-Bush, Rabelo, Meza, Ferreras, Rodriguez, Milan, Miranda, &
Kelarestani, 2010). In Canada, the number of women in corporate leadership continued to
increase; the percentage of women in senior corporate positions rose from 9.8% in 2001 to
17.7% in 2011 (Catalyst Inc, 2012). In engineering, the influence of women in leadership roles is
less in evidence (Calan & Levac, 2009). Henein and Morissette (2006) claimed that Canada lags
behind in development of leaders, and the shortcoming is noticeable on a local and international
scale. The authors proposed a national leadership strategy to do the following: makes leadership
development a priority for federal and provincial governments, stresses the value of capable
leaders, supports investment in leadership development, and takes a strategic, long-term
perspective. Leadership capability in women engineers is part of this crucial resource; a resource
that Canada needs to develop or acquire.
Statement of the Problem
The problem is that Canada has significant need of leadership education across all
domains of business and government (Henein & Morissette, 2006). Reeve (2010) claimed the
following: “There is an urgent need for engineering leadership education” and this research plans
to raise the dialogue surrounding this urgency (p. 1). In Canadian universities, Touchie, Pressnail,
Beheeshti, and Tzekove (2010) argued for engineering leadership that focused on sustainability
and a holistic thinking in decision-making, a contrast to the broader range of management and
leadership education in American engineering education (Schuhmann, 2010). Leadership
education takes place beyond university broadens the career opportunities for engineers as well
as contributing leadership capability across the many domains the profession covers.
Women in Engineering
The general problem is that engineers regard leadership training as a soft skill with less
value in a technical field. Specifically, the challenge for organizations or professional association
leaders is to identify the preferred strategies and techniques needed to develop engineering
leadership or to risk using leaders without technical expertise for strategic planning and decision-
making, particularly in technology-based organizations. A survey of engineering employers
(Dunn, 2009) showed that employers expected engineering graduates to have equal skill in
technical expertise, business knowledge, and leadership capability. The research assumed a
future in which technical expertise becomes a commodity, making leadership skills even more
important in the competitive market for engineering services (p. 6). The advancements in
curriculum for business education offer comparable lessons for engineering education to add
leadership (Gray, 2007; Rousseau & McCarthy, 2007; Schoemaker, 2008).
In this study, quantitative correlational methods will assess the leadership practices of
women engineers and other sources of development that contributed to their growth as leaders.
The research attempts to further the field of engineering leadership in a Canadian context for a
population of women engineers who practice in the province of British Columbia.

Purpose of the Study
The purpose of the quantitative correlational study is to profile the leadership of women
engineers licensed in the province of British Columbia by using the Leadership Practices
Inventory to operationalize leadership and explore association to levels of education, executive
coaching, years of engineering practice, and the location of practice as rural versus urban. Study
participants will include women engineers licensed by the Association of Engineers and
Geoscientists of British Columbia (APEGBC) Data collection will utilize a demographic
questionnaire and the Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI). The LPI is an inventory of thirty
statements that are rated by an individual to assess leadership. The statements represent the
leadership behaviors in the model by Kouzes and Posner (2003) that included five leadership
practices, herein known as the five subscales of the LPI. The five practices are the following:
“modeling the way, inspire a shared vision, challenge the process, enable others to act, and
encourage the heart” (pp. 11-12). See Appendix H for the complete list of statements and
leadership practices on the LPI. Response options will include a 10 point Likert scale that ranges
from 1 to 10 with 1 indicating almost never and 10 indicating almost always. Responses for each
subscale will be summed to create a total score; data will be continuous.
Significance of the Study
The study is a unique approach to the problem because it focuses specifically on women
professional engineers and the sources of leadership education associated with their leadership.
The study acknowledges the emergence of engineering leadership education and this study may
contribute to the study of leadership in engineering education. Engineering practice requires
more leadership capability than in former times (Fishbein & Chan, 2010; Schuhmann, 2009).
Numerous factors contribute to the change in the practice of engineering, particularly for projects
that have implications across national and cultural boundaries. Large-scale engineering projects
raise ethical issues that question the social responsibility of engineers. Reeve (2010) claimed that
a bond of trust exists between engineers and the Canadian public, and the trust may be lost
without sufficient engineering leadership. In new areas of the profession, such as
nanoelectronics, the cross-disciplinary nature of engineering is evident and adds compelling
reasons for engineering leadership education (Brun & Neilson, 2010). Whether women engineers
lead projects in the public realm or in business, they require leadership capabilities to manage the
social, political, and relationship issues that go beyond their technical expertise.
Significance of the Study to Leadership
Engineering leadership recently emerged as a scholarly discipline, and engineering
leadership education is in a nascent stage of development (Haghighi, Smith, Olds, Fortenbury &
Bond, 2008). The study results will provide insight to engineering leadership for a sample of
women engineers in a Canadian province. Heinen and Morissette (2006) used a gardening
metaphor to describe the four stages of leadership development. The first stage is seeding,
accessing the leader within to complement the individual’s expert skills with the assertive skills
of leadership. In the second stage, the team leader emerges to lead others, and in the third stage
the leader blossoms as leadership expands to include a broader organization of diverse and
multicultural global projects. Blossoming is the transformational stage of leadership, a phase that
emulates earlier research on transformational leadership (Burns, 1978; Kouzes & Posner, 1987,
2011; Wolfram & Mohr 2009). The final stage in the model (Henein & Morissette, 2006) is
creation of a leadership development process that enables followers to become leaders, called
“pollinating” (p. 48), as leaders grow by teaching followers leadership skills. Dinpolfo, Silva &
Carter (2012) reinforced the proactive responsibilities of senior leaders to develop future women
leaders by investing time to sponsor and promote inclusive leadership development. These
descriptors of a leader’s actions and behavior reflect the theory of transformational leadership,
which is the foundational theory for this research, including the data collection instrument, the
Leadership Practices Inventory (Kouzes & Posner 1987, 1993, 2002). This study offers further
evidence of the applicability of transformational leadership concepts to the educational
curriculum and programs that support leadership education for women engineers.
Nature of the Study
The objective of the quantitative correlational study is to describe the leadership of
women engineers and attempt to quantify the influences that contributed to their development as
leaders. The quantitative correlational method is appropriate in this study because the research is
preceded by theory that provides models, research instruments, and approaches to the topics of
research, including leadership education, leadership development, and engineering leadership.
Models represent the theory and isolate factors into quantifiable variables and collection methods
results in raw data that will be transformed through descriptive analysis (Cooper & Schindler,
2003; Newman, 2003). In quantitative methods the logic of hypothesis analysis governs the
research investigation Creswell (2009). Deductive reasoning dominates quantitative research
methods in that the research hypothesis constructs or frames the research questions (Waruingi,
2010, p. 64). The correlational research is an attempt to quantify an association between
combinations of variables; an analysis method made available through computers in the second
half of the twentieth century (Creswell, 2005). The prevailing theory in this research study is the
transformational leadership (Bass & Avolio, 1990; Bass, 1999); and for advances in ways of
learning leadership, social learning theory and experiential learning theory are two dominant
theories (Gray, 2007; Rousseau & McCarthy, 2007; Schoemaker, 2008).
In contrast to quantitative methods, qualitative research is not inhibited by existing
theories, models, assumptions and the instruments for data collection. Using a qualitative
approach, research proceeds without voicing assumptions that may limit the participant’s input.
As noted by Dey (1993), “Qualitative data embraces an enormously rich spectrum of cultural and
social artefacts.” (p. 12). Rather than the reliance of numbers to transform the artifacts into
numerical data, qualitative research seeks meaning that is articulated through interviews,
observation, and documentation. For example, the focus group is an interview method that
includes observation of the group dynamics as part of the date collection (Morgan, 1988). The
researcher approaches the focus group with preliminary questions that initiate the group
dynamics and generate a broad range of perspectives. The qualitative data analysis is the
interpretation of the observed interaction and documentation of the group’s discussion. A
qualitative approach is not appropriate for this research study because a sufficient body of
knowledge and evidence-based research already exists on the topics of leadership development
and leadership education (Garcia, 2009), engineering leadership (Graham, Crawley &
Mendelsohn, 2009), and women in engineering and leadership (Foust-Cumming, Sabatini &
Carter, 2008; Ely & Rhode, 2010).
The quantitative correlational research will include a survey of women engineers with at
least five years’ experience in professional practice in the province of British Columbia, Canada.
The sampling is Canadian, the target population is localized to one province and to women
engineers who represent one segment of a licensed membership of 26,000 engineers and
geoscientists in the provincial licensing association (APEGBC, 2013). The survey instrument is
the Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI) that includes thirty statements of leadership behavior
that the participant will rate on frequency of practice. The ratings will produce an assessed value
and categorized according to the five subscales of leadership practices that to serve as a measure
of the leader’s strength. As a leadership assessment tool, the LPI will provide the participants
with a language to describe her leadership. Kouzes and Posner (2002, 2011) claimed that
leadership is a learned behaviour that will develop through the study of the five practices and
research continues to support their claims (Tourganeau and McGilton, 2004; Duygulu & Kublay,
2010; Vito & Higgins, 2010).
Research Questions
coaching, years of engineering practice, and the location of practice as rural versus urban. The
research will include correlational analyses to associate leadership practices to the level of
education, executive coaching, the number of years in engineering practice, and location of
practice as rural or urban within the province. The study will ask five research questions (RQ)
and pose hypothesis as follows:
RQ1: Is there a significant relationship between the five subscales of the LPI and highest level of
education achieved?
H1o: There is not a significant relationship between the five subscales of the LPI and
highest level of education achieved.
H1a: There is a significant relationship between the five subscales of the LPI and highest
level of education achieved.
RQ2: Is there a statistically significant relationship between the hours of executive coaching and
the five subscales of the LPI?
H20: There is not a statistically significant relationship between the hours of executive
coaching and the five subscales of the LPI.
H2a: There are statistically significant relationships between the hours of executive
RQ3: Are there statistically significant relationships among the five subscales of the LPI?
H3o: There are not statistically significant relationships among the five subscales of the
LPI.
H3a: There are statistically significant relationships among the five subscales of the LPI.
RQ4: Is there a statistically significant relationship between the five subscales of the LPI and the
location as urban or rural?
H4o: There are not statistically significant relationships between the five subscales of the
LPI and the location as urban or rural?
H4a: There are statistically significant relationships between the five subscales of the LPI
and the location as urban or rural?
RQ5: Is there a relationship between the five subscales of the LPI and the number of years in
practice?
H5o: There is not a relationship between the five subscales of the LPI and the number of
years in practice.
H5a: There is a relationship between the five subscales of the LPI and the number of ears
in practice.
In this study, the survey tools for data collection will include a questionnaire to
collect demographic, education, coaching, and location information; and the Leadership
Practices Inventory (LPI). A participant will assess her leadership by scoring thirty statements of
behavior on the LPI, with six statements testing each of the five practices, see Appendix H. The
LPI results will report the mean score for the five practices with the highest mean representing
the leadership strength of the participant (Kouzes and Pozner, 2011). For the sample of study
participants, the results of the five subscales of the LPI are a mean for the five leadership
practices. Calculation of the mean for all participants’ scores will represent the mean for the
group; subsequent inferential statistics will describe the leadership capability for the study
population. The summary statistics for the group will reveal the leadership behaviors that women
engineers believe are the most important in their practice. In the second phase of data collection,
participants respond to a questionnaire on the university education and professional development
that contributed to her leadership development. The variables for the correlational analysis will
include undergraduate and graduate education plus, coaching. In the quantitative correlational
analysis, the variables associated with the leadership practice are age, years of experience in
practice, and the level of education that contributed to leadership development.

Theoretical Framework
Theories of transformational leadership, management and leadership, and engineering
leadership conceptualized the theoretical framework of this study. Adult learning theory,
experiential learning theory, cognitive learning theory, and constructivist theory, contribute to the
curriculum for learning leadership. Schunk (2004) described cognitive theories as a recognition
that learning occurs by collecting information and concepts. Students learn through imitating or
observing models, developing concepts, solving problems, and including analysis of self and
context. Constructivist theory identifies learning as a construction of knowledge from an
experience that involves social interaction, in contrast to the tradition of behavioral learning that
dominates teacher-centered education. Gredler (2005) described behavioral theories as focusing
on behavior as a sign that learning occurred. Behavior is more objectively measurable than the
thoughts leading to the behavior; a change in behavior is a sign of learning.
Constructivist learning involves collaboration and role-playing, enabling the learners to
use perception, beliefs, and previous experience to learn. The educator, Vygotosky, was a key
proponent of collaboration; he argued that individuals learn when they are in a social situation
and share knowledge with peers (Schunk, 2004). Collaboration in learning emphasizes the social
process, that is, learning is a consequence of the interaction between students as they work
together to achieve a common goal. Collaboration in learning is a constructivist approach that
represents a significant departure from the tradition of learning established scientific principles
and application protocols.
Tan (2004) applied the constructivist pedagogy of problem-based learning to develop
curriculum for an undergraduate engineering program. He proposed curriculum for engineering

faculty that taught them how to teach students better thinking skills, and thus improve the skill of
graduate engineers to adapt quickly to their practice environment. Tan’s (ibid) theoretical
framework had a basis in the psychology theory of Mediated Learning Experience (MLE); to
teach a student an awareness of their thinking, faculty used interactively through coaching to
bring the student’s attention to how he or she learned. The faculty’s intervention helped remove
the cognitive difficulties that block the learner’s ability to follow a thinking process. An
intervention, as cited in Tan (ibid), applied the following; “Feuerstein’s checklist for cognitive
functions and dysfunction enables one to gain insights into his/her own cognitive skills and thus
move to a level of reflective thinking and metacognition” (p. 248). Tan’s (2006) curriculum
provides the instructor with a mediated learning approach while the student improved cognitive
functioning. The outcome of Tan’s (2006) program of thinking modified the belief system of the
instructor and the student who learned to approach problem solving from different perspectives.
The relevance between the works of Tan (2006), Kaagan (1999), and this research study is the
comparable foundation for teaching learners to think and lead. Tan (2006) and Kaagan (1999)
proposed curriculum innovations on the learner’s depth of learning and self-awareness that
relates to thinking through their personal beliefs to change intelligence and leadership capability,
respectively.
Situated learning offered new ways of adapting to the speed and change of the global
business economy. In business education in the United States and in Europe, large industry
employers collaborated with universities to deliver a corporate master’s in business
administration (MBA). In a situated learning for an MBA, the emphasis is on learning the
company’s processes while also promoting networks among the employees and the promise of
career development pathways. Thursfield (2008) argued against the benefits of the corporate
MBA, he said the following; “it frustrates rather than supports collective learning” and he
blamed organizational politics for inhibiting collaboration (p. 295). In other words, an
organizational culture of learning and collaboration are essential elements of a successful
corporate MBA. Situated learning enabled the participating corporate managers to practice
individual reflection in which they questioned their assumptions and methods of problem
solving. The participants needed to go beyond individual reflection to include dialogue with
other corporate managers, dialogue that further tested their assumptions and methods to provide
a double-loop of learning and promote a culture of collaborative thinking. Thursfield (2008)
concluded that the learning mechanisms that facilitate collaboration existed, neither in the
organization, nor in the MBA curriculum.
In engineering education, the concept of a “Learning Factory” (Lamancusa, Zayas,
Soyster, Morell & Jorgensen, 2008, p. 7) provided situated learning for undergraduate engineers.
In partnership with industry firms, the Learning Factory was a venue for practice-based
curriculum, interdisciplinary learning, and technology entrepreneurship. Some learning factories
include outreach projects to developing countries, a product of the collaborative efforts of
engineering educators, research conferences, professional associations, Non-Government
Organizations (NGOs), and government agencies. The program known as the “Engineer for the
Americas” (p. 9) promoted education of engineers in Latin America and fostered foreign direct
investment for entrepreneurial and technology-based business. Such efforts promoted a spirit of
engineering leadership beyond the primacy of market growth to include social responsibility. A
further advantage of situated learning for leadership is the access to peer processes. In a case
study at British Petroleum (BP), Thomas and Carnall (2008) reported the following:
“the peer processes help to create value through the transfer of best practice,
via peer advice , shared expertise and by creating a firmer bass for major
business development/strategic moves” (p. 201).
In the networked world of information-based economies, Kelly (1999) claimed learning
became more important than productivity in determining an individual’s or an organization's
ability to adapt, survive, and grow (Kelly, 1999). Increasingly complex and service-oriented jobs
demanded flexibility a skill requirement to help individuals deal with the uncertainty and speed
of change; Kelly (ibid) claimed that Experiential Learning Theory (ELT) provided the educator
with learning design for the student to practice flexibility. ELT emphasizes the role experience in
the learning process, an emphasis that distinguishes ELT from behavioral learning theories. This
study examines the curricula for leadership education based on changes that took place in
management education and in engineering education with a specific lens on the leadership
education of women engineers. Examples of situated learning and ELT reveal that learning-
centered, practice-based, and peer learning combined to help professionals keep pace with
economic and technological change of the late twentieth century.
Cunliffe (2009) advocated teaching leadership from a critical perspective in which
leaders think about leadership in different ways. She proposed use of a philosopher metaphor that
viewed leadership as three intertwining threads of relational leadership, moral activity, and
reflexivity. Cunliffe (ibid) described relational leadership as the leader’s ability to develop
relationships and interact with followers. Relational leadership is a constructivist perspective as

Cunliffe stated: “we are always selves-in-relation-to-others” (p. 95). Reflexivity is a means of
questioning accepted assumptions in business decision-making, with use of critical, open
dialogue. Cunliffe’s (ibid) inclusion of moral activity may be a response to the recent history of
corporate scandals and unethical behavior of the past decade. Her research deepened
understanding of leadership and strengthened the constructivist pedagogy for teaching and
learning leadership. See Appendix A for a graphic of the theoretical framework for this study.
Definition of Terms
The purpose of definition of terms is to clarify researcher’s meaning of language used
within the study and to gain acceptance of the researcher’s application from the reading
audience. Operational definitions for this study follow.
Business schools The combined university departments for undergraduate, graduate, and
postgraduate studies in management, leadership, and business.
Constructivist learning Constructivist learning actively engages students through discussion,
argument, and negotiation of ideas, and collaboration to solving problems. The instructor designs
the learning context and facilitates learning activities that requires individual and group learning.
Coaching A facilitated learning process conducted through one-to-one conversations, between a
coach and a recipient, that generates insights, heightens self-awareness, and provides a means for
reflexivity.
Executive Coaching Executive coaching is a learning process for leaders; a professional coach
provides a framework for the leader to develop and practice the behavior and actions of a leader;
the structure is a conversational and the learning involves the cognitive and affective domains.
Formal Education Formal education is an organized program of learning activities within the
physical or virtual environment of an accredited educational institution). In contrast, informal
education takes place in the workplace in work-related situations, and in personal environments
(Barakett & Cleghorn, 2000).
Leadership development The combination of learning through experience, educational
programs, and personal development that shifts from the individual, internal focus of a leader to
an orientation to the collective good of followers (Ely & Rhode, 2010; Stead & Elliot, 2013).
Leadership Practices Statements that represent the behaviors of successful leaders as portrayed
in the model by Kouzes and Posner (2003) with statements grouped into five leadership
practices, known as follows: “modeling the way, inspire a shared vision, challenge the process,
enable others to act, and encourage the heart” (pp. 11-12).
Learning-Centered An approach to designing curriculum that emphasizes the learning experience
of the student in contrast to teacher-centered learning in which the curriculum addresses the
delivery style of the teacher (Diamond, 2008).
Level of Education The university education in engineering, the applied sciences, business,
management and leadership with levels measured from diploma, baccalaureate, master’s degree,
and doctorate.
Location of practice Location relates to the location of the engineer’s office; in the province of
British Columbia eight cities have a population greater than 100,000 and represent urban
locations for the purpose of this study (BC Stats, 2013). Location of practice is treated as a
dichotomous data, where the location of practice is urban or rural within the province of British
Columbia.
Problem-based learning An approach to structuring learning activities in which students begin
the learning with an unstructured problem and follow an inquiry process to refine the definition
of the problem and move to generating solutions to the problems (Tan, 2006).
Professional Engineer On the website for the Association of Professional Engineers and
Geoscientists of British Columbia (APEGBC), a professional engineer (P.Eng.) is the following:
“The P.Eng. designation is a professional license, allowing you to practice engineering in the
province or territory where it was granted. Only engineers licensed with APEGBC, or those
practising under the direct supervision of a P.Eng. licensed with APEGBC, have a legal right to
practice engineering in British Columbia.” (2012).
Reflexivity The experience of reflection, awareness, and emotion that captures a critical turning
point for the recipient. It is the coach’s skill of inquiry that facilitates a conversation of learning
(Cunliffe, 2009).
Assumptions
A primary assumption of this research study is that the participants have a personal and
professional interest in developing leadership capability. Participation in the study is voluntary
and limited to professional women engineers with at least five years’ experience practicing in
British Columbia, Canada. The researcher will ensure participants’ protection of confidentiality
with written commitment; see Appendix D for the confidentiality statement that the participants
receive and return prior to the survey. The application of the Leadership Practices Inventory has
proven reliability and validity in similar studies for professionals in nursing, law enforcement,
and in higher education (Clavelle, Drunkard, Tullai-Mcguiness & Fitzpatrick, 2012; Herbst &
Conradie, 2011; Tourangeau & McGilton, 2004).

Limitations
The limitations of a research study identify the potential weaknesses not within control of
the researcher (Creswell, 2006). In this study, data collection will utilize a participant
questionnaire plus the Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI). The sampling criterion limits the
study participation to women engineers with five years’ experience in professional practice. The
intention is to select women engineers who had experience as a leader, which may not be
possible in less than five years of practice. A second limitation is the assumption that the five
subscales of the LPI do not operationalize leadership for the target population of women
engineers in this research study.
Delimitations
Delimitations of the study narrows the scope by indicating what is not included
(Creswell, 2006). The study confines participation to women engineers licensed to practice in the
province of British Columbia. The uniqueness of the study, within a specific context of women
engineers, makes it difficult to replicate exactly in another context (Creswell, 2006). Participants
respond on a printed questionnaire with demographic data and they will complete the Leadership
Practices Inventory (LPI). The LPI is a leadership assessment with over twenty five years of
research evidence by Kouzes and Posner (1987, 2011) and with proven construct validity for
groups in nursing, teaching, educational leadership and law enforcement (Clavelle, Drunkard,
Tullai-McGuinnes & Fitzpatrick, 2012; Posner, 2010; Vito & Higgins, 2010). Time constraints
and unforeseen acts of nature are risks in research studies that may skew the results of the
statistical analysis in a quantitative study. However, the large population of women engineers in
the provincial association mitigates an inadequate sample size for the quantitative correlational
research.
Summary
review of literature will draw upon the current understanding within the fields of management
education, leadership education, and engineering leadership education. The research
methodology outlined in Chapter 3 outlines the research design, the questions that frame the
research problem; it includes the appropriateness of this study to the field of leadership; the
methodologies for data collection and data analyses; and the reliability and validity of the
research design.
CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
The literature review is an exploration of the history of a research topic, providing a path
from prior research to the need for the current study. Neuman (2003) identified the following
purposes of a literature review: a) to verify that the chosen research topic, leadership
development for women engineers in British Columbia, is a credible topic; b) to situate the topic
in a broader, relevant context; c) to find gaps in knowledge concerning the topic; and d) to show
a logical flow in the literature. The literature review is an analyses and synthesis that reveals the
known direction for future research and practice within the field.
Information came from articles in databases such as EBSCO host, ProQuest,
EmeraldInsight, Thomson Gale Power Search, and ABI/INFORM Global, the ProQuest
dissertation and theses library, and the WebPages of engineering societies, educational
foundations, and universities. Key words used in the preliminary literature search included:
engineering education, leadership models, leadership education and development, women
engineers, management education, learning styles, and curriculum, see Appendix B for Table 1:
Summary of Literature Reviewed by Search Topic.
The literature review will categorize research through the multiple perspectives of
management education, leadership education, engineering leadership education, and curriculum
development. Management education defines the formal education that takes place in
postgraduate education, including the Master’s of Business Administration (MBA). In the
context of curriculum development, the recent history of the curriculum improvements to the
MBA program will illustrate the resistance to curriculum change when a largely, technical and
analytical emphases required education for the broader needs of managers and leaders.
Leadership education is a description of the teaching and learning of leadership that began in
management education, like the MBA (Mintzberg, 2004; Datar, Garvin & Cullen, 2010). The
lens of engineering leadership education will reflect the progress in the discipline of engineering
leadership education in Canada and the US. The lens of curriculum will involve a review of the
existing literature on leadership education and leadership development, as well as investigating
literature on future possibilities for teaching and learning leadership.
The literature review reveals a strong foundation of current knowledge and establishes
the appropriate research method for exploring the topic of leadership education and development
for women engineers in British Columbia, Canada. In this study, the variable of gender across the
engineering disciplines is secondary to the research questions on leadership development for
women engineers. Engineers acquire technical expertise in undergraduate education and enter the
workforce having immediately applicable skills. Not surprisingly, the culture of engineering
includes technical learning and knowledge that is a normative measure of strength. Even among
the engineering disciplines, stereotypes of the harder, technical learning in electrical, mechanical,
and civil engineering persists against the easier learning in industrial engineering (Frehill, 2007).
One interpretation of the hard, technical stance is that engineers lack a clear line of sight between
the technology in use and the human application of the technology products (Gata & McKay,
2003). For example, an engineer working on the turbines of a hydroelectric system or the
intricacies of circuits are distant from the social capital that results from the technology. Of
relevance in this study is the influence of stereotypes and bias on the leadership development of
women engineers (Ely & Rhode, 2010)

Management Education
Leadership and management are an intricate entanglement, even though differences of
definition and interpretation prevail (Allio, 2011). Managers and leaders both acquire and
manipulate capital, human resources, intellectual capital, and the visible assets of property,
equipment, and computing power. Management focuses on the current, present arrangements,
while leadership has a time horizon for decision-making that relates to the future vision (Thomas
& Carnall, 2008). In the literature, seminal works (Bennis, 1999; Mintzberg, 2004) contrast the
differences between managers and leaders.
The history of management education provides a roadmap of curriculum development
that combined highly technical and analytical content with learning management and leadership.
The introduction of management to business education started in the early 1950s as vocational
training in bookkeeping and business practice. By the 1960s, funding for American business
education came from two sources, the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching
and the Ford Foundation (Schoemaker, 2008). Schoemaker (ibid) concluded that the funding
from these private foundations moved business education into the universities, where economics
and finance were the dominant subjects for academic research and learning. Described as “Four
centers of excellence”, the leading US business schools included Carnegie-Mellon University,
Harvard, MIT, and the University of Chicago (p. 120). From these origins, the masters of
business administration (MBA) grew in popularity in North America and Europe.
The curriculum in the MBA degree reflected the American values of market economics
(Shoemaker, 2008). The business school subjects of economics and finance became the core of a
common curriculum for the MBA; Brocklehurst, Sturdy, Winstanley, and Driver (2007) claimed
the outcome of the common curriculum was the international recognition of American MBA
credentials. Although the academic subjects expanded to include marketing, human resources
management, operations research, and accounting, the dominance of finance and economics
continued. This common curriculum facilitated growth in MBA education as universities
throughout the Western world opened business schools.
By the late twentieth century criticism surfaced of the MBA with comments such as the
following; “The MBA has contributed to a decline in the standard of management. This research
is not able to confirm or reject this claim about the nature of the influence, but it does assume
that influence occurs” (Sinclair & Hintz, 2007, p. 54). Although alternatives to the American
style of management appeared in the 1970s and 1980s when the emphasis on quality
management, the singular focus of the MBA as learning financial and economic analysis. More
recently, Mintzberg and Gosling (2004) criticized MBA education for graduating specialists
instead of general managers with the skills to integrate and collaborate across business units and
functions.
Ackoff (2002) noted the pedagogical limitations of the MBA’s instructional focus, which
left students unprepared to continue to learn after graduation, stated as “to learn how to learn” (p.
59). Adults learned how to learn when taught methods of inquiry, use of reflective practice, and
dialogue education (Vella, 2008). When the business schools of the University of Toronto and
Case Western University introduced an integrated curriculum, the enrolment rates suffered
because the perceived measure of success remained on analytical skill, instead of a broader
managerial competency (Bennis, 1999; Pfeffer & Fong, 2004). Criticism of the excessive
analytical focus related to the tension between teaching management theory versus management
practice. Although management education and research is not limited to business schools, the
MBA received the majority of the criticism. Business schools responded to the criticism with
curriculum reviews and innovations in management teaching (Shoemaker, 2008). Mintzberg
(2004) proposed developing managers through action learning, more reflective thinking, and
development of personal competency in listening, speaking, and collaborative thinking.
Monaghan and Cervero (2006) proposed integrated and multiple layered learning that related to
all levels in the organizational context, the individual, the group, and the organization. In
business school’s curriculum included the meta-abilities of self-knowledge, critical reflection,
emotional resilience, and leadership (Buckley & Monks, 2004). The use of multidisciplinary
integration in management education (Ducoffe, Tromley, & Tucker, 2006) resulted learning
based on the following; “on a foundation of multidisciplinary and integrative problem solving
rather than the isolated delivery of ‘functional silos’ disciplines” (p. 108).
Boyatzis (2008) reviewed longitudinal studies on the impact of management education
that was limited to finance and economics and proposed a competency based curriculum.
Changes in program design of management education included teaching methods to improve
both cognitive thinking and emotional intelligence. The integration of leadership courses into
programs stressed a variety of learning activities that helped students learn the relationship skills
of emotional intelligence. Building on the concept of multiple intelligences, Boyatis’ (ibid)
research enabled graduate management education to move to a new level of adult learning that
developed emotional, social, and cognitive abilities within degrees such as the MBA and
executive management programs at business schools.

Rousseau and McCarthy (2007) proposed teaching evidence-based management (EBM)
for management learning. This promising approach provided the opportunity for the student to
practice management, described by the authors as follows: “one applies what is being learned,
reflects on upon it and the results produced, revises an individual’s understanding, and practices
again to get better at it” (p. 93). The traditional medical education is an example of EBM, in
which the grand rounds on the wards provide a practice field for medical students. Physicians
lead a review of a patient’s illness, treatment, and prognosis while attending medical students,
interns, and residents discuss the alternatives for treatment and care. The exchange between the
teacher and students provides a practice field for learning diagnosis, decision-making, and for
shared reflection. Mintzberg (2004, 2005) reinforced the value of learning through shared
reflection is a generative type of learning; when managers return to their organizations the
practice of shared reflection promotes learning in their organizations.
Engineers continue to use the MBA degree as a source of learning for management and
leadership. In previous decades, management dominated the MBA curriculum and leadership
currently takes an equal stance. Recent curriculum developments in MBA education respond to
the growing demand for leadership in business and government. In planning for engineering
education, universities face similar curriculum demands for leadership and global engineering
skills development. For engineering education, the added challenge is to provide leadership in
the application of new technology including leadership in the public policy debates (Farr &
Brazil, 2009; Fishbein & Chan, 2010; Reeves, 2010).

Leadership Education
The literature on leadership reveals many different perspectives, models, and theories.
Burns (1978) published seminal research on leadership that introduced it as a continuum on
which the leader’s style evolves from a transactional style to the transformational leadership
style. As cited in Janddghi, Matin, & Farjami (2009), Burn’s first concept of transformational
leadership was the following; “According to Burns, transformational leadership is a process in
which leaders and followers promote each other to higher levels of mortality and motivation” (p.
211). Kouzes and Posner (1987) developed the survey instrument known as the Leadership
Practices Inventory to reflect the concept of transformational leadership by describing the
behavior and actions of accomplished leaders in terms of five leadership practices. Although the
business environment changed significantly throughout the past twenty-five years, Kouzes and
Posner (2011) reported that the five leadership practices endured as an accurate data collection
instrument in their research on the narratives and stories of leaders’ experiences (p. 2-7).
Researchers acknowledge the model by Kouzes and Posner (2011) as representative of highly
effective leaders (Clavelle, Drenkard, Tullai-McGuinness & Fitzpatrick, 2012; Vito & Higgins,
2010).
Henein and Morissette (2007) described leadership as an invisible field of study in
Canada after a comprehensive two-year study in which the majority of participants had no formal
education in leadership. Henein and Morissette (ibid) proposed a national strategy for leadership
education, with leadership becoming a Canadian theme in schooling, post-secondary and adult
education. Henein and Morissette (2006) proposed the following; “To be effective leadership
development must be practice heavy. Therefore, students need to be introduced to these

opportunities early on. Community projects and service oriented learning opportunities should be
mandatory across the school curriculum.” (p. 198). The comment suggests that leadership
development starts with civic education that connects the diverse multicultural communities to
the broader international community (p. 199). The apprenticeship model combines formal and
informal education through an experiential, adult learning scaffold that has similarities to
leadership learning. Guiding the apprentice’s learning are artisans, mentors, and adequate
practice time to refine one’s skills. While the apprentice focuses on the craft, the developmental
journey of a leader begins with questions of identity that require guidance by leaders, educators,
and those within the profession. In apprenticeship and leadership development, learning comes
from a combination of sources. In formal university education, cognitive thinking takes priority;
however, learning leadership requires abstract, contextual and conceptual thinking (p. 200).
Recent developments in curriculum reflect a broader range of learning in Canadian universities’,
such as the integration of problem-based learning and community services learning in the arts,
business, and health sciences (Kuruganti, Needhamm & Zundel, 2012). In this study, the research
seeks educational options that enable women engineers to strengthen their leadership. The
literature reveals different sources of formal and informal education are feasible for the growth
of leaders; informal education covers a wide range of alternatives such as executive and peer
coaching, small group learning, mentoring, and developmental events and activities.
Engineering Leadership Education
In the academic discipline of engineering education, the history of curriculum change
mirrors the economic and technological pace of the Western world. University education in
engineering leadership does not appear until the new millennium, although the theme of
leadership surfaced in different context in the earliest literature. Farr and Brazil (2009) cite three
seminal works that impacted American engineering education; The Grinter Report (1955), The
Green Report (1994), and Educating the Engineer of 2020 (2005). The reports highlighted the
engineer’s dual responsibilities of technical expertise and ethical responsibility. The Grinter
Report (1955) recommended the following: “one fifth of the curriculum should be devoted to
humanities and social studies” (p. 82) with the intent of learning in the humanities and social
sciences, intended for engineers to learn how to meet the ethical obligations of practice.
Lamancusa, Zayas, Soyster, Morell, and Jorgensen (2008) note the timing of the Grinter Report
(1955) together with the launch of Sputnik in 1957 was a major turning point for American
engineering education. The 1950s and 1960s were a period of growth for university engineering
education with new buildings and steady growth in enrollment. By the 1980s engineering faculty
members formed coalitions to change engineering education, in particular to encourage faculty to
place more time on teaching (Lamancusa et al.). The Green Report (1994), conference reports,
and literature (Goldberg, 1996; Russell and Yao, 1996) accelerated curriculum reform for skill
development in teamwork, communications, and leadership. In the global world of business of
the 1990s, competition for engineering services heightened demand for more flexibility in
pricing, use of team structures, cultural diversity, and client relationships. Leadership appeared in
engineering curriculum along with attention to diversity, interdisciplinary content, and learning
how the forces of change influenced engineering decisions (Farr, Walesh & Forsythe, 1997). By
2005, the National Academy of Engineering proposed a reinvention of engineering education to
teach global business perspectives, engineering leadership in public policy, leadership of
collaborative, interdisciplinary teams. One conclusion from this historical review is that
engineering has a consistent web of themes that fall within the definition of engineering
leadership: technical expertise, social responsibility, ethical implications of technology, cultural
diversity, and the changing nature of the engineer’s role and relationships that go beyond the
engineering context.
Engineering leadership education is a new scholarly discipline (Haghighi, Smith, Olds,
Fortenbury & Bond, 2008). Since 1995, Pennsylvania State University (PSU) offered a minor in
engineering leadership development in the undergraduate degree. Schuman (2010) reported the
results of a 2005 curriculum review at PSU in which objectives included skill development in
communication, project planning, management, organizational leadership, economics, and
marketing. Learning outcomes included technology management, shared leadership in teamwork,
creativity, innovation, and critical thinking. Learning diversity takes place on virtual team
projects with exposure to the global context comes through partnership with an engineering
school in Morocco. The curriculum is a rich combination of applied science, engineering, social
science, and cultural studies.
In Canada, the most progressive leadership education was at the University of Toronto
that began in 2004. Faculty in the department of applied science and engineering began a
certificate program, known as Leaders of Tomorrow (LOT). The LOT incorporates learning to
lead teams, learning the social and psychological dynamics of relationship building, and learning
to acquire the identity of leadership. Reeve (2010) elaborates on the challenges of blending
engineering and leadership education:
“engineers traditionally do not identify themselves as leaders; many are uncomfortable
with the concept of taking on leadership roles. This could be explained in part by the
inherent tension exist between the practices of leadership and engineering. Leadership
involves navigating through the unknown and providing a goal often without all of the
information desired to make an executive decision. Engineering, by contrast, involves the
application of analytical thinking, where decisions are executed in the most informed
manner relative to an acceptable level of carefully calculated risk.” (p. xiii)
Equally important to leadership development program is the formation of a community of
leaders that encourages and supports continuous learning. This community of practice involves
formal and informal learning and creation of networks that reinforce the importance of
leadership development.
Elements of Learning Leadership
Reflective learning
Curriculum innovations in management education incorporated learning reflective
practice that proved beneficial; in the 1990s, leadership development became an important part
of MBA education. Densten and Gray (2001) examined the importance of integrating reflective
practice in leadership development programs. Reflective practice is constructivist learning
linking leadership theory to the experience of the student. Brookfield (1995) integrated reflective
practice into education for new teachers and claimed that the teachers improved their ability to
facilitate student learning. Lougham (1996) claimed teachers developed their ability to reflect
when they detached from personal feelings and viewed their assumptions of teaching through the
perspectives of others. Known as double loop learning, the process involves shared reflection
and group learning (Hughes, Ginnett & Curphy, 1999). When an individual examines his or her
assumptions and asks others to contribute a perspective on the assumptions, a double loop of
learning occurs. Leaders learn the value of relationships and test personal attitudes and beliefs
through double loop learning.
Cunliffe (2009) went beyond reflective practice to emphasize critical thinking, in contrast
to Schon’s (1983) concept of a professional’s reflection-in-action. Cunliffe (2009) advocated
teaching leadership from a critical perspective in which leaders think about leadership in
different ways. She proposes a philosopher metaphor that views leadership as three intertwining
threads of relational leadership, of moral activity, and of reflexivity. Farr and Brazil (2009) claim
leadership is largely an individual process and Avolio (2005) supports the idea of each individual
pursuing a life path. In the traditional teaching of leadership, learning begins with the student’s
journey of self-awareness. This is an individual endeavor that is central to the growth of the
leader who wishes to lead others and central to the self-identity of a leader. Cunliffe (2009)
stresses leadership is relational, depending upon relationships, and interaction for developmental
learning. Relational leadership is a constructivist perspective; “we are always selves-in-relation-
to-others” (p. 95). Reflexivity is constructivist language for examining and challenging
assumptions, and the influences of the assumptions. Cunliffe’s (ibid) inclusion of moral activity
may be a response to the recent history of corporate scandals and unethical behavior. Reflexivity
is a means of questioning accepted assumptions in business decision-making by using critical,
open dialogue in contrast to decisions moving through the traditional hierarchy from the top to
the lower levels of the organization.
Situated learning
Situated learning gained favor in management education, particularly for the MBA, in the
United States and in Europe. Situated learning is a partnership between a university and large
industry employers to offer a degree or certificate program that emphasizes learning the
company’s processes. In addition, program participants strengthen networks between the
university and the next generation of industry managers and leaders. In engineering education the
concept of the Learning Factory at Pennsylvania State University is an example of situated
learning in engineering (Lamancusa, Zayas, Soyster, Morell & Jorgensen, 2008). In a partnership
between the university and industry employers, a new engineering curriculum emerged, one in
which the learning is active and stimulating, both practical and theoretical. The Learning
Factory provides a venue for practice-based curriculum, interdisciplinary learning, and
technology entrepreneurship. Some learning factories include outreach projects to developing
countries, a product of the collaborative efforts of engineering educators, conferences,
professional associations, NGOs, and government agencies. Another initiative in engineering
education is the program known as the “Engineer for the Americas” (p. 9). It promotes the
education of engineers in Latin America and fosters foreign direct investment for entrepreneurial
and technology-based business, which fosters a spirit of engineering leadership beyond the
primacy of market growth. Research literature is lacking in these active learning experiments for
engineering leadership education.
Thursfield (2008) used an interview approach to study an MBA developed by university
academics and senior corporate managers of a government agency. The aims of the program
were to increase collaboration and collective learning across the agency. The situated learning
included the senior agency managers in the design and teaching. Students learned reflective
practice by examining his or her individual approach to agency problems. Consistent with MBA
education, the assessment of student performance was individual. Thursfield (2008) argued
against the use of an MBA program as follows: “it frustrates rather than supports collective
learning” and blamed organizational politics for inhibiting collaboration (p. 295). Situated
learning enabled the agency managers to practice individual reflection and question individual
assumptions and methods of problem solving. However, the participants did not go beyond
individual reflection and had no exchange with the senior agency managers to promote their
collaborative thinking. In this example, the mechanisms to facilitate collaboration did not exist
within the organization or in the design of the educational program. Therefore, the MBA
program was not successful in furthering collaboration within the agency.
Experiential learning
Kolb (1984) believed that adults learn through the experience of doing, “learning is the
process whereby knowledge is created through the transformation of experience” (p. 38).
Experiential learning theory presented a cyclical model of learning with four stages: a concrete
experience initiated in a seminar, workshop, or laboratory; a stage of reflective observation of the
experience; the formation of an abstract model; and the experimentation to apply or test the
learning in a future experiences. Turesky & Gallagher (2011) reinforced the value of experiential
learning as a theoretical framework for coaching leaders; by teaching the leader awareness of
learning preferences, the leader grasps a wider range of behaviors, which enhances relationships
with followers and others. Griffiths & Campbell (2009) compared adult learning to the process of
coaching where coach and client question, reflect, listen, and interact. The learning takes place
through iterations, called an “iterative learning cycle” (p. 26), in which the client tests their
learning in a work context then relates and questions their actions in the next iteration. Kolb’s
model of adult learning was foundational to adult education, enabling working adults to connect
new knowledge to the reality of their work experience.
Executive Coaching
Joo, Sushko & McLean (2012) defined coaching as a developmental practice for managers in
organizations that moved away from vertical hierarchy to team structures using horizontal
coordination. Management of team structures required skills in leadership, the ability to merge
technical and strategic perspectives using communication and relationship skills. Technological
change made jobs more challenging and added complexity to work processes, while
globalization enabled business to outsource work and form new global, business alliances.
Griffiths & Campbell (2009) noted the rapid growth of coaching during the 1990s and into the
first decade of the twenty-first century. Levenson (2009) used case studies to measure the
financial benefits of coaching to business and Bowser (2012) reported that coaching for
leadership development contributed to the financial value of the business value. Coaching is an
instructional technique for teaching skills such as the following: goal-setting; strategic thinking;
communication skills of conversation, listening, and feedback; and the ability to lead incremental
and transformative change (De Hann, Bertie, Day & Sills, 2010). During the coaching, the leader
develops competencies that further a culture of organizational learning (Cerni, Curtis & Colmar,
2010). Coaching is interdisciplinary, a combination of adult learning, organizational
development, counseling psychology, and management education. Joe et al (ibid) listed many
categories of coaching; managerial coaching, executive coaching, business coaching, life
coaching, career counseling, and mentoring (p.20-21). In managerial coaching, coaching is an
integral to the process improvement and employee performance and a method for strengthening
the capability of employees. At the managerial level, use of coaching broadened the perspectives
of the managers and employees to accommodate the changing nature of work.
For the purposes of this study of leadership development, executive coaching is the most
relevant coaching terminology. De Haan & Duckworth (2012) defined executive coaching as
follows:
“Executive coaching aspires to be a form of organization and leadership development that
results in a high occurrence of relevant, actionable, and timely outcomes. Coaching is
tailored to individuals so that they learn and develop through a reflective conversation
within an exclusive relationship that is trusting, safe and supportive.” (p. 7)
The exclusive nature of the relationship depends upon one-to-one or face-to-face communication
that is a conversational, in contrast to the traditional directive styles of leadership. All forms of
coaching are facilitated learning; the coach instructs through inquiry, by skillful questioning that
retains a focus on reaching a solution, which Bower (2012) described as the “solution-focus” of
coaching (p. 53). In executive coaching the learning focuses specifically on leadership skills and
behavior as the client formulates the identity of a leader and seeks a higher sense of purpose (Ely,
Ibarra & Kolb, 2011). Ely, Ibarra & Kolb (2011) examined leadership development of women
and characterized the process of achieving leadership as involving “identity work” (p. 6). This
refers to the leader’s ability to reflect on personal identity as a leader; the identity evolves over
time through an integration of self-understanding, through leadership experiences, developing
relationships with followers, and the pursuit of a higher purpose. In an organizational context, the
higher purpose relates to the business or strategic objectives. Executive coaching provides the
leader with a practice field for this identity work, where the leader experiments, implements
change, and uses the coach’s feedback to assess actions and behavior. Executive coaching
provides a learning process for leaders; the coach provides a framework for the leader to develop
and practice as a leader; the structure is a conversational and the learning takes place in the
cognitive and affective domains. De Hann and Duckworth (2013) summarized the outcome
research on executive coaching and cited studies where the clients of executive coaches reported
productivity gains (Bowles, Cuningham, De La Rosa, Picano, 2007), increased leadership
effectiveness (Thach, 2002; Perkins, 2009). Other studies on outcome research for executive
coaching showed increased self-efficacy in goal-setting, more belief in self, increased ratings on
feedback from direct reports, and the ability to ask superiors for improvements (Evers, Brouwers
& Tomic, 2006; De Hann, Duckworth, Brich & Jones, 2013).
Gaps in the Literature
In this literature review, three gaps emerged; debates over the definition of engineering
leadership, the lack of research on leadership education and leadership development specifically
within the engineering profession, and the research on leadership development for women in
engineering. Although leadership is prolific in research and literature, the academic discipline of
engineering leadership is recent addition (Haghighi, Smith, Olds, Fortenbury, & Bond, 2008).
Attention to leadership remains heightened in business schools, engineering, and education;
learning leadership through executive coaching is a convergence of disciplines in research and
practice. University business education has only a decade of experience with teaching
leadership; curriculum improvements in MBA education embraced multidisciplinary
perspectives that broadened the definition of management (Mintzberg, 2004; Shoemaker, 2008).
Research on leadership and coaching is more substantive from academics in physician and
nursing education (Garcia, 2009), in psychology (De Haan & Duckworth (2012), and in women’s
leadership development (Ely, Ibarra & Kolb, 2011) provide extensive literature on the pedagogy
of leadership. New ways of teaching leadership emerged as group learning replaces individual
reflective practice and pedagogy teaches relational leadership (Cunliffe, 2009; Eriksen &
Cunliffe, 2010). Innovation in pedagogy for leadership learning suggests new possibilities for
engineering leadership. In the organizational context and in professional practice, executive
coaching emerged as a learning process for leadership development in business, government, and
health. Although it is a popular learning venue for leadership, executive coaching has
approximately five years of evidenced-based literature, and similar to the discipline of
engineering leadership in this respect. The literature review will reveal the gaps of knowledge
and provide justification for the quantitative correlational study of leadership development for
female engineers.
Summary
review of literature builds upon the current understanding within the fields of business
management, leadership, and engineering leadership. The review of historical and recent
literature will reveal the common themes that surface in leadership education. The research
methodology outlined in Chapter 3 will detail the research design, the research questions, the
data collection, a data analysis plan, and comments on the validity and reliability of this research
approach.
CHAPTER 3: METHOD
The quantitative correlational study attempts to identify the leadership capacity of women
professional engineers in the province of British Columbia (BC). The engineers will assess their
leadership using the Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI), an assessment to operationalize
leadership as practices and behavior. Secondly, the study explores the association between
leadership practices and the levels of university education, the executive coaching received, the
years of engineering practice, and the location as to urban or rural BC. The results of the research
will contribute to the curriculum development of leadership education for professional
associations, engineering firms, and institutions related to engineering practice. The research
may clarify engineering leadership in a Canadian context for women engineers who practice in
British Columbia. Chapter 3 details the methodology for this study, to explain the research
design, to restate the research questions, to describe the population of interest and the sampling
techniques. Chapter 3 includes the confidentiality and informed consent procedures followed in
doctoral research.
Research Design
In this research, quantitative correlational design methods will test existing theories of
adult learning, leadership development, and engineering leadership. Building on a
transformational leadership model, Kouzes and Posner (1987, 2011) provided the theoretical
basis for the research design. The significance of transformational leadership theory was an
acknowledgment of the developmental nature of leadership and the importance of relationships
between leaders and followers (Avolio & Bass, 1999). The five subscales in the Leadership
Practices Inventory (LPI) reflect the transformational leadership theory; see Appendix H for the
content of the LPI. The study participant assesses the frequency of the leadership practice on a
10-point Likert scale; the higher the rating chosen, the more likely the participant practices the
leadership behavior. In this study the results of the LPI will represent are the leadership
capabilities of the sample population.
A participant questionnaire will collect demographic data and information on the
university education that contributed to the leader’s development, see Appendix F for the
questionnaire. In this study, levels of university education will be measured according to
university diploma, baccalaureate, master’s degree, and doctorate. The correlation analysis
attempts to measure the association between the dependent variable of leadership practices on
the five subscales of the LPI. Independent variables in the correlation analysis represent the
number of hours of executive coaching, the university degree obtained, the number of years of
practice, and location of practice as to urban or rural British Columbia.
Appropriateness of Design
The choice of the research design is significant in a broad area of inquiry such as
leadership. This study documents the leadership of women engineers and explores sources of
learning that contributed to their leadership development. In Canada, research identified the need
for more leadership development (Heinin & Morissette, 2007); more specifically, the literature
suggests the need for women leaders in engineering and the sciences (Frehill, 2007; Koehler,
2007; Firestone, 2012). The appropriateness of research method relates to design that offers the
“best fit” to answer the research questions (Maxwell, 2005, p. 17).
Descriptive statistics of the LPI scores will detail the mean, standard deviation, and
frequency distribution for the five subscales. The correlational analyses will explore association
to levels of education, executive coaching, years of engineering practice, and the location of
practice as rural versus urban. The correlational research design allows for multiple variable
analyses that incorporate predictive design, that is, the analyses identifies predictors of leadership
practices from the educational variables considered in the study. The outcome or criterion for
success in this study is the leadership practices of the sample of women engineers.
Research Questions
research will quantify leadership according to the five subscales of the LPI (Kouzes & Posner,
2011). The research question and hypothesis testing are the following:
RQ1: Is there a significant relationship between the five subscales of the LPI and highest level of
education achieved?
H1o: There is not a significant relationship between the five subscales of the LPI and
highest level of education achieved.
H1a: There is a significant relationship between the five subscales of the LPI and highest
level of education achieved.
RQ2: Is there a statistically significant relationship between the hours of executive coaching and
the five subscales of the LPI?
H20: There is not a statistically significant relationship between the hours of executive

H2a: There are statistically significant relationships between the five subscales of the LPI and the
hours of executive coaching.
RQ3: Are there statistically significant relationships among the five subscales of the LPI?
H3o: There are not statistically significant relationships among the five subscales of the
LPI.
H3a: There are statistically significant relationships among the five subscales of the LPI.
RQ4: Are there statistically significant relationships between the five subscales of the LPI and
the location as urban or rural?
H4o: There are not statistically significant relationships between the five subscales of the
LPI and the location as urban or rural.
H4a: There are statistically significant relationships between the five subscales of the LPI
and the location as urban or rural.
RQ5: Is there a relationship between the five subscales of the LPI and the number of years in
practice?
H5o: There is not a relationship between the five subscales of the LPI and the number of
years in practice.
H5a: There is a relationship between the five subscales of the LPI and the number of ears
in practice.
Population
The population consists of women professional engineers who practice in the province of
British Columbia, Canada. The Association of Professional Engineers of British Columbia
(APEGBC) is the licensing agency for professional practice and therefore, a stable source of data
on the number of professional women engineers, which was 1322 (Personal Communication
with APEGBC, March 2013). The researcher approached APEGBC with a request to contact
women engineers on the APEGBC’s membership list by email. A letter from the Chief Operating
Officer of AEGBC became the record of permission for the researcher to contact women
member; this letter became part of the institutional review board application for the research
proposal. In this quantitative correlational research, the target population met an additional
criterion of engineering experience; participants will have 5 or more years of professional
practice, an estimate of experience level for the engineer to assume leadership roles. This
criterion narrowed the target population to 722 (Personal Communication with APEGBC, March
2013). While not a collaborative research partner, the association‘s name will be published in
the dissertation, see Appendix I for the association’s permission to publish its name.
The proposed data analyses include Spearman correlations, descriptive statistics, a
repeated measures ANOVA, a between measures MANOVA, and Pearson correlations. Sample
size for each analysis was conducted using G*Power (Heine, 2013) and the correlations require
the most stringent sample size. For a two-tailed test, using an effect size of .30, an alpha of .05,
and a power of .80, the sample size was calculated to be 82 participants. To achieve empirical
validity, a minimum sample size of 82 participants is required.
Sampling Frame
In this study, the population has the similar characteristics of gender, and license to
practice engineering in the province of British Columbia, Canada. The sampling frame is the
target population for the research study and the study sample is a subgroup that represents the
area of research interest (Creswell, 2005). The target population is women engineers, licensed in
the province of British Columbia with at least 5 years professional practice, the size of the
population was 722 women engineers (Personal Communication with APEGBC, March 2013).
Initial contact with the population will be through an email that announces the study and invites
participation, see Appendix G for the email invitation to participate. Replies to the email
invitation and all subsequent communication will take place between the researcher and the
participants.
This study will use two survey instruments to collect data: a participant questionnaire
and the Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI) for data collection. A sample criterion of five years’
experience in engineering will indicate a purposive sampling approach (Cresswell, 2006). The
researcher knows with confidence that the engineers are licensed professionals in the province,
as they are licensed by the provincial engineering association. The risk of using the non-
probabilistic approach is that the results may not be generalizable for the sample group.
Informed Consent
The research follows all criteria for privacy in British Columbia and Canada.
Communications between the participants and the researcher initially will involve the
Association of Professional Engineers of British Columbia (APEGBC). The researcher will send
an email invitation to the target population who are members of APEGBC. Subsequent contact
between participants and the researcher is direct, through email, postal, and telephone
communication. The researcher will brief study participants on the research study, provide
confidentiality protection, and follow anonymity procedures in reporting the results of the
research. Study participants will receive a letter of informed consent prior to the beginning of the
study; see Appendix C for the letter of consent between the researcher and the participant.
Confidentiality
Participants in this research receive assurance of confidentiality, as indicated on the
informed consent between the researcher and participant. Participants complete a questionnaire
to provide demographic data, information on the education and coaching that contributed to their
leadership development, see Appendix F. An identification code will replace the participant’s
name to ensure anonymity in the questionnaire and all data obtained through the questionnaire
will be coded for the quantitative correlational analysis. The research data includes a completed
Leadership Practices Inventories, notes, artifacts, consent forms, analysis, and electronic files,
retained in locked storage by the researcher for at least three years. Destruction of the research
materials takes place after three years by the most efficient method available at the time, as
determined by the researcher. The researcher will provide study participants with a signed
confidentiality statement by email and return it with an electronic signature prior to the start of
the research. See Appendix D for the confidentiality statement for this research study.
Geographic Location
The research study takes place in the province of British Columbia (BC) on the west
coast of Canada, where the researcher resides; she is a non-practicing professional engineer, and
a member of the provincial association, the Association of Professional Engineers and
Geoscientists of British Columbia (APEGBC). Study participants are members of APEGBC;
APEGBC had a membership of approximately 12,000 professional engineers in which 1322
were women, that is, 11per cent (Personal Communication with Chief Operating Officer of
APEGBC, March 2013).

Data Collection
The collection of demographic data, including the participant’s age, level of education,
coaching for leadership, years of experience, and location of engineering practice will be
collected on a participant questionnaire, see Appendix F for the specific data. The purpose of the
questionnaire is to obtain demographic data from the women engineers, including the levels of
university education and whether coaching contributed to her development as a leader. This
study categorizes university engineering education according to diploma, baccalaureate, master’s
degree, and doctorate. A second source of learning leadership is through executive coaching, a
learning process that will be tested in a research question. The study participants will be
contacted by email for the letter of intent, research confidentiality, and details of the research
schedule. For the data collection printed materials will be used; participants will receive the
demographic questionnaire and the Leadership Practices Inventory through Canada Post mail
and returned the same.
The Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI) is a psychometrically evaluated instrument that
frames the challenge of leadership as five practices, written as five subscales with six
statements for a total of 30 statements (Fields & Herold, 1997; Kouzes & Posner, 1993, 2002).
When Kouzes and Posner (2011) collected data, they asked the same question throughout the
decades of research, “What did you do when you were at your best as a leader?” (p. 2). Although
the LPI originally was designed to validate the personal best experiences of leaders, the LPI
became a development tool for leaders to view themselves and learn behaviors that improve
leadership (Kouzes & Posner, 1987, 2011). The publisher of the LPI provides two formats: the
LPI-Self, a self-assessment of leadership behavior and the LPI-Observer, a 360-degree feedback

instrument in which managers, peers, and followers or direct reports rate the frequency that a
leader demonstrates the behaviors in the five practices (Kouzes & Posner, 2003). The LPI-Self is
a self-scoring assessment with thirty statements; see Appendix H for the content of the LPI-Self.
The study participant assesses the frequency of the leadership practice on a 10-point Likert scale;
the higher the rating chosen, the more likely the participant practices the leadership behavior.
The publisher of the LPI, Jossey-Bass Inc., gave the researcher permission to use the printed
version of the Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI-Self); see Appendix D for a scanned copy of
the permission letter. Study participants will receive the printed version of the LPI-Self for data
collection in this study, herein referred to as the LPI.
Data Analysis
Data collected on the participant questionnaire and the Leadership Practices Inventory
(LPI) will be transferred into SPSS version 21.0 for Windows. Data analysis of the sample
characteristics will use descriptive statistics to determine the sample characteristics. For data on
education, area of practice, coaching received, and location, frequencies and percentages will be
presented; calculation will include the mean and standard deviation for the five subscales of the
(LPI) as well as years of experience in a professional practice.
Research Question One
To assess the first research question, analysis will determine if there is a significant
relationship between the five subscales of the LPI and highest level of education achieved, point
biserial correlations will be conducted. In this study, the appropriate analysis will utilize the point
biserial correlation to determine the extent of a relationship between two variables, when one
variable is continuous and the other variable is dichotomous. The variables of interest in the
analysis will be education and the five subscales of the LPI. One correlation will be conducted
between each level of education and each of the five subscales of the LPI. Data on the level of
education will be collected on the demographic portion of the participant questionnaire. For
purposes of the analysis data will be dummy coded and treated as dichotomous data where 1 =
inclusion in the category and 0 = non-inclusion. The levels of education will include diploma,
baccalaureate, master’s degree, doctorate, and other.
Correlation coefficients vary from - 1 to + 1, where 0 indicates no relationship, -1
indicates a perfectly negative linear relationship, and +1 indicates a perfectly positive linear
relationship. For a positive coefficient, as one variable increases, the other also increases. For
negative coefficients, as one variable increases, the other variable decreases (Pallant, 2010).
Cohen’s standard (Cohen, 1988) will be used to evaluate the coefficient to assess the strength of
the relationship between the subscales of the LPI and education. Coefficients between .10 and .
29 represent a small relationship; coefficients between .30 and .49 represent a medium
relationship; and coefficients .50 and above represent a large relationship. An alpha of .05 will be
used for analysis. Prior to analysis, the assumptions of Spearman rho correlation will be
assessed. The assumptions include that data must be at least ordinal, and scores on one variable
must be monotonically related to the other variable. The assumption will be assessed with the
examination of scatter plots (Morgan, Leech, Gloekner, & Barrett, 2007).
Research Question Two
When the goal of research is to determine the extent of the relationship between two
variables when one variable is continuous and the other variable is dichotomous. Correlations
will be conducted to assess the relationship between each of the five subscales of the LPI with
the hours of executive coaching received. The five LPI subscales will be treated as continuous
level data. The hours of executive coaching will be dummy coded for use in the analysis so that
1 = inclusion in the category and 0 = non-inclusion in the category. The hours of executive
coaching will include coaching with a professional coach for the purposes of leading a project,
organizational unit, or company.
the relationship between the subscales of the LPI and coaching received. Coefficients between .
10 and .29 represent a small relationship; coefficients between .30 and .49 represent a medium
relationship; and coefficients .50 and above represent a large relationship. An alpha of .05 will
be used for analysis. Prior to conducting the analysis, the assumptions of linearity and
homoscedasticity will be assessed. Linearity assumes a straight line relationship between the
each of the variables in the analysis and homoscedasticity assumes that residual scores are
normally distributed about the regression line. Scatterplots will be examined to address the
assumptions (Stevens, 2009)
Research Question Three
To assess research question three and determine if there are significant relationships
between the five subscales of the LPI, ten Pearson product moment correlations will be
conducted. The Pearson correlation is the appropriate analysis to determine the extent of a
relationship when both of the variables are continuous. The five LPI subscales will be correlated
among themselves; they will be considered the variables of interest. All data will be treated as
continuous level data.
the relationship between each of the subscales of the LPI. Coefficients between .10 and .29
represent a small relationship; coefficients between .30 and .49 represent a medium relationship;
and coefficients .50 and above represent a large relationship. An alpha of .05 will be used for
analysis. Prior to conducting the analysis, the assumptions of linearity and homoscedasticity will
be assessed. Linearity assumes a straight line relationship between the each of the variables in
the analysis and homoscedasticity assumes that residual scores are normally distributed about the
regression line. Scatterplots will be examined to address the assumptions (Stevens, 2009).
Research Question Four
To assess research question four and determine if there are statistically significant
relationships between the five subscales of the LPI and location as urban or rural, five point
biserial correlation will be conducted. The point biserial correlation is the appropriate analysis
when the goal of research is to determine the extent of the relationship between two variables
when one variable is continuous and the other variable is dichotomous. Five correlations will be
conducted; one to assess the relationship of each of the five LPI subscales with location. The
five LPI subscales will be treated as continuous level data. Location will be treated as
dichotomous data, where the location of practice is urban or rural within the province of British
Columbia. In this study, the urban versus rural location will attempt to approximate the
influence of location on leadership practices. The underlying assumption of location is that an
urban location offers a practicing engineer more access to leadership education.
the relationship between the subscales of the LPI and location. Coefficients between .10 and .29
represent a small relationship; coefficients between .30 and .49 represent a medium relationship;
and coefficients .50 and above represent a large relationship. An alpha of .05 will be used for
analysis. Prior to conducting the analysis, the assumptions of linearity and homoscedasticity will
be assessed. Linearity assumes a straight line relationship between the each of the variables in
the analysis and homoscedasticity assumes that residual scores are normally distributed about the
regression line. Scatterplots will be examined to address the assumptions (Stevens, 2009).
Research Question Five
To assess research question five and determine if there is a relationship between the five
subscales of the LPI and years in practice, five Pearson product moment correlations will be
conducted. A Pearson correlation is the appropriate analysis when the goal of research is to
determine the strength of the relationship between two continuous variables. The variables of
interest in the analysis will be the five subscales of the LPI and number of years in practice.
Responses for each subscale will be summed to create a total score; data will be continuous.
Participants will present numeric, open ended responses in years of practice on the demographic
questionnaire; data will be treated as continuous.
Correlation coefficients vary from - 1 to + 1, where 0 indicates no relationship and -1
relationship. For positive coefficients, as one variable increases, the other also increases. For
the relationship between the subscales of the LPI and years in practice. Coefficients between .10
and .29 represent a small relationship; coefficients between .30 and .49 represent a medium
relationship; and coefficients .50 and above represent a large relationship. The level of
significance, the alpha of .05, will be used for analysis.
Prior to analysis, the assumptions of Pearson correlation will be assessed. The
assumptions include normality, linearity, and homoscedasticity. Normality assumes the scores on
the subscales of the LPI and years of experience are normally distributed and will be assessed
with Kolmogorov Smirnov tests. Linearity assumes a straight line relationship between the
subscales of the LPI and years of experience, and homoscedasticity assumes that scores are
normally distributed about the regression line. Linearity and homoscedasticity will be assessed
by examination of scatter plots (Stevens, 2009).

Validity and Reliability
Reliability is the measure of the results of a survey instrument to report consistently over
time and for the repeated testing of an individual. An instrument with low reliability has
measurement errors that surface in the results with an assessment that does not relate to the
individual, or shows that the individual answered questions differently from one testing to
another. Reliability coefficients are the measures of the internal consistency of an instrument,
known as the reliability coefficient, or simply stated as reliabilities. Salkind (2003) indicated that
research projects have reliability coefficients in the range of 0.8 to 0.9 (p. 111). Kouzes and
Posner (2002) reported the reliability coefficients for the LPI-Self in the range from 0.75 to 0.87
(p. 6). Kouzes and Posner (ibid) claimed the variation in reliability coefficients was not
detrimental to the LPI with the justification that reliability remained consistent for demographic
variables of gender, marital status, educational levels, and countries, and without re-testing
differences (p.7-8). Posner’s (2010) data analysis supported the earlier claims of Kouzes &
Posner (2002) with respect to demographic variables. He reported that the LPI-self instrument
reached a reliability coefficient for the five subscales as follows: .84, .91, .86, .91, .86,
respectively (p. 5). In this study, the LPI-self is the survey instrument, herein referred to as the
LPI.
In this study, a reliability measure is the internal consistency of the participant’s ratings of
the 6 statements of leadership behavior that sum to form the total score for the five subscales, see
Appendix H. Cohen’s standard (Cohen, 1988) is a measure of the internal consistency reliability,
this standard statistical formula assesses the strength of the relationship between the subscales of
the LPI and years in practice. The data analysis will address other measures of reliability and
validity for reserch questions. Comparison of the reliability of the LPI will include review of
studies with similar purpose of identifying leadership capability in professional groups, such as
nursing and post-secondary teaching (Clavelle, Drunkard, Tullai-McGuinnes & Fitzpatrick,
2012; Posner, 2010). .
Another empirical measure of reliability is test-retest reliability, which measures the
sensitivity of the instrument to external factors. In fact, the less sensitive the assessment
instrument is to external factors, the higher is the instrument’s test-retest reliability. As cited in
Brown and Fields (2011), exploratory and confirmation analysis of the LPI supported the
psychometric properties of the LPI (Fields & Herold, 1997). Factors that influenced instrument
sensitivity were the time of day, weather, individual personality, political or social events, and the
activity within the participant’s organization (Kouzes & Posner, 2003). In this study, the
participants receive the printed version of the Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI) and complete
the assessment independent of the researcher, without monitoring or re-testing.
Kouzes and Posner (1987) developed the model known as the leadership challenge from
their research by asking individuals about personal-best experiences of leadership. The model
organizes the actions and behaviors of successful leaders into five groups of leadership practices.
They also developed an assessment tool, the LPI, which is an instrument for both leaders and
their followers to assess leaders. Kouzes and Posner (2002) identified face validity of the LPI as
accounting for the most validity, due to the subjective evaluation of the LPI by leaders who
participated previously in the authors’ research. The authors reported that participants identified
with the language of leadership used in the thirty statements; the language described their own or
another leader’s personal best experience; thus, it was concluded that the LPI had face validity
(p. 14). Other measures of the validity of the LPI included the statistical measure of factor
analysis to support the discriminatory validity of the LPI (Field & Herold, 1997; Carless, 2001;
Herold & Fields, 2004). Vito and Higgins (2009) used factor analysis to test the construct
validity of the LPI for use by a specific group of police managers. Vito & Higgins (ibid) found
the LPI was valid for police leadership performance, therefore a valid construct for assessing the
leadership capabilities in law enforcement agencies (p. 317).
External validity is the measure of generalizing the research conclusions to other
populations. In this study, it relates to the inferences made about the leadership development for
women engineers who will not participate in the study sample. External validity enables the
researcher to make confident statements about results of the research; that is, make inferential
statements that generalize the research results to the whole population of women engineers in
other times and places. The inferences are claims that the research results apply to different
samples in the population. The methodological steps that help to guard against threat to external
validity are the sample size, the sample location, and the sample characteristics (Waruingi, 2011).
The external validity of sample size relates to the margin of error between the sample size and
the target population. In this study, the target population is small at 772; a small population
requires a large sample size to guard against a high margin of error. The current methodology for
calculating sample size relies upon sample size calculators that are available on the Internet and
applications of the sample size formula may reduce the threat to external validity. In this study, a
sample size of 82 was the result of the sample size calculator at G*Power (Heine, 2013) with a
margin of error of .05 or 5%.
Summary
The research methods of the quantitative, correlational research provides a basis for testing ways
of learning leadership such as adult learning, experiential learning, the facilitated learning of
executive coaching, and the situated learning of engineering leadership education. The target
population is 722 professional, women engineers in British Columbia, Canada. The research
design builds upon transformational leadership theory; leadership is developmental and focused
on the relationship between the leader and followers (Avolio & Bass, 1999). Kouzes & Posner
(2003) characterized a leadership model of five leadership practices and produced an assessment
instrument, the Leadership Practices Inventory that is utilized for data collection in this research
study. The data analysis plan addresses five research questions and through correlation analysis
seeks to measure the degree of association between variables that influenced the participant’s
leadership. The chapter concludes with a discussion of reliability and validity of the research
methodology.
REFERENCES
Adams, R., Evangelou, D., Dia de Figuerrdo, A., Mousoulides, N., Pawley, A., Schifellite,
Stevens, R., Svincki, M., Trenor, J., & Wilson, D. (2011). Ten Faces of Engaging Future
Engineers. Journal of Engineering Education 100 (1), 1-41.
Ackoff, R.L. (2002). Interview by Glenn Detrick. Academy of Management Learning 1, 56-63.
Allio, R.J. (2011). Henry Mintzberg: Still the zealous skeptic and scold. STRATEGY &
LEADERSHIP 39(2), 4-8. DOI 10.1108/10878571111114419.
American Society for Engineering Education. (1955, September). The Grinter Report. Journal of
Engineering Education 25-60.
American Society for Engineering Education. (1994). The Green Report: Engineering education
for a changing world. Retrieved August 11, 2012 from http://www.asee.org/pubs2.
American Society for Engineering Education. (2012, June). Innovation with impact; creating a
culture of scholarly and systematic innovation in engineering education. Washington,
DC: American Society of Engineering Education.
APEGBC. (2010). What is a P.Eng? Association of Engineers and Geoscientists of British
Columbia. Retrieved August 10, 2012 from http://www.apeg.bc.ca/reg/peng.html
APEGBC. (2013, May). Registration & Licensing: Engineer-in-Training (EIT). Retrieved May
26, 2013 from http://www.apeg.bc.ca/reg/eit.html
APEGBC (2013, August). APEGBC Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of BC. Retrieved
August 17, 2013 from http://www.apeg.bc.ca
Avolio, B.J. (2005). Leadership Development in Balance: MADE/born. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Bandura, A. and Bussey, K. (2004). On broadening the cognitive, motivational, and
sociostructural scope of theorizing about gender development and functioning:
Psychological Bulletins 130(5), 691-701.
Barakett, J. & Cleghorn,A. (2000). A. Sociology of education: An introductory view from
Canada. (1st ed.). Toronto, ONT: Pearson Education Inc.
Bass, B.M. (1999). Two decades of research and development in transformational leadership.
European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 8(1), 9-32.
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1990). Developing transformational leadership: 1992 and beyond.
Journal of European Industrial Training, 14, 21–27.
BC Stats. (2013, January). 2012 Sub-provincial Population Estimates. Retrieved September 16,
2013 from
http://www.bcstats.gov.bc.ca/StatisticsBySubject/Demography/PopulationEstimates.aspx
Bennis, W. (1999). The end of leadership: Exemplary leadership is impossible without full
inclusion, initiatives, and cooperation of followers. ORGANIZATIONAL DYNAMICS
28(1) 71-79.
Bernard M. Gordon-MIT Engineering Leadership Program. (2011, June). Capabilities of
effective engineering leaders (Version 3.6) Retrieved from
http://web.mit.edu/gordonelp/leadershipcapabilities.pdf
Bolman, L.G. & Deal, T.E. (2003). Reframing organizations, ( 3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Bonasso, S.G. (2002,April). Twenty-first-century engineering projects – More than bricks,
mortar, and money. Leadership and Management in Engineering 2(2), 14-18.

Bordas, J. (2007). Salsa, soul, and spirit: Leadership for a multicultural age. San Francisco:
Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.
Borrego, M & Newswander, L.K. (2008, April). Characteristics of successful cross-disciplinary
engineering education collaborations. Journal of Engineering Education 97(2), 123-134.
Bower, K.M. (2012). Leadership coaching: Does it really provide value? Journal of Practical
Coaching 4(1), 1-5.
Bowles, S.V., Cunningham, C.J.I., De La Rosa, G.M. & Picana, J.J. (2007). Coaching leaders in
middle and executive management: Goals, performance, buy-in. Leadership and
Organization Development Journal 28(5), 388-408.
Boyatzis, R.E. (2008). Competencies in the 21st century. Journal of Management Development
27(1), 5-12. Retrieved November 10, 2008 from www.emerladinsight.com/0262-
1711.htm.
Brocklehurst, M., Sturdy, A., Winstanley, D., & Driver, M. (2007). Introduction: Whither the
MBA? factions, fault lines and the future. Management Learning 38(4), 379-388.
Brown, R.T. and Fields, D. (2011). Leaders engaged in self-leadership: Can followers tell the
difference? Leadership 7(3), 275-293.
Brunn, E. & Nielson, I. (2010). A model for the development of university curricula in
nanoelectronics. European Journal of Engineering Education 35(6), 655-666.
Buchner, A., Erdfelder, E. & Faul, F. (2001). G*Power 3. Retrieved February 15, 2013 from
http://www.psycho.uni-duesseldorf.de/abteilungen/aap/gpower3/
Burns, J.M. (1978). Leadership. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Calnan, J. and Levac, O. (2009, September) The Future is Now: Engineers Take the Lead.
Retrieved from http://www.engineerscanada.ca/files/w_WIEAG_Workshop_Session.pdf.
Carless, S.A. (2001). Assessing the discriminant validity of the Leadership Practices Inventory.
Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 74, 233-239.
Catalyst Inc. (2012, July). The Catalyst Pyramid: Canadian Women in Business. Retrieved from
http://www.catalyst.org/publication/198/canadian-women-in-business
Cerni, T., Curtis, G.J. & Colmar, S.H. (2010, March). Executive coaching can enhance
transformational leadership. International Coaching Psychology Review 5(1), 81-85.
Catalyst Inc. (2012, August). Women in Management in Canada. Retrieved from
http://catalyst.org/publication/247/3/women-in-management-in-canada
Clavelle, J.T., Drenkard, K., Tullai-McGuinness, S., & Fitzpatrick, J.J. (2012). Transformational
leadership practices of Chief Nursing Officers in Magnet® organizations. The Journal of
Nursing Administration 42(4), 195-201.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). St. Paul, MN:
West Publishing Company.
Cramer, D. (1998). Fundamental statistics for social research: Step by step calculations and
computer techniques using SPSS for Window. New York, NY: Routledge.
Cresswell, J.W. (2006). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative
research (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Crumpton-Young, L., McCauley-Bush, P., Rabelo, L., Meza, K., Ferreras, A., Rodriguez, B.,
Milan, A., Miranda, D. & Kelarestani, M. (2010). Engineering leadership development

programs: A look at what is needed and what is being done. Journal of STEM Education
11 (3&4), 10-21.
Cunliffe, A.L. (2008). Orientations to social constructivism: Relationally responsive social
constructionist and it implications for knowledge and learning. Management Learning,
39(2), 123-139.
Cunliffe, A.L. (2009). The philosopher leader: On relationalism, ethics and reflexivity – A
critical perspective to teaching leadership. Management Learning 40(1), 87-101.
Datar, S.M., Garvin, D.A., & Cullen, P.G. (2010). Rethinking the MBA: Business education at
the crossroads. Boston, MASS: Harvard Business Press.
De Haan, E., Bertie, C., Day, A., & Sills, C. (2010). Clients’ critical moments of coaching:
Toward a “Client Model” of executive coaching. Academy of Management Learning &
Education 9(4), 607-621.
De Haan, E. & Duckworth, A. (2012, March). Signaling a new trend in executive coaching out
research. International Coaching Psychology Review 8(1) 6-19.
De Haan, E., Duckworth, A, Birch, D. & Jones, C. (2013). Executive coaching outcome resrecah:
The predictive value of common factors such as relationship, personality mach and self-
efficacy. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research (In Press).
Dehass, J. (2011, September). The home advantage. Maclean's. 124 (3), 600249262.Retrieved
from http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.apollolibrary.com/ehost/detail?
vid=10&hid=11&sid=9d864ad8-6de6-468f-bf7f-302977f1fbac
%40sessionmgr4&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d
%3d#db=f5h&AN=66360054
Dunn, K. (2009). The Case for Leadership Skills courses in the Engineering Curriculum. In 2009
ASEE Midwest Section Conference Proceedings Conference. Retrieved from
http://www.asee.org/documents/sections/midwest/2009/Dunn-98.pdf
Duygulu, S. & Kublay, G. (2010, September). Original research: Transformational leadership
training programme for charge nurses. Journal of Advanced Nursing 67(3), 633-642.
Dinpolfo, S., Silva, C. & Carter, N.M. (2012). High potentials in the pipeline: leaders pay it
forward. New York, NY: CATALYST.
Ducoffe, S.J. Tromley, C.L. & Tucker, M. (2006). Interdisciplinary, team-taught, undergraduate
business courses: The impact of integration. Journal of Management Education, 30, 276-
295.
Ely, R.J. & Rhode, D.L. (2010). Women and leadership: Defining the challenges. In Handbook
of Leadership Theory and Practice: A Harvard Business School Centennial Colloquium.
Boston, MASS: Harvard Business Press.
Eriksen, M. & Cunliffe, A. (2010). Response to Jeffrey McClellan: Relational Leadership.
Complicity: An International Journal of Complexity and Education 7(2), 97-100.
Fan, M. (2010, May). Systema and leadership: One tool to enhance foundational leadership
competencies developed. Engineering Leadership Review 1(1). 45-56.
Farr, J.V. and Brazil, D.M. (2009, March). Leadership skills development for engineers.
Engineering Management Journal 21(1), 3-8.
Farr, J.V., Walesh, S.G. and Forsythe, G.B. (1997). Leadership development for engineering
managers. Journal of Management Engineering 13(4), 38-41.

Field, D.L. & Herold, D.M. (1997). Using the Leadership Practices Inventory to measure
transformational and transactional leadership. Educational and Psychological
Measurement 57, 569-579.
Firestone, B.L. (2012). Engineers perceptions of diversity and the learning environment at work:
A mixed methods study. ProQuest UMI 3521181.
Fishbien, J. & Chan, A.D.C. (2010). Global engineering begins at home: A response to Kobelak.
The Journal of Public Engagement 2(1), 7-8. Retrieved June 18, 2011 from
http://www.sce.carleton.ca/faculty/chan/publications.shtml.
Foust-Cumming, H., Sabattini, L. & Carter, N. (2008, February). Women in Technology:
maximizing talent, Minimizing Barriers. New York: catalyst Publication. Retrieved from
http://www.catalyst.org/knowledge/women-technology-maximizing-talent-minimizing-
barriers
Frehill, L.M. (2007). What do women do with engineering degrees? Proceedings of the WEPAN
2007 Conference. Retrieved July 5, 2008, from
http://www2.tech.purdue.edu/cpt/courses/CIT581HRI/Announcements/WEPAN2007Wha
tDoWomenDoWithEngrDegrees.pdf
Friedman, M.I., Harwell, D.H., & Schnepel, K.C. (2006). Effective instruction: A handbook of
evidence-based strategies. Columbia, SC: The Institute for Evidence-based Decision-
making in Education, Inc.
Garcia, E. J. (2009). MBA lecturers’ curriculum interests in leadership. Management Learning,
41(1), 21-36.
Garcia, E.J. (2009). Raising leadership criticality in MBAs. Higher Education, 58, 113-130.
Gardiner, J. J., & Walker, E. L. (2009). Transcendent leadership: Theory and practice of an
emergent metaphor. International Journal of Servant Leadership 5(1), 243-267.
Gatta, M. & McKay, D. (2003). Engineering their future: The educational and workplace
experiences of female engineers. Report prepared for the New Jersey Council on Gender
Parity in Labor and Education. Retrieved from
http://www.njstatelib.org/digit/w872/w8722003.pdf
Gerzon, M. (2006). Leading through conflict: How successful leaders transform differences into
opportunities. Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing.
Golemen, D., Boyatzis, R. & McKee, A. (2002). Primal leadership: Learning to lead with
emotional intelligence. Boston, Mass: Harvard Business School Press.
Goldberg, D.E. (1996). Change in engineering education: One myth, two scenarios, and three
foci. Journal of Engineering Education 85(2), 107-116.
Graham, R., Crawley, E. and Mendelsohn, B.F. (2009). Engineering leadership education: A
snapshot review of international good practice. Retrieved from
http://web.mit.edu/gordonelp/elewhitepaper.pdf
Gray, D.E. (2007). Facilitating management learning: Developing critical reflection through
reflective tools. Management Learning 38(5), 495-517.
Gredler, M. 2005. Learning and instruction: Theory into practice. (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River,
NY: Pearson Education.
Griffiths, K. & Campbell, M. (2009, August). Discovering, applying and integrating: The process
of learning in coaching. International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching 7(2), 16-30.

Haghighi, K., Smith, K.A., Olds, B.M., Fortenberry, N., Bond, S. The time is now: Are we ready
for our role. Journal of Engineering Education 97 (2), 119-122.
Hannum, K.N., Martineau, J.W. & Reinalt, C. (2007). The handbook of leadership development
evaluation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Harvard Business Essentials. (2004). Coaching and Mentoring: How to develop top talent and
achieve stronger performance. Boston MA: Harvard Business Press.
Henein, A., & Morissette, F. (2007). Made in Canada Leadership. Mississauga, ONT: John
Wiley & Sons Canada, Ltd.
Heine, H. (2013). G*Power 3. Retrieved May 26, 2013 from http://www.psycho.uni-
duesseldorf.de/abteilungen/aap/gpower3/
Herbst, T.H.H. & Conradie, P.D.P. (2011). Leadership effectiveness in higher education:
Managerial self-perceptions versus perceptions of others. South African Journal of
Industrial Psychology 37(1), 1-14.
Jandaghi, G., Matin, H.Z., & Farjami,A. (2009). Comparing transformational leadership in
successful and unsuccessful companies. International Journal of Social Sciences, 4(3),
211-216
Joo, Sushko & McLean (2012) Multiple faces of coaching: Manager-as-coach, Executive
Coaching, and Formal Mentoring. Organization Development Journal 30(1), 19-38.
Jorgenson, J. (2002). Engineering selves negotiating identity in technical work. Management
Communications Quarterly 15(3), 350-380.
Kaagan, S.S. (1999). Experiential learning for organizational development. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Kaesuk Yoon, C. (2010, January). Luminous 3-D Jungle Is a Biologist’s Dream. New York Times.
Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/
Karelaia, N. & Guillen, L. (2012). Me, a woman and a leader: Antecedents and consequences of
the identity conflict of women leaders. Retrieved February 15, 2013 from
http://faculty.insead.edu/natalia-karelaia/research
Kemp, T.J. (2009). Is coaching an evolved form of leadership? Building a transdisciplinary
framework for exploring the coaching alliance. International Coaching Psychology
Review 4(1), 105-110.
Kolb, D.A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the source of learning and
development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Kouzes, J.M., & Posner, B.Z. (1987). The leadership challenge (1st ed.). San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Kouzes, J.M., & Posner, B.Z. (1993). Psychometric properties of the leadership practices
inventory updated. Educational and Psychological Measurement 53, 191-199.
Kouzes J.M. & Posner B.Z. (2002). Appendix0512BP. In The Leadership Practices Inventory:
Theory and Evidence Behind the Five Practices of Exemplary Leaders. Retrieved
February 19, 2013, 2012 from
http://www.leadershipchallenge.com/UserFiles/lc_jb_appendix.pdf
Kouzes, J.M., & Posner, B.Z. (2003). Leadership Practices Inventory: Facilitator’s Guide.
(Third edition revised). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.
Kouzes, J.M., & Posner, B.Z. (2011). The Leadership Challenge (5th ed.). SanFrancisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Kouzes, J.M., & Posner, B.Z. (2011). Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI) New Norms
November, 20121. Retrieved March 6, 2013 from
http://www.leadershipchallenge.com/Research-section-Our-Authors-Research-
Detail/leadership-practices-inventory-lpi-new-norms-november-2011.aspx
Kuruganti, U., Needham, T., & Zundel, P. (2012). Patterns and rates of learning in two problem-
based learning courses using outcome based assessment and elaboration theory. The
Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
http://dx.doi.org/10.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2012.1.4
Lamancusa, J.S., Zayas, J.L., Soyster, A.L., Morell, L. & Jorgensen. (2008). The learning
factory: Industry-partnered active learning. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(1), 5-
12.
Leech, N. L., Barrett, K. C., & Morgan, G.A. (2008). SPSS for intermediate statistics: Use and
interpretation (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Leshchyshyn, J. (2010, September). Re-thinking our streets symposium; Engaging engineers in
dialogue to define public policy. Retrieved
http://members.peo.on.ca/index.cfm/ci_id/47751.htm
Leornard, H.S. (2003). Leadership development for the postindustrial information age
Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research 55(1), 3-14.
Lord, R. & Hall, R. (2005). Identity, deep structure and the development of leadership skill.
Leadership Quarterly 16, 591-615.
MaCorr Research Solutions Online. (2013). Sample Size Calculator. Retrieved March 6, 2013
from http://www.macorr.com/sample-size-calculator.htm
Mintzberg, H. (2004). Managers not MBAs. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers Inc.
Mintzberg, H. (2005). The magic number seven-plus or minus a couple of managers. Academy of
Management Learning and Education 4, 244-247.
Mintzberg, H. & Gosling, J. (2002). Educating managers beyond borders. Academy of
Management Learning and Education 1, 64-76.
Monaghan, C.H., & Cervero, R.M. (2006). Impact of critical management studies courses on
learner’s attitudes and beliefs. Human Resource Development International 9(3), 379-
396.
Morgan, G. (2006). Images of organizations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications,
Inc.
Morgan, G.A., Leech, N. L., Gloekner, G. W. & Barrett, K. C. (2007). SPSS for introductory
statistics: Use and interpretation (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
Publishers.
Moss Kanter, R. (1997). When Giants Learn to Dance. London: International Thomson Business
Press.
Mulligan-Ferry, E., Soares, R., Combopiano, J., Cullen, J. & Riker, L. (2011). 2010 Catalyst
census: FINANCIAL POST 500 women senior officers and top earners. Ottawa, ONT:
Catalyst, Inc. Retrieved from http://www.catalyst.org/publication/467/11/2010-catalyst-
census-financial-post-500-women-senior-officers-and-top-earners
Neuman, W.L. (2003). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, Fifth
Edition. Boston, Mass: Pearson Education, Inc.
Pallant, J. (2010). SPSS Survival Manual (4th ed.). New York, New York: McGraw-Hill.
Perkins, R.D. (2009). How executive coaching can change leader behavior and improve meeting
effectiveness: An exploratory study. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and
Research 61(4), 293-318.
Thach, E.C. (2002). The impact of executive coaching and 360 degree feedback on leadership
effectiveness. Leadership and organization Development Journal 23, 205-214.
Levenson, A. (2009). Measuring and maximizing the business impact of executive coaching.
Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research 61(4), 103-121.
National Academy of Sciences. (2011). The Future of Nursing: Leading Change, Advancing
Health. Retrieved August 2, 2013 from http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?
record_id=12956 .
Pfeffer, J. & Fong, C.T. (2004). The Business School ‘Business’: Some lessons from US
experience. Journal of Management Studies 41(8), 1501-1520.
Posner, B. (2010). Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI) data analysis, September 2010.
Retrieved February 13, 2013 from
http://media.wiley.com/assets/2260/07/LPIDataAnalysisSept2010.pdf
Porter-O’Grady T. (20090. Creating a context for excellence and innovation: Comparing chief
nurse executive leadership practices in Magnet and non-Magnet hospitals. Nursing
Administration Quarterly 33(3), 198-204.
Pugh, A.G., Fillingim, J.G., Blackborn, J.M. & Thomas, C. (2011-2012). Faculty validation of
the Leadership Practices Inventory with secondary school principals. National Forum of
educational Administration and Supervision Journal 28(3), 4-11.

Reeve, D. (2010). There is an urgent need for engineering leadership education. Engineering
Leadership Review 1(1), 1-6. Retrieved December 28, 2010 from
http://lot.utoronto.ca/elr.
Rousseau, D.M. & McCarthy, S. (2007). Educating managers from an evidence-based
perspective. Academy of Management Learning & Education 6(1), 84-101.
Reyes, E. & Galvez, J.C. (2011, January). Introduction of innovations into the traditional
teaching of construction and building materials. Journal of Professional Issues in
Engineering Education and Practice 28-37.
Salkind, N.J. (2003). Exploring Research (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.
Schoemaker, P.J.H. (2008). The future challenges of business: Rethinking management
education. California Management Review, 50(3), 119-139.
Schon, D.A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York,
NY: Basic Books, Inc.
Schuhmann, R.J. (2010). Engineering leadership education: The search for definition and a
curricular approach. Journal of STEM Education 11(3&4), 61-69.
Schunk, D. H. (2004). Learning theories: An educational perspective (3rd ed). Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Merrill
Senge, P.M., Kleiner, A., Roberts, C., Ross, R.B. & Smith, B.J. (1994). The Fifth Discipline
Fieldbook: Strategies and tools for building a learning organization. New York, NY:
Currency Doubleday.
Sinclair, A. & Hintz, P. (2007). Developing managers: Re-examining Ten Myths about MBAs
and Managers. Journal of Management Development 10(7), 53-65.

Sloan, J. (2007). Learning to think strategically. Boston, MASS; Butterworth-Heinemann.
Stevens, J. P. (2009). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (5th ed.). Mahwah,
NJ: Routledge Academic.
Tan, Oong-Seng. (2006, August) Development of a thinking programme for engineering
students. Innovations in Education and Teaching International 43(3), 245-259.
Thomas, H. & Carnall, C. (2008). Leadership development: Integration in context. Strategic
Change 17, 193-206. DOI: 10.1002/jsc.826
Thursfield, D. (2008). Managers’ learning in a UK local authority: The political context of an in-
house MBA. Management Learning 39(3), 295-309.
Touchie, M., Pressnail, K.D., Beheshti, A., & Tzekova, E. (2010, May). A Promise to Future
Generations. Engineering Leadership Review 1(1), 7-13.
Tourangeau, A.E. & McGilton, K. (2004). Measuring leadership practices of nurses using the
leadership practices inventory. Nursing Research 53(3), 182-189.
Turesky, E.F. & Gallagher, D. (2011, June). Know thyself: Coaching for leadership using Kolb’s
experiential learning theory. The Coaching Psychologist 7(1), 5-14
Urdan, T.C. (2010). Statistics in plain English (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis Group.
Vella, J. (2008). On Teaching and learning: Putting the principles and practices of dialogue
education into action. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Vito, G.F. & Higgins, G.E. (2010). Examining the validity of The Leadership Challenge
inventory: The case for law enforcement. International Journal of Police Science &
Management 12(3), 305-319.

Waruingi, M. (2011). Dr. Mac! Dissertation Mentoring Handbook—Book 1: strategies for
Quantitative Research. Ustawi Research Institute, Kenya: The Journal of Global Health
Care Systems.
Wofram, H.J. & Mohr, G. (2009). Transformational leadership, team goal fulfillment, and
follower work satisfaction: The moderating effects of deep-level similarity in leadership
dyads. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 15(3), 260-274.

APPENDICES
Appendix A: Theoretical Frame Work

Appendix B: Table 1: Summary of Literature Reviewed by Search Topic
Search Peer-Reviewed Books and WebPages Total
Topics Articles Dissertations

Engineering 21 4 25
Leadership 36 6 42
Women 2 6 8
Engineers
Management 15 8 23
Research 2 11 1 15
Learning and 11 5 15
Curriculum
Development
TOTALS 87 30 11 128
Appendix C: Informed Consent Participants 18 Years of Age and Older
INFORMED CONSENT: PARTICIPANTS 18 YEARS OF AGE AND OLDER
Dear study participant,
My name is Phyllis MacIntyre and I am a student at the University of Phoenix working on an

EDD degree. I am doing a research study entitled A Quantitative Correlational Research
Study of Leadership Development for Women Engineers. The purpose of the quantitative
correlational study is to profile the leadership of women engineers practicing in the province of
British Columbia in terms of leadership practices and to examine the association between their
leadership practices and level of education, years of engineering practice, and location of
practice in terms of rural versus urban settings. The population for the research is women
engineers licensed by the Association of Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia
(APEGBC) with at least 5 years of experience. Data collection will utilize a demographic
questionnaire and the leadership assessment known as the Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI).
Your participation will involve completing the Leadership Practices Inventory, which will be
mailed to you and returned to the researcher by Canada Post. For the purposes of this research,
the results of your individual assessment remains confidential as only aggregated data from the
LPI will be used to describe a leadership profile for the population. After the researcher
completes the dissertation, she will debrief you on the results of the LPI assessment.
The results of the research study may be published but your identity will remain confidential and
your name will not be made known to any outside party. In this research, there are no foreseeable
risks to you. The benefits to you are learning about your leadership style and contributing to the
research on leadership development for female engineers. If you have any questions about the
research study, please call me at 778 227 8099 or 604 648 4490 and for email at
pmacinty@fdu.edu. For questions about your rights as a study participant, or any concerns or
complaints, please contact the University of Phoenix Institutional Review Board via email at
IRB@phoenix.edu.
As a participant in this study, you should understand the following:

1. You may decide not to be part of this study or you may want to withdraw from the study
at any time. If you want to withdraw, you can do so without any problems.
2. Your identity will be kept confidential.
3. Phyllis MacIntyre, the researcher, has fully explained the nature of the research study
and has answered all of your questions and concerns.
4. The researcher will develop a way to code the data to assure that your name is protected.
5. Data will be kept in a secure and locked area. The data will be kept for three years by
Fairleigh Dickenson University in Vancouver and then destroyed.
6. The results of this study may be published.
“By signing this form, you agree that you understand the nature of the study, the possible risks to
you as a participant, and how your identity will be kept confidential. When you sign this form,
this means that you are 18 years old or older and that you give your permission to volunteer as a
participant in the study that is described here.”
( ) I accept the above terms. ( ) I do not accept the above terms. (CHECK
ONE)
Signature of the participant ____________________________________ Date _____________
Signature of the researcher /e/ Phyllis MacIntyre Date: May 27, 2013_
Appendix D: Confidentiality State

Appendix E: Permission Letter from the Publisher.
August 17, 2012
Phyllis MacIntyre
842 Cambie Street
Vancouver, BC V6B 2P6
Dear Ms. MacIntyre:
Thank you for your request to use the Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI) in your dissertation.
We are willing to allow you to reproduce the instrument in written form, as outlined in your
request, at no charge. If you prefer to use our electronic distribution of the LPI (vs. making
copies of the print materials) you will need to separately contact Lisa Shannon
(lshannon@wiley.com) directly for instructions and payment. Permission to use either the
written or electronic versions requires the following agreement:
(1) That the LPI is used only for research purposes and is not sold or used in conjunction
with any compensated management development activities;
(2) That copyright of the LPI, or any derivation of the instrument, is retained by Kouzes
Posner International, and that the following copyright statement is included on all copies
of the instrument; "Copyright  2003 James M. Kouzes and Barry Z. Posner. All rights
reserved. Used with permission",
(3) That one (1) electronic copy of your dissertation and one (1) copy of all papers,
reports, articles, and the like which make use of the LPI data be sent promptly to our
attention; and,
(4) That you agree to allow us to include an abstract of your study and any other
published papers utilizing the LPI on our various websites.
If the terms outlined above are acceptable, would you indicate so by signing one (1) copy of this
letter and returning it to me either via email or by post to; 1548 Camino Monde San Jose, CA
95125. Best wishes for every success with your research project.
Cordially,
Ellen Peterson
Permissions Editor
Epeterson4@gmail.com
I understand and agree to abide by these conditions:
(Signed)___________________________________________Date: ________________
Expected Date of Completion is: _____________________________________

Appendix F: Participant Questionnaire
Coding Please insert  for
your response
Name
Address in British Columbia
What area of engineering practice?

Biomedical
Chemical
Civil
Computer Science and Software
Electrical and Telecommunications
Environmental
Industrial
Mechanical and Manufacturing
Mining
Petroleum
Photovoltaic and Renewable Energy
Surveying and Geospatial
Other: specify below
How many years have you been in professional practice __________ years
What level of university education do you have?
Diploma
Baccalaureate
Master’s degree
Doctorate
Other : specify below
Have you had executive coaching? Yes No
If YES, what is the total number of hours of executive coaching?
Executive Coaching is a learning process for leaders;
a professional coach provides a framework for the leader
to develop and practice the behavior and actions of a leader;

Coding Please insert  for
your response
the structure is a conversational and the learning involves the
cognitive and affective domains.

Appendix G: Email Invitation to Participant
Dear _________,
From time to time APEGBC receives requests to assist in connecting researchers to specific
groups of members. When appropriate and aligned with its mandate, APEGBC will provide this
assistance by sending an email on behalf of the researcher. At no time does APEGBC provide
your personal information (name, contact information, etc.) to the researcher. APEGBC is not
affiliated with this research. Your participation in the research study is optional. Please see below
for information about the study.
The Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia (APEGBC)
sent this request for your participation in the resrecah study on my behalf. I am a member of
APEGBC, a lecturer, and a doctoral student who asked for APEGBC’s assistance in a research
study. This email is a request for your participation in the research study. The email was sent to
women engineers in BC with more than 5 years’ experience in professional practice. As an
engineer you lead others, in teams, in projects, in your company, or in other organizational
contexts. I am curious to find out what helps female engineers become leaders. In this research, I
will collect data with the use of two instruments, a questionnaire and a leadership assessment
tool known as the Leadership Practices Inventory. My aim is to quantify the different types of
education that contributed to your growth as a leader, with a view to specifying a program of
leadership education for professional women engineers. This research is the final step in a
doctorate in educational leadership in which the concentration is in curriculum development and
instructional design. I study with the School of Advanced Studies at the University of Phoenix in
Arizona.
Here is how the research study will proceed with the researcher doing the following:
 Identified a study population of female engineers in engineering practice.
 Contacted the study population through an email from the researcher sent via APEGBC.
 Interested participants contact the researcher by email or phone.
 The researcher sends the participant a package by Canada Post that includes: (a) a
participant questionnaire for demographic data, (b) the Leadership Practices Inventory,
the research instrument for describing leadership capacity of the study population, (c) a
confidentiality statement, (d) a letter of informed consent, (e) two envelopes with
postage for the participant to return the signed letter of consent and the completed
Leadership Practices Inventory.
 Engineers who wish to participate will contact the researcher.
 After collecting the data, the researcher completes the data analysis and submits the
dissertation.
 The researcher meets with participants individually or in groups to debrief the results of
their Leadership Practices Inventory.
Thank you for taking the time to review this email. Please contact me if you wish to participate
in this research study, which should begin in late March 2013. I appreciate your interest and
participation in my research. I look forward to working with you during the coming weeks. I can
be reached at pmacintyre@telus.net and 778 227 8099.
Sincerely,
Phyllis MacIntyre, P. Eng, MBA, CHRP

Appendix H: Leadership Behaviors Organized by Practice
Kouzes and Posner (2003) developed the Leadership Practices Inventory to operationalize their
leadership model. Below are the thirty statements of leadership behvaior that leaders use to
assess their capability.
Model the Way
1. I set a personal example of what I expect of others.
6. I spend time and energy making certain that the people I work with adhere to the
principles and standards we agreed on.
11. I follow through on the promises and commitments that I make.
16. I ask for feedback on how my actions affect other people’s performance.
21. I build consensus around a common set of values for running the organization.
26. I am clear about my philosophy of leadership.
Inspire a Shared Vision
2. I talk about future trends that will influence how our work gets done.
7. I describe a compelling image of what our future could look like.
12. I appeal to others to share an exciting dream of the future.
17. I show others how their long-term interests can be realized by enlisting in a common
vision.
22. I paint the “big picture” of what we aspire to accomplish.
27. I speak with genuine conviction about the higher meaning and purpose of our work.
Challenge the Process
3. I seek out challenging opportunities that test my own skills and abilities.
8. I challenge people to try out new and innovative ways to do their work.
13. I search outside the formal boundaries of my organization for innovative ways to
improve what we do.
18. I ask “What can we learn?” when things don’t go as expected.
23. I make certain that we set achievable goals, make concrete plans, and establish
measurable milestones for projects and programs that we work on.
28. I experiment and take risks, even when there is a chance of failure.
Enable Others to Act
4. I develop cooperative relationships among the people I work with.
9. I actively listen to diverse points of view.
14. I treat others with dignity and respect.
19. I support the decisions that people make on their own.
24. I give people a great deal of freedom and choice in deciding how to do their work.
29. I ensure that people grow in their jobs by learning new skills and developing
themselves.
Encourage the Heart
5. I praise people for a job well done.
10. I make it a point to let people know about my confidence in their abilities.
15. I make sure that people are creatively rewarded for their contributions to the success
of our projects.
20. I publicly recognize people who exemplify commitment to shared values.
25. I find ways to celebrate accomplishments.

30. I give the members of the team lots of appreciation and support for their
contributions. (p. 11-12)

Appendix I: Premises, Recruitment, and Name (prn) Use Permission
PREMISES, RECRUITMENT AND NAME (PRN) USE PERMISSION

Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia
Name of Facility, Organization, University, Institution, or Association
Please complete the following by check marking any permissions listed here that you approve,
and please provide your signature, title, date, and organizational information below. If you have
any questions or concerns about this research study, please contact the University of Phoenix
Institutional Review Board via email at IRB@phoenix.edu.
I hereby authorize , a student of University of Phoenix, to use the premises (facility
identified below) to conduct a study entitled (insert title of research study or a brief description of
research study)
I hereby authorize , a student of University of Phoenix, to recruit subjects for

participation in a conduct a study entitled (insert title of research study or a brief description of
research study).
 I hereby authorize Phyllis MacIntyre, a student of University of Phoenix, to use the

name of the facility, organization, university, institution, or association identified above when
publishing results from the study entitled (A Quantitative Correlational Research Study of
Leadership Development ).
_____/e/ Janet Sinclair_____________ 24/05/13
Signature Date
Janet Sinclair
Chief Operating Officer
Association of Professional Engineers & Geoscientists of BC
200-4010 Regent Street, Burnaby, BC V5C 6N2
Direct: 604-412-4874 / Toll Free: 1-888-430-8035 ext. 4874
Fax: 604-430-8085 http://www.apeg.bc.ca"

PMacIntyre Thesis Ch1 2 3 Jan2014

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

PMacIntyre Thesis Ch1 2 3 Jan2014

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Running Header: A QUANTITATIVE CORRELATIONAL RESEARCH 1

A Quantitative Correlational Research Study of Leadership Development

For Women Engineers

Background to the Problem 7

Statement of the Problem 12

Purpose of the Study 14

Significance of the Study 14

Significance of the Study to Leadership 15

Nature of the Study 16

CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 30

Engineering Leadership Education 37

Elements of Learning Leadership 40

Gaps in the Literature 46

Research Question One 57

Research Question Two 58

Research Question Three 59

Research Question Four 60

Research Question Five 61

Validity and Reliability 63

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Appendix A: Theoretical Framework 84

Appendix B: Table 1 Summary of Literature Reviewed by Search Topic 85

Appendix C: Informed Consent: Participants 18 years of age or older 86

Appendix D: Confidentiality Statement 88

Appendix E: Permission Letter from the Publisher 88

Appendix F: Participant Questionnaire 91

Appendix G: Email Invitation to Participants 93

Appendix H: Leadership Behaviors Organized by Leadership Practice 95

Appendix I: Premises, Recruitment and Name USE Permission 98

provide more leadership education to support professionals in their leadership development;

(2010), leadership development is the combination of experiential learning with program

leadership (Henein & Morissette, 2006). Crumpton-Young, McCauley-Bush, Rabelo, Meza,

creating, designing, developing, implementing, and evaluating products, systems, or services”

development in undergraduate programs (Crumpton-Young, McCauley-Bush, Rabelo, Meza,

that advances their leadership in professional practice.

Background to the Problem

leadership development as follows:

A postmodern approach to leadership is necessary situationally based. The

implication for leadership development programming is that it is important to include

This postmodernist approach supports the developmental nature of leadership as a process of

represented a significant advancement in leadership education, as individual learning combined

dialogue in leadership development programs that are a combination of in-house training,

executive coaching, continuing education, and university executive management programs

(Hannum, Martineau & Reinelt, 2007; Sloan, 2006).

change perceptions of their public role.

engineering practice required additional skills in cultural diversity, cross-disciplinary teamwork,

organizations, structural changes facilitated an individual’s adaptation to the cross-disciplinary

women to advance through developmental assignments and to strengthen cross-disciplinary

action (Foust-Cumming, Sabatini & Carter, 2008).

through a combination of training, experience, and career growth. University educators

offered a minor in engineering leadership development in the undergraduate degree. Schuhmann

curriculum objectives included the addition of skill development in communication, project

planning, management, organizational leadership, economics, and marketing. Learning outcomes

addressed technology management, shared leadership in teamwork, creativity, innovation, and

the curriculum (p. 68).

Crumpton-Young, McCauley-Bush, Rabelo, Meza, Ferreras, Rodriguez, Milan, Miranda,

engineers and technical personnel responsible for creating, designing, developing ,

surveys of engineering students and of professional engineers to document their awareness of

(ibid). In the leadership development programs offered by university engineering departments,

engineering in the global business context.

Reyes and Galvez (2011) provided an example of increasing complexity in engineering

complexities of engineering practice. The authors encouraged additional engineering education

in the following: divergent thinking and inquiry of multiple perspectives, recognition of