By Dr. Joel Cormier

Joel Cormier, PhD, is Assistant Professor of Sport Management and Assistant Men's and Women's Tennis Coach at Nichols College. A former youth ice hockey coach and academic tutor at the University of New Mexico, he can be reached at: joel.cormier@nichols.edu.

Most athletic directors wear a lot of hats. Sometimes you need to be a politician, and other times you need to be a strategist. There are days when you feel like a human resources professional, and days when you need to be immersed in policies and procedures.

When you leave for work in the morning, which hat do you put on? That's a question I recently asked 278 athletic directors at NCAA institutions to find the most prevalent leadership model in intercollegiate athletics. The results provide insight into the bigger question: What makes an effective leader in athletic administration?

FOUR FRAMES
My research was based on the Multiframe Leadership Model featured in the book Reframing Change: Artistry, Choice, and Leadership by Terrence Deal, an educational expert, and Lee Bolman, a business consultant. I chose this model because it joins education and business in a way that relates well to athletic administration. It does not see these two areas as competing, but explains how each can work in cooperation with the other.

The Multiframe Leadership Model breaks down behavior into four frames:

Human Resources: Leaders in the human resource frame seek to understand their personnel and individual relationships within the organization. In order to lead a successful program, they work to discover what motivates each of their employees.

Structural: A leader in the structural frame focuses on policy, procedures, and outcomes. The work of the group is highlighted over the individual. Focusing on this frame leads to effective goal setting and a strong bottom line.

Political: In the political frame, the leader views an organization as a group of players who are constantly forming alliances and coalitions to compete for power and resources. This can, for example, lead to many different entities on campus coming together to support an athletic program.

Symbolic: A leader in the symbolic frame stresses the organizational culture, focusing on its values, attitudes, rituals, and traditions. An athletic director who understands how to use this frame motivates others to work extremely hard for the cause.

TOP HATS
It is believed that getting a measure of people's frames indicates how leaders view behavior in their organization and their field. Therefore, I asked athletic directors questions relating to which of the four frames they choose most often. What hat do they wear most of the time?

Overall, the human resource frame was the most popular. Over 53 percent of respondents (149 of the 278 who participated) chose the first model as most descriptive of their leadership. Most athletic directors see their athletic department as an organization made up of individuals with different wants, needs, desires, feelings, limitations, views, and skills. Their number one job is to make the most of the individuals and blend them into a cohesive group.

The second most popular frame chosen was structural, at 27 percent, followed by symbolic, at 13 percent. Political was chosen least often, at just seven percent.

There was some variation among athletic directors in different NCAA divisions. Those in Divisions II and III gave the symbolic frame a lower rating and the structural frame a higher rating than those in Division I. However, all divisions chose the political frame last.

MAKING IT FIT
What does this mean for athletic directors? First, it shows the importance of keeping a human resources frame in developing your program. Successful athletic directors need to view their coaches and athletes as the most important elements in their department. Developing people ultimately leads to achieving goals.

Second, it underscores the need to use different leadership styles at different times. Each of the other three frames has relevance in an athletic director's success:

• Structural leadership is especially important as outside constituents and governing bodies become increasingly watchful of our programs. Having a structural frame ensures we develop policies and procedures so rules are followed and problems are discovered before they become crises.

• Political leadership recognizes that there are often competing influences in our program. Athletic directors need to be skilled at negotiation, compromise, and persuasion to survive. This is apparent in budgeting, coaches' contracts, and working with the community, parents, faculty, and upper-level administrators.

• Symbolic leadership may not be on your daily to-do list, but it ultimately influences the organizational culture in your department. Athletic directors who use a symbolic frame recognize every department is unique and driven by stories, ceremonies, rituals, and heroes. As such, programs should not only continue to honor their past, but also look to create new traditions that celebrate success, on and off the field.

Finally, I hope the discussion of these frames can help athletic directors understand how to categorize their leadership roles. Sometimes, we wear the hat that fits us best. But ideally, we can stop and think about which hat best fits the occasion.

Research involving the Multiframe Leadership Model suggests that leaders who operate out of multiple frames are generally more effective overall. When you choose the appropriate leadership style for a particular situation, rather than remaining in one leadership frame at all times, you are more likely to achieve the desired result. Overcoming a challenge may simply come down to choosing the right frame.