Character for Leadership: The Role of Personal Characteristics

Measures 
This study utilized a four-part survey. The first part of the survey requested 
demographic information from the participant, followed by measurements of 
character (TCI; Cloninger, Przybeck, et al., 1994), visionary (transformational) 
leadership (TLP; Sashkin et al., 1997), and social desirability. 
Demographic Survey 
The first part of the survey that participants completed was a section 
requesting demographic information. This section was designed to assess the level 
of previous and current ministry leadership involvement. In addition, age, gender, 
marital status, and family of origin categories were included to identify the 
potential effects of these factors on character development and the use of specific 
leadership practices. Finally, questions regarding degree program and vocational 
direction were included to identify differences that may exist due to self-selection 
criteria. A sample of this instrument is provided in Appendix A. 
TCI 
The instrument used to assess the participant’s character was the TCI, 
version 9 (Cloninger, Przybeck, et al., 1994). Typically, the TCI has been used in 
clinical populations for the identification of personality disorders and includes 
items intended to assess both temperament and character. For the purposes of this 
study, only the character scales of the TCI instrument which consist of 107 
true/false items that assess the self-directedness, cooperativeness, and self-
transcendence of participants were used.
The TCI (Cloninger, Przybeck, et al., 1994) was selected for this study 
because it is the only instrument that assesses an individual’s character as a 
component of personality. In addition, the TCI utilizes the conceptual definition of 
character consistent with the foundational assertions for this study. Many other 
moral character measurements exist. However, only the TCI provides an 

---

Character for Leadership 
45 
 
appropriate assessment of character as distinct from values, ethics, and morality as 
detailed in the literature review. 
In its current form, the TCI (Cloninger, Przybeck, et al., 1994) has been 
modified from the original Tridimensional Personality Questionnaire (TPQ; 
Cloninger, Przybeck, & Svrakic, 1991). The TPQ was originally designed with 
three temperament scales only. Later, a fourth temperament factor was identified 
and items for the character scales were added to assess those abstract self-concepts 
that develop throughout life. All but two of the original 100 items from the TPQ 
were included in the TCI with additional items added to increase reliability of the 
subscales. The full TCI instrument consists of 226 true/false items. 
While the TCI (Cloninger, Przybeck, et al., 1994) has been utilized 
primarily in clinical research, the theoretical foundations of the instrument are 
based on character components of healthy personality and have been validated with 
a community sample. The comparison between TCI scales and identified symptoms 
of personality disorders yielded moderate correlations (Svrakic et al., 1993). The 
TCI includes a number of internal validity indicators, such as the Rarity Scale, the 
Runs Scale, the Number True, the Scale of Like Items, the Scale of Unlike Items, 
and one item that directly asks the participant about honesty. Cronbach 
α
s for the 
TCI range from .65 to .89 for seven factors in the community sample (
N
= 300) 
utilized for instrument validation.
TCI (Cloninger, Przybeck, et al., 1994) research using the community 
sample defined mature character as a combined score of greater than 58 for the 
character subscales measuring self-directedness and cooperativeness. This equates 
to the 33rd percentile for the TCI community sample used in the validation of the 
instrument (Cloninger, Przybeck, et al.). This study utilized the same percentile 
measure to rank cases in thirds based on TCI responses for this particular sample to 
identify participants with mature character and assign them to groups for analysis. 
This same percentile measure was used to assign participants to analysis groups 
(low, medium, or high) for all three character traits: self-directedness, 
cooperativeness, and self-transcendence. A sample of the TCI instrument used in 
this study is included in Appendix A. 

---

Character for Leadership 
46 
 
Sashkin et al.’s (1997) TLP
To assess transformational leadership, Sashkin et al.’s (1997) TLP was 
used. Other measures of transformational leadership exist that have wider 
recognition and use such as the MLQ (Bass & Avolio, 1990) and the LPI (Kouzes 
& Posner, 1987). McElreath (1999) evaluated all three of these instruments and 
found significant correlations for most of the factors represented (
r
= .47 to .54, 
p
< 
.01 for the TLP and LPI; 
r
= .31 to .42, 
p
< .01 for the TLP and MLQ), which is 
remarkably consistent since all three instruments were developed out of 
independent research programs. For this study, the TLP was selected since it 
incorporates an evaluation of the personal characteristics of the leader in addition to 
an assessment of transactional and transformational leadership behaviors. The TLP 
was used to evaluate those who are high in transformational leadership behavior. 
The TLP (Sashkin et al., 1997) is a 50-item instrument based on a five-point 
Likert scale that includes 1 (
to little or no extent
), 2 (
to a slight extent
), 3 (
to a 
moderate extent
), 4 (
to a great extent
), and 5 (
to a very great extent
),
Cronbach 
α
s for the TLP (Sashkin et al., 1997) range from .42 to .94 for 9 
of the 10 factors in seven different samples (Sashkin, 2002). Scale 8 regarding 
follower-centered leadership had the lowest reliabilities demonstrated (.21 - .51) 
due to the conceptually inconsistent subscales assessing prosocial versus 
personalized power orientation (Sashkin, 2002). Test–retest reliability measures for 
the TLP show correlations ranging from .22 (
p
< .05) to .62 (
p
< .01) (Lafferty, 
1998). A sample of the TLP used in this study is included in Appendix A. 
Social Desirability Scale 
The final instrument used was included to measure social desirability 
(Paulhus, 1984). This instrument consists of 20 true/false self-report items. Other 
useful social desirability measures exist such as the Marlowe-Crowne Social 
Desirability Scale (Crowne & Marlowe, 1960). The major advantage of Paulhus’ 
scale is its length. For purposes of this study, only those items related to impression 
management were used, limiting the instrument to 10 true/false items. Self-report 
instruments have been known for false positive responses or faking good, 
especially when an item or instrument is assessing characteristics that are desirable 

---

Character for Leadership 
47 
 
for the respondent to possess. This measurement artifact is predicted to be present 
for both aspects related to desired character and leadership behaviors. A sample of 
the social desirability instrument used in this study is included in Appendix A. 
This research study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at 
Regent University. The approval form is included in Appendix B.