Volunteered Volunteers: Role Expectations and Performance of the US University President and Chancellor’s Partner

Vargas, Juanita Gamez

doi:10.1057/hep.2013.35

Cited by 1 publication

(7 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These duties include hosting, fundraising, representing the president in meetings, maintaining the presidential residence, serving on community boards, and many other roles varying by institution (Thompson, 2008). In cases where a spouse is not readily available to volunteer time to campus needs, paid staff can serve in these functions (Thompson, 2008), though this option is typically more readily available for male spouses (Vargas, 2014).…”

Section: Roles and Duties Of Th E Spousementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both Thompson (2008) and Reid et al (2011) found that spouses varied widely in their feelings towards their role-with Reid et al especially detailing how some thrived and enjoyed their sphere of influence while others outright resented it. Likewise, Vargas (2014) found that male and female spouses were both frustrated with unclear or unwarranted expectations from the board. Some spouses even recommended not trying to balance a career with the role of presidential spouse since it caused so much stress and a full time commitment to the university ended up happening anyway.…”

Section: Spousal Discontentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Do presidential biographies disclose the role of the spouse, and do press releases announcing a new president reveal that the role of the spouse was established prior to hiring? Additionally, since previous work has focused either on two-year colleges (Smith 1994(Smith , 2001Vaughan, 1986), four-year colleges (Reid et al, 2011;Vargas, 2014) or an unspecified institution type (Thompson, 2008), this paper will include samples from four institutional types (two-year, four-year, masters, and doctoral) to establish a more broad context.…”

Section: Spousal Discontentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Deetz (2001) stated, "The central goal of critical theory in organizational communication studies has been to create a society and workplaces…where all members can contribute equally to produce systems that meet human needs and lead to progressive development of all" (p. 26). Because research has shown that spousal roles are largely determined by organizational factors (i.e., pressure from the board, tradition, the precedent of previous spouses) rather than spouses themselves (Thompson, 2008), and that those organizational factors are very difficult to circumvent (Vargas, 2014), there is an imbalance of power while establishing the spouse's role that must be addressed. The aim of this research is to illuminate how the spouse's role is recognized, which may lead to progression within the organizations shaping that role.…”

Section: Theoretical Framework and Research Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This expectation is not unique to university presidential spouses, as spouses of high profile leaders such as ministers (Benoit, 2010), politicians (Kaufman, 2008), and corporate executives (Kaufman, 2008) are put in much the same position. While these roles are often referred to as voluntary, the repercussions for not complying often send a stronger message of it being required (Reid, Cole, & Kern, 2011;Thompson, 2008;Vargas, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Behind Every Good Leader: How Higher Education Institutions Disclose Information about the Presidential Spouse

McNaughtan

2018

JSPTE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim/Purpose: Using the lens of critical theory, the authors of this study analyzed if institutions of varying institutional type acknowledged the role of the presidents’ spouses in presidential biographies and press releases. The purpose of this investigation was to establish to what extent institutions are transparent about the involvement of the presidential spouse. Background: Spouses of high profile leaders, including a university president’s spouse, are often expected to fill time-consuming roles for their spouses’ positions. Past research has found that spouses vary widely in their feelings towards this informal, yet oft-expected, role. While some thrive in the role, others feel taken for granted performing free work with little recognition or personal benefit. Methodology: Using a random stratified sample of current presidents at four types of institutions, a content analysis was performed on 200 presidential biographies and corresponding press releases announcing new presidents. Nominal data was collected and compared to existing data to illustrate in what manner and in what frequency institutions disclosed information about presidents’ spouses. Contribution: While the aspects of the spouse’s role at a university have been researched from the spouse’s perspective and the president’s perspective, the authors researched the role from an organizational perspective. Identifying how the spouse was discussed in organizational mediums and comparing to existing data established a baseline for understanding to what extent institutions are transparent about spousal contributions. Findings: The results of the content analysis indicate that organizational mediums mention spouses and their work at a low rate. There was also a difference between institutional types in how spouses are discussed, with two-year institutions discussing spouses the least. Additionally, spouses’ off-campus contributions were more likely to be mentioned than their on-campus contributions. Recommendations for Practitioners: The findings give reason for practitioners to consider the institution’s transparency of a spouse’s work, and to begin considering this issue during the hiring stage. Hiring committees may need to investigate their institutional culture and what changes may be realistically implemented to create a more egalitarian atmosphere for the president’s spouse. Recommendation for Researchers: Realizing that there is a discrepancy between a spouse’s involvement on campus and disclosure of that involvement to campus constituents, researchers may investigate best practices in how spouses are involved on campus and in the community and how they are recognized for that work. Researchers should also be considerate of how these results may differ by institutional type and gender of the spouse. Impact on Society: Because high profile leaders and their spouses are perceived to lead a life of privilege, the possibility of negative power dynamics within the arrangement is often overlooked. However, highly visible couples should be empowered to set an equitable standard, and this research illuminates one area in which improvement may be considered. Future Research: Future inquiry could seek a more intentional quantitative and qualitative understanding as to how the dynamics of a spouse’s involvement, representation, expectations, and satisfaction differ by institutions type. Future inquiry could also analyze how spouses’ experiences and expectations in their formal and informal roles differ by gender.

show abstract

Section: Roles and Duties Of Th E Spousementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Spousal Discontentmentioning

confidence: 99%