Character for Leadership: The Role of Personal Characteristics

Limitations 
Several limitations of this study are worth noting. First, all instruments 
utilized in this study were self-report measures. Such measures may lead to the 
problem of common method variance. This study attempted to assess whether or 
not this was a problem through the use of the social desirability items in the survey. 
Since there were low social desirability scores, it is unlikely that variance estimates 
were inflated due to common method (Spector, 2006). 
Second, the survey items utilized in this study were summed ordinal 
variables, categorized and grouped to create scales. As such, these scales 
approximate interval level statistics (Newton & Rudestam, 1999) that may allow 
for correlational analysis. This study explored differences between groups created 
by dividing participant’s scores into groups rather than evaluating relationships 
between actual scores for independent variables. Though not the same as 
dichotomization of variables (where groups are divided at the scale mean), this type 
of analysis may result in a reduction of statistical power (MacCallum, Zhang, 
Preacher, & Rucker, 2002). 
Third, though this study utilized a population of first-year and second-year 
students preparing for ministry at one institution, the sample was small, leading to 
problems with generalizability of the findings. Additionally, only potential ministry 
leaders participated in this study, not those in an actual ministry capacity. 
Finally, this study incorporated a version of the TCI (Cloninger, Przybeck, 
et al., 1994) instrument that utilized a true/false item response rather than a five-
point Likert scale. The latter version was only available online at the time the 
survey was administered; it was not yet available in paper form. Also, reliability 
and validity information were not readily available at that time. Future versions of 
the TCI that utilize the five-point Likert scale for item response would allow 
greater confidence in the analysis regarding evaluation of mean differences rather 

---

Character for Leadership 
73 
 
than relationships between variables. Such future versions will allow increased 
power in statistical analyses. 
Implications 
This chapter has already addressed a number of implications and 
recommendations specific to particular expectations raised in the literature review. 
However, other broader implications are also apparent due to results from this 
study. 
Leadership Development 
Character assessment can be a useful tool for leadership development of 
those committed to professional and personal growth (Clark, 2003). Can it be used 
for more than personal reflection and self-motivated growth? Can such 
instrumentation allow formal evaluation and the development of personal growth 
plans? Perhaps such character assessment could be pertinent to the leadership 
development engine that exists in our organizations. 
Theological education is designed to function as dialectic in the formation 
process—dialectic as an examination of the assumptions that form the basis for a