winston.p65 The Importance of Leadership Diversity 517 The Importance of Leadership Diversity: The Relationship between Diversity and Organizational Success in the Academic Environment Mark D. Winston In the academic community, efforts to foster diversity are generally sup­ ported by a rationale that relates to equity and changing societal demo­ graphics. Private sector research, however, indicates support for a ratio­ nale relating to overall organizational success. Such research forms the basis for the consideration of the relationship between diversity and or­ ganizational success in the academic environment. In addition, the re­ search provides evidence that diversity continues to be valued in the private sector, which employs many of the graduates whose academic preparation is supported by the college or university library. This article presents the results of a research study involving diversity and organi­ zational success in the academic environment. The results provide evi­ dence that there is a relationship between diversity and organizational success and offers further support for the results of the prior research in this area, as well as offering data to enhance the rationale for the sup­ port of diversity efforts in the academic library community. ostering diversity in organiza- and fostering diversity within organiza­ tions is generally considered a tions go beyond the fact that it is a good priority in relation to the in- thing to do. In other words, there are fun­ creasingly diverse population, damental, practical, fiscally responsible as well as past inequities, current unfair­ ness, and underrepresentation. However, cutting-edge research in the study of di­ versity in the private sector has high­ lighted a documented connection be­ tween investment in diversity and overall organizational success and performance. In many organizations, and certainly in the private sector, specifically, there is the realization among managers and re­ searchers that the reasons for promoting reasons for fostering diversity that complement the rationale associated with social responsibility and equity, as orga­ nizations strive for success in an increas­ ingly diverse society. However, the study of diversity has not led to the identification of a direct, causal relationship between fostering di­ versity and organizational success. Thus, it seems that the study of diversity re­ quires further consideration of the nature Mark D. Winston is Assistant Professor in the School of Communication, Information and Library Stud­ ies at Rutgers University; e-mail: mwinston@scils.rutgers.edu. 517 mailto:mwinston@scils.rutgers.edu 518 College & Research Libraries November 2001 of the relationship between diversity and organizational success or performance. This article addresses the study of that relationship within the context of the aca­ demic environment. Background and Review of the Literature Lreanizational Success and Diversity Researchers in organizational theory have documented the fact that the companies that are the most diverse, as measured by factors such as minority employment at all levels, spending with minority suppliers, and underwriting business that goes to minority-owned investment banks, have also been identified as more successful companies overall.1 Stock performance has generally been used as the measure of organizational success in such research. Stock performance might be considered as a measure of factors such as organizational performance, strength of the company, and investor confidence, among other consid­ erations. For example, in the 1999 Fortune magazine article identifying “America’s Best Companies for Minorities,” the re­ searchers reported rankings that indicate that the “companies that pursue diversity outperform the S&P 500.”2 Sherry Kuczynski reported similar results in her research, addressing what she described as “a direct link between a company’s lead­ ership diversity and its stock market per­ formance.”3 Kuczynski emphasized the fact that “One hallmark of successful di­ versity programs is diverse company lead­ ership.”4 In providing an initial explanation for this relationship between diversity and organizational performance, Kuczynski noted that “Diverse leadership suggests that a company has drawn a wide pool of talent up through its ranks and is open­ ing itself up to a variety of different views and ideas.”5 This leadership diversity in­ volves the relationship between organi­ zational success and membership on the company’s board and in senior manage­ rial positions, among other positions. There is—and should be—continuing study of the nature of that relationship, which has not been fully defined. There is speculation that enhanced creativity re­ sults from varied perspectives, that spe­ cialized markets are easier to target, and that consumers are more aware and con­ cerned about the performance, social re­ sponsibility, and composition of the com­ panies they patronize, thus influencing overall organizational performance and success.6 It also is important to note that issues of underrepresentation, equity, and fair­ ness should continue to be considered, in addition to other measures of perfor­ mance. Indeed, if boosting the bottom line was the only reason to increase di­ versity, some leading companies might wonder why they should carry their diversity programs any further than they already have. There are well-run companies that do not rank among the diversity leaders, as measured by the increas­ ingly popular ‘best’ lists…. A con­ tinuing tight labor market may give companies more of a financial rea­ son to boost diversity.7 In addition, growing corporate com­ petitiveness, the unprecedented changes in the demographics of U.S. society, and the increasing globalization of market­ places are likely to change the landscape dramatically and to provide continuing support for diversity programs. In a num­ ber of sectors, such as health care, for ex­ ample, researchers and managers have begun to apply the study of leadership diversity to better assess organizational environments and performance and to make changes necessary to enhance the likelihood of success.8 Theory It might be assumed that the concept of leadership diversity implies the initial formation of a theoretical construct in­ volving the nature of the relationship be­ tween investment in and efforts to foster diversity and organizational success. The Importance of Leadership Diversity 519 Generally, leadership theory, which fo­ cuses on the study of the ways in which individuals can influence the success of organizations, through their efforts and those of others, provides a worthwhile basis for the consideration of issues of diversity as related to organizational suc­ cess. Issues of diversity in relation to lead­ ership have been addressed to a limited extent in the research literature, in rela­ tion to “gender and race differences. Other things being equal, men and women and those in different racial and ethnic backgrounds are equally effective as leaders.”9 Moreover, research in this area has involved cross-cultural studies of leadership that are intended to deter­ mine whether certain leadership theories or approaches are culturally based.10 The issue of realism or pragmatism associated with contingency theory relates to diversity in more than one way. It is generally the case that leadership theory relates to the study of the leader or to the study of the followers, in a more general sense, with some theories focus­ ing more on the context. For example, a significant body of literature focuses on the extent to which the leader ’s personal qualities, such as intellectual ability, power, charisma, and virtue, and the leader ’s ability to influence followers, as a result of his or her values, for example, are the bases for effective leadership in organizations and more broadly. 11 Leader–member exchange theory, for ex­ ample, “holds that the manager ’s effi­ ciency and effectiveness are affected by the quality of the relationship he or she has with each subordinate.”12 The issue of context, beyond and including the leader and the followers, is considered in relation to aspects of leadership theory, as well.13 Historical determinism, for ex­ ample, purports that it is the historical context, or the needs of the time, that “cre­ ate the leader.”14 The issue of context, par­ ticularly in relation to the environment, is considered in relation to theories such as transformational leadership, adminis­ trative conservatorship, and ecovision, as well.15 However, it appears to be the case that the aspect of leadership theory that relates most closely to leadership diver­ sity is contingency theory, which is “also called pragmatism, realism, and Realpolitik.”16 Contingency theory is based on the concept that the achievement of leaders’ goals requires varying “styles and approaches depending on what will most effectively allow them to achieve” those goals.17 The issue of realism or pragmatism associated with contingency theory re­ lates to diversity in more than one way. There is the well-documented aspect of realism associated with the changing de­ mographics and increasing diversity of the U.S. population and the impact that these changes will have on the workforce and the marketplace. In addition, among managers, certainly within the private sector, as has been noted, there is the is­ sue of pragmatism associated with being competitive and successful in targeting an increasingly diverse market and employ­ ing the type of individuals who will con­ tribute to organizational success in this changing environment. Also, with regard to realism or pragma­ tism, there is the importance of the role of colleges and universities in the prepara­ tion of the future graduates who will make up the well-prepared workforce that con­ tributes to the success of the employing organizations, as well as the realization among those in society at large of this role. A significant research finding emerging in relation to diversity in higher education is based on the Ford Foundation’s Campus Diversity Initiative and other research, in­ dicating the central role of “colleges and universities [in] prepar[ing] people to func­ tion in a diverse society.”18 In other words, when queried about issues related to the value of diversity as a societal issue, most people appear to realize its importance and value and indicate an understanding of the role of colleges and universities in prepar­ ing students to function in a diverse soci­ ety. It is important to note that despite con­ http:goals.17 http:broadly.11 http:based.10 520 College & Research Libraries November 2001 flicting court decisions and policy deci­ sions related to diversity, the research in­ dicates that most members of the public, like managers in organizations and orga­ nizational researchers, understand the importance of fostering diversity.19, 20 Thus, the nature of the competitive, increasingly diverse, and evolving envi­ ronment indicates that leaders must use techniques that will most effectively ad­ dress the dynamic nature of that environ­ ment and that will represent pragmatism in realizing organizational success in this context. Organizational Success and Diversity in the Academic Environment The Fortune study and the related research involving the connection between orga­ nizational success and diversity in the private sector provide a worthwhile ba­ sis for studying such a relationship in the academic library environment. This is the case, particularly in light of the role of colleges and universities in preparing future graduates and the extent to which the academic library is a part of the re­ search and education in all disciplines. In the study of diversity and organi­ zational success in the academic environ­ ment, considering the college- or univer­ sity-level parent institutions instead of the libraries per se is appropriate initially because the parent institutions are more directly comparable to the companies (i.e., parent companies) evaluated and ranked in the Fortune study and related research. Based on the fact that more published data are available in relation to parent institutions—colleges and universities in this case as opposed to the libraries—as is also the case in the private sector, it was determined that this initial research re­ lated to the relationship between organi­ zational success and diversity in the aca­ demic community would focus on the larger institutional level. The published research related to colleges and universi­ ties includes more comprehensive, estab­ lished data regarding institutions overall and in relation to diversity. In addition, although there is little published research related to diversity in liberal arts colleges, for example, there is even less in relation to liberal arts college libraries. In the case of academic libraries, al­ though organizational success might be considered in relation to factors such as use, quality, and user satisfaction, the few rankings based on measures of organiza­ tional success include the Chronicle of Higher Education rankings, which focus on collection size and growth, but not on collection quality or quality overall, or data published by the Association of Re­ search Libraries, which generally do not identify institutions by name in relation to performance or success involving di­ versity.21, 22 In addition, there are data that indicate that with regard to the connection be­ tween the larger organization and the li­ brary in terms of diversity, there is a con­ nection between the influence of efforts at the college or university level and ef­ forts undertaken in the library.23 Thus, the study of the relationship between orga­ nizational success and diversity at the institutional level informs the study of diversity in academic libraries and forms the basis for further consideration of these issues in college and university libraries. To address the relationship between organizational success and efforts to fos­ ter diversity, it is necessary to identify appropriate measures of success and di­ versity for such a study. The published research related to the comparison of col­ leges and universities on various mea­ sures of organizational success is quite extensive. One well-known example, The Princeton Review: The Best 331 Colleges, has been published for many years and fo­ cuses mainly on student evaluations of various aspects of the academic experi­ ence, as well as other statistical informa­ tion.24, 25 The Princeton Review publication includes rankings of institutions of vari­ ous types, such as research universities and liberal arts colleges, that are com­ pared with one another. “The Top Ameri­ can Research Universities: An Occasional Paper from the Lombardi Program on Measuring University Performance,” pro­ http:library.23 http:versity.21 http:diversity.19 The Importance of Leadership Diversity 521 vides rankings of the top private research universities and top public universities.26 The Lombardi study considers criteria such as research funding, faculty, and degrees awarded but has been published in its entirety only once.27 The U.S. News and World Report rankings of colleges and universities pro­ vides specific rankings of quality—mea­ sures used to define “academic excel­ lence”—including academic reputation, graduation, freshman retention, faculty resources, class sizes, student/faculty ra­ tios, percentage of full-time faculty, SAT/ ACT scores, acceptance rates, financial resources, and alumni giving, for vari­ ous types of institutions (liberal arts col­ leges, national universities, national pub­ lic universities, as well as regional uni­ versities).28, 29 Although the U.S. News rankings are based on a methodology that has been tested and validated over time, the editors indicate that because the methodology may undergo some “re­ finement” from year to year, they “do not invite readers to track colleges’ annual moves in the rankings.”30 There are few published rankings of college and university performance in relation to diversity. Generally, rankings of this type focus on enrollment or gradu­ ation rates for members of particular eth­ nic groups, such as Hispanics, in the pub­ lication “Colleges Awarding the Most Bachelors Degrees to Hispanics” and on similar rankings related to Asian Ameri­ cans and African Americans.31–33 The U.S. News and World Report publication, how­ ever, includes diversity rankings that fo­ cus on minority enrollment overall and provides such rankings in relation to vari­ ous types of institutions, with similar types of institutions compared with one another. The rankings are determined on the basis of “a formula that factors in both the total proportion of minority students at a university—not including interna­ tional students—and the mix of racial and ethnic groups….The formula produces a diversity index that ranges from 0.0 to 1.0. The closer the index is to 1.0, the more diverse is the student body.”34 Generally, the research related to diver­ sity in libraries focuses on issues of staff­ ing, collections, services, and organiza­ tional climate.35 The focus of research re­ lated to diversity in college and univer­ sity libraries has been mainly libraries in research universities, with limited discus­ sion of liberal arts college libraries, where the level of activity in relation to diver­ sity programs has not been overwhelm­ ing.36, 37 Thus, further study of this impor­ tant segment of the academic environ­ ment is appropriate. And it was deter­ mined that liberal arts colleges would be the focus of this study. The purpose of the research presented here is to address the extent to which there is a relationship between organizational success and diversity efforts in liberal arts colleges. Thus, the research not only pro­ vides a basis for determining the extent to which there is a relationship between diversity and organizational success in an important segment of the academic envi­ ronment, as there is in the private sector, but it also provides a basis for further study related to academic libraries, par­ ticularly considering whether there is a correlation between college or university success and diversity programs and simi­ lar considerations for the libraries that are a part of the institutions, which initial re­ search indicates to be the case. Methodology To gather data for the study, data related to organizational success of liberal arts colleges and data related to performance in fostering diversity by such colleges were identified, in the form of established rankings based on clearly identified cri­ teria and methodologies that have been tested and refined over time. To determine an appropriate measure of organizational success that was com­ parable to that used in the Fortune study and related research, it was determined that an established ranking system, the U.S. News and World Report data, related to organizational success and diversity, would be used in light of its strengths and the limitations of the other ranking sys­ http:climate.35 http:versities).28 http:universities.26 522 College & Research Libraries November 2001 tems. Data from the two most recently published rankings (i.e., 1999 and 2000) were considered. As a result of the fact that there have been slight changes in the methodologies from year to year, the data were not compared across years but, rather, with institutions being compared to one another using data compiled for each year. There was no state in the Northeast for which the majority of the colleges were highly rated. A database was created that incorpo­ rated the data associated with quality (or success) and diversity for each of the in­ stitutions listed from the rankings, in the category of liberal arts colleges, with con­ sideration of the actual rank and the rank within ranges (i.e., 1 to 5, 6 to 10, etc.). In addition, data related to the region and the state in which the colleges are located were included to determine whether there were differences based on geo­ graphic location of the institutions. A number of types of correlational analysis were undertaken to determine the extent to which various factors had an impact on the quality measures or the diversity rankings. Findings and Discussion LineralgArtsgnolleges In total, fifty-seven liberal arts colleges are represented among the rankings of orga­ nizational success and of diversity. The U.S. News rankings of organizational suc­ cess range from a rank of one to fifty, with the scoring making it possible for more than one institution to receive any given TABLE 1 Geographic Location rank. The rankings of diversity range from a rank of one to fifteen. As shown in table 1, the colleges are located in various regions of the country, including more than half in the North (thirty institutions), as well as those in the South (eight), Mid­ west (nine), and the West (ten). Among the more than twenty states represented, the most frequently identified were New York (nine), Pennsylvania and California (seven each), Massachusetts (six), and Connecticut, Maine, and Ohio (three each). DiversitygandgGeographicgLocation Of the fifty-seven liberal arts colleges, only seventeen (29.8%) were ranked highly on the basis of diversity in the U.S. News 2000 rankings. A slightly lower per­ centage (26.3%) was so ranked in the 1999 rankings. In addition, six of the institu­ tions were ranked highly in relation to diversity but did not appear on the U.S. News 2000 rankings of success, as com­ pared with fifteen colleges in the 1999 data. A number of factors were considered in relation to the impact on the diversity rankings. For example, the region of the country in which the colleges are located was correlated with significant differ­ ences in relation to whether the colleges were rated highly in terms of diversity in both 1999 and 2000. Specifically, seven out of ten of the liberal arts colleges in the West were ranked highly on the basis of diversity in 2000, as compared with ap­ proximately one-quarter of the colleges in the North and the South. None of the schools in the Midwest was ranked highly in relation to diversity (table 2). This level of difference among the colleges on the basis of location was Regeon of the Country Number of Colleges North _0 Nest 10 Wedtest 0 South 9 Percent of Total 6_._% 12.6% 16.9% 15.1% represented by a chi square of 0.008. The data for 1999 showed similar re­ sults, with an even greater level of differ- Total 62 100.0% ence, in that fewer of the colleges in the The Importance of Leadership Diversity 523 North were related TABLE 2 highly in relation to di- Diversity Ranking by Location: Percentage of versity, as represented Colleges Ranked Highly by a chi square of 0.003. Again, seven out of the Region of the Country Percent of Total Percent of Total ten colleges in the West (2000) (1999) were rated highly in re- West 70.0% 70.0%lation to diversity, but North 26.7% 20.0% only 20 percent of the South 25.0% 25.0% colleges in the North and Midwest 0.0% 0.0% a quarter of those in the South were so ranked. Total Also, none of the col­ leges in the Midwest were rated highly in relation to diversity. In addition, dif­ ferences approaching significance were noted in relation to the actual diversity rankings of the individual colleges for 2000. In other words, differences related to the actual ranking were identified, as were differences related to whether the schools were rated at all, as discussed above. This finding was also the case with regard to the diversity rankings grouped by categories of 1 to 5, 6 to 10, and 11 to 15. Similar results related to the rankings by category were noted for the 1999 data, with a chi square of 0.044, although no such difference was identified in relation to the straight diversity rankings. With regard to the 2000 data, the indi­ vidual states in which the colleges were located were correlated with a significant difference in terms of the diversity rank­ ing as well, as represented by a chi square of 0.053. Specifically, all of the colleges in California were ranked highly in relation to diversity. And none of the institutions in the other western states was ranked highly in relation to diversity, indicating that the colleges in California represent the success related to diversity for liberal arts colleges in the West. With the excep­ tion of Georgia, for which both of the col­ leges were rated highly in relation to di­ versity, no other colleges in the South were so ranked. There was no state in the Northeast for which the majority of the colleges were highly rated. Again, none of the colleges in the Midwest was rated highly in relation to diversity. Similar re­ sults, with an even greater degree of dif­ 57 100.0% ference (i.e., a chi square of 0.30), are noted with regard to the 1999 data, with all of the colleges in California and Georgia being rated highly in relation to diversity. Again, none of the other institutions in the West or the Midwest were rated highly. And in the northeastern states, there were no instances in which the ma­ jority of the colleges were highly rated. Organizational Success and Diversity To determine the extent to which there is a relationship between organizational success and performance related to diver­ sity, a number of types of correlational analysis were undertaken. Specifically, the actual 2000 U.S. News rankings were correlated with whether or not the insti­ tutions were rated (i.e., included in the rankings at all) related to diversity. The results indicate that a significant differ­ ence was identified, in that the five insti­ tutions that were most highly rated in the U.S. News overall rankings of success also were rated highly in terms of diversity. The institutions rated least highly in terms of overall success also were not rated highly in relation to diversity, as represented by a chi square of 0.015 (see table 3). Similar analyses were undertaken con­ sidering whether the colleges were highly rated in terms of diversity and the over­ all success ranking by category or range (1 to 5 and so on). In addition, correla­ tional analyses involving the specific di­ versity rankings, the diversity rankings by category or range, the specific overall rankings, and the overall rankings by cat­ 524 College & Research Libraries November 2001 TABLE 3 Organizational Success and Diversity: Chi Square Values Overall Ranking: Overall Ranking: Specific Ranking By Category Diversity Ranking: Yes or No 0.015 0.000 Diversity Ranking: Specific Ranking 0.001 0.205 Diversity Ranking: By Category 0.001 0.022 egory were undertaken as well. In nearly every correlational measure, significant differences were noted. For example, in the case of the specific diversity rankings as correlated with the specific overall rankings—the correlation that provides for the most detail and specificity of analysis—a chi square value of 0.001 was found. This indicates even more clearly the degree of correlation between insti­ tutions that were rated highly in terms of diversity and those rated highly in terms of overall organizational success. Thus, whether the data are considered in rela­ tion to the criteria associated with whether the institutions are rated highly at all in terms of diversity (i.e., yes or no), in terms of the specific ranks themselves, or in terms of the ranks within a five-point range, in nearly every instance, the sta­ tistical analysis indicates a significant dif­ ference. The institutions that are rated most highly in terms of diversity are also rated highly in relation to other measures of organizational success. The one instance in which the result­ ing measure of statistical significance did not indicate a significant level of differ­ ence involved the correlation between the overall rankings by category or range and the specific diversity ranking. In addition, these similar tests of correlation did not reveal significant differences in relation to the 1999 data, suggesting a lesser de­ gree of correlation, an effect of the change in the criteria used in the measures of aca­ demic excellence from one year to the next, as indicated by the editors or some other factor. However, the number of in­ stances of statistically significant correla­ tional statistics provides evidence of the relationship between diversity and orga­ nizational success in the academic setting and supports the results of prior research involving private sector organizations. Because the intent of the research pre­ sented here is to determine the extent to which there is a relationship between di­ versity and organizational success at the institutional level, as the basis for further research involving the libraries them­ selves, the analyses were not intended to be exhaustive but, rather, illustrative. Summary and Conclusion The findings of this study of liberal arts colleges indicate a relationship between diversity and organizational success or performance in the academic environ­ ment. The institutions that are rated most highly in terms of diversity are also rated highly in relation to other measures of organizational success. Thus, the results, based on data from established rankings of organizational success and diversity in the academic environment, provide further evidence to support the results of the private sector research on leader­ ship diversity. These results suggest im­ portant implications for the academic li­ brary, based on the relationship between larger institutional efforts to foster diver­ sity and similar efforts undertaken within the college library. Although it appears that further study is needed to more fully define the nature of the rela­ tionship between diversity and organi­ zational success, this and prior research indicate that managerial decisions re­ lated to recruitment and hiring efforts taken to (1) target a broad segment of the The Importance of Leadership Diversity 525 evolving user and potential user popu­ lation and (2) provide appropriate ser­ vices for those populations have signifi­ cant organizational implications and are supported by a rationale that includes pragmatic considerations associated with competitiveness and organizational performance and success. Results relating to the larger parent institution, as is the case in the private sector research, both inform the overall discussion of diversity as it relates to or­ ganizational units such as the library and serve as the basis for further study of the relationship between diversity and orga­ nizational success in the academic library. This research is of particular concern in relation to the fact that there is clear evi­ dence that diversity is valued in private sector organizations—the employers of many graduates of colleges and univer­ sities. Thus, the findings are of signifi­ cance in terms of the role of colleges and universities, which includes the educa­ tional mission of the academic library, in preparing graduates who can contribute to the success of organizations that have made diversity a priority. Further re­ search should address the nature of the relationship between diversity and orga­ nizational success, including the extent to which there is a causal relationship and the extent to which leadership diversity is supported by the prior research associ­ ated with theoretical models of leader­ ship, including contingency theory, in order to more fully inform those in the academic library community who have an interest in, and commitment to, diversity and organizational success. Notes 1. Geoffrey Colvin, “The 50 Best Companies for Asians, Blacks, and Hispanics: Companies That Pursue Diversity Outperform the S&P 500. Coincidence?” Fortune 140 (July 19, 1999): 53–54; Sherry Kuczynski, “If Diversity, Then Higher Profits? Companies That Have Successful Diver­ sity Programs Seem to Have Higher Returns. But Which Came First?” HR Magazine 44 (Dec. 1999) [cited 4 April 2001]. Available online from http://www.shrm.org/hrmagazine/articles/ 1299div.htm. 2. Colvin, “The 50 Best Companies for Asians, Blacks, and Hispanics,” 54. 3. Kuczynski, “If Diversity, Then Higher Profits?” 4. Ibid. 5. Ibid. 6. Ibid. 7. Ibid. 8. Janice L. Dreachslin and Joseph J. Saunders Jr., “Diversity Leadership and Organizational Transformation: Performance Indicators for Health Service Organizations/Practitioner Applica­ tion,” Journal of Healthcare Management 44 (Nov. /Dec. 1999): 427–39; Gail Warder, “Leadership Diversity,” Journal of Healthcare Management 44 (Nov./Dec. 1999): 421–23. 9. Fred E. Fiedler, “Research on Leadership Selection and Training: One View of the Future,” Administrative Science Quarterly 41 (June 1996): 43. 10. Martine Duchatelet, “Cultural Diversity and Management/Leadership Models,” Ameri­ can Business Review 16 (June 1998): 96–99; Deanne N. Den Hartog, Robert J. House, Paul J. Hanges, S. Antonio Ruiz-Quintanilla, et. al., “Culture Specific and Cross-Culturally Generalizable Im­ plicit Leadership Theories: Are Attributes of Charismatic/Transformational Leadership Univer­ sally Endorsed?” Leadership Quarterly 10 (summer 1999): 219–56. 11. Kevin Dobbs, Jack Gordon, Chris Lee, and David Stamps, “Leadership Theories: A Top-10 List,” Training 36 (Oct. 1999): 26–27. 12. Janet Z. Burns and Fred L. Otte, “Implications of Leader–Member Exchange Theory and Research for Human Resource Development Research,” Human Resource Development Quarterly (Oct. 1, 1999): 225. 13. Boas Shamir and Jane M. Howell, “Organizational and Contextual Influences on the Emer­ gence and Effectiveness of Charismatic Leadership,” Leadership Quarterly 10 (summer 1999): 257– 83; Daniel Goleman, “Leadership That Gets Results,” Harvard Business Review 78 (Mar./Apr. 2000): 78–90. 14. Dobbs, Gordon, Lee, and Stamps, “Leadership Theories,” 26. 15. Reginald Shareef, “Ecovision: A Leadership Theory for Innovative Organizations,” Orga­ nizational Dynamics 20 (summer 1991): 50–63. http://www.shrm.org/hrmagazine/articles 526 College & Research Libraries November 2001 16. Dobbs, Gordon, Lee, and Stamps, “Leadership Theories.” 17. Ibid. 18. Daniel Yankelovich, Campus Diversity Initiative (New York: Ford Foundation, 1998). 19. Peter Schmidt, “Federal Judge Upholds Use of Race in Admissions: Michigan Defends Policy by Showing That It Is `Narrowly Tailored,’” Chronicle of Higher Education 47 (Jan. 5, 2001): A32; Amy Wallace, “UC Regents Refuse to Yield on Affirmative Action Ban,” Los Angeles Times, 19 Jan. 1996, A1. 20. Yankelovich, Campus Diversity Initiative. 21. Chronicle of Higher Education Almanac (Washington, D.C.: The Chronicle, 2000–2001). 22. ARL Annual Salary Survey 2000–2001 (Washington, D.C.: Association of Research Librar­ ies, 2000). 23. Mark Winston and Haipeng Li, “Managing Diversity in Liberal Arts College Libraries,” College & Research Libraries 61 (May 2000): 205–15. 24. Robert Franek, ed. The Princeton Review: The Best 331 Colleges (New York: Princeton Re­ view Publishing/Random House, 2000). 25. “About Those College Rankings,” Review.Com. [cited 12 February 2001]. Available from http://www.review.com/college/article.cfm?id=college\colAbout. 26. John V. Lombardi, Diane D. Craig, Elizabeth D. Capaldi, and Denise S. Gate, The Top Ameri­ can Research Universities: An Occasional Paper from the Lombardi Program on Measuring University Performance (Gainesville, Fla.: The Center at the University of Florida, 2000). 27. Diane D. Craig, “Top 100 Universities Data for Ten Quality Measures,” The Center at the University of Florida [cited 4 April 2001]. Available from http://thecenter.ufl.edu/ research_data.html. 28. “America’s Best Colleges 2001: Exclusive Rankings,” U.S. News & World Report 129 (Sept. 11, 2000): 106–23; “America’s Best Colleges 2000: Exclusive Rankings,” U.S. News & World Report 127 (Aug. 30, 1999): 88–95; “2001 College Rankings,” U.S News Online [cited 4 April 2000]. Avail­ able from http://www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/college/corank.htm. 29. “America’s Best Colleges 2001,” 106–107. 30. Robert J. Morse and Samuel Flanigan, “How We Rank Colleges: Our Method Uses 16 Measures of Academic Excellence,” U.S. News Online [cited 4 April 2001]. Available from http:// www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/college/rankings/collmeth.htm. 31. “Hispanic Outlook: Top 100,” Hispanic Outlook in Higher Education Magazine (May 5, 2000) [cited 14 December 2000]. Available from www.hispanicoutlook.com/top100.html. 32. “Asian American Universities: Best and Worst Universities for Asian Americans,” Goldsea Asian American Supersite [cited 12 December 2000]. Available from http://goldsea.com/ AAU.aau.html. 33. “The Progress of Black Student Matriculations at the Nation’s Highest-Ranked Colleges and Universities,” Journal of Blacks in Higher Education 25 (autumn 1999): 8–16. 34. “Campus Diversity Methodology,” U.S. News Online [cited 15 November 2000]. Available from www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/college/rankings/codivers.htm. 35. Winston and Li, “Managing Diversity in Liberal Arts College Libraries,” 205. 36. Ibid., 206. 37. Ibid. and Haipeng Li, “Diversity in the Library: What Could Happen at the Institutional Level,” Journal of Library Administration 27 (1999): 146. www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/college/rankings/codivers.htm http:http://goldsea.com www.hispanicoutlook.com/top100.html www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/college/rankings/collmeth.htm http://www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/college/corank.htm http:http://thecenter.ufl.edu http://www.review.com/college/article.cfm?id=college\colAbout http:Review.Com