Medical Teacher, Vol. 27, No. 7, 2005, pp.
629–633
Aspiring to leadership—identifying teacher-leaders
JOHN ROGERS
Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA
SUMMARY Educational institutions need effective leaders at
many levels. This paper explores the applicability of the Porter/
Mazlow need-priority and Herzberg maintenance-motivation
models to the challenge of identifying individuals who aspire to
leadership. The review includes literature from teaching, engineer-
ing, medicine, astronomy, business, and the military. Autonomy
need and achievement motivation consistently distinguished leaders
Med Teach Downloaded from informahealthcare.com by National Silicosis Library on 10/29/14
from non-leaders in several studies. Affiliation and esteem needs
also characterized leaders in two studies. These empirical data
support the use of these theoretical models, which are intuitively
appealing and have potential for practical applications. One such
application could be the identification and recruitment of education
‘‘champions’’ who would be teacher-leaders at dispersed sites.
Through self-reflection faculty members could become aware of
their needs and motivations and may realize their leadership
aspirations and accept the teacher-leader role. For an education
‘‘champions’’ program to be successful, the department leadership
would need to attend to the organizational culture and provide
For personal use only.
release time for the teacher-leaders. A blueprint for the development
of teacher-leaders is outlined.
Introduction
Medical schools face challenges in their missions of
education, research, and patient care that call for effective
leadership at all levels of the organization. Departments and
other units within schools of medicine are concerned with
identifying and developing faculty members to help them
progress along a leadership career ladder. A critical question
is how to identify the potential leaders from among a faculty
that may be dispersed among several teaching or clinical sites.
What are the characteristics of medical schoolteachers,
particularly clinicians, who have leadership potential or
leadership aspirations?
Katzenmeyer and Moller (2001) provide some insights
into these questions, including a Teacher Leadership
Readiness Instrument, but do not present a theoretical
foundation that could guide understanding and potential
interventions. Models of motivation seem to have the most
promise in helping address this question by providing
direction for analysis of the factors affecting faculty drive to
engage in leadership responsibilities beyond direct teaching.
Two motivation theories may have relevance to the
identification of aspiring leaders: Porter/Maslow need hier-
archy and Herzber’s two-factor theory. The Porter/Maslow
need hierarchy assumes that ‘‘people are driven from within
to realize their full growth potential’’ and that ‘‘one cannot be
motivated by a higher need until the lower needs are first
met’’ (Owens, 2001, p. 353). The Porter/Maslow needs from
lower to higher are: security—affiliation—self-esteem—
autonomy—self-actualization. Herzber’s two-factor theory
ISSN 0142–159X print/ISSN 1466–187X online/05/070629-5 ß 2005 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/01421590500156228
describes maintenance factors, such as ‘‘salary, fringe
benefits, type of supervision, working conditions, climate of
the work group, and attitudes and policies of the adminis-
tration’’ as potential sources of dissatisfaction but not
motivation (Owens, 2001, p. 358). As such, they are
prerequisites to motivation. On the other hand, motivation
arises from motivators, such as ‘‘achievement, recognition,
the challenge of the work itself, responsibility, advancement
and promotion, and personal or professional growth’’
(Owen, 2001, p. 359). The Herzberg’s two-factor motivating
factors from lower to higher are: recognition—responsibil-
ity—growth—work itself—advancement—achievement
(Owens, 2001).
Based on experience in our setting, it appears that a
faculty member’s level on the Porter/Maslow need hierarchy
or Herzberg’s two-factor theory substantially affect the
individual’s level of goal setting, whether limited to direct
patient care and teaching in the clinical setting or expanded
to leadership opportunities. Clinical faculty members report
dissatisfaction with their current work situations, which
seems to be due in great part to barriers to fulfillment of
their autonomy needs. For example, clinical faculty members
report having little or no control over their clinic schedules,
patient care processes, or clinic administration. It appears
that faculty members may not set academic goals for
themselves, because they have unfulfilled mid-level needs,
such as self-esteem and autonomy. Instead they focus on
unfulfilled maintenance factors, such as working conditions,
climate of the work group, and attitudes and policies of the
administration. A compounding factor is that clinical faculty
members report low expectations that they can influence their
clinical environments to produce any substantive changes. So
with their unmet needs, focus on maintenance factors, and
low expectations that effort will lead to change, these faculty
members tend to set professional goals that deal primarily
with their clinical practice and not broader academic or
leadership pursuits. In other words, they do not set goals
related to higher-level needs or motivating factors.
Is there any empirical evidence in support of these
hypotheses? Without direct evidence about our faculty, is
there any empirical evidence in the literature that these
theoretical constructs are related to leadership aspiration?
In particular, are there data showing that the need levels on
the Porter/Maslow hierarchy, or the corresponding motivat-
ing factors in the Herzberg model, distinguish individuals
who have leadership aspirations, potential, or positions, from
those who do not?
Correspondence: John Rogers, MD, MPH, Professor and Vice Chair for
Education, Department of Family and Community Medicine, Baylor College
of Medicine, 3701 Kirby Drive, Suite 640, Houston, TX 77098, USA.
Email: jrogers@bcm.tmc.edu
629
 J. Rogers

Literature Affiliation and interpersonal relations

A literature search for empirical studies addressing these
questions used the ERIC (EBSCO) thesaurus to select search
terms and searched with several terms in various combina-
tions: leadership & aspiration & academic, academic
self concept, academic leadership, leadership motivation,
leadership aptitude, achievement need, readiness, academic
achievement, career change, intention, self motivation, goal
orientation, academic aptitude, ability, psychological need,
affiliation need, teacher motivation, and autonomy.
Recent unbound issues of Leadership Quarterly, Educational
Leadership, and Strategy & Leadership were scanned and the
bibliographies of articles selected were reviewed, which led to
the Journal of Vocational Behavior that had published some of
the most useful studies.
There is general support in the literature for the assertion
that attitudes, values, needs, and motives are associated with
Med Teach Downloaded from informahealthcare.com by National Silicosis Library on 10/29/14
Agbor-Baiyee (1998) observed that a need for affiliation
motivated college and university presidents. However, as
noted previously, this study did not include non-leaders, so it
is not known whether affiliation need distinguishes between
leaders and non-leaders. Sedge (1985) observed that affilia-
tion needs significantly differentiated between leaders and
non-leaders. Sedge had used the Adjective Check List to
measure personal needs of 70 engineers and 86 engineer
managers. It appears that need for affiliation can distinguish
leaders from non-leaders.
Esteem and recognition
The only study about esteem and leadership is that of Agbor-
Baiyee (1998) who reported that need for esteem motivated
college and university presidents. However, since this study

leadership aspirations. Rynes (1987) administered an instru- did not include non-leaders, it is not known whether esteem
ment measuring eight dimensions (reasons for pursuing need distinguishes between leaders and non-leaders.
engineering, aptitudes and abilities, curriculum choices,
extracurricular activities, postgraduate plans, career anchors,
career strategies, and beliefs about engineering) to 284 Autonomy and responsibility/growth
undergraduate engineering majors who indicated whether
Are autonomy needs related to leadership? Steers and
they wanted to be an engineer, manager, entrepreneur,
Braunstein (1976) observed in their study of hospital
academic, or consultant in 20 years. The single best predictor
personnel that autonomy was negatively correlated with
of career aspirations was the item measuring career anchors,
hierarchical level. Their interpretation was that individuals
especially in differentiating managerial aspirants from tech-
who need autonomy prefer independence to opportunities
For personal use only.

nical aspirants. Career anchors are conceptually similar to

for promotion. This interpretation fits with the items that
work motives and needs (Rynes, 1987).
measured autonomy need in the Manifest Needs
There is also literature support for the application of
Questionnaire used by Steers and Braunstein. These items
Porter/Mazlow’s and Herzberg’s theories in particular to
relate to control issues about disregarding rules and regula-
understanding leadership. Agbor-Baiyee (1998) interviewed
tions that hamper personal freedom, preferring to work alone,
eight college and university presidents about their needs and
not considering oneself to be a ‘‘team player’’, going own way
leadership motivation. Thematic analysis of the interview
regardless of others’ opinions, and trying to be own boss. It is
texts revealed the needs for achievement, affiliation, power,
not surprising that individuals who have need for autonomy
esteem, self-actualization, and growth to be motivating.
as defined by these items do not aspire for formal leadership
Manthei (1992) studied the areas of need of 73 teachers
positions.
preparing for formal mentor teacher leadership roles. The
On the other hand, Porter described autonomy as
primary motivator for seeking this new role was professional
‘‘control of work situation, influence in the organization,
growth and stimulation, which is related to Porter/Mazlow’s
participation in important decisions, authority to utilize
self-actualization need and Herzberg’s achievement
organizational resources’’ (Owens, 2001). This conceptuali-
motivation. These studies involve three of the five needs in
zation of autonomy is consistent with Herzber’s motivating
the Porter/Mazlow need-priority model (affiliation, esteem,
factor of responsibility (Owens, 2001) and the dominance
and self-actualization) and three motivators in Herzberg’s
scale in the Manifest Needs Questionnaire developed by
maintenance-motivation model (recognition, growth, and
Steers and Braunstein (1976). There are four papers about
achievement).
dominance and leadership. First, Stricker (1989) observed
These two papers do not include non-leaders; however, so
among the 642 Naval midshipmen that dominance was
it is not clear that these needs differentiate between those
correlated with leadership. Second, Collins and Toppins
with leadership aspiration and those without. Most of the
(1987) noted in their study of 60 teachers in leader groups
studies reviewed in the remainder of the paper include
and 80 non-leader teachers that dominance appeared to be
leaders and non-leaders. This work will be presented in
related to leadership but not at a statistically significant level.
ascending order on the Porter/Mazlow and Herzberg levels
Third, although dominance was not related to hierarchical
(security & working conditions, affiliation & interpersonal
level in Steers and Braunstein’s study of 382 hospital
relations, esteem & recognition, autonomy & responsibility/
personnel, dominance was significantly related to supervisory
growth, and self-actualization & achievement).
rank and leadership abilities. Finally, Mael, Waldman and
Mulqueen (2001) administered manifest needs scales, based
on Steers and Braunstein’s Manifest Needs Questionnaire, to
Security and working conditions
personnel in an astronomical scientific research institute,
No studies were found dealing with the relationship 64 of whom did not aspire to become managers and 50
between these lower level needs or maintenance factors and who did aspire to leadership. Mael et al. (2001) observed that
leadership. need for dominance distinguished those who aspired to

630

management from those who did not. These four papers
provide evidence that needs for autonomy distinguish leaders
from non-leaders.
Self-actualization and achievement
Achievement motivation ‘‘drastically’’ distinguished higher
education administrators from teachers in a study by Lester
and Chu (1980) who administered a questionnaire to 68
administrators and 69 teachers. The instrument included a
number of other concepts, but no others that dealt with need
or motivation other than achievement. Three other papers
confirm the association of achievement motivation with
leadership but did not involve teachers. In the first, Ellis
and others (1984) studied 81 university business students
who worked in groups of 6–7 members. The students
completed an Achieving Tendency Questionnaire, and
Med Teach Downloaded from informahealthcare.com by National Silicosis Library on 10/29/14
6 weeks later, the group members evaluated fellow students
in the group on leadership. The students who received high
leadership ratings by their peers also rated themselves high on
achievement motivation. In the second study, Stricker (1989)
performed a similar study on 642 midshipmen at the Naval
Academy where the students completed questionnaires, and
subsequently the students rated their peers on leadership.
The need for achievement scale correlated with the leader-
ship criteria. In the third paper, Steers and Braunstein (1976)
conducted a series of studies while developing and validating
the Manifest Needs Questionnaire, which measures achieve-
For personal use only.
ment, affiliation, autonomy, and dominance needs. They
administered their instrument and other questionnaires to
382 hospital employees including administrators, profes-
sionals, technicians, clerical employees, and service workers.
Achievement was positively associated with hierarchical level,
confirming again the relationship between achievement
motivation and leadership. Supervisors rated the leadership
abilities of 82 individuals with leadership roles in adminis-
tration or general supervision. Achievement need was not
associated with leadership abilities, except for self-confi-
dence. This result seems to contradict the findings of Ellis
and Stricker, where peers did the rating of leadership but did
not specifically rate leadership abilities. These two methodo-
logical differences, different raters and different aspects of
leadership rated, may account for the discrepant findings.
Nevertheless, these four studies indicate that achievement
motivation, which is one of the highest motivating factors in
Herzberg’s model, and comparable to self-actualization on
the Porter/Mazlow need hierarchy, distinguishes leaders from
non-leaders.
Relevance to identification of teacher leaders
How do these findings relate to the initial formulation of the
challenge of identifying potential leaders? It was hypothesized
that a faculty member’s level on the Porter/Maslow need
hierarchy or Herzberg’s two-factor theory could substantially
affect the individual’s leadership aspirations. The above
literature confirms the supposition that the need-priority
and maintenance-motivation models are relevant to char-
acterizing leadership aspiration and potential, since elements
in these models can distinguish leaders from non-leaders.
Faculty reflection on the types of needs associated with
leadership, perhaps stimulated by an instrument like the
Aspiring to leadership
Manifest Needs Questionnaire (Steers & Braunstein, 1976),
may facilitate identification of potential leaders.
It is intuitively reasonable that internal needs and
motivations are some of the driving forces that compel
individuals to become leaders. Leaders put out more effort
than their counterparts who do not venture very far outside
the boundaries of their prescribed work assignments. Leaders
think beyond the day-to-day ‘‘work in the trenches’’ and take
risks, both emotional and career, by becoming involved,
taking stands, seeking to contribute, and speaking up.
Leaders make themselves vulnerable to criticism and failure.
This extra effort and risk takes energy and presumes that core
‘‘survival’’ issues, i.e. lower level needs and maintenance
factors, are already secure. It is also apparent that leaders are
driven predominantly from inside, though there are obvious
external rewards for success. These internal driving forces are
not always benevolent, though, for some individuals refer to
these forces as their internal demons. So these concepts are
useful for those who are interested in identifying and
cultivating potential leaders.
The notion that the needs and motivators of leaders are
different than those for non-leaders may also be helpful to the
young faculty who are wondering if they have leadership
potential. The challenge is not just unidirectional with senior
leaders identifying and grooming potential recruits, but is
bi-directional with junior members of the profession trying to
choose a career trajectory. Young professionals may be able,
through self-reflection, to identify their needs and motivators
and then compare theirs to those that characterize leaders.
A leadership path is not simply chosen for a person, like from
above in the organizational hierarchy, but must also be
chosen by a person. The language of needs and motivators
provides a common vocabulary for seniors and juniors to
communicate about a process essential for the survival of
organizations and professions, that is, the development of the
next wave of leaders.
It was also hypothesized that many faculty members are
not setting academic goals for themselves, because they have
unfulfilled needs and maintenance factors and consequently
are dissatisfied with their current work situation. This leads
them to focus on their lower-level needs and to avoid
professional goals related to higher-level needs. The above
literature did not address these issues directly, but Carpenter
(1989) observed that autonomy in the job was directly related
to job satisfaction, and Orpen (1979) found that job
enrichment that increased autonomy led to significant
increases in job satisfaction, job involvement, and internal
motivation. These findings do not directly confirm the
hypothesis but are consistent with the proposition that if
individuals lack job satisfaction they are likely to withdraw
from job involvement and not be motivated to make broader
contributions, such as become leaders. These results also
highlight the possibility that the manifestation of higher-level
needs and motivators is context-dependent in that an
individual may not exhibit leadership potential in an
environment that lacks autonomy, with its resultant low job
satisfaction, but may show considerable promise in an
environment that strongly supports autonomy. This, too, is
intuitively reasonable and is pertinent to senior leaders who
want to cultivate junior members of the field. An environ-
ment that hampers job satisfaction is unlikely to be an
effective incubator for new leaders. In a barren environment,
631
 J. Rogers
it may appear that there are no potential leaders, but if that
environment becomes generative, a number of potential
leaders may appear.
In summary, there is literature from a variety of fields that
confirms the relationship between leadership aspirations
and both Porter/Mazlow needs and Herzberg motivators.
These empirical data support the use of these theoretical
models that are intuitively appealing with potential for
practical interventions. How might they be applied to current
organizations?
Education ‘‘champions’’ as teacher-leaders
Medical school department strategic planning retreats
frequently use small groups to brainstorm about issues
related to clinical, educational, and research missions.
A typical outcome of these retreats is a plan to implement
Med Teach Downloaded from informahealthcare.com by National Silicosis Library on 10/29/14
an academic leadership development plan. One possible
strategy could be to identify potential education ‘‘cham-
pions’’ at clinical teaching sites and to develop the leadership
skills of these teacher-leaders. This strategy would require
three essential elements for success, namely, institutional
support, the identification and recruitment of potential
teacher-leaders, and a leadership development program.
Institutional support would need to be addressed first
for further efforts to have a chance of succeeding. The
department, division, or unit leadership would need to make
a firm concrete commitment to two prerequisites: a culture
For personal use only.
that would support the efforts of education ‘‘champions’’ and
release time for the development and work of teacher-leaders
(Katzenmeyer & Moller, 2001). As for culture, the leadership
would need to support the educational programs by provid-
ing adequate funding and encouraging the development of
curricular innovations. The leadership would also need to
grant formal teacher-leaders with reasonable degrees of
autonomy in policy decisions. The leadership would need
to be an advocate of teacher leadership (Katzenmeyer &
Moller, 2001) and would need to attend to symbolic acts
to communicate this advocacy (Deal & Peterson, 2000). As
for release time, the strategy will not succeed if the leadership
does not agree to give the education ‘‘champions’’ protected
time for their new role as teacher-leaders. If the culture and
time issues are satisfactorily addressed, then it is appropriate
to take the next steps of identifying, recruiting, training, and
mentoring the education ‘‘champions’’.
The step of identifying potential education champions
could build on the above literature and our experience with
using quantitative measurement instruments to facilitate
self-discovery. During the leadership module of a year long
part-time fellowship, faculty members have completed several
self-assessment questionnaires that have been the basis for
teaching leadership concepts and promoting self-reflection.
To date, approximately 16 faculty have completed these
leadership instruments: Leadership Motivation, Self-
Confidence, Substitutes for Leadership, Personal Power
Profile, Influence Tactics, Organization-Based Self-Esteem,
Positive and Negative Affect, Emotional Intelligence,
Self-monitoring, Group Cohesiveness, Least Preferred
Co-worker, Michigan Organizational Assessment, Initiating
Structure and Consideration, Participatory Leadership
Attitudes, and Transformational and Charismatic
Leadership (Pierce & Newstrom, 2003). The faculty fellows,
632
both those currently in leadership positions such as medical
directors and those without formal leadership roles, report
that they value this process of self-reflection and comment
that they discovered leadership capabilities they did not
know they had. To facilitate self-discovery among the
general teaching faculty, all faculty members who teach
could be asked to complete the Leadership Motivation
questionnaire (Pierce & Newstrom, 2003), the Manifest
Needs Questionnaire (Steers & Braunstein, 1976), or the
Assessing Your Readiness for Teacher Leadership
Questionnaire (Katzenmeyer & Moller, 2001) and could
then be guided through a reflection on their capabilities,
interests, and aspirations. Perhaps even briefly discussing the
above findings from the literature may help individuals clarify
their leadership interests. The opportunity to be an education
‘‘champion’’ could be mentioned and those faculty members
who discover that they may have leadership aspirations could
be encouraged to learn more about this new role.
An introduction and training program could help poten-
tial education ‘‘champions’’ develop new abilities as teacher-
leaders by building on their aspirations. Lieberman et al.
(2000) outlined a useful blueprint for the curriculum by
describing the tasks these individuals would need to
accomplish at their sites: build trust and rapport, make an
organizational diagnosis, deal with the change process, use
resources, manage the work, and build skill and confidence in
others. One approach to the program could use a longitudinal
curriculum to follow after an initial intense daylong workshop
where a visioning process would be critical. What does the
group see as its shared vision for its new role and for
education at each site and across sites? Teleconferencing
capabilities at each site could be useful for regular contact
among the ‘‘champions’’ in addition to face-to-face training
sessions. Asynchronous e-mail communication could help
maintain close communication and group cohesion. The
inclusion of a reflection journal may be an effective teaching
tool. Mentoring and peer coaching could be important in the
development of these individuals as they worked through
each of the above tasks.
The intent of a program for education ‘‘champions’’
would be to create a system that continually developed new
teacher-leaders and that built a culture where educational
excellence and continual improvement were the norm. The
‘‘champions’’ program would seek to generate enthusiasm
for teaching and a sense of meaning by contributing to an
important goal, the education of the next generations of
physicians. The measure of success would be how people
describe the educational climate in the clinical sites (Owens,
2001).
Conclusion
There is literature from a variety of fields that confirms the
relationship between leadership aspirations and the Porter/
Mazlow need-priority and Herzberg two-factor models of
motivation. Faculty members who become aware of their
needs and motivations may realize their leadership aspira-
tions and seek to become teacher-leaders. Such education
‘‘champions’’ would need a department leadership that
attended to the organization’s culture and provided time for
training and sustained action. Nurturing and supporting

these emerging leaders could enhance the long-term success
of the organization.
Practice points
. Educational institutions need ways of identifying and
developing effective leaders.
. Empirical data support using the Porter/Mazlow
need-priority and Herzberg motivation-maintenance
models to identify aspiring leaders.
. Autonomy needs and achievement motivation
consistently distinguished leaders from non-leaders.
. Affiliation and esteem needs also characterized
leaders.
. These models could aid in the identification and
recruitment of teacher-leaders in an educational
‘‘champions’’ leadership development program.
Med Teach Downloaded from informahealthcare.com by National Silicosis Library on 10/29/14
Notes on contributor
JOHN ROGERS, is Professor and Vice Chair for Education in the
Department of Family and Community Medicine, Baylor College of
Medicine, Houston, Texas. Dr Rogers is enrolled in a Master of
Education program in administration and supervision for higher
education in the College of Education, University of Houston.
For personal use only.
References
AGBOR-BAIYEE, W. (1998) Applying need theories to understand leader-
ship motivation in college and university presidents. Paper presented at
the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association,
San Diego, CA, April 1998. Retrieved 4 March 2003, from the ERIC
(EBSCO) database.
CARPENTER, K.D. (1989) Academic middle managers for baccalaureate
nursing: work motivation and satisfaction, Journal of Nursing Education,
28, pp. 256–264.
COLLINS, P.H. & TOPPINS, A.D. (1987) Personality strength that influence
teachers pursuit of leadership roles: a comparative bi/polar study. Paper
presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mid-South Educational
Research Association, Mobile, AL, November 1987. Retrieved 4
March 2003, from the ERIC (EBSCO) database.
DEAL, T.E. & PETERSON, K.D. (2000) Eight roles of symbolic leaders,
in: The Jossey-Bass Reader on Educational Leadership, pp. 202–214
(San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.)
Aspiring to leadership
ELLIS, R.J., et al. (1984) Self-monitoring and leadership emergence. Paper
presented at the Annual Convention of the American Psychological
Association, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, August 1984. Retrieved
4 March 2003, from the ERIC (EBSCO) database.
KATZENMEYER, M. & MOLLER, G. (2001) Awakening the Sleeping Giant—
Helping Teachers Develop as Leaders, 2nd ed. (Thousand Oaks, CA,
Corwin Press).
LESTER, P. & CHU, L. (1980) Personality factors and achievement
motivation of women in higher education administration.
(Report No. NIE-G-79-0012). Washington, DC: National Institute of
Education (DHEW). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service
No. ED197663). Retrieved 4 March 2003, from the ERIC (EBSCO)
database.
LIEBERMAN, A., SAXL, E.R. & MILES, M.B. (2000) Teacher leadership:
ideology and practice, in: The Jossey-Bass Reader on Educational
Leadership, pp. 348–365 (San Francisco, CA, Jossey-Bass).
MAEL, F.A., WALDMAN, D.A. & MULQUEEN, C. (2001) From scientific
work to organizational leadership: predictors of management
aspiration among technical personnel, Journal of Vocational Behavior,
59, pp. 132–148.
MANTHEI, J. (1992) The mentor teacher as leader: the motives,
characteristics and needs of seventy-three experienced teachers who
seek a new leadership role. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of
the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA,
April, 1992. Retrieved 4 March 2003, from the ERIC (EBSCO)
database.
ORPEN, C. (1979) The effects of job enrichment on employee satisfaction,
motivation, involvement, and performance: a field experiment, Human
Relations, 32, pp. 189–217.
OWENS, R.G. (2001) Organizational Behavior in Education. Instructional
Leadership in School Reform, 7th ed. (Boston, MA, Allyn and Bacon).
PIERCE, J.L. & NEWSTROM, J.W. (2003) Leaders & the Leadership Process.
Readings, Self-assessments & Applications, 3rd ed. (New York, NY,
McGraw-Hill).
RYNES, S.L. (1987) Career transitions from engineering to management:
are they predictable among students? Journal of Vocational Behavior, 30,
pp. 138–154.
SEDGE, S.K. (1985) A comparison of engineers pursuing alternate career
paths, Journal of Vocational Behavior, 27, pp. 56–70
STEERS, R.M. & BRAUSTEIN, D.N. (1976) A behaviorally-based measure
of manifest needs in work settings, Journal of Vocational Behavior, 9,
pp. 251–266.
STRICKER, L.J. (1989) Assessing leadership potential at the Naval
Academy with a biographical measure. (Report No. ETS-RR-89-14).
Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. Retrieved 4 March 2003,
from the ERIC (EBSCO) database.
633