Dissertation hearing defense delsa r bush april 7 2009
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 68

Dissertation Hearing Defense Delsa R. Bush April 7, 2009 PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 80 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Perceived Justice and Barriers and Facilitators to the Attainment of Leadership Positions in Local and County Law Enforcement Organizations in the State of Florida. Dissertation Hearing Defense Delsa R. Bush April 7, 2009. INTRODUCTION. Introduction to the Problem.

Download Presentation

Dissertation Hearing Defense Delsa R. Bush April 7, 2009

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Dissertation hearing defense delsa r bush april 7 2009

Perceived Justice and Barriers and Facilitators to the Attainment of Leadership Positions in Local and County Law Enforcement Organizations in the State of Florida

Dissertation Hearing Defense

Delsa R. Bush

April 7, 2009


Introduction

INTRODUCTION


Introduction to the problem

Introduction to the Problem

  • Women, minorities, increasing within organizations

  • Women and minorities occupy the lower rungs in leadership positions

  • 17,000 Law Enforcement Organization

  • Women in chief executive positions 1%

  • Glass Ceiling Effect


Purposes of the study

Purposes of the Study

  • Descriptive: Study sample in terms of all variables, human capital assets, demographic characteristics, perceived procedural justice, distributive justice, barriers and facilitators to career advancement, and attainment of leadership positions according to organizational characteristics


Purposes of study cont

Purposes of Study Cont.

  • Exploratory (Comparative)1:

  • Exploratory (Comparative)2: Determine differences in all study variables according to race and gender

  • Explanatory (Correlational): Determine if study variables are significant explanatory variables of attainment of law enforcement positions

  • Contribute to the Empirical Validity of Cotter et al. (2001) criterion based glass ceiling effect


Definition of terms

Definition of Terms

  • Glass ceiling

  • Human capital assets

  • Demographic characteristics

  • Organizational characteristics

  • Procedural justice

  • Distributive justice

  • Perceived barriers and facilitators to career advancement


Justification

Justification

  • Significant - contribution to knowledge

  • Researchable – scientific, measureable, tested

  • Feasible - participants are available


Delimitations and scope

Delimitations and Scope

  • Setting (geographic) is confined to the State of Florida.

  • Setting (organizational) 100 or more officers

  • Target population law enforcement officers only local and county only


Review of the literature

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

  • Leader label

  • Self Conceptualization

  • Tokenism

  • Brass Ceiling

  • Equity Theory

  • Procedural Justice

  • Distributive Justice

  • Perceived Barriers and Facilitators

  • Glass Ceiling


Gaps in the literature

Gaps in the Literature

  • Literature limited to corporate organizations

  • Effects of race and gender combined is ignored

  • Glass ceiling effect not synthesized


Theoretical framework

Theoretical Framework

  • Glass ceiling effect

  • Equity theory

  • Procedural justice

  • Distributive justice

  • Perceived barriers and facilitators to career advancement (Lyness & Thompson, 2001)


Hypothesized model

Human Capital Assets

Demographic

Race

Gender

Organizational Characteristics

Procedural Justice

Distributive Justice

Barriers and Facilitators to Career Advancement

H2

H3

H6

H4

H5

H1a

H1b

Attainment of Leadership Positions

H1c

Hypothesized Model


Research question 1

Research Question 1

  • Descriptive

    • Sample in terms of all variables

      • Human capital assets

      • Demographic characteristics

      • Organizational characteristics

      • Procedural justice

      • Distributive justice

      • Perceived barriers in facilitator to career advancement


Research question 2

Research Question 2

  • Exploratory (comparative)

    • Differences according to organizational characteristics


Hypothesis 1

Hypothesis 1

  • Exploratory (comparative) 2

    • Differences according to demographic characteristics

      • Race and Gender


Hypothesis 2 6

Hypothesis 2-6

  • Explanatory (correlational)

    • Significant

    • Leadership positions


Research methods

RESEARCH METHODS


Research design

Research Design

  • Quantitative

  • Non-experimental

  • Descriptive (research question 1)

  • Exploratory (comparative) research question 2, hypothesis 1 and sub hypothesis

  • Explanatory (Correlational, hypotheses 2-6)

  • Self report online survey research


Population sampling sample size and setting

Population, Sampling, Sample Size, and Setting

  • Target population (2500)

  • Accessible population (entire target population (with e-mail addresses)

    • No more than 2500 officers

    • 75 local and state

  • No sampling plan (entire population)


Sample size

Sample Size

  • The sample size needed for data analysis

  • Green’s (1991) estimate sample size n (sample size) = 50 + 8 (m)=258

  • m = number of explanatory variables =26

  • 286


Sample size cont

Sample Size Cont.

  • 428 responses

  • 286 responses valid (data analysis)

  • 11.64% response overall


Setting

Setting

  • State of Florida

  • 75 law enforcement agencies

  • Within Organizations 100 or more

  • At home or Office


Instrumentation

Instrumentation

  • Six-part online Survey

  • 73 questions self report

  • Approximately 20 minutes to complete.

  • Electronically via a website.


Instrumentation cont

Instrumentation Cont.

  • Part 1 - Human capital assets (5)

  • Leadership attainment (1)

    • Developed by researcher

    • Education

    • Training

    • Experience

    • Tenure

    • Level of Knowledge


Instrumentation cont1

Instrumentation Cont.

  • Part 2 - Demographic characteristics (4)

    • Race

    • Gender

    • Age

    • Ethnicity


Instrumentation cont2

Instrumentation Cont.

  • Part 3 - Organizational characteristics (4)

    • Size

    • State/local

    • Union affiliation

    • Promotional process


Instrumentation cont3

Instrumentation cont.

  • Part 4 - Distributive justice (6)

    • Moorman (1991)

    • Cronbach’s alpha .94

    • Internal consistency acceptable

    • Above .70 (Nunnally, 1978)

    • Confirmatory factor analysis .67-.89


Instrumentation cont4

Instrumentation cont.

  • Part 5 - Procedural justice (6)

    • Price and Muller (1996)

    • Cronbach’s alpha, .82

    • Exploratory factor analysis >.80


Instrumentation cont5

Instrumentation Cont.

  • Part 6 - Perceived barriers and facilitators to career advancement (47)

    • Lyness & Thompson (2000)

    • Perceived Barriers 6a (26)

      • Six subscales

      • coefficient alphas .69-.84

      • Factor analysis not reported


Instrumentation cont6

Instrumentation Cont.

  • Perceived Facilitators 6b (21)

    • Five sub-scales

    • Coefficient alphas sub-scale .70-.90

    • Validity not reported


Data collection ethical considerations

Data Collection/Ethical Considerations

Document preparation

  • Permission for the use of questionnaires x 4

  • SurveyMonkey.com policies and procedures

  • Online survey

  • IRB application and protocol

  • Waiver of signed consent

  • Placed on website SurveyMonkey.com


Data collection cont

Data Collection Cont.

  • Anonymous, group responses,

  • No e-mail List Management tool

  • Survey Responses Collected Daily

  • 31 days

  • IRB form 8

  • The data will be destroyed after one year.


Method of data analysis

Method of Data Analysis

  • Validity of scales

    • Principle Component analysis

  • Internal Consistency Reliability

    Cronbach’s Alpha

  • Divergent Validity

    • Pearson r correlations


Data analysis cont

Data Analysis Cont.

  • Statistical package for social sciences (SPSS) version 14

  • Data coding

  • Research Question 1:Exploratory data analysis (descriptive statistics)

  • Research Question 2: Independent t tests, Chi-square, Pearson r


Data analysis cont1

Data Analysis Cont.

  • Data analysis hypotheses testing

    • H1a: Independent t tests x 14

    • H1b: Independent t tests x 14

    • H1c:14 ANOVA one way with post hoc comparison

    • Hypotheses 2-6:Pearson r, Point-biserial, Separate multiple regression analysis (stepwise)


Results

RESULTS


Results cont

Results Cont.

  • Validity and Reliability of Instruments


Results research question 1

Results Research Question 1

  • Human capital assets

  • Demographic characteristics

  • Organizational characteristics

  • Perceptions of Procedural Justice

  • Perceptions of Distributive Justice

  • Perceived Barriers

  • Perceived Facilitators


Human capital assets

Human Capital Assets


Human capital assets cont

Human Capital Assets Cont.


Demographic characteristics

Demographic Characteristics

  • Race


Demographic characteristics cont

Demographic Characteristics Cont.


Demographic characteristics cont1

Demographic Characteristics Cont.


Research question 21

Research Question 2

Differences in human Capital Assets, demographic characteristics, perceptions of procedural justice, distributive justice, barriers and facilitators to career advancement, according to organizational characteristics


Differences according to organizational characteristics

Differences According to Organizational Characteristics


Research hypothesis 1

Research Hypothesis 1

African American women perceive less justice, more Barriers Fewer Facilitators, and attain fewer leadership positions than other racial groups


H1a partially supported

H1a Partially Supported


H1b partially supported

H1b Partially Supported


H1c partially supported

H1c partially supported

Hypothesized Order of Perception

White Males

African American Male

White Females

African American Females

+ -


H1c partially supported1

H1c Partially Supported


Hypotheses 2 4 results

Hypotheses 2-4 Results


Hypothesis 5 6 results

Hypothesis 5-6 Results


Evaluation of research methods

Evaluation of Research Methods

Internal Validity

  • Strengths

    • The quantitative, explanatory (correlational)

    • Procedures for data analysis are appropriate

    • Appropriate sample size

    • Instruments used in the survey are valid and reliable

  • Weaknesses

    • Research design non-experimental

    • Instruments with moderate validity

    • Electronic Survey


Evaluation of research methods cont

Evaluation of Research Methods Cont.

External Validity

  • Strengths

    • Entire population

    • Natural setting

    • Large sample (entire population)

    • Homogenous population


Evaluation of methodology cont

Evaluation of methodology Cont.

External Validity

  • Weaknesses

    • Homogenous target population

    • In one state

    • Not generalizable/geographic


Discussion

DISCUSSION


Summary and interpretation

Summary and Interpretation

  • 70% of training at institutions other than the FBI or Southern Police Institute.

  • Human capital were very significant explanatory barriers, whereas race and gender was hypothesized.

  • 70% belonged to organizations with more than 250 employees.


Summary and interpretations cont

Summary and Interpretations Cont.

  • Labor unions. 85% unions

  • 94% promoted

  • As aggregate, moderate perceptions of PJ, DJ, BCA,FCA.


Summary and interpretations cont1

Summary and Interpretations Cont.

  • Lower level leaders receive less advanced training

  • Appointed= higher knowledge, higher positions, in smaller agencies/sig.


Practical implications

Practical Implications

  • Support training, and education

  • Training/education= human capital assets =attainment of leadership positions

  • Remove barriers and facilitators to facilitate the attainment of leadership positions

  • Change Culture within organizations


Practical implications cont

Practical Implications Cont.

  • Lack of Culture largest Barrier

  • Glass Ceiling Effect diminished by removal of Barriers

  • Expand Mentoring programs


Conclusions

Conclusions

  • No gender or racial significant differences in the attainment of leadership positions

  • Over representation=Whites, and larger organizations

  • Majority occupied lower level positions

  • Inverse relationship attainment of leadership positions and organizational size

  • More African Americans employed in county vs local


Conclusions cont

Conclusions Cont.

  • Appointed /higher perceptions of facilitators

  • Appointed more knowledgeable/higher positions

  • Females, more barriers in significant subscale Lack of Culture Fit.

  • African Americans, greater barriers and total barriers

  • White males ,fewer barriers than any other group.


Conclusions cont1

Conclusions Cont.

  • African American Males,more facilitators/sig

  • Age significant Explanatory variable

  • Human Capital Assets significant explanatory variable ALP

  • African American females /less leadership positions/not sig.


Limitations

Limitations

  • Non-experimental.

  • State of Florida.

  • Local and county law

  • Agencies with more than 100 sworn law enforcement officers

  • Online research design was limited


Recommendations

Recommendations

  • Scales and surveys specifically designed for law enforcement organizations

  • Research design interviews and questionnaires

  • Replication-national sample of law enforcement organizations


Recommendations cont

Recommendations Cont.

  • Conduct construct validity studies of scales

  • Additional variables incorporated into model


The end

The End

Questions and Answers


  • Login