Abstract
Purpose. The purpose of this study was to compare the self-perceptions of selected directors of California's multidirected SELPAs with the perceptions of their governance board chair-persons in the following four leadership competency areas: (1) management of self, (2) orientation to others, (3) management of others, and (4) management of the system. Methodology. The researcher used descriptive research. The sample population was forty-three SELPA directors and forty-three governance chairpersons. A questionnaire was utilized to collect qualitative data to answer four research questions. Each item on the questionnaire was organized into index areas related to each of the research questions. The software package integrated into the "Leadership Competency Assessment System," was used to input the data, apply statistical programs, and to generate feedback. The data consisted of mean response rating by item for both groups that were ranked related to the means of the findings. Findings. The findings revealed: (1) a larger perceptual gap between the governance chairpersons and the SELPA directors related to competencies identified as management skills in all major indices; the ability to self-management, orientation to others, management of others, and management of the system; (2) the governance chairpersons rated the SELPA directors lower on the Likert scale compared to the perceived self-ratings of the SELPA directors on sixty-two out of sixty-five items; (3) the governance board perceived that SELPA directors need improvement in competencies related more to management of others and management of the system than to those related more to self-management and orientation to others; and (4) although no statistical differences were found at the .05 level, the SELPA directors and their governance board chairpersons rated themselves lower in (1) management of others and (2) management of the system. Conclusions and recommendations. In conclusion, the SELPA directors need to meet on a regular basis with all members of the governance board in addition to other stakeholders within the community to: (1) mutually establish and regularly review shared vision and expectations, (2) examine and resolve areas of potential conflict, and (3) to establish an ongoing 360-degree feedback system.