360° Leadership Analytics Assessment for Chairs Report

Daly, Monroe

Chair, English at IDEA University
2014

Purpose

The purpose of this report is to address two important leadership questions:

  1. How effective am I perceived to be?
  2. What might I do to improve?

Overall Ratings

Your overall ratings of effectiveness regarding your leadership abilities are reflected in faculty responses to the following two summary judgment statements:

  • "I have confidence in the chair's ability to provide future leadership to the department"
  • "Overall, this chair has provided excellent leadership"

There are two critical pieces of information on this page.

  1. The response rate as determined by the number of respondents divided by the number of individuals who were asked to complete the survey.

    While the report yields important information even if there is a low number of respondents, as in a small department, there is greater confidence in the representativeness and reliability of the data when the response rate is high (exceeds 65% of those asked to respond) and at least 10 individuals respond to the survey.

  2. The percent of respondents who rated you positively (agreed or strongly agreed) on each of the two summary judgement statements.

    To delve deeper into these ratings and to obtain further insight on strengths to be retained as well as suggestions for further personal and professional development, proceed to the Responsibilities, Administrative Characteristics and Insights on Improvement sections.


Overall Ratings of Effectiveness

Your overall ratings of effectiveness regarding your leadership are reflected in faculty responses to the following two statements:

Response Rate is 35.29% (17 individuals asked, 6 responded)

  Agreed or Strongly Agreed Disagreed or Strongly Disagreed
I have confidence in the chair's ability to provide future leadership to the department 66% 0%
Overall, this chair has provided excellent leadership 66% 0%

Responsibilities

Legend
Priority
High Priority ***
Moderate Priority **
Low Priority *
 
Faculty Rating
70% or higher
50 - 69%
< 50%

Responsibilities

The table below describes responsibilities associated with the role of the department chair and you rated these low, moderate, or high priority.

Scale for targeted development based on percent of faculty who gave you a positive rating (“Good” or “Outstanding”)

Through our research 21 responsibilities have been identified that are relevant to the role of the Chair. You were given the opportunity to prioritize these responsibilities as they relate to your specific role and duties as Chair. Here you will find each of the responsibilities, the percent of faculty who gave you a positive rating (4 or 5), and the priority level that you assigned to each responsibility. If you did not assign a priority level to a responsibility, the report defaults to low priority.

Responsibility Faculty Rating Priority
1 Attending to essential administrative tasks (e.g., class scheduling, staffing, finances/budgeting, facilities) 66%
2 Fostering good teaching in the department (e.g., encourages course updating, use of appropriate technology, attending to student feedback) 83%
3 Assisting in securing funding from external sources (e.g., grants, contracts, gifts, partnerships) 66%
4 Leading in establishing and monitoring progress on annual or biannual department goals 50%
5 Guiding the development of sound procedures for assessing faculty performance 83%
6 Facilitating successful recruitment and selection of promising faculty 66%
7 Communicating the department's needs (e.g., personnel, space, monetary, technology) to the dean and other appropriate administrators 83%
8 Developing collegiality/cooperation among faculty members 66%
9 Stimulating research, scholarly activity, and/or creative endeavors in the department 83%
10 Guiding the development of a sound long-range plan to carry out departmental programs 83%
11 Promoting a positive image of the department within the campus community 83%
12 Fostering the development of each faculty member's special talents or interests 50%
13 Ensuring that new faculty and staff are acquainted with departmental procedures, priorities, and expectations 50%
14 Clearly communicating expectations of the campus administration to the faculty 83%
15 Stimulating or rejuvenating faculty vitality/enthusiasm 66%
16 Facilitating curriculum development 50%
17 Establishing trust between himself/herself and members of the faculty 83%
18 Promoting a positive image of the department to off-campus constituencies 66%
19 Rewarding faculty in accordance with their contributions to the department 83%
20 Ensuring the assessment of student learning outcomes is meaningful and ongoing 66%
21 Actively supporting student recruitment and retention efforts 83%

Personal Characteristics and Administrative Methods

Legend
Self Rating
Definite Strength ++
More Strength Than Weakness +
In Between 0
More Weakness than Strength -
Definite Weakness --
 
Faculty Rating
70% or higher
50 - 69%
< 50%

Personal Characteristics and Administrative Methods

The table below lists personal characteristics and administrative methods that are most highly related to successful accomplishment of chair responsibilities and you self-rated these on a five point scale: ++ Definite Strength; + More Strength than Weakness; 0 In Between; - More Weakness than Strength; or -- Definite Weakness

Scale for Targeted Development based on percent of faculty who gave you a positive rating (“More Strength than a Weakness” or “Definite Strength”)

We have conducted research to identify specific personal characteristics and administrative methods that are most highly related to successful accomplishment of specific responsibilities. Here you will see the percent of faculty who gave you a positive rating (4 or 5) together with how you rated yourself ranging from definite strength to definite weakness.

Personal Characteristics Faculty Ratings Self Rating
22 Problem solving ability 66%
23 Demonstrates caring 83%
24 Practical judgment 66%
25 Trustworthy 33%
26 Flexibility/adaptability in dealing with individuals/situations 83%
27 Fairness 66%
28 Organizational skills 83%
29 Consistency 50%
30 Enterprising 66%
31 Institution-centered 66%
32 Clarity 83%
Administrative Methods Faculty Ratings Self Rating
33 Allocates faculty responsibilities in an effective and equitable manner 83%
34 Reduces, resolves, and/or prevents conflict among departmental faculty members 83%
35 Assists faculty in developing their own goals and priorities 50%
36 Makes sound suggestions for developing/changing departmental directions/priorities 83%
37 Effectively advocates for departmental interests to higher authorities 66%
38 Demonstrates that high faculty morale is vital to him/her 33%
39 Tries out new ideas with the faculty 83%
40 Sees to it that faculty members are working up to capacity 50%
41 Looks out for the personal welfare of individual faculty members 83%
42 Lets faculty members know what is expected of them 50%
43 Promotes inclusiveness and diversity among students and faculty 83%
44 Makes sure the work of the faculty is coordinated 83%
45 Explains the basis for his/her decisions 66%
46 Lets faculty members know when they have done a good job 66%
47 Makes sure his/her part in the department is understood by all members 83%
48 Acts as though visible department accomplishments were vital to him/her 66%
49 Maintains definite standards of performance 83%
50 Puts faculty suggestions into action 33%
51 Facilitates positive relationships between faculty and the clerical/technical staff 66%
52 Encourages teamwork among members of the faculty 66%
53 Provides feedback to faculty on their major activities 66%

Insights on Improvement

One approach to improvement is to focus your efforts on specific responsibilities that you identified as a high priority and in which you were rated less positively than you desired. To assist you, this section of the report is divided into three tables based on the priority ranking you assigned to each responsibility (high, moderate, and low). Beneath each responsibility, you will find personal characteristics and administrative methods our research shows are associated with high performance of that responsibility.

In the right-hand columns are 1) the percent (%) of faculty who gave you a rating of either "More Strength than a Weakness" or a "Definite Strength," and 2) the gap score, which is a comparison of your self-ratings with ratings by your faculty. To review the actual scores, simply hover your cursor over the gap score in the HTML report. An explanation of how to use the gap score to improve your performance is provided below.

We recommend using the following two-step process as you review the information in this section.

Step One: For each responsibility identified in table 4.1 (High Priority), review the overall rating for each responsibility as well as ratings of the supporting personal characteristics and administrative methods listed that are associated with high performance of that responsibility. Do your ratings for any of them fall below 70%? Are some of those administrative methods and personal characteristics listed with more than one responsibility?

Step Two: Identify all responsibilities, administrative methods, and personal characteristics where you rated yourself (self-rating) "higher" than the respondents. If faculty did not rate you as positively as you rated yourself, you may wish to discover why differences in perception exist. Similarly, if you did not rate yourself as high as your faculty rate you, you may wish to reflect on the reason for the gap.

Insights on Improvement

The responsibilities you identified as a high priority in your role as department chair are located in table 4.1 (4.2- moderate priority, 4.3- low priority).

4.1: Responsibilities of High Priority and supporting Characteristics and Administrative Methods

Legend
Positive Rating:
% faculty who rated you positively (4 or 5 on a 5 point scale)
>= 70%
50 - 69%
< 50%
 
Gap Score:
your rating is at least one half point (.5) higher than faculty average + (higher)
your rating is at least one half point (.5) lower than faculty average - (lower)
your rating is within one half-point of your faculty average = (similar)
Responsibilities/characteristics Positive Rating Gap Score

4.2: Responsibilities of Moderate Priority and supporting Characteristics and Administrative Methods

Legend
Positive Rating:
% faculty who rated you positively (4 or 5 on a 5 point scale)
>= 70%
50 - 69%
< 50%
 
Gap Score:
your rating is at least one half point (.5) higher than faculty average + (higher)
your rating is at least one half point (.5) lower than faculty average - (lower)
your rating is within one half-point of your faculty average = (similar)
Responsibilities/characteristics Positive Rating Gap Score

4.3: Responsibilities of Low Priority and supporting Characteristics and Administrative Methods

Legend
Positive Rating:
% faculty who rated you positively (4 or 5 on a 5 point scale)
>= 70%
50 - 69%
< 50%
 
Gap Score:
your rating is at least one half point (.5) higher than faculty average + (higher)
your rating is at least one half point (.5) lower than faculty average - (lower)
your rating is within one half-point of your faculty average = (similar)
Responsibilities/characteristics Positive Rating Gap Score

Executive Summary

Anthology has analyzed your data and offers the following observations and recommendations. In addition, you are strongly encouraged to conduct a personal analysis of the information in this report through self-reflection and by engaging your faculty, peers and supervisor as appropriate.

Strengths

Responsibilities: You received positive ratings in 0 of the 0 responsibilities that you identified as moderate- to- high priority in your role (at least 70% of your faculty rated you as “good” or outstanding”). Your top 5 strengths are:

Personal Characteristics and Administrative Methods: You received positive ratings from your faculty in 13 of the 32 personal characteristics and administrative methods that are most highly related to successful accomplishment of chair responsibilities (at least 70% of your faculty gave you a positive rating of 4-5 on a five point scale). Your top 5 strengths are:

  • Maintains definite standards of performance
  • Makes sure his/her part in the department is understood by all members
  • Makes sure the work of the faculty is coordinated
  • Promotes inclusiveness and diversity among students and faculty
  • Looks out for the personal welfare of individual faculty members

Areas for Improvement

Of the responsibilities that you identified as a priority (moderate-to-high), the five that were rated lowest by your faculty are listed below.

Professional Development Recommendations

The faculty ratings for responsibilities identified as a priority (high or moderate) are used to determine which areas are targeted for improvement. We have factored each of the 21 responsibilities into four overarching categories. Click on the (?) above to view the detailed category breakout of responsibilities. The following guidelines will assist you in planning your development activities:

  • Red shading indicates areas for improvement; green indicates positive ratings.
  • Referencing the charts below, click on the category most in need of improvement to be directed to appropriate educational material and resources.
  • If no one area comes to the forefront, that is there are significant areas for improvement in multiple categories, explore resources in each of the categories and focus your attention on development materials that address specific areas that you identified as a priority (refer to Areas of Improvement section above).
  • If you scored positively in each of the four categories, congratulations on your success! As the role of the chair continues to evolve, you might consider exploring topics of interest or focus on your five lowest scoring responsibilities to continue your growth and development that are listed above.
  • Click the arrows below for a direct link to suggested resources for your professional development.
Promoting Positive Culture
  • 8. Developing collegiality/cooperation among faculty members
  • 12. Fostering the development of each faculty member's special talents or interests
  • 15. Stimulating or rejuvenating faculty vitality/enthusiasm
  • 17. Establishing trust between himself/herself and members of the faculty
  • 19. Rewarding faculty in accordance with their contributions to the department
Administrative Leadership
  • 1. Attending to essential administrative tasks (e.g., class scheduling, staffing, finances/budgeting, facilities)
  • 2. Fostering good teaching in the department (e.g., encourages course updating, use of appropriate technology, attending to student feedback)
  • 3. Assisting in securing funding from external sources (e.g., grants, contracts, gifts, partnerships)
  • 4. Leading in establishing and monitoring progress on annual or biannual department goals
  • 10. Guiding the development of a sound long-range plan to carry out departmental programs
  • 16. Facilitating curriculum development
  • 20. Ensuring the assessment of student learning outcomes is meaningful and ongoing
Faculty Management and Development
  • 5. Guiding the development of sound procedures for assessing faculty performance
  • 6. Facilitating successful recruitment and selection of promising faculty
  • 9. Stimulating research, scholarly activity, and/or creative endeavors in the department
  • 13. Ensuring that new faculty and staff are acquainted with departmental procedures, priorities, and expectations
  • 14. Clearly communicating expectations of the campus administration to the faculty
  • 20. Ensuring the assessment of student learning outcomes is meaningful and ongoing
Department Advocacy
  • 3. Assisting in securing funding from external sources (e.g., grants, contracts, gifts, partnerships)
  • 6. Facilitating successful recruitment and selection of promising faculty
  • 7. Communicating the department's needs (e.g., personnel, space, monetary, technology) to the dean and other appropriate administrators
  • 9. Stimulating research, scholarly activity, and/or creative endeavors in the department
  • 11. Promoting a positive image of the department within the campus community
  • 18. Promoting a positive image of the department to off-campus constituencies
  • 21. Actively supporting student recruitment and retention efforts

Statistical Detail

The Statistical Detail section provides raw data that was used in the analysis of this report. It includes the number of responses for each response option as well the mean, standard deviation, and self-rating.

You will find additional details in this section that were not evident in the previous sections. One detail to note is the number of individuals who did not respond to an item (the number in the omit column). Although it is rare that more than a few survey respondents choose not to respond to an item, the percentages provided in earlier sections of this report are based on those who responded to each item. If a large number did not respond to an item, care needs to be taken in interpreting its results. Also, your first-hand experience with your department may provide insights from this detailed information that others may not see.

Finally, some of the most valuable information for you to review can be found in the separate Comments and Additional Questions Reports.

Statistical Detail

Part I. Responsibilities Number of Faculty Responding Mean s.d. Self-Rating
1 2 3 4 5 Omit
1. Attending to essential administrative tasks (e.g., class scheduling, staffing, finances/budgeting, facilities) 0 0 1 0 4 1 3.9 1.7 NA
2. Fostering good teaching in the department (e.g., encourages course updating, use of appropriate technology, attending to student feedback) 0 0 0 4 1 1 2.8 1.6 NA
3. Assisting in securing funding from external sources (e.g., grants, contracts, gifts, partnerships) 0 0 1 1 3 1 1.6 1.7 NA
4. Leading in establishing and monitoring progress on annual or biannual department goals 0 1 1 1 2 1 2.5 2.0 NA
5. Guiding the development of sound procedures for assessing faculty performance 0 0 0 0 5 1 1.7 3.6 NA
6. Facilitating successful recruitment and selection of promising faculty 0 1 0 0 4 1 1.5 1.3 NA
7. Communicating the department's needs (e.g., personnel, space, monetary, technology) to the dean and other appropriate administrators 0 0 0 0 5 1 0.8 1.3 NA
8. Developing collegiality/cooperation among faculty members 0 0 1 2 2 1 1.9 3.8 NA
9. Stimulating research, scholarly activity, and/or creative endeavors in the department 0 0 0 1 4 1 4.8 4.2 NA
10. Guiding the development of a sound long-range plan to carry out departmental programs 0 0 0 1 4 1 2.2 4.7 NA
11. Promoting a positive image of the department within the campus community 0 0 0 0 5 1 4.2 0.8 NA
12. Fostering the development of each faculty member's special talents or interests 0 1 0 2 1 2 1.9 4.0 NA
13. Ensuring that new faculty and staff are acquainted with departmental procedures, priorities, and expectations 1 0 1 1 2 1 4.0 2.0 NA
14. Clearly communicating expectations of the campus administration to the faculty 0 0 0 2 3 1 4.3 4.2 NA
15. Stimulating or rejuvenating faculty vitality/enthusiasm 0 0 1 0 4 1 3.0 1.3 NA
16. Facilitating curriculum development 1 0 1 2 1 1 4.3 4.8 NA
17. Establishing trust between himself/herself and members of the faculty 0 0 0 3 2 1 4.1 2.8 NA
18. Promoting a positive image of the department to off-campus constituencies 0 0 0 0 4 2 0.6 4.2 NA
19. Rewarding faculty in accordance with their contributions to the department 0 0 0 2 3 1 4.7 0.5 NA
20. Ensuring the assessment of student learning outcomes is meaningful and ongoing 1 0 0 0 4 1 0.5 2.7 NA
21. Actively supporting student recruitment and retention efforts 0 0 0 1 4 1 1.8 2.0 NA
Part II. Personal Characteristics Number of Faculty Responding Mean s.d. Self-Rating
1 2 3 4 5 Omit
22. Problem solving ability 0 0 1 2 2 1 4.4 1.9 NA
23. Demonstrates caring 0 0 0 0 5 1 0.3 0.4 NA
24. Practical judgment 0 0 1 1 3 1 3.5 4.7 NA
25. Trustworthy 0 1 2 1 1 1 3.2 1.0 NA
26. Flexibility/adaptability in dealing with individuals/situations 0 0 0 2 3 1 3.6 1.0 NA
27. Fairness 0 0 1 2 2 1 4.2 3.0 NA
28. Organizational skills 0 0 0 1 4 1 4.0 4.5 NA
29. Consistency 0 1 1 2 1 1 4.0 2.3 NA
30. Enterprising 0 1 0 3 1 1 2.4 1.1 NA
31. Institution-centered 0 0 1 0 4 1 4.9 3.4 NA
32. Clarity 0 0 0 1 4 1 4.6 0.5 NA
Part III. Administrative Methods Number of Faculty Responding Mean s.d. Self-Rating
1 2 3 4 5 Omit
33. Allocates faculty responsibilities in an effective and equitable manner 0 0 0 2 3 1 0.9 1.6 NA
34. Reduces, resolves, and/or prevents conflict among departmental faculty members 0 0 0 0 5 1 3.1 2.8 NA
35. Assists faculty in developing their own goals and priorities 0 0 2 0 3 1 4.8 3.8 NA
36. Makes sound suggestions for developing/changing departmental directions/priorities 0 0 0 2 3 1 0.5 2.6 NA
37. Effectively advocates for departmental interests to higher authorities 0 0 1 3 1 1 3.5 4.1 NA
38. Demonstrates that high faculty morale is vital to him/her 0 1 2 1 1 1 1.5 5.0 NA
39. Tries out new ideas with the faculty 0 0 0 2 3 1 4.0 2.9 NA
40. Sees to it that faculty members are working up to capacity 0 1 1 0 3 1 3.1 4.0 NA
41. Looks out for the personal welfare of individual faculty members 0 0 0 0 5 1 1.4 3.7 NA
42. Lets faculty members know what is expected of them 0 1 1 1 2 1 4.4 3.2 NA
43. Promotes inclusiveness and diversity among students and faculty 0 0 0 0 5 1 0.7 4.3 NA
44. Makes sure the work of the faculty is coordinated 0 0 0 0 5 1 4.1 2.3 NA
45. Explains the basis for his/her decisions 0 0 1 1 3 1 4.5 0.9 NA
46. Lets faculty members know when they have done a good job 0 0 1 2 2 1 1.4 1.6 NA
47. Makes sure his/her part in the department is understood by all members 0 0 0 3 2 1 0.8 1.0 NA
48. Acts as though visible department accomplishments were vital to him/her 0 0 1 1 3 1 0.2 1.7 NA
49. Maintains definite standards of performance 0 0 0 3 2 1 2.0 3.0 NA
50. Puts faculty suggestions into action 1 1 1 1 1 1 3.6 4.9 NA
51. Facilitates positive relationships between faculty and the clerical/technical staff 0 0 1 0 4 1 4.8 2.1 NA
52. Encourages teamwork among members of the faculty 0 1 0 2 2 1 4.3 2.0 NA
53. Provides feedback to faculty on their major activities 0 0 1 1 3 1 0.5 3.9 NA
Part IV. Summary Judgments Number of Faculty Responding Mean s.d.
1 2 3 4 5 Omit
54. I have confidence in the chair's ability to provide future leadership to the department 0 0 1 2 2 1 2.6 2.9
55. Overall, this chair has provided excellent leadership 0 0 1 2 2 1 1.7 0.8