Citation
Acculturation and leadership styles of elected Latino leaders

Material Information

Title:
Acculturation and leadership styles of elected Latino leaders
Creator:
Trevino, Dale
Place of Publication:
Denver, Colo.
Publisher:
University of Colorado Denver
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
xi, 113 leaves : ; 28 cm

Thesis/Dissertation Information

Degree:
Doctorate ( Doctor of Philosophy)
Degree Grantor:
University of Colorado Denver
Degree Divisions:
School of Education and Human Development, CU Denver
Degree Disciplines:
Educational Leadership and Innovation
Committee Chair:
Fulmer, Connie
Committee Members:
Muth, Rodney
Garrison-Wade, Dorothy
Rudolph, Mary Chavez

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Hispanic American leadership ( lcsh )
Hispanic American politicians ( lcsh )
Hispanic Americans -- Cultural assimilation ( lcsh )
Hispanic American leadership ( fast )
Hispanic American politicians ( fast )
Hispanic Americans -- Cultural assimilation ( fast )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
theses ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references (leaves 97-113).
General Note:
School of Education and Human Development
Statement of Responsibility:
by Dale Trevino.

Record Information

Source Institution:
|University of Colorado Denver
Holding Location:
|Auraria Library
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
657061238 ( OCLC )
ocn657061238
Classification:
LD1193.E3 2010d T73 ( lcc )

Full Text
ACCULTURATION AND LEADERSHIP STYLES OF ELECTED LATINO LEADERS
by
Dale Trevino
B.A., University of Colorado at Boulder, 1986
M.Ed., Colorado State University, 1990
A thesis submitted to the
University of Colorado Denver
in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
Educational Leadership and Innovation


This thesis for the Doctor of Philosophy
degree by
Dale Trevino
has been approved
by
Rodney Muth
Date


Trevino, Dale (Ph.D., Educational Leadership and Innovation]
Acculturation and Leadership Styles of Elected Latino Leaders.
Thesis directed by Associate Professor Connie Fulmer
ABSTRACT
Given the increased demographic change of Latinos in our society, the
need for understanding who they are, how they live, and more importantly
how they lead has never been more urgent. Answers regarding how Latinos
lead warrant further empirical research and investigation. The purpose of
this exploratory study was to examine how a group of elected Latino leaders
scored on an acculturation and leadership scale. It also provides a better
understanding of how elected Latino leaders define and experience
leadership based on their acculturation level and leadership styles. This
study also adds to the current body of literature on Latino leadership. Two
surveys were administered to a sample of elected Latino leaders to find out
how they scored on the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire and the
Acculturation Rating Scale of Mexican Americans II, to examine how
acculturation is associated with leadership styles, and to identify how
acculturation gets expressed between leadership styles of elected Latino
leaders. A chi-square analysis for independence was used to measure the
association of acculturation level and leadership style among this sample. The
findings confirm an association between acculturation level and leadership
style.
This abstract accurately represents the content of the candidate's
thesis. I recommend its publication.
Signed
Connie Fulmer


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Completing the final requirement of this program was a tremendous
struggle for me. Not because this study was difficult nor was my research
topic to demanding, but because life constantly threw incredible life
challenges my way while I was trying to complete this dissertation.
However, this experience has truly been a humbling one and I have immense
respect and appreciation towards those individuals who have embarked in a
doctoral program while still working full-time, trying to raise a family, and
trying to maintain some balance in their lives.
1 would also like to acknowledge several individuals who have offered
me constant support and encouragement over the course of this endeavor.
First, I would like to thank my faculty advisor, Connie Fulmer, who agreed to
serve as my committee chair and helped guide me through this dissertation.
And I know it was not easy given my situation, but I thank you for your
patience. 1 would also like to thank my dissertation committee, Dr. Muth, Dr.
Garrison-Wade, and Dr. Chavez-Rudolph, for also being patient with me
during the final stages of this thesis. A special thank you to Dr. Yun and Dr.
Avitale for their support and guidance through the analyses phase of this
study, I could not have done it without your assistance. I would also like to
thank my good friend, colleague, and classmate in the program, Cleo Estrada,
thank you for your support and encouragement. I am glad to have gone
through this experience with you.


I would also like to thank my parents Ruben and Florence for instilling
the importance of education and cultural pride in our family. I want to thank
my siblings Eddie, Steven, Salvador, Dianna, Danny, and Ruben Jr. for their
patience during the course of my doctoral program. Rather than putting
added pressure on me, they offered support and encouragement. The only
regret that 1 have is that I am not able to share this momentous occasion with
my father, Ruben and my brother, Sal. They both passed away during the
final stages of my doctoral program, which is why I would like to dedicate
this dissertation in their memory.
Finally, I want to give a special acknowledgement and thank you to my
family. To my wife Michelle, thank you for putting up with me during my
highs and lows throughout this entire endeavor. Many times I left like giving
up because of the challenges we both faced throughout this process, but you
helped me through them and supported my decision to keep moving
forward. For that, I will always be thankful. To my sons Wesley and Ryan,
both of you are truly my inspiration and the major reason why I followed
through with the completion of this degree. It is a pleasure to see your
leadership skills develop everyday and I am especially proud of your
commitment to social justice issues. I am confident that one day, you too will
serve in leadership positions and will have a positive impact on those around
you.


TABLE OF CONTENTS
Figures.......................................................x
Tables.......................................................xi
CHAPTER
I. INTRODUCTION.................................................1
Purpose of the Study..................................2
Background............................................4
Conceptual Framework..................................6
Delimitations.........................................8
Significance of Study.................................9
Organization of Study.................................9
Definition of Terms..................................10
Chapter Summary.................................... 12
II. LITERATURE REVIEW........................................13
Latino Demographics..................................13
Immigration..........................................17
Latino Educational Attainment........................22
Latino Economic Attainment...........................28
Latino Culture.......................................32
Acculturation........................................38
vi


Cross-Cultural Research and Leadership Styles.........40
Transformational and Transactional Leadership.........42
Chapter Summary.......................................44
III. METHODOLOGY..............................................45
Research Questions......................................45
Research Design.........................................46
Study Sample............................................48
Questionnaire...........................................49
Leadership........................................49
Acculturation.....................................51
Data Collection.........................................53
Data Analysis...........................................54
Chapter Summary.........................................55
IV. FINDINGS.................................................56
Demographic Data........................................56
Leadership Style........................................60
Transformational Leadership Dimensions..............61
Transactional Leadership Dimensions.................61
Non-Leadership Dimension............................62
Acculturation Level.....................................62
vii


Results for Research Question One
63
Results for Research Question Two.......................66
Results for research Question Three.....................67
Chapter Summary.........................................72
V. SUMMARY....................................................73
Overview of Study.......................................73
Summary of Findings.....................................74
Latino Leadership Associated with
Transformational Leadership.........................74
Low Acculturation Scores and Transformational
Leadership..........................................75
High and Low Acculturation Scores
of Latinos Split....................................76
Transformational Leadership
Characteristics.....................................77
Implications of Findings................................79
Latino Leadership as a Genre........................80
Association of Acculturation and
Leadership Styles...................................81
Preferred Leadership Style of Latinos...............82
Recommendations.........................................83
Recommendations for Future Latino
Leadership Theory Development.......................83
viii


Recommendations for Future Latino Leadership
Practice in Context...............................84
Recommendations Future Research on Latino
Leadership and Culture............................85
Chapter Summary......................................90
APPENDIX
A. INFORMED CONSENT..................................91
B. MULTIFACTOR LEADERSHIP QUESTIONNAIRE (MLQ)
PERMISSIONS TO ADMIINISTER........................92
C. MULTIFACTOR LEADERSHIP QUESTIONNAIRE SAMPLE.......93
D. PERMISSION TO ADMINISTER ACCULTURATION RATING
SCALE FOR MEXICAN AMERICANS (ARSMA- II)...........94
E. ACCULTURATION RATING SCALE FOR MEXICAN
AMERICANS (ARSMA-II)..............................96
REFERENCES...............................................97
IX


FIGURES
Figure
1 Organizational Framework of Study.......................................44
2 Percentage of MLQ survey respondents by leadership style.............60
3 Percentage of MLQ survey respondents by acculturation style..........60
x


TABLES
Table
1 Demographic and Educational Trends of US Latinos.......................24
2 Population by Hispanic Origin and Educational
Attainment: 2002......................................................25
3 Population with at Least a High School Education by
Detailed Hispanic Origin: 2002........................................26
4 Generational Level and Educational Attainment..........................55
5 Acculturation Level and Educational Attainment.........................55
6 Generational Level of Respondents......................................56
7 Acculturation Level and Generational Level.............................56
8 Acculturation Level and Leadership Style...............................62
9 Cross Tabulation for Leadership Style by
Acculturation Level...................................................63
10 Leadership Style (Transactional and Transformational)
and Leadership Characteristics........................................66
11 Acculturation Level (High and Low) and Leadership
Characteristics.......................................................67
xi


CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
The exponential growth of the Latino population in the United States
in recent years has triggered dramatic changes at all levels of contemporary
society. According to a 2008 US census report, the US Latino population
surpassed 45 million in July of 2007 now making up 15 percent of the total
US population. This statistic reflects a 10.1 million-population increase since
the last US census counts in 2000. However, it does not include an additional
estimated 11 million undocumented Latino immigrants (primarily Mexican)
living in the United States. As this population increases, so does their
influence and leadership power.
The political landscape is starting to get redefined and reconfigured in
cities across our nation as a result of this growth. Additionally, Latinos in
leadership positions continues to grow and currently there are over 2,500
elected Latino officials in various levels of the political arena at the local and
national level (Andrade, 2008, p. 1). The result of this increase reflects the
ever-changing demographics in the districts these leaders represent. In fact,
the number of eligible Latino voters increased 21.4% between 2004 and
2008, the largest percentage increase of any group in the US Latinos also
increased their share of the electorate from 11% in 2004 to 12.1% in 2008
1


causing a shift in the balance of power in elections at all levels, including the
Presidential race, which is perhaps considered the most important political
election in America. In fact, individuals who voted in the 2008 presidential
election were the most racially and ethnically diverse in US history (Lopez,
2009).
Purpose of This Study
Given the increased demographic changes of Latinos in our society, it
is has become even more important that we understand who they are, how
they live, and more importantly how they lead. These questions warrant
further empirical research and investigation. The purpose of this study was
to describe how a group of elected Latino leaders viewed their leadership
style and to examine if an association existed between their acculturation
level and leadership style.
Surveys were used in order to determine how elected Latino leaders
scored on the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ; Avilo & Bass,
1999), a leadership inventory (measuring leadership style) and the
Acculturation Rating Scale for Mexican Americans (ARSMA-II; Cuellar &
Arnold, 1995) an acculturation scale (measuring acculturation level). The
study also to the current body of literature on Latino leadership.
2


The guiding research questions for this study are listed below.
1. How does a sample of elected Latino leaders score on the
Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) and Acculturation
Rating Scale for Mexican Americans ARSMA-II?
2. How is acculturation associated with leadership styles?
3. How does acculturation get expressed between leadership styles?
Although many styles of leadership exist, it is hypothesized that
transformational leadership styles are more likely to be congruent with
Latino culture. Therefore the greater the transformational leadership style
(Burns, 1978; Rost, 1993; Bass, 1990; Boje, 2000; Pixton 2005; Kouzes &
Posner 1995; Northouse, 1997) of elected Latino leaders, the lower the
acculturation level (Andrade, 2008; Bordas, 2007; Zoppi, 2004).
This research study examined current leadership studies and cross-
cultural research in relation to Latino Leadership. Given the ever increasing
diverse population in the US, coupled with the globalization of industrial
organizations and increased interdependencies among nations throughout
the world, leaders will need to understand how culture influences leadership
behavior (House, 1997). Rost (1993) critically looked at the history of
leadership studies and recognized the shortcomings of current leadership
studies and concluded that, "on the basis of cultural imperatives and the
particular organizations to which people belong, as well as influences based
3


on race, gender, religion, family, and professional education, people develop
an idea of what leadership is (p. 16).
Leadership that centers on a white ethnocentric model is no longer
acceptable in today's society. However, a multicultural leadership approach,
which, incorporates many cultural perspectives, appreciates differences, and
values the contributions of diverse backgrounds, is what makes an effective
contemporary leader (Bordas, 2007).
Background
Numerous research studies and subsequent publications on various
theoretical approaches have examined leadership and the leadership process
(Burns, 1978; Bass, 1990; Bryman, 1986; Northouse, 2007; Rost, 1993). The
views expressed by these authors and vary in that some believe that
leadership is a trait or behavior, whereas others view leadership from an
information-processing perspective or from a relational standpoint
(Northouse, 2007, p. 1).
However, what is common about these viewpoints is that the majority
of them has been, and continues to be, studied and written about from a
Western-European perspective (Andrade, 2008; Bordas, 2007; Lopez, 2009;
Napier, 1999; Zoppi, 2004). Napier (1999), notes that leadership is often
profiled primarily in Western terms, depicting primarily the desired traits
and behaviors based mostly on white males, despite the awareness that
4


characteristics and behaviors differ among groups based on cultural
frameworks. It is through their influences that tools for measuring effective
leadership are developed (p. 10).
Many leadership scholars have bought into a paradigm, which Rost
(1993) labeled as the "industrial leadership paradigm" and he concludes that
this paradigm is uniquely western in its conceptualization because of the
following characteristics: (a) a structural-functionalist view of organizations,
(b) a view of management as the preeminent profession, (c) a personalistic
focus on the leader, (d) a dominant objective of goal achievement, (e) a self-
interested and individualistic outlook, (f) a male model of life, (g) a utilitarian
and materialistic ethical perspective, and (h) a rational, technocratic, linear,
quantitative, and scientific language and methodology (p. 180).
However, Napier (1999) suggests that the leadership paradigm needs
to expand. In addition, it must include "alternative models" that analyze new
ways of viewing leadership development in order to better serve all
communities and their members (p. 35). Along the same lines, Rost (1993)
earlier noted that the industrial-leadership paradigm has come to an end.
The ever-changing world indicates that post-industrial societal values are
different from Western societies. Rost (1993) concludes,
"In trying to develop a way out of the problems that the industrial era
has produced in the world, many commentators have pointed to the
importance of such values as collaboration, common good, global
concern, diversity and pluralism as well as a consensus-oriented
5


policy-making process. If these values and others like them are going
to achieve dominance in the future, they must be embedded in a new
understanding of what leadership is in a postindustrial school of
leadership." (p. 181)
Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework for this study is rooted in the notion that
culture plays a role in the way that Latinos lead, similar to the current
research that suggests that African American and women leaders are
influenced by their cultural origins. More specifically, the study examines
how a select group of elected Latino leaders scored on two surveys that
measure acculturation level and leadership style and adding to the current
body of Latino leadership.
Because limited studies on Latinos and leadership still exist, this study
focused on research that describes culture and the effects of culture on the
leadership process. A preliminary review of the literature suggests that
culture and cultural context may shape the way individuals view and exhibit
leadership behaviors (Andrade, 2009; Bordas, 2007; Garcia, 1989; House,
2004; Ramirez, 2004; Zoppi, 2004).
According to Northouse (2007), leadership is a process, involves
influence, occurs in a group context, and involves goal attainment. Napier
(1999) described leadership from an Indigenous perspective as having many
cultural variables as possible, including traditional beliefs and practices
associated with one's ethnicity, religion and/or spirituality, and community
6


mores (p. 13). Rost (1993) argues that people develop an idea of what
leadership is on the basis of cultural imperatives and the particular
organizations to which people belong, as well as influences based on race,
gender, religion, and family. Bordas (2007), suggests that leadership has
been culled largely from White male perspectives and cultural values, thus
reflecting an ethnocentric orientation towards current leadership practice.
Until a more inclusive form of leadership embodies our diverse society, a
truly multicultural society will not be attained (p. 9).
Although limited empirical data exists on the relationship between
culture and leadership, the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior
Effectiveness (GLOBE) research project is perhaps the most extensive and in-
depth research on this topic. GLOBE was designed to contribute to the
development of empirically based cross-cultural leadership and
organizational theory.
More specifically, The GLOBE project investigated the roles of societal
and organizational values and institutionalized practices; organizational
contingency variables; and implicit leadership theories as antecedents to
cross-cultural variance in leader behavior, leader influence, leader
effectiveness, and organizational practices and performance (House et al., p.
70). Through the GLOBE project, researchers have used quantitative
methods to study the responses of 17,000 managers in more than 950
7


organizations representing 62 different cultures throughout the world
(Northouse, 2007, p. 306). A recent focus on cross-cultural issues have
helped researchers, "uncover new relationships by forcing them to include a
much broader range of variables often not considered in contemporary
theories, such as the importance of religion, language, ethnic background,
history, etc." (House, 2004, p. 6). The findings of the GLOBE project as well as
other research on culture and leadership, serve as a foundation for the
conceptual framework for this study, which may help develop new theories
of leadership such as Latino leadership.
Delimitations
1. Due to the large number of potential participants in the study
population, the population involved in the current study will focus
only on "elected Latino leaders.
2. In order to assure manageability of the data collected, the
survey instrument will focus only on leadership behaviors based
on transactional and transformational styles.
3. In order to assure manageability of the data collected, survey
instrument will focus only on "self-perceived" leadership style
(Leader Form) of sample population and not how "others
perceive" (Rater Form) sample population being studied.
8


Significance of Study
This study is significant because it establishes a foundation for future
Latino leadership theory and practice. Since very little empirical research
and literature currently exists on how Latinos define and experience
leadership, this study will be useful in that it investigates the extent to which
leadership styles and acculturation are associated. Further, it provides
additional insight regarding the preferred leadership styles of Latino leaders.
By conducting this exploratory study, conclusions drawn might yield new
knowledge for understanding Latino Leadership behavior that can serve as a
future reference for researchers on the subject of Latino leadership.
Moreover, this research study provides recommendations on future
Latino leadership theory and development, practice in context, and research
on Latino leadership and culture. Finally, this study is helpful to leadership
scholars and practitioners in training and informing them about ways to
support Latino leaders.
Organization of Study
The statement of the problem, background, conceptual framework,
methodology, and research questions for this study is introduced in chapter
one. Included in chapter one is a brief overview of the bodies of literature
that contributed to the conceptual framework of this study. Chapter two
provides a complete review of the literature relevant and essential to the
9


research topic. It also includes definition of terms and concepts that describe
Latino culture. Chapter three provides the methodology of this study. Survey
instrument and interview questions as well as method of data collection. And
data analysis is discussed in this chapter. Chapter four includes all findings
and data analysis of the research questions. Summaries of the research
findings as well as implications of the findings are addressed in chapter five.
Definition of Terms
The following key terms serve to clarify and guide the research
questions of this study:
1. Culture nuance such as beliefs, values, rules, norms, symbols, and
traditions that are common for a group of people. Culture is the way of
life, customs, and script of a group of people (Northouse, 2007, p.
302).
2. Diversity the existence of different cultures or ethnicities within a
group or organization.
3. Leadership is a process whereby an individual influences a group
of individuals to achieve a common goal (Northouse, 2007, pp. 307-
308).
4. Dimensions of Culture nine dimensions developed by the Global
Leadership and organizational Behavior Effectiveness or GLOBE
research project;
10


a. uncertainty avoidance the way cultures use rules,
structures, and laws to make things predictable and less
uncertain;
b. power distance members within a group that expect and
agree how power should be shared unequally;
c. institutional collectivism the degree to which an
organization or society encourages institutional or societal
collective action;
d. in-group collectivism the degree to which people express
pride, loyalty, and cohesiveness in their organizations or
families;
e. gender egalitarianism the way in which organizations or
societies minimize gender role differences and promotes
gender equality;
f. assertiveness ways that people within a culture are
determined, assertive, confrontational, and aggressive in
their social relationships;
g. future oriented the way that people within a society
engages in future oriented behaviors such as planning,
investing in the future, and delaying gratification;
11


h. performance orientation the way in which organizations
or societies encourage and reward group members for
improved performance and excellence; and
i. humane orientation the degree to which a culture
encourages and rewards people for being fair, altruistic,
generous, caring, and kind to others.
Chapter Summary
Chapter one provides the purpose, background, conceptual
framework, delimitations, organization, and definition of terms for this study.
In addition, an introduction to the problem was provided in order to
investigate the acculturation and leadership styles of elected Latino leaders.
The subsequent chapters provide the literature review, methodology,
findings, and summary of this study.
12


CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW
Chapter two provides a complete review of the literature relevant and
essential to understanding U.S. Latino culture from a historical and
contemporary context. Next the literature will provide a review of leadership
and cross-cultural research. In order to gain a better understanding of the
theoretical framework for this study, the literature review is presented in the
following sections: [a) Latino demographics, (b) immigration issues, (c)
Latino educational attainment, (d) Latino economic attainment, (e) Latino
culture (f) cross-cultural research and leadership styles, and (g)
transformational and transactional leadership styles. It should be noted that
currently, very little empirical data or dissertation studies exist on Latino
leadership as a distinct topic. Therefore, the literature focuses on research
that describes culture, its dimensions, and the effects of culture on the
leadership process. The literature review will serve to guide the research
questions of this study.
Latino Demographics
One only needs to turn on the television, radio, or drive down the
street to see and hear the influence Latinos have on popular U.S. culture.
There was a time in which one could only experience Latino culture by
13


venturing into certain enclaves of major metropolitan cities. Today, in many
major cities across the United States, there is no need to visit enclaves to
experience Latino culture, because Latino influences are being felt at all
levels of urban and rural communities. The rapid increase in the Latino
population is becoming more and more noticeable at all levels of society and
will have major implications in the labor force, educational system,
healthcare system, and the political system of this country.
Latinos have been, and continue to be, the fastest growing population
in the United States for the past several decades (US Census Bureau, 2008).
Suro (2006), reports that the number of Latinos living in the U.S. doubled
between 1970 and 1990 and it and has nearly doubled again since 1990. This
upward trend in the Latino population will have major implications on how
they live now and in the future (Andrade, 2008; Bordas, 2007; Suro, 2006).
Demographic data reveals that U.S. Latinos are more likely to be
young, have less formal education, earn less, are group oriented, and come
from diverse Latin host countries. Ramirez (2004) reported that U.S. Latinos
represented 13.3% of the country's population. Among the Latino
population, two-thirds (66.9 %) were of Mexican origin, 14.3% were Central
and South American, 8.6% were Puerto Rican, 3.7% were Cuban and the
remaining 6.5% were of other Latino/Hispanic origins. A 2005 U.S. Census
report found that the Latino population totaled 42 million of which,
14


twenty seven million were of Mexican decent, 3.8 million were Puerto Ricans,
1.4 million were Cuban, and 9.8 million were of "other Latin American
countries.
Where does the majority of U.S. Latinos live? According to Andrade
(2008), over 82% of all Latinos living in the U.S. resides in 10 states. They
are (by descending order), California with 12.2 million, Texas with 7.6
million, New York with 3 million, Florida with 3 million, Illinois with 1.7
million, Arizona with 1.5 million, New Jersey with 1.2 million, Colorado with
862.000, New Mexico with 308,000, and Georgia with 576,000. A combined
7.4 million Latinos live in the other 40 states. This count reflects a 71%
increase in the Latino population from 1990 to 2004.
Additionally, the following U.S. cities had a Latino population of
200,000 or more in 2004; New York with 2.2 million, Los Angeles with 1.8
million, Houston with 830,000, Chicago with 745,000, San Antonio with
729.000, Phoenix with 512,000, Dallas with 501,000, El Paso with 459,000,
San Diego with 333,000, San Jose with 277,000, Santa Ana with 257,000,
Austin with 235,000, Miami with 225,000, Long Beach with 214,000,
Albuquerque with 212,000, Fresno with 211,000 and Forth Worth with
209.000, This count reflects an increase of 139% within the Latino
population of these major cities from 1990 to 2004 (Andrade, 2008).
15


According to Suro (2006), the Latino population accounts for a
disproportion share of total population growth in the U.S. They further note
between 2000 and 2020 the Hispanic population is projected to grow by 25.1
million and the white population by 13.3 million. In other words, Latinos will
account for 46% and whites 24% of total population growth over the next
two decades. Another unique characteristic of the U.S. Latino population is
that they are a relatively young group with mostly young adults in their
prime childbearing years. They have high fertile rate, with birth rates twice
as high as those of non-Hispanics (Suro, 2006, p. 2). More specifically in
2004, 39.2% of the total Latino population was under the age of 21 as
compared to 26.1% of the white population. With a younger population
comes a longer child bearing range. Adding to this disparity in age is the fact
that only 5.1% of the Latino population is 65 years and over as compared to
14.5% of white population (US Census Bureau Annual Social and Economic
Supplement, 2004).
While the white population is growing "older the Latino population
continues to be younger, thus causing the extraordinary growth rate among
this group. According to Vega (2006), the age characteristic seems to hold
most true for Mexican Americans and varies among the other Latino groups.
For example, "almost four in ten (37.1 percent) of Mexican-origin Latinos are
under the age of eighteen. This compares to only one in five (19.6 percent)
16


U.S. Cubans, who are also under the age of eighteen. At the other end of the
age spectrum, one in twenty-five Mexican-origin Latinos is sixty-five or older
compared to nearly one in four (22.6 percent) U.S. Cubans. The median age
for Mexican-origin Latinos is twenty-four years compared to forty for Cubans
and thirty-three for Dominicans (Vega, 2006, p. 1).
Immigration
Another unique characteristic of U.S. Latinos is the role of recent
immigrants and their impact on the changing demographics of this
population. Martinez (2002), reports that many immigrants (legal or illegal),
chose to come to the "Norte" (north), or "al otro lado" (the other side) of the
border to risk it all for a better life. Many pay a high price for their decision.
They are placed in financial debt and, often times, their lives are in jeopardy.
For many Mexican American individuals who are successful, they continue to
have on-going interactions with recent immigrants who reinforce their
traditional values.
In 2005, the US Census Bureau analysis on immigrants reported the
following:
There are an estimated 35.2 million immigrants (legal and illegal)
living in the US during March of 2005 which is the highest number
ever recorded 2 1/2 times the 13.5 million during the height of the
last huge immigration wave in 1910;
Between January 2000 and March 2005, 7.9 million new
immigrants (legal and illegal) settled in the US, making it the highest
five-year period of immigration in American history;
17


Nearly half of post-2000 arrivals (3.7 million) are estimated to be
illegal aliens;
Immigrants account for 12.1 percent of the total US population,
which is the highest percentage in eight decades. If current trends
continue it will surpass the high of 14.7 percent reached in 1910;
Of adult immigrants, 31 percent did not complete high school.
(p. 1).
According to Suro (2006), the issue of immigration from a political
perspective has reached a boiling point that confronts primarily Latino
immigrants like no other group in this country. This has been supported by
the numerous speeches and debates at all levels of the government including
the Presidency. In a June 2007 press conference regarding immigration
reform, President Bush stated:
"The first thing that we've got to recognize in the country is that the
system isn't working. The immigration system needs reform. The
status quo is unacceptable. Most Americans understand that. They
say, well, we attempted to reform the system in 1986, and the reform
didn't work. Our view is, if the status quo is unacceptable, we need to
replace it with something that is acceptable, and have been working
toward that end with both Democrats and Republicans in the Senate.
(Office of the Press Secretary, The White House, June 26,2007)
Suro (2006), further suggests that immigrants from Latin or Spanish
speaking countries are arguably the largest ethnic groups that face the most
stigma because of their birthplace and argues that since immigration issues
have never been more volatile then they are now, the outcome of this debate
will have significant consequences on how society views immigrants and
how they are integrated (if at all) into American mainstream culture (p. 34).
18


There is a large demographic change happening in the United States
and in July 2007, the US Latino population reached the 45.5 million mark
making up 15 percent of the total US population (US Census Bureau News,
2008). In 1966, when the US population reached the 200 million mark, the
Hispanic population was 8.5 million. Since then, Latinos, accounted for 36%
of the 100 million added to the population in the last four decades, the most
of any racial or ethnic group. They further state that a number of diverse
factors determined the increased rate of growth of Latinos, ranging from
changes in the U.S. immigration law in 1965,1986 and 1990 to steady
improvements in life expectancy. In addition, the increase in population
growth among Latinos can be attributed to the recent influx of recent
immigrants (both documented and undocumented) migrating from various
Latin American countries, with the majority migrating from Mexico.
It is estimated that the Latino population will reach 47.7 million by
the end of this decade, and 60.4 million by 2020. This projected population
increase may not accurately represent the true number of this population
since many undocumented immigrants remain "hidden" in the United States
in fear of being deported. Currently there is an estimated 11 million
undocumented citizens form Latin American countries residing in the United
States (Pew Research Center, 2009).
19


In 2006 a Pew Hispanic Center survey, it was revealed that of adults
surveyed nationwide, only 10% viewed immigration as an important
problem facing the nation. More specifically, when asked, "What do you
think is the most important problem facing the country today?" 18%
answered "The War in Iraq," 14% answered "Energy and Gas Prices," 13%
answered, "Government and Politics," 10% Immigration," 7% answered,
"Economy (general)," 5% answered, Terrorism," 4% answered, "Health Care
and Costs," 4% answered, "Morality/Values," and 3% answered,
"Unemployment/Jobs (p. 2).
In 2006, the Pew Hispanic Center conducted one of the most
comprehensive surveys, which focused on US public perceptions of Latino
immigrants. Some of their key findings included:
"It appears that the general public is almost evenly divided on
whether immigration overall is good for the country or not;
Americans are split over levels of legal immigration; A significant
majority of Americans see illegal immigration as a very serious
problem and most others see it at least as a serious problem; A
majority of Americans believes that illegal immigrants are taking jobs
Americans do not want; A majority of Americans appears to favor
measures that would allow illegal immigrants currently in the US to
remain in the country either as permanent residents and eventual
citizens or as temporary workers who will have to go home
eventually; Americans generally express greater confidence in
Democrats on immigration issues than Republicans; A majority of
Americans disapprove of the way that President Bush is handling
immigration issues." (p. 1)
These findings suggest that although many Americans have expressed
some adverse feelings about immigrants, there are other issues that are more
20


important to them at the national level. According to a May, 2006 survey
conducted by the New York Times/CBS News Poll, 1,241 adults were asked,
"Do you think illegal immigrants coming to this country today take jobs away
from American citizens, or do they mostly take jobs from Americans dont
want?" only 36% answered, "Take jobs away." The majority, however, 53%
answered, "Take unwanted jobs." Additionally, in a Fox/Opinion Poll
conducted April 2006, when 900 registered voters nationwide were asked to
respond to the following statement, "Some people say that illegal immigrants
are mainly doing low-paying jobs that US citizens don't want. Others contend
that illegal immigrants are taking jobs away from U.S. citizens. Which is
closer to how you feel?" only 34% responded, "Take jobs away as opposed
to 47% who responded, "Take unwanted jobs" (Pew Hispanic Center, 2006,
p. 6).
Perhaps the two most striking survey results regarding public
perception of immigrants (primarily undocumented) were conducted by the
ABC News/Washington Post Poll in April 2006 to 1,027 adults nationwide,
and the Associated Press/Ipsos survey conducted March 2006 to 1,003
adults nationwide. When asked, "Overall do you think illegal immigrants take
jobs that other people want, or take jobs that other people don't want?
Approximately 70% of all respondents answered, "Take jobs that other
people dont want." Similarly, when asked by the Associated Press/Ipsos
21


survey, "Which comes closet to your view? Illegal immigrants take jobs that
Americans dont want, or illegal immigrants take away jobs that are wanted
by Americans." An overwhelming 65% answered, "Take unwanted jobs"
(Pew Hispanic Center, 2006).
In addition the Pew Hispanic Center survey, the Fox News/Opinion
Poll, ABC News/Washington Post Poll, and Associated Press/Ipsos Poll, six
additional surveys were conducted by various organizations such as
Newsweek Magazine, Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg, NBC News/Wall Street
Journal, USA Today/Gallup Poll, and Times Magazine regarding public
perception of immigration and its impact in the US. Over 11,500 adults
nationwide responded suggesting that this issue remains a topic of public
discussion.
Regardless of the position one takes regarding immigration, the
impact of the Latino immigrant population in the United States has caused a
national debate and the need for reform at the federal and state level. The
changing demographics of the Latino immigrant population will require us to
understand how they will impact the future leadership of this country
(Andrade, 2008; Bordas, 2007; Lopez, 2009).
Latino Educational Attainment
One of the strongest indicators of social and economic mobility is
educational attainment. Access to quality educational systems is becoming
22


difficult for many individuals in society today. The lack of a quality education
is most apparent in systems that are primarily populated by ethnic minority
groups in the U.S. As a result, Latinos as an overall population remain
undereducated. The census reports that more than one-quarter (27 percent)
of U.S. Latinos has less than a ninth-grade education compared with only 4
percent non-Latino whites (Ramirez 2004, p. 4). And, while eight in ten (80.4
percent) of the total U.S. population twenty-five and older are high school
graduates or more, only five in ten U.S. Latinos claim the same educational
level.
According to Chapa & De La Rosa (2004), "the educational attainment
of the growing numbers of Latino school-age children continues to lag behind
that of non-Latino Anglos" (p. 3). Additionally, they report the proportion of
Latinos in younger age groups is much larger than that of the White
population. "Further, more than one third of all Latinos are younger than 18,
compared to about one fourth for Whites. As a result, Latinos have much
younger age distributions (with a median age of 26 years) compared to
Whites (median age of almost 36 years) (p. 4). Chapa and De La Rosa (2004)
argue that many Latino adults are also relatively young and have more
childbearing years ahead of them ensures that Latinos will become an even
greater part of the school-age population in the future (p. 3). As this
population continues to grow at very high rates, they will continue to
23


compose larger segments of the preschool, school age, and college-age
populations.
More than one-quarter or 27% of Hispanics had less than a ninth-
grade education, compared with only 4% percent of non-Hispanic Whites (US
Census Bureau, 2000). Chapa and De La Rosa (2004) report that without
exception, among all Hispanics, Mexicans have the lowest rates of
educational attainment for all levels of education. However, among all the
Hispanic subgroups, "Cubans had the highest high school completion rates,
with 34.8%. In fact, Cubans had high school completion rates that were
slightly higher than the 33% of Anglos (p. 7).
According to Saracho & Martinez-Hancock (2004), a myth has existed
suggesting that Mexican American individuals do not value education. This
myth reflects Mexican American children's school experience and poor
academic achievement (p. 4). However, Valencia and Black (2002) argue that
the basis for the myth is the pseudoscientific concept of "deficit thinking."
They further contend that this myth is a result of ideology and a mind set that
blames the victim rather than examining the oppressive and inadequate
school system in which many lower socio-economic school children
experience. They further found that the myth has been supported (intended
or not) by prior research of academicians who particularly focused their
24


work on cultural deprivation and at risk classifications. See Table 1 and 2 for
demographic and educational trends of US Latinos.
Table 1.
Demographic and Educational Trends of US Latinos
A) l 15- c o o o- 10 H t w s £ 5 3
U 1980 1990 2000
Pop 18-24 6.8 11.9 17.5
-% Total Pop 6.4 9.0 12.5
-O- % HS Grads 4.5 6.5 10.8
% 2-yr Coll 8.1 14.2
H* % AA deg 4.3 5.3 9.9
-A- % 4-yr Coll 4.2 6.6
-* % BA Recipients 2.4 3.2 6.3
% PhDs 1.6 2.5 3.8
Source: Data from U.S. Bureau of the Census and National Center for Education
Statistics tables.
25


Table 2.
Population by Hispanic Origin and Educational Attainment: 2002
(As a percent of each population 25 years and older) Hispanic Non-Hispanic White
Less than 9th grade 27 4
9th to 12th grade (no diploma) 16 7.3
High School graduate or some college 45.9 59.3
Bachelor's degree or more 11.1 29.4
Source: U.S Census Bureau, Annual Demographic Supplement to the March 2002
Current Population Survey.
26


Table 3.
Population with at Least a High School Education by Detailed Hispanic
Origin: 2002
(As percent of each population 2 5 years and older)
Non-Hispanic Hispanic
88.7 57.0
Mexican Puerto Rican Cuban Central/ South American Other Hispanic
50.6 66.8 70.8 4.7 74.0
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Demographic Supplement to the March 2002
Current Population Survey.
Despite the overall dismal high school graduation rates of Latinos in
general, there have been some gains made in the area of higher education.
Chapa & De La Rosa [2004], report that the numbers of Latinos participating
in higher education is increasing. However, the rate of degrees conferred
upon Latinos narrows as these students further their education beyond the
bachelors level e.g., Bachelors degrees 6%, Masters degrees 4%, and
Doctorate degrees 3%. According to the 2004 US Census Bureau, the
proportion of Latinos that had "attained at least a bachelors degree ranged
from 18.6 percent for Cubans, 17.3 percent for Central and South Americans,
and 19.7 percent for other Hispanics to 7.6 percent for Mexicans" (p. 10).
27


Chapa & De La Rosa [2004) concludes, the rapid growth of the Latino
population has serious implications for educational policies and for the
economic growth of the United States [p. 9).
According to Lopez (2009), there are many reasons for poor school
attendance by Latinos. The following were reasons given for not continuing
their education. Seventy-four percent said they need to help support their
family, 49% said their English skills are limited, 40% said they cannot afford
to go to school, and 42% said they dont like school. Zoppi (2004), suggests
that what is alarming about these statistics is that Latinos continue to
increase in population and in the labor force however, the educational
achievement among this population continues to lag behind the rest of the
nation.
Latino Economic Attainment
Another important aspect of Latinos in the U.S. is the economic
attainment of this population. Generally, economic attainment can be directly
linked to one's educational attainment, which is a key indicator of ones
future occupational or career path. However, a wage gap still exists and
Latinos will have to make huge gains if they are to contribute to the economic
prosperity of this nation. Further, Latino earning and spending power is
likely to grow as a direct result of their dramatic population growth. In a
2002 Pew Hispanic Center/Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation survey, 80% of
28


Latinos expressed confidence that their children (growing up in the United
States) would get a better education and 76% of Latinos were confident that
their children (once grown) would have better employment and better wages
(Saracho & Martinez-Hancock, 2004, p. 8).
According to a 2002 U.S. Census Bureau report, Hispanics/Latinos and
non-Hispanic Whites have different occupational distributions. The Bureau
reports, that 22.1% of Hispanics were more likely than 11.6% of non-
Hispanic Whites to work in service occupations. Zoppi (2004) reports that in
2003, Latinos comprised only 4.5% of managers and officials, 5.7% were
professionals, and 3.9% were technicians as compared to Whites who
comprised 12.6% officials/managers, 17.8% professionals, and 6.5%
technicians. The significance translates to an overall lower earning potential
of Latino families in the U.S.
The 2002 U.S. Census Bureau reports that Latinos are much more
likely than non-Latino Whites to be unemployed. More specifically, 8.1% of
Hispanics or Latinos in the civilian labor force aged 16 and older were
unemployed, compared with only 5.1% of non-Hispanic/Latino Whites.
Additionally, among all Hispanic/Latino groups, 8.4% of Mexicans, 9.6% of
Puerto Ricans, 6.8% of Central and South Americans, 6.1% of Cubans, and
8.6% of other Hispanics/Latinos were unemployed. However, many Latinos
are employed in the workforce. Nearly seven in ten (69 percent) of all U.S.
29


Latino men were in the workforce as of the last census count. This compares
to 71 percent of all U.S. men participating in the workforce during the same
period (Ramirez 2004, p. 12). Fifty-three percent of U.S. Latinas participated
in the workforce in 2000 compared to nearly six in ten (58 percent) of all U.S.
women in general.
Although many U.S. Latinos are actively engaged in the workforce,
according to Ramirez (2004), nearly half (45.1 percent) of all Latino males
are employed in either service or production, transportation and material
moving occupations (13 percent). In comparison, one in three (33.5 percent)
of all U.S. males are employed in similar occupations. In addition, while more
than three in ten (31.4 percent) U.S. males are employed in management and
professional occupations, only one in seven (14.6 percent) U.S. Latino males
are in similar occupations. Census statistics indicated that 41% of Hispanic
workers were employed in service occupations or as operators and laborers.
These limited job opportunities pose a concern for many Latino families in
that they limit the earning potential and overall income of this group.
The median family income for U.S. Latinos in 1999 was $34,400. This
compares to a median family income of $50,000 for all families in the United
States. Moreover, while one in eight (12.4 percent) of the total U.S.
population lives below the poverty rate, one in five U.S. Latinos (19.6
percent) lives in poverty (Ramirez, 2004, p. 17). Zoopi (2004) reports that
30


overall, Latinos (both male and female] earn less than their White and Black
counterparts, despite their educational attainment (p. 22]. However,
occupational differences exist among Latino sub-groups. According to the
2002 U.S. Census Bureau, in 1999 27.3% of Cubans, 19.4% Puerto Ricans, and
11.8% Mexican Americans were employed in management and professional
positions. When further examined, Mexicans were more likely to be working
as operators, factory workers, and laborers (Zoppi 2004, p. 25].
Saracho and Martinez-Hancock (2004], conclude that over-all Latinos
in general are hard-working people who are typically undereducated and
who work primarily as unskilled laborers and, as a result, receive low
salaries. Even though there have been some economic gains in this
population recently and more Latinos are experiencing a middle-class life
style, there is still a looming threat to the working-class or poor. According to
Kochhar (2009], the recent recession has had a worsening effect on Latinos
in the labor force and the unemployment rate for Latinos increased from
6.7% to 9.5% in 2009.
Despite the fact that Latinos fully participate in the workforce, the
economic disparity they still face today can lead to significant burdens on
social programs such as welfare, healthcare, and the educational system of
mainstream society.
31


Latino Culture
The word "culture" has been examined and debated by
anthropologists and sociologists for many years (Banks, 2001; Moya, 2002;
Northouse, 2007]. According to many researchers, culture is an abstract
concept because it is difficult to define and has different meanings to
different groups of people. Spradley (1980], states that culture "consists of
what people do (behaviors), what people say (language), and some tension
between what people really do and what they ought to do as well as what
they make and use (artifacts)" (p. 53). However, what is agreed upon, is that
culture captures the nuances of how groups of people live.
As was stated in the definition of terms in chapter one, the researcher
will use the definition as defined by Northouse (2007) as "the learned beliefs,
values, rules, norms, symbols, and traditions that are common to a group of
people. It is these shared qualities of a group that make them unique.
Additionally, culture is the way of life, customs, and script of a group of
people" (p. 302). Trueba (1993) suggests, by understanding the concept of
culture and one's own culture, one has the ability to effectively function in
other cultures (as cited in Zoppi, 2004, p. 55). In turn, culture provides the
bases for how groups identify, both at the individual and group level.
According to Ramirez (2004), there were 40,459,196 people in the
United States who identified themselves as "Hispanic or Latino." The labels or
32


terms used to identify this particular group of individuals has been
challenging because it is difficult to categorize a group of people who's
ancestral origins are so large and varied. (Suro, 2006) further contends that
the idea that people from all these places are bound together by an
overarching group identity is an American phenomenon. Tafoya (2004)
reports that to many Latinos, the term American is viewed less in the context
of an overall identity and more in specific reference to citizenship or
birthplace. For example, both second generation Mexicans in Los Angeles
and Puerto Ricans in New York reported that they referred to themselves as
unhyphenated Americans when they were crossing the boarder or when they
were outside of the United States, but within the United States they saw
themselves as Mexican-Americans, and Puerto Ricans (p. 16).
Vega (2006), reports that in one study conducted by a 1990 Latino
National Political survey, Latino respondents were asked a series of
questions regarding labels often used to describe them (respondent's or
respondent's parent's country of origin; Latino/Hispanic; and American).
Respondents who identified with all three labels were then asked to indicate
which label they primarily use to identify themselves. Over 50% of the Latino
respondents selected their own or their parent's country of origin; 23.7%
chose Latino or Hispanic; and 20.7% selected American.
33


Garcia-Preto (1996), reported that in their countries of origin, these
people would not use either label to describe themselves. Instead, they
would use a label that describes their country of origin or ethnic group
identification. They are Cubans, Chicanos, Mexicans, Puerto Ricans,
Argentineans, Colombians, Dominicans, Brazilians, Guatemalans, Costa
Ricans, Nicaraguans, Salvadorians, and all the other nationalities that
comprise South America, Central America, and the Caribbean.
Suro (2006), reports that the U.S. Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) debated the matter and decided not to pick one label over another so
as not to offend anyone. Further, the OMBs official definition relies on
national origins, stating the term Hispanic or Latino" refers to people who
trace their descent from Mexico, Puerto Rico, Cuba, Central and South
America and other Spanish cultures. Regardless of the preference used to
describe Latinos living in the U.S., this issue is just symbolic of a much larger
question, who are these people?
According to Bordas (2007), a core belief in Latino culture is that
other people come first. This drives a humanistic set of values that are group
centered rather than self-centered among Latinos and several core values
have been identified as being central to the cultural values of Latinos.
Family (familia) is the most crucial and valued element (or heart) of
the Latino culture. Providing a sense of belonging and connection among all
34


members of the family both immediate and extended (padres, padrinos,
commadres, tios y tias) is of most importance to Latinos. Latinos use the
term, "mi casa es su casa" (or my house is your house) which captures the
true essence of this value. Respect (respecto) is revered and is generally
shown to those who are older (padres, abuelitos, and other elders in the
family), to those who hold knowledge (teachers, doctors, lawyers, etc.), and
to those who hold authority (priests or community leaders). Signs of respect
are usually conveyed through body language, tone of voice, and deference.
Often Latinos tend to offer profuse thanks, praise, and/or apologies when
displaying respect. Being humble is a way to display and receive respect.
Trust (confianza) refers to the traditional group centered orientation
Latinos come from in which their actions and behaviors center on
relationships within their group. To this end, being able to be count on and
being trustworthy/loyal is highly valued.
Awareness (conciencia) refers to identity, knowing who and where
you come from and what kind of person you are is highly valued. Latinos
look to personal example, core values, and overall cultural awareness when it
comes to identifying as "Latino." Awareness implies that individuals from this
group have done some soul searching and have an awareness and
appreciation of who they are culturally.
35


Service (servicio) refers to the value many Latinos place on
cooperation, reciprocity, mutual assistance, generosity, and sharing among
others. This can be at various levels, whether it is in the immediate or
extended family or the greater community. Therefore, giving back to the
community is highly valued and personal gain is to be shared and benefit the
family and community alike. Being a servant or providing service to the
community is highly valued.
Finally, Emotions or Feelings (sentimientos) are highly valued. For
many Latinos, showing emotion and feeling is a way to express their passion
for life in general. To this end, Latinos are a contact culture and often use
physical gestures such as hugs when greeting or placing hands on the arms
or shoulders of those they are talking with. This behavior is directly related
to the value placed on family.
DeNeve [1997), found the following cultural patterns in many Latino
groups:
^"Importance of the family and authority: Latino people often place a
great emphasis on the family and family obligations and believe the
family is honored through strong work ethics and by providing good
financial support. In Latino families gender roles are defined with
males being in superior roles within a well-defined family hierarchy.
The male as head of the household sets the rules and actions. This is
also true in other parts of a Latino's life where age is respected and a
hierarchy of status and economic class is expected. The use of titles
and rank add to these roles and expected differences.
Formality: From this value on hierarchy and authority comes a
tradition of formality in speech, dress, and relationships.
36


Status differentiations are part of the Spanish language reflecting how
close friends are addressed versus all other people. Further, proper
appearance outside the home since this is related to status,
respectability, and family pride.
* Work ethnic: The attitudes of authority and family affect attitudes
toward work. On the one hand, Latinos feel that family should take
precedence over work because work is an obligation to meet family
responsibilities. This contrasts with respect for authority and the
value of work causing Latinos to invest a great deal in their work.
"Their preference is to work in an organization to which they can give
their loyalty and establish long-term relationships." Moving from job
to job is seen as a sign of instability rather than a sign of success (p.
20).
It is important to note that Latinos living in the United States
(regardless of generational status) come from a myriad of host countries that
make them a heterogeneous group in terms of their ethnic identities.
According to Passel & Taylor (2009), 48% of Latino adults generally describe
themselves by their country of origin first; 26% use the term Latino or
Hispanic first; and 24% refer to themselves as American first. And although
how they describe themselves does matter, they also acknowledge their
shared variations of common cultural characteristics that connect each sub-
group. These include language, strong ethnic identity, values and beliefs
(family being prominent throughout all sub-groups), collective group
orientation, customs and traditions, and other cultural traits (Garcia-Preto,
1996; Hurtado, 1995; Novas, 1994; Suro, 2006; Trueba, 1999).
Latinos come from rather large and diverse backgrounds, therefore
they are increasingly choosing to identify in multiple ways such as Mexican
37


(or Mexican American), Puerto Rican, Cuban, Dominican, etc. which allows
them to fully express who they are and where they come from. It has been
reported that each Latino ethnic sub-group shares common experiences, learned
through education and socialization, and transmitted from generation to
generation, embodied in thought, language, action, artifacts, norms, values, and
beliefs (Hurtado, 1995; Trueba, 1999; Zambrana, 1987; Zambrana et al., 1997;
Zambrana & Zoppi, 2002). Further, each sub-group holds their own national
cultural identity that makes them unique but separates them from other ethnic sub-
groups. This expression is becoming more evident in mainstream society and
is often the source of tension because the U.S. has a history of either
reinforcing group difference or negating them (Suro, 2006; Zoppi, 2004;
Trueba, 1999).
The Latino culture is rich and diverse and as this population continues
to grow, they will undoubtedly influence (if not change) many aspects of
current pop culture. This change will range from the type of food, music, and
language we experience everyday to the way we make decisions and plan for
the future. Whether we are situated (or not) for this change, Latinos have
arrived, and their presence at all levels of our society is being felt.
Acculturation
As generations of Latinos have settled in the US, the influences of the
dominant or "White culture has begun to influence traditional cultural
38


values of Latinos. Berry (1980) states that individuals undergo a process of
change when they come in contact with another culture. According to Marin &
Marin (1991), the process of learning and behaviorally adapting to a new culture
is labeled acculturation. Teske and Nelson (1974) offered the first complete
psychological perspective on acculturation. They report that acculturation is
the inclusion of value systems, developmental sequences, roles, and
personality factors that contribute to how groups accommodate when they
come into contact with each other (as cited in Zoppi, 2004, p. 176).
Several theorists have established that ones psychological functioning
such as language, cognition, personality, identity, attitude, and stress (e.g.,
conflict or crisis) enter different stages (such as assimilating, integrating, or
rejecting) in which their attitude becomes conditioned according to their
environment and the new culture (Banks, 2001; Berry, 1980; Padilla, 1980; Marin
& Marin, 1991; Ryder, Alden, & Paulhus, 2000). It is through this process that
individual behaviors get exhibited and the extent to which one has
acculturated, determines how much of their original traditions and values get
expressed. Padilla and Perez (2003) argue that models of acculturation based on
social cognition, offers a new and innovative approach to research on the process
of acculturation. This is done through social identity theory, which stresses that
individual behavior reflects individuals larger societal units (p. 43). Various
approaches and theories to identity and acculturation, which focuses on
39


culture, ethnicity, and identity have begun to emerge. Across disciplines, the
growing body of literature addressing the constructs of self in relation to the
individuals whole person (i.e., behavior, psychology, education) and its
responses to the environment provides the connection between ones culture and
others culture as independent and autonomous (Padilla & Perez, 2003).
Since acculturation plays an extremely important role in how Latinos
behave, further studies on the acculturation processes will provide a better
understanding of how acculturation influences leadership behavior.
Currently, the literature on acculturation does not address leadership styles,
particularly of Latino leaders.
Cross-Cultural Research and Leadership Styles
Several studies have been conducted on culture and leadership styles
such as "Leadership in Aotearoa New Zealand: A cross-cultural study, and
"Cross-Cultural Research of Legitimated Leadership Behaviors in Chinese
Societies, Findings, Explanations and Implications." However, more are
needed to assess how these two dimensions intersect.
Given the large shift in demographics of U.S. Latinos, the opportunity
for leaders to improve these communities and make significant changes has
never been more apparent than today. More than ever, leaders at all levels
(schools, business, community) will need to be prepared to meet the
challenges of a new America. One major new challenge for leaders today
40


includes the ability to understand the role of one's culture and its impact on
leadership style. More specifically, this demographic shift has created a need
to understand how cultural difference affect leadership performance
(Northouse, 2007).
House (2004), conducted one of the most recent and comprehensive
studies on the relationship between culture and leadership. The major goal
of his study known as GLOBE (Global Leadership and Organizational
Behavior Effectiveness) was to develop an empirically based theory to
describe, understand, and predict the impact of cultural variables on
leadership and organizational processes and effectiveness of those processes.
Triandis (1996) states that a focus on cross-cultural issues within
leadership theory can help researchers uncover new relationships by forcing
investigators to include a much broader range of variables often not
considered in current theories, such as the importance of language, ethnic
background, or political systems. House (2004), concludes, cross-cultural
research may also help to develop new theories of leadership and
organizational processes and effectiveness, as well as to fine-tune existing
theories by incorporating cultural variables and moderators within existing
theoretical frameworks (pp. 6-7).
To this end, the conceptualization used by GLOBE is based on implicit
leadership theory (Lord & Maher, 1991). Dorman, Hanges, & Brodbeck,
41


(2004) assert that within implicit theory, individuals have implicit beliefs
and convictions about the attributes and beliefs that distinguish leaders from
non-leaders and effective leaders from ineffective leaders. From this
perspective, leadership is in the eye of the beholder (as cited in Northouse,
2007, p. 313).
Transformational and Transactional Leadership
Burns (1978) introduced the concept of transformational leadership
as one of two forms that leadership (the other being transactional) in which
one or more persons engage with others in such a way that leaders and
followers raise one another to higher levels of motivation and morality (Rost,
1993). Avolio & Bass (2004) outline dimensions of transformational
leadership attributes as transformative in nature.
The definitions for these leadership dimensions are as follows; within
Idealized influence (attributed) the leader is perceived as being confident
and powerful and followers are drawn to the socialized charisma of the
leader. The leader is also viewed as focusing on higher-order ideals and
ethics. Within Idealized influence (behavior), the leaders charismatic actions
are centered on values, beliefs, and a sense of mission. Inspirational
motivation leaders energize their followers by viewing the future with
optimism, stressing ambitious goals, projecting an idealized vision, and
communicating to followers that the vision is achievable. Actions that appeal
42


to intellectual stimulation leaders are their sense of logic and analysis that
challenge followers to think creatively and find solutions to difficult
problems. Individualized consideration leaders pay attention to the
individual needs of followers by advising and supporting them. Thus
followers are able to develop which contributes to their satisfaction.
According to Avolio & Bass (2004), transactional leadership can best
be defined as an exchange process based on the fulfillment of contractual
obligations. These behaviors are ones that usually set objectives, monitor,
and control outcomes of followers. They identified several behaviors
associated with transactional leadership.
Contingent reward leadership leaders focus on clarifying role and task
requirements and provide followers with material or psychological rewards
contingent on the fulfillment of contractual obligations. Management-by-
exception (active) leaders demonstrate active vigilance of goals to ensure
that standards are met. Management-by-exception (passive) leaders only
intervene or exercise leadership after noncompliance has occurred or when
mistakes have already happened. Laissez-faire leadership is the absence of
leadership behavior in which the leader avoids making decisions, abdicates
responsibility, and does not use their authority. This behavior is generally
the most passive and ineffective form of leadership (Avilio and Bass, 2004).
43


Chapter Summary
A review of the literature outlined in this chapter provides the
background for an emerging leadership theory. Although the literature
makes a strong connection between culture and leadership, little empirical
research exists on how Latinos define and experience leadership. Some of
the literature on culture and its impact on leader behavior offer some
promising foundation for future research on Latino leadership development.
Given the important role culture has on leaders, this study attempts to
describe how culture, as expressed through acculturation levels is associated
with leadership styles of elected Latino leaders.
44


CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
The purpose of this study was to investigate how elected Latino
leaders define and experience leadership by examining their leadership style
and measuring their acculturation level. Specifically, the study aimed at
asking the respondents to identify specific leadership behaviors that reflect
their self-perceived leadership style as well as asking the respondents to
identify their acculturation level to examine the if there was an association
between acculturation and leadership styles. In order to obtain this data, the
Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) and the Acculturation Rating
Scale for Mexican Americans (ARSMA-1I) was administered; each designed to
gather the appropriate data for this study.
Research Questions
In order to obtain the most appropriate results for this study, the
following research questions were used to guide this study.
(1) How does a sample of elected Latino leaders score on the
Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) and Acculturation
Rating Scale for Mexican Americans (ARSMA-II)?
(2) How is acculturation associated with leadership styles?
(3) How does acculturation get expressed between leadership styles?
45


Research Design
The design of this study was exploratory using descriptive and
inferential statistics to analyze the data (Ewen, 1988; Levin & James, 1991;
Runyon & Haber, 1976). Exploratory design was chosen because it allows for
the researcher to be flexible which provides an opportunity to examine all
aspects of the research problem. More importantly, an exploratory design is
best used when the literature fails to reveal any significant research in the
area currently being explored, as is the case with Latino leadership. See
figure 1 for conceptual framework of this study.
46


Leadership Style
Acculturation Level
Multifactor Leadership
Questionnaire (MLQ)
Acculturation Rating Scale
for Mexican Americans
(ARSMA-II)
Demographics
T ransformational
Leadership Style Educational
Attainment
Latino
Leadership
Economical
Attainment
Immigration
Transactional Issues
Leadership Style
Cultural Values
Figure 1. Organizational Framework of Study
Quantitative methods were used to explore the association between
acculturation and leadership styles of the sample study. As a result,
inferential statistics were used to analyze the data in order to describe how
elected Latino leaders acculturation level and leadership styles are
associated. According to Rosenthal and Rosnow (1969), quantitative
research are also utilized to generate hypotheses and develop theories which
to expand upon subsequent research.
47


Although there are many styles of leadership, it is predicted that
transformational leadership style (Burns, 1978; Rost, 1993; Bass, 1990;
Kouzes & Posner, 1995; Northouse, 1997) will be the most congruent with
Latino cultural values and traditions (Andrade, 2009; Bordas, 2007; Zoppi,
2004) because of their similar characteristics.
Study Sample
The final study sample consisted of 60 participant responses to a
survey that was sent via email to 200 randomly selected elected Latino
Leaders that were identified in the 2007 Almanac of Latino Politics,
published by the United States Hispanic Leadership Institute. Requests to
participate were emailed to all segments of elected service at the local and
national level (i.e., school board, city council, state and U.S. senators and
House of Representatives). A total of 60 responses were completed and
analyzed for this study. Participants were not asked to disclose their gender
or age for this study; however, as part of the ARSMA-II questionnaire for
assessing level of acculturation, they were asked to indicate level of
education and generational status.
Currently, there are over 5,000 Latino elected officials in the United
States. Of this group, one Latino is serving as the Secretary of Interior, two
Latinos serve in the US Senate, one Latino serves as Governor, and more than
48


twenty Latinos currently serving in the US Congress and over 200 Latino
state legislators (Andrade, 2008, p. 4).
Leadership Questionnaire
The researcher administered the Multifactor Leadership
Questionnaire (MLQ), Leader Form, to 200 elected Latino leaders (N=200)
throughout the U.S. in order to investigate their leadership styles. Although
there are several leadership surveys and questionnaires designed to examine
various leadership processes and styles (Avolio & Bass, 2004; Kouzes &
Posner, 1999), the researcher selected this instrument because the MLQ
measures a full range of leadership behaviors, as well as leadership outcomes,
based on transformational leadership, transactional leadership, and non-leadership
behaviors. A profile of the leader emerges based on these leadership attributes and
a preferred leadership style is identified. Additionally, data from MLQ scores
are, "used to better understand early developmental factors and experiences
that contribute to the wide range of adult leadership styles and "early
developmental experiences data can be gathered by in-depth life history
interviews or responses to biographical information. (Avolio & Bass, 2004,
p. 16). This questionnaire was also elected due to the breath of its use in
leadership research, its record of high validity, and successful translations in
many languages in various cultures around the world (Avolio & Bass, 2004).
49


Therefore, the MLQ (Leader Form), was used to measure self-perceived
leadership behaviors of elected Latino Leaders.
Using a 5-point Likert scale, subjects (or self-raters) were asked to
respond to forty-five questionnaire items that evaluate how frequently, or to
what degree, they believe they engage in 32 specific leadership behaviors
towards others. These behaviors are based on and attributed from nine
components of transformational leadership (idealized influence [attributed],
idealized influence [behavior], inspirational motivation, intellectual
stimulation, individual consideration), transactional leadership (contingent
reward, management-by-exception [active], and management-by-exception
[passive]), and laissez-faire leadership (absence or avoidance) (Avolio &
Bass, 2004).
The MLQ was re-tested for its validity and reliability in 1995, and the
findings revealed construct validity of the newly adapted Full Range
leadership model. More specifically, the initial set of 9 samples (N=2,154)
was reported in the 1995 MLQ Technical Report. Reliabilities for each
leadership factor scale ranged from .74 to .94. All of the scales reliabilities
were generally high, exceeding standard cut-offs for internal consistency
recommended in the literature (Avolio & Bass, 2004, p. 48). The reliability
and validity scores of nine samples (N = 2,154) and 5 samples (N = 1,709)
used in the original construct validity analyses (Confirmatory Factor
50


Analyses] provide cross-validation of the MLQ Survey (Avolio & Bass, 2004,
p. 53).
The most recent revisions to the MLQ now measure a full range of
leadership styles. The original version was criticized for having inadequate
discriminant validity among factors comprising the survey, for including
behavioral and impact items in the same survey scales, and because the
factor structure initially proposed sometimes failed to be replicated in
subsequent empirical research (Avolio & Bass, 2004, p. 45). According to
Bass, Cascio, and O'Connor (1974) a five point scale for rating the frequency
of observed leader behaviors is used and bears a magnitude estimation based
ratio of 4:3:2:1:0, according to a tested list of anchors (as cited in Avolio &
Bass, 2004, p. 15). The anchors used to evaluate the MLQ are 4 = Frequently,
if not always; 3 = Fairly often; 2 = Sometimes; 1 = Once in a while; 0 = Not at
all.
Acculturation Questionnaire
Acculturation orientation is defined by the leaders cultural
preference, familiarity, and behavioral self-assessment of ethnic identity,
which "impact individuals at all levels of functioning, including behavioral,
affective, and cognitive" (Cuellar & Maldonado, 1995, p. 278). The
measurement of acculturation is important because it is a way to assess
individual identification or personality differences and it gauges change of
51


behavior and values by individuals exposed to mainstream cultural patterns
of the US (values, norms, attitudes, and behaviors) (Marin, Sabogal, VanOss
Marin, Otero-Sabogal, & Perez-Stable, 1987).
The Acculturation Rating Scale for Mexican Americans (ARSMA-II) is a
30-item Likert type scale, which measures acculturation along three
acculturation orientations: Anglo Orientation, Latino Orientation, and Marginal
Orientation. These orientations reflect three primary factors: language, ethnic
identity, and ethnic interaction (Cuellar, 2000, p. 116). Additionally,
acculturation models evaluate the cultural value dimension ofself-identity both
as an individual and as a group of individuals. This cultural value dimension is
called individualism-collectivism (Zoppi, 2004). Latino Oriented refers to
Latino/Hispanic (e.g., Spanish-speaking) culturally oriented individuals who
relate more to Latino culture. Anglo Oriented refers to Anglo or White (e.g., non-
Spanish-speaking) culturally oriented individuals who relates more to Anglo
culture. Marginalization oriented refers to the psychological state in which
acculturating individuals give up their original ethnic/cultural identification with
another group only to discover that they are rejected or otherwise not accepted by
the group to which they were acculturating (Cuellar & Maldonado, 1995, p.
279).
The ARSMA-II was also chosen because it provides a bi-dimensional
acculturation scale reflecting two cultural orientations, Mexican and Anglo
(independently of each other) and it is multidimensional and implements two
52


subscales to compare Mexican culture and the Anglo culture. In addition, it
has been adapted to measure African Americans and Asian Americans as
well. According to Cuellar (2000), the ARSMA II scale shows good
psychometric characteristics that reveal generalizability of the instrument
and its usefulness in comparative or cross-cultural studies (Cuellar, 2000, p.
115). Further the ARSMA-I1 is a rating scale that measures orientation
toward Mexican and Anglo culture independently using two subscales, a
Mexican Orientation Subscale (MOS) and Anglo Orientation Subscale (AOS).
The MOS has 17 items and a Coefficient Alpha of .88 and the AOS has 13
items and a Coefficient Alpha of .83, which suggests that the reliability for
using this instrument is good.
Data Collection
Email invitations were sent to elected Latino officials (N=200)
soliciting their participation in this research study. Access to email
addressees of the sample population was obtained through their local office
headquarters' or political party headquarters. Once participants clicked on
the link connecting them to the online questionnaire, an abstract outlining
the purpose of the study, the benefits of participating in the study, the risks
involved (if any) by participating in the study was provided on the first page
of the online survey. In addition, the researchers contact information was
provided in case any questions came up while participating in the study.
53


Subjects were asked to fill out an online MLQ and ARSMA-II
questionnaire that took 20 30 minute to complete. For subjects wishing to
take the questionnaire by paper and pencil method, the researcher offered to
distribute questionnaires by U.S mail and participants were asked to return
them by U.S mail within two weeks.
The researcher made every effort to keep all data collected
confidential. The managers of the questionnaire Web page (Survey Monkey)
managed the Internet database and ensured the researcher of its
commitment to keep all data collected confidential. In addition, the
researcher stored all data collected from the paper questionnaires on a
separate and confidential database. This was accomplished by storing all
data on a separate memory disk. This disk will be secured at the researcher's
home.
Data Analysis
The data analysis procedure was conducted through online surveys
and responses were individually analyzed. The computer program,
Predictive Analytics Soft Ware (PASW 17.0) formally known as SPSS, was
used for statistical analysis to generate the quantitative results of the data.
More specifically, statistical analysis of the data was performed using
the following methods; descriptive analyses to describe the study sample,
median and mean to measure any central tendency (Levin & James, 1991;
54


Runyon & Harber, 1976) and nonparametric tests to measure associations
between two-level variables for leadership (transformational and
transactional) and acculturation (high and low).
Chapter Summary
I have discussed the questions and the methodology design of the
study in this chapter. Included in that section, is the researcher's choice of
method as well as the organizational framework of the study. A description
of the sample population that includes the sample size as well as an overview
of the instruments used to collect the data for this study is discussed. The
researcher will briefly review the data collection and the subsequent data
analyses in chapter four.
55


CHAPTER IV
FINDINGS
This chapter presents findings of how elected Latino leaders scored
on both the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) and the
Acculturation Rating Scale for Mexican Americans (ARSM-II) and how levels
of acculturation are associated with leadership styles (transformational and
transactional). Additionally, findings are presented of how levels of
acculturation are expressed with those leadership styles.
Findings are organized by the research questions listed below
following a section on the demographics of the participants of the study:
1. How does a sample of elected Latino leaders score on the
Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) and the Acculturation
Rating Scale for Mexican Americans (ARSMA-II)?
2. How is acculturation associated with leadership styles?
3. How does acculturation get expressed between leadership styles?
Demographic Data
The final study sample consisted of 60 participant responses to a
survey that was sent via email to 200 randomly selected elected Latino
Leaders. Requests to participate were emailed to all segments of elected
service at the local and national level (i.e., school board, city council, state
56


and U.S. senators and House of Representatives). The response rate was 33
percent for this study. All participant respondents were of Latino background
as identified by the Annual Latino Elected Official Almanac produced by the
United State Hispanic Leadership Institute. Participants were not asked to
disclose their gender; however, as part of the ARSMA-II questionnaire for
assessing level of acculturation, they were asked to indicate level of
education and generational status.
In terms of their educational attainment, 85% of the sample had
attended at least one year of college and 70% had attended 3-4 years (see
Table 1 and 2). The participants generational status was broken down into 5
categories (see Table 3 and 4); the majority of the respondents were 2nd
generation (born in the U.S., either parent born in Mexico or other country)
or 5th generation (self, parents, and grandparents born in the U.S.), 40% and
35%, respectively.
Chi-square analyses for independence were used to measure three
associations. First was the association between acculturation level and educational
attainment of elected Latino leaders, no statistically significant association
(p<.05) was found (p=3.81). Second was the association between acculturation
level and generational level of elected Latino leaders, a statistically significant
association (p<.05) was found (p=6.90). Third was the association between self-
perceived leadership styles and acculturation level, a statistically significant
association (p<.05) was found (p=6.73).
57


It should be noted that because the researcher did not hypothesize what the
frequency distributions should look like as part of the research questions, it was
not possible to calculate the exact power for this study. However, based on a
sample of 60, and using the tables published by Cohen (1969) it was determined
that the power to detect a large effect is .93, for a medium effect it is .69, and for a
small effect, .41. Because the power to detect a large difference is .93, there is
confidence in the interpretation of the results that there is an association between
leadership style and acculturation level.
Table 4.
Generational Level and Educational Attainment of Respondents
Generational Level Total
lst-4th Generation 5th Generation
Educational Attainment
0-8 3 0 3 (5%)
9-12 5 1 6 [10%)
1-2 years of College 7 2 9 (15%)
3-4 years of College 24 18 42 (70%)
total 39 21 60
58


Table 5.
Acculturation Level and Educational Attainment
Grade Completed Total
0-8 9-12 1-2 years of college 3-4 years of college
Acculturation Level
Low 3 2 4 22 31
High 0 4 5 20 29
Total 3 6 9 42 60
x2 (1, 60) = 3.81, p > .01.
Table 6.
Generational Level of Respondents
Generational Level
1st Generation: You were born in Mexico or other country 2nd Generation: You were born in USA & either parent were born in Mexico or other country 3rd Generation: You & both parents in USA and all grandparents born in Mexico or other country 4th Generation: You, parents & at least one grandparent born in USA and other grandparent born in Mexico or other country 5th Generation: You, parents and all grandparents born in USA Total
3(5%) 24 (40%) 6 (10%) 6 (10%) 21 (35%) 60
59


Table 7.
Acculturation Level and Generational Level of Respondents
Generational Level Total
1st -4th Generation 5th Generation
Acculturation
Low 25 6 31
High 14 15 29
Total 39 21 60
x2(l, 60) = 6.90, p < .01.
Leadership Style
The Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) Leader Form,
(Appendix A), was used to measure self-perceived leadership behaviors in
this sample of elected Latino Leaders. Using a 5-point Likert scale, (self-
raters) were asked to respond to 45 questionnaire items that evaluate how
frequently, or to what degree, they believe they engage in 32 specific
leadership behaviors towards others.
These leadership behaviors were assessed along nine dimensions that
underpin the behaviors of transformational and transactional leadership
styles (Avolio & Bass, 2004). It should be noted that one leadership
dimension, Laisser-faire, was not examined in this study because the study
centered on a preferred leadership style.
60


Transformational Leadership Dimensions
1. Idealized Influence [attributed] Builds trust/confidence that
others admire. Serves as a role model for others. Reassures others that
obstacles will be overcome.
2. Idealized Influence [behavior] this refers to charismatic actions of
the leader that are centered on values, beliefs, and a sense of mission.
3. Inspirational Motivation Provides vision of what is possible and how
to attain possibilities. These leaders provide motivation and inspiration by
providing meaning and challenge.
4. Intellectual Stimulation Help others to think about old problems in
new ways by rethinking self-assumptions and beliefs.
5. Individual Considerations Recognizes the needs of others in order to
develop and maximize their full potential. Provides others with support,
mentoring, and coaching.
Transactional Leadership Dimensions
1. Contingent Reward Makes clear what one can expect to receive
when performance goals are achieved (to do something right).
2. Management-by Exception [active] Engages in corrective
transactions to maintain stability. Direct attention towards failure to
meet standards.
3. Management-by-exception [passive] A corrective transaction only
when something negative occurs. Take no action until complaints are
61


received.
Non-Leadership Dimension
1. Laisser-faire Leaders offer the least amount of guidance under the
assumption that followers will be able to find their own way to achieve
goals.
The responses were given on a 5-point scale:
4 = Frequently, if not always
3 = Fairly often
2 = Sometimes
1 = Once in a while
0 = Not at all
Acculturation Level
The Acculturation Rating Scale for Mexican Americans (ARSMA-II,
Appendix B) is a 30-item Likert scale that measures acculturation along three
primary factors: language, ethnic identity, and ethnic interaction. The
responses were given on a 5-point scale; 5 = Almost Always/Extremely
Often; 4 = Much/Very Often; 3 = Moderately; 2 = Very Little/Not Very Much;
and 1 = Not at all.
The ARSMA-II is a multidimensional scale that measures orientation
toward Mexican and Anglo culture independently using two subscales, a
Mexican Orientation Subscale (MOS) and Anglo Orientation Subscale (AOS).
The MOS has 17 items and a Coefficient Alpha of .88 and the AOS has 13
items and a Coefficient Alpha of .83, which suggests that the reliability for
using this instrument is good. After the ARSMA-II was administered a
62


calculation of the level of acculturation was achieved by the researcher
summing the Mexican Orientation Subscale (MOS) and then dividing the sum
by 17 (survey numbers 1, 3, 5, 6,8,11,12,14,17,18, 20, 21, 22, 24, 26,28
and 29), giving the mean of the MOS scale.
The researcher then summed up all questions related to the AOS
(Anglo Orientation Subscale), which are 2,4, 7,9,10,13,15,16,19, 23, 25,
27, and 30. The sum was then divided by 13, giving the researcher the mean
of the AOS scale. The AOS mean minus the MOS mean provides the
Acculturation Score. This calculation generates a positive score for
individuals with higher Anglo orientation and a negative score for those who
are more Mexican-oriented. This score can be used to measure or categorize
subjects into various levels of acculturation (Cuellar, 2000).
Results for Research Question 1
Research Question 1: How does a sample of elected Latino leaders score on
the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) and the Acculturation
Rating Scale for Mexican Americans (ARSMA-II)?
Responses to the MLQ as demonstrated in Figure 1, yielded twenty-
three (38.3%) with transactional leadership styles and thirty-seven (61.7%)
with transformational leadership styles among all sixty responses. The
prevalence of transformational leadership style suggests an association of a
preferred leadership style among the sample of this study.
63


Leadership Style
Figure 2. Percentage of MLQ survey respondents by leadership style.
Responses to the ARSMA-II as demonstrated in Figure 2, yielded
thirty-one (51.7%} with low acculturation levels and twenty-nine (48.3%}
with high acculturation levels. It should be noted that the acculturation levels
between high and low seem to be evenly split.
Acculturation Level
Acculturation Level
Figure 3. Percentage of MLQ survey respondents by acculturation style.
Results for Research Question 2
Research Question 2: How is acculturation associated with leadership styles?
Examination of the cross tabulation for acculturation level and
leadership style indicates some association with acculturation level and
64


leadership style. The association was assessed using Chi-square test for
independence and the Eta measure of association.
The researcher created 2 two-level variables for leadership and
acculturation by artificially assigning people to one of 2 groups on each of
these variables, acculturation high and low, and leadership
transformational and transactional. There was a significant relationship
between type of leadership style and level of acculturation (x2 (1, 60) = 6.73,
p < .05). Transformational leaders were more likely to be low in level of
acculturation whereas the transactional leaders were more likely to be high
in acculturation level (Table 8). The Eta was .36, which is suggestive of some
directional relationship, although not strong.
Table 8.
Acculturation Level and Leadership Style of Respondents
Leadership Style
Transactional T ransformational Total
Acculturation Level Low 7 24 31
High 16 13 29
Total 23 37 60
x2(l, 60) = 6.73, p<.05.
65


These findings appear to be consistent with the literature on Latino
culture that suggests Latinos who are more identified with Latino culture
(expressed through a high MOS on the ARSMA-II) may maintain certain
cultural values that support a higher level of transformational leadership
behaviors (Andrade, 2008; Bordas, 2007; Padilla & Chavez Chavez, 1995;
Portes, 2000; Zoppi, 2004,).
Table 9 presents the percentage breakdown of leadership style by
acculturation level. Overall results show that within transactional leadership
style, 22.6% responses reported low acculturation level and 55.2% reported
high acculturation level. However, within transformational leadership style,
77.4% reported low acculturation level and 44.8% reported high
acculturation level.
66


Table 9.
Cross Tabulation for Leadership Style by Acculturation Level
Acculturation Level
Low High Total
Leadership Transactional Count 7 16 23
Style % within Leadership Style 30.4% 69.6% 100.0%
% within Acculturation Level 22.6% 55.2% 38.3%
% of Total 11.7% 26.7% 38.3%
Transformational Count 24 13 37
% within Leadership Style 64.9% 35.1% 100.0%
% within Acculturation Level 77.4% 44.8% 61.7%
% of Total 40.0% 21.7% 61.7%
Total Count 31 29 60
% within Leadership Style 51.7% 48.3% 100.0%
% within Acculturation Level 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
% of Total 51.7% 48.3% 100.0%
Results for Research Question 3
Research Question 3: How does leadership styles get expressed between
acculturation?
Table 10 provides the responses to each specific leadership behaviors;
transformational idealized influence (attributed); idealized influence
67


[behavior); inspirational motivation; intellectual stimulation; individual
consideration; transactional contingent reward; management-by exception
(active); and management-by-exception (passive) with acculturation level;
low and high. The mean, standard deviation, minimum, maximum for both
variables are listed in Tables 10 and 11 thus showing how acculturation is
expressed between leadership styles (transactional and transformational).
The results in Table 10 show that within transactional leadership, the
mean scores of transformational leadership characteristics were low
(ranging from 2.01 to 2.10) which means that they engaged in these
behaviors "sometimes. The mean score for transactional leadership
characteristics were high, ranging from 2.51 to 3.62, which mean that these
respondents engage in these behaviors "fairly often.
Conversely, the results indicate that within transformational
leadership, the mean scores of transactional leadership characteristics were
low (ranging from 1.60 to 1.74) which means they engaged in these
behaviors "Once in a while." The mean score for transformational leadership
characteristics were high, ranging from 3.00 to 3.45, which mean these
respondents engage in these behaviors "Fairly often.
The results in Table 11 reveal that within the mean scores of low
acculturation were fairly consistent across all leadership behaviors, ranging
from 2.07 to 3.10, which means that they engaged in these behaviors
68


sometimes to fairly often. Additionally, the results indicate that within high
acculturation level, the mean score of high acculturation was also fairly
consistent across all leadership behaviors, ranging from 2.62 to 2.80, which
demonstrates that these respondents engaged in these behaviors
"sometimes."
69


Table 10.
Leadership style (Transactional and Transformational) and Leadership Characteristics
Leadership Style Idealized Influence (Attributed) Idealized Influence (Behavior) Inspirational Motivation Intellectual Stimulation Individualized Consideration Contingent Reward Management-by -Exception (Active) Management-by- Exception (Passive)
Transactional
Mean 2.01 2.12 2.05 2.17 2.10 2.51 3.64 3.62
N 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23
Std. Deviation .40 .40 .50 .47 .39 .39 .31 .34
Minimum 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.75 3.00 3.00
Maximum 2.75 2.75 2.75 2.75 2.75 3.25 4.00 4.00
Transformational
Mean 3.45 3.40 3.44 3.41 3.41 3.00 1.74 1.60
N 37 37 37 37 37 37 37 37
Std. Deviation .51 .50 .48 .42 .47 .42 .96 .94
Minimum 1.75 2.00 1.75 1.75 1.75 2.00 .00 ..00
Maximum 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 3.75
Total
Mean 2.90 2.91 2.91 2.93 2.91 2.81 2.47 2.37
N 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60
Std. Deviation .85 .78 .83 .73 .80 .47 1.21 1.25
Minimum 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.75 .00 .00
Maximum 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00


Table 11.
Acculturation Level (High and Low) and Leadership Characteristics
Acculturation Level Idealized Influence (Attributed) Idealized Influence (Behavior) Inspirational Motivation Intellectual Stimulation Individualized Consideration Contingent Reward Management-by -Exception (Active) Management-by- Exception (Passive)
Low
Mean 3.00 3.01 2.98 2.12 2.10 2.51 3.64 3.62
N 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31
Std. Deviation .80 .72 .86 .65 .79 .52 1.16 1.21
Minimum 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.75 1.00 2.00 1.00 .00
Maximum 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
High
Mean 2.78 2.80 2.84 2.74 2.74 2.72 2.63 2.69
N 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29
Std. Deviation .89 .83 .81 .78 .79 .41 1.27 1.24
Minimum 1.00 1.75 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.75 .00 .00
Maximum 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 3.50 4.00 3.75
Total
Mean 2.90 2.91 2.91 2.93 2.91 2.81 2.47 2.37
N 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60
Std. Deviation .85 .78 .83 .73 .80 .47 1.21 1.25
Minimum 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.75 .00 .00
Maximum 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00


Chapter Summary
Data were collected with a leadership style questionnaire to determine
how a sample of elected Latino leaders would score based on self-perceived
leadership characteristics as determined by the Multifactor Leadership
Questionnaire. The overall results from this study sample indicate that there were
more transformational than transactional elected Latino leaders.
In regards to acculturation, an acculturation scale questionnaire was
administered to measure respondents level of acculturation, either low or high.
The overall results indicate that there was an even split between low and highly
acculturated leaders. The data were also examined to determine how
acculturation is associated with leadership style. The results revealed that the
association between low acculturated and transformational leaders was
statistically significant. This suggests that a higher orientation to Latino culture
might suggest a preferred leadership style that is more transformative, supportive
and, collective in nature. In regards to how acculturation is expressed between
leadership styles, the results indicate that no particular pattern seems to emerge.
72


CHAPTER V
SUMMARY
Overview of Study
The intent of this study was to explore and describe some of the
leadership behaviors and acculturation levels of elected Latino leaders
through the use of available literature on leadership, Latino culture, and
other limited studies. This study investigated the association between
acculturation level and leadership styles of elected Latino leaders in order to
gain a better understanding of how they lead. Further, this study explored
the relationship between leadership style and acculturation levels through
self-perceived reporting and it attempted to provide a better understanding
of how Latino leadership is experienced by elected Latino leaders. However,
it should be noted that much more investigation and additional studies need
to be done in this area.
The guiding research questions for this study were: 1) How does a
sample of elected Latino leaders score on the Multifactor Leadership
Questionnaire (MLQ) and Acculturation Rating Scale for Mexican Americans
(ARSMA-II)? 2) How is acculturation associated with leadership styles? 3)
How does acculturation get expressed between leadership styles?
A leadership questionnaire (MLQ) and a scale used to measure
acculturation level (ARSMA-II), was utilized to collect data from 200 elected
73


Latino leaders representing various levels of elected office throughout the
US. Each instrument was used to determine if there was an association with
leadership style and acculturation level. The response rate was thirty-three
percent with over eighty-five percent of the respondents completing some
level of formal education; and the majority of the respondents (40%) was 2nd
generation (born in the U.S., either parent born in Mexico or other country)
and (35%) was 5th generation (self, parents, and grandparents born in the
US).
Summary of Findings
Four major findings emanate from this study in the areas of self-
perceived leadership styles and acculturation levels of elected Latino leaders:
(a) Latino leadership is associated with transformational leadership style; (b)
Low acculturation level among Latino leaders is associated with
transformational leadership styles; (c) Acculturation levels between high and
low Latino leaders seem to be evenly split; (d) Transformational leadership
characteristics seem to be congruent with the cultural nuance of Latino
culture, which resulted in higher tendencies of responses leaning toward this
style of leadership.
Latino Leadership Associated with Transformational Leadership
In regards to how elected Latino leaders scored on the MLQ and
ARSMA-II, the studys finding revealed that among the sixty responses,
38.3% scored as transactional leaders while 61.7% scored as
74


transformational leaders. These results indicate that for elected Latino
leaders, they identified with highly transformational behaviors (idealized
influence [attributed/behavior], inspirational motivation, and intellectual
stimulation) therefore scoring high in this area. This finding may also be
related to the fact that the participants are elected officials who might be
inclined to exhibit attributes that are more engaging, inspirational, and
transformative in nature because of the highly visible role they have in their
respective communities. However, these findings were not surprising to the
researcher because it was predicted that transformational leadership
attributes are consistent with the cultural nuances of Latino culture as
described in the review of the literature.
Low Acculturation Scores and Transformational Leadership
In terms of how acculturation is associated with leadership styles, the
studys findings suggest that an association exist between the leaders self-
perceived leadership style and their acculturation level. More specifically, the
findings reveal that there is a significant relationship between type of
leadership style and level of acculturation (x2 (1,60) = 6.73, p < .05). The
transformational leaders (67.7%) were more likely to be low in level of
acculturation verses the transactional leaders (38.3%) who were more likely
to be high in acculturation level. The data suggests some directional
relationship, although not strong. The results suggest that for Latinos who
had a high MOS (Mexican Orientation Subscale) score, their culture is a very
75


part of their daily life, where values and traditions are more central,
especially among recent immigrants (Zoppi, 2004]. Further, a low
acculturation score indicates that these individuals are more likely to exhibit
deeper cultural concepts such as familia (family), personalismo (close
personal relationships), respeto (respect), and mi casa es su casa (sharing
personal space) as part of their identity (Bordas, 2007).
High and Low Acculturation Scores of Latino Leaders Split
An interesting finding of the ARSMA-II results however, shows that
scores for "acculturation level between high and low Latino leaders seem to
be evenly split; (51.7%) low and (48.3%) high acculturation respectively.
One explanation for this occurrence is that culture influences individuals at
various levels. The process of self-identity as it relates to Latino orientation,
gets defined and re-defined through the process of acculturation (i.e., give
and take between two cultures). Through instruments such as the ARSMA-II
acculturation scale, individuals display their acculturation orientation (i.e.,
Latino orientation) through cultural preference such as Latino vs. Anglo. This
occurrence might also suggest that the sample population represented a
fairly equal cross-section of Latinos; recent immigrants who still maintain
traditional cultural attitudes and beliefs, as well as Latinos who have been in
the USA for several generations and have subsequently adopted more
"Anglo attitudes and beliefs.
76


Transformational Leadership Characteristics
There are five transformational leadership characteristics that seem
to be congruent with the cultural nuance of Latino Leadership. As the data
suggests, this sample study identified the most with these five
transformational characteristics: (a) Idealized Influence (Attributed); (b)
Idealized Influence (Behavior); (c) Inspirational Motivation; (d) Intellectual
Stimulation; and (e) Individual Consideration.
Idealized influence (Attributed) leaders are perceived as being
confident and powerful or viewed as focusing on higher-order ideals, and
ethics. The focus is on the socialized charisma of the leader. These leaders
build trust and confidence and reassures followers that obstacles will be
overcome. For example, many Latinos place high value on certain individuals
in the community who hold position of authority (e.g., clergy, doctors,
teachers, and politicians) (Bordas, 2007). As a result these individuals gain a
higher level of respect and are often revered for their commitment to "la
comunidad" (high value for Latino community).
Idealized influence (Behavior) centers actions of the charismatic
leader who focuses on values, beliefs, and a sense of mission. Most
importantly, these leaders encourage achievement of followers full potential.
Latino leaders prefer to lead in ways that promote group effort in responding
to problems. Portes (2000) establishes that Latinos sponsor mutual growth,
77


which comes out as a natural instinct from cultural norms that are attached
to the desire to help "la comunidad."
Inspirational motivation refers to leaders who provide visions of what
is possible and how to attain them. They enhance meaning and promote
positive expectations about what needs to be done. Since Latinos place a high
value on cooperation, leaders typically inspire others to become actively
involved in reaching and attaining goals in order to benefit the entire
community.
Inspirational stimulation refers to leaders who help others to think
about old problems in new ways by rethinking self-assumptions and beliefs
in order to solve current problems. Followers learn to solve problems on
their own by being creative and innovative. Through intellectual stimulation,
followers question the status quo and new, creative methods of
accomplishing the organizations mission are explored (Avolio & Bass,
2004],
Individualized Consideration refers to leader behavior that strives to
understand and share in others' concerns and developmental needs and
treating each individual uniquely. These leaders attempt to recognize and
satisfy their followers needs and serve as a catalyst to elevate followers
needs in order to maximize and develop ones' full potential. Through
individualized consideration, many Latino leaders focus on one to one
relationships that includes mentoring and coaching other members in the
78


community. This characteristic resonates with Latinos as Latino culture
places high value on the importance of cooperation in the attainment of goals
that benefit the entire group.
These characteristics seem to be congruent with the cultural nuance
for Latinos in this study. Further, these Findings suggest that there may be a
connection between ethnic identity and culture, which, resulted in higher
tendencies of responses leaning towards transformational leadership
behavior [Andrade, 2008; Bordas, 2007; Gracia, 2001). Padilla (1980),
suggests that despite the longstanding residence of people of Latino origin in
the U.S., Latinos seem to maintain their cultural heritage.
In sum, the findings of this study support the assertion that the
preferred leadership style among this sample of elected Latino leaders is
transformative in nature and more prevalent among elected Latino leaders
who had a lower acculturation score.
Implications of Findings
The shift in US demographics has resulted in a subsequent increase of
Latinos serving in various elected positions in their communities. Therefore,
examination of how Latinos lead warrants further empirical research and
investigation. Based on the findings of this exploratory research study, there
are three main implications specifically related to the Latino leadership: (a)
the need to recognize Latino leadership as a distinct genre of leadership;
79


(b) the association of acculturation and leadership styles; (c) the preferred
leadership style of Latinos
Latino Leadership as a Genre
First, given the noticeable demographic changes in the Latino
population within our society, the need for better understanding who they
are; how they live; and more importantly how they lead has never been more
urgent. Although prior studies have been conducted on African American
leadership (Smith & Walters, 1999) and women leadership (Regan & Brooks,
1995; Rosener, 1995), very little information currently exists on Latino
leaders and how this emerging group expresses their leadership styles.
Additionally, there have been numerous research studies and subsequent
publications on various theoretical approaches of leadership and the
leadership process (Burns, 1978; Bass, 1990; Bryman, 1992; Northouse,
2007).
However, these viewpoints have been, and continue to be, primarily
studied and written about from a Western-European perspective depicting
primarily the desired traits and behaviors based mostly on White males. This
is done despite the awareness that characteristics and behaviors differ
among groups based on cultural frameworks (Andrade, 2009; Bordas, 2007;
Napier, 1999). For example, for Latinos, culture, as well as language abilities
and preference, is part of their cultural identity framework, which helps to
80


identify leadership behaviors [whether low or highly acculturated) (Zoppi,
2004).
Since culture shapes behavior and personality, the role it has on
human behavior is very critical [Cuellar, 2000). Therefore, it cannot be
assumed that "air leaders lead the same way. While many definitions of
leadership claim to be universal, they are in fact not, because most universal
theories of leadership fail to account for cultural context [Adler, 1999). The
reconfiguration of Latino demographics and the subsequent election of more
Latinos into public office are beginning to shed more light on how these
groups of leaders express their leadership styles.
Association of Acculturation and Leadership Styles
This study provides a better understanding of how acculturation
[culture) and leadership styles are associated among this group of elected
leaders therefore, providing a better understanding of how Latinos express
leadership behaviors.
For example it appears that Latinos in this sample study, who scored
low in acculturation, expressed more (self perceived) transactional
leadership behaviors. An example of this would be that this particular subset
of Latinos places a greater emphasis on cooperation and teamwork rather
than individualism and competition. Exhibiting behaviors such as
cooperation or "all-for-one and one-for-all" (or collective attitude) is a highly
revered cultural value of low acculturated Latinos, that is, Latinos who have
retained a greater sense of Latino culture verses White culture.
81


Additionally, Latinos who express a higher sense of competition and
individualism over collective efforts are seen as having an incorrect or
unacceptable social behavior and therefore may be labeled selfish and cannot
be trusted (Griggs & Dunn, 1996). This cultural value is also a strong tenant
of the transformational leadership behavior, idealized influence (attributed
and behavior), which is defined as building trust and confidence that others
admire and reassures others that obstacles will be overcome as well as
individual consideration in which the leader recognizes the needs of others in
order to develop and maximize their full potential.
The remaining characteristics of transformational leadership,
inspirational motivation provides vision of what is possible and how to
attain possibilities and intellectual stimulation (help others to think about old
problems in new ways by rethinking self-assumptions and beliefs), seem to
be congruent with the cultural nuance of Latino culture, which resulted in
higher tendencies toward this style of leadership among Latinos in this study.
The Preferred Leadership Style of Latinos
Furthermore, individual levels of functioning, such as behavioral,
affective, and cognitive seem to reflect Latino cultural values and identity, as
expressed in transformative leadership behaviors (Cuellar, 2000; Bordas,
2007; Portes, 2000). This is consistent with the literature on Latino culture
82


that suggests Latinos who are more identified with Latino culture (expressed
through a high MOS on the ARSMA-II) may maintain certain cultural values
that supports a preferred leadership style (Andrade, 2009; Bordas, 2007; R.
Padilla & Chavez, 1995; Garcia, 2003; Marin & Gamba, 1996; Portes, 2000;
Zoppi, 2004).
Recommendations
The recommendations of this study are offered in three sections. The
first section is in the area of developing theory related to Latino leadership.
The second section details recommendations for the practice of Latino
leadership in context. The third section provides recommendations for future
studies on Latino leadership.
Recommendations for Latino Leadership Theory Development
Any attempt to describe the full range of the leadership process was
far more complicated than originally anticipated. For one, leadership theory
is a relatively recent academic discipline and involves social complexities
often interpreted through many authors. Secondly, the literature on
leadership from a cultural context perspective is very limited. However, the
existing literature on leadership studies suggests that cultural context does
play an important role in the daily lives of many individuals from various
ethnic groups (Adler, 1996; Bordas, 2007; Burns, 1978; Napier, 1999;
Nothhouse, 2007). Additional theories focused on the degree in which
culture influences ones leadership behavior regardless of their acculturation
level; would yield interesting results for the refinement and development of
83


future leadership theory (Cabassa, 2003; Cuellar, 1995; Bordas, 2007;
Hurtado, 2005).
Further development from a cultural competency perspective is
needed to advance Latino leadership theory. More importantly, exploring
leadership from other cultural perspectives is strongly recommended and
could offer additional insights into the leadership process of diverse groups
and add to the knowledge base of current Latino leadership theory.
Recommendations for Future Latino Leadership Practice in Context
In order for Latino leaders to define, experience, and thrive in the
leadership arena, several recommendations for Latino leadership practice in
context emerge:
1. Latino leaders must feel empowered to express their culture
and heritage through their leadership style (regardless of their
acculturation level). More importantly, since culture was found to
be a defining factor in the emergence of a preferred leadership
style for this study sample (e.g., transformational), cultural values
may inform us concerning the application of behaviors to the
understanding of Latino leadership styles (Triandis, 1996).
2. Latino leaders who have assimilated to a point in which they very
rarely express their cultural heritage must be encouraged to re-
engage in cultural self-development. It is through this process that
Latinos either chose to be "true to self' and express leadership
behaviors that reflect their cultural traditions or chose to express
84


leadership behaviors that emulate dominant cultural values and
traditions. In other words, Latinos should not feel as though they
have to give up their cultural identity in order to become leaders.
3. Organizations (e.g., business, educational settings, non-profits,
military, etc.) need to provide a nurturing environment for self-
development (in terms of cultural exploration) among Latino
leaders who might otherwise not feel as though they can be true-
to-self in expressing their leadership styles. By doing so,
organizations are able to experience Latino leadership that is
rooted in transformational attributes.
4. Current attitudes towards leadership styles less understood,
whether positive or negative, have the power to restrict Latino
leaders from expressing their full leadership potential. Therefore,
organizations focused on leadership theory and practice need to
be culturally competent in understanding the preferred leadership
style of Latinos thus providing training programs that focus on
values that support transformational leadership.
Recommendations for Future Research on Latino Leadership and Culture
Therefore, further research studies are needed that (1) expand on
hypothesis that will continue to provide others with a better understanding
of Latino culture (2) conduct a study to investigate Latina leadership styles;
(3) continue to provide others with a better understanding of the association
85


of acculturation (i.e., cultural norms and traditions) and its impact on Latino
leadership behaviors; (4) conduct correlation studies between culture and
leadership styles of Latino leaders; (5) replicate this study to include
additional qualitative investigation; and [6) conduct additional exploratory
and descriptive studies.
1. Culture and Leadership Research Conduct future research
studies that examine the dimensions of Latino culture (i.e.,
perspectives, ideologies, behaviors, etc.) and leadership behavior
in order to provide some cultural context to Latino cultural and
leadership congruence." The greater cultural competency that one
posses, the more likelihood of understanding the intersection of
culture and leadership among Latino leaders.
2. Latinas and Leadership Although current literature exists on
women and leadership (Appelbaum, Audet, & Miller, 2003;) it
should be noted that gender and age related data were not
collected and analyzed for this study; but may be an important
variable in how Latinas express leadership behaviors. Therefore,
additional research is needed to examine how Latinas in
particular, express leadership behaviors.
Additionally, the absence of gender in this study can be
attributed to the lack of a single probing question on gender
within the current research surveys utilized; and its role in Latino
86


leadership. Therefore, it is recommended that research
instruments should be developed for collecting gender related
data among Latinas with the aim of examining how gender might
influence leadership behaviors among this particular group of
leaders. An implication exists that gender and age may also be a
defining variable affecting results of future studies among
leadership behaviors of Latinas and leadership.
3. Understanding of Acculturation Conduct future research studies
that examine acculturation (i.e., cultural norms and traditions) so
that Latino leaders can gain the courage to lead in ways that fully
express their leadership style (e.g., transformational) rather than
leading in ways that reflect White cultural values (e.g.,
transactional) because they have assimilated to the point of
adopting to the dominant culture. Additionally, it is recommended
that additional acculturation scales be developed to further assess
cultural orientation within Latinos and to that of the dominant
culture.
4. Correlation between Latino Culture and Leadership It has been
determined in this study that culture is an antecedent
to behavior and personality and its role is critical in human
behavior (Cuellar, 2000). Further, Latino culture as related to
"self, gets defined and re-defined through the process of
87


acculturation (i.e., orientation between two cultures). Individuals
of Latino orientation manifest their acculturation orientation
through cultural preference (e.g., Latino vs. Anglo values, beliefs,
language, etc.) that then get expressed through actions and
behaviors (Cabassa, 2003; Cuellar & Maldonado, 1995; Suro,
2006).
Therefore further investigations that increase ones knowledge
and understanding of culture and Latino leadership, can provide a
nurturing ground for self-development (in terms of self-identity
and the acculturation process) for Latino leaders who might
sometimes feel as though they cant be "true-to-self in expressing
their leadership styles. Because it is through this process that
Latinos either chose to be "true to self' and express leadership
behaviors that reflect their cultural traditions or chose to express
leadership behaviors that emulate dominant cultural values and
traditions. Latinos do not have to give up their cultural identity in
order to become leaders and by not withholding their culture they
are able to experience a state of "cultural and leadership
congruence.
5. Qualitative Study: Culture and Leadership This study has
determined that cultural values as expressed through leadership
styles or behaviors are statistically significant among a selected
88


group of Latinos leaders. More importantly, culture, as expressed
through acculturation level, was found to be a defining factor in
the emergence of a preferred leadership style for this study
sample (e.g., transformational). Because culture does influences
each individual at the basic level of self, cultural values may inform
us concerning the application of behaviors to the understanding of
Latino leadership styles (Triandis, 1996). This aspect of culture
and Latino leadership can be further expanded upon through a
qualitative approach. More specifically, by collecting data through
follow-up interviews after the quantitative data collection phase is
complete allows for triangulation to emerge. This can further
validate the association of culture and Latino leadership style and
to tease out the nuances associated with culture and leadership.
6. Exploratory and Descriptive Studies Since very few empirical
studies that exist, future exploratory and descriptive studies on
Latino leadership will need to be conducted. These studies will
need to focus on the correlation between culture and
leadership styles and the relationship of cultural values and
leadership styles of Latino leaders. In addition, these studies
will need to obtain a larger sample size and include a more
comprehensive demographic breakdown (e.g., age, gender,
educational attainment, economic attainment, etc.).
89