The Big Five Factors of Personality Traits and Leadership Practices of Academic Department Chairs: A Predictive Study Mohammed Ali Assiri 1 • This study investigated whether the big five factors of personality traits can predict academic department chairs’ leadership practices. The study had a predictive research design; the data were collected from 424 par - ticipants in the 2023 academic year, and the instruments of this study were two questionnaires. The study found that the big five factors of per - sonality traits predict the leadership practices of academic department chairs. Two factors of personality traits, conscientiousness and openness to experience, were statistically significant and predicted the practices in modelling leadership. Four factors (agreeableness, conscientiousness, openness to experience, and extroversion) were statistically significant and predicted leadership practices in inspiring a shared vision. Three factors (neuroticism, extroversion, and conscientiousness) were sta - tistically significant and predicted leadership practices in challenging processes. Two factors (conscientiousness and openness to experience) were statistically significant and predicted leadership practices enabling others to act. Three factors (conscientiousness, agreeableness, and open - ness to experience) were statistically significant and predicted leader - ship practices encouraging the heart. The study recommended that aca - demic leaders be required to consider personality traits as an important dimension in selecting and assigning academic department chairs and other academic leaders at all levels at higher education institutions. Keywords: personality traits, leadership practices, academic leader 1 Faculty of Education, King Khalid University, Abha, Saudi Arabia; moaassiri@kku.edu.sa. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.1736 Published on-line as Recently Accepted Paper: February 2024 c e p s Journal the big five factors of personality traits and leadership practices of academic ... 2 Velikih pet dejavnikov osebnostnih lastnosti in prakse vodenja predstojnikov fakultetnih oddelkov: napovedna študija Mohammed Ali Assiri • Ta študija je ugotavljala, ali lahko velikih pet dejavnikov osebnostnih la- Ta študija je ugotavljala, ali lahko velikih pet dejavnikov osebnostnih la - stnosti napoveduje prakse vodenja pri predstojnikih fakultetnih oddel - kov. Študija je imela napovedni raziskovalni načrt; podatki so bili zbrani prek 424 udeležencev v študijskem letu 2023, instrumenta te študije pa sta bila dva vprašalnika. Študija je pokazala, da velikih pet dejavnikov osebnostnih lastnosti napoveduje prakse vodenja predstojnikov fakulte - tnih oddelkov. Dva dejavnika osebnostnih lastnosti, tj. vestnost in odpr - tost za izkušnje, sta bila statistično značilna in sta napovedovala prakse pri zglednem vodenju. Štirje dejavniki (prijetnost, vestnost, odprtost za izkušnje in ekstravertnost) so bili statistično značilni in so napovedovali prakse vodenja pri navdihovanju skupne vizije. Trije dejavniki (nevro - ticizem, ekstravertiranost in vestnost) so bili statistično značilni in so napovedovali prakse vodenja pri preizpraševanju procesov. Dva dejav - nika (vestnost in odprtost za izkušnje) sta bila statistično značilna in sta napovedovala prakse vodenja, ki omogočajo drugim, da ukrepajo. Trije dejavniki (vestnost, prijetnost in odprtost za izkušnje) so bili statistično značilni in so napovedovali vodstvene prakse spodbujanja srčnosti. Štu - dija je priporočila, da bi morali vodje fakultetnih oddelkov upoštevati osebnostne lastnosti kot pomembno dimenzijo pri izbiri in imenovanju predstojnikov teh oddelkov in drugih akademskih vodij na vseh ravneh v visokošolskih ustanovah. Ključne besede: osebnostne lastnosti, prakse vodenja, akademski vodja c e p s Journal 3 Introduction Leadership is a complex phenomenon in all organisations, including those in the higher education setting. For many years, philosophers and schol - ars have attempted to investigate leadership to provide a clear and comprehen - sive understanding of how it occurs. Leadership has been defined according to the perspectives and backgrounds of these scholars. Stogdill (1974) reviewed many leadership studies and the body of litera - ture and discovered many different meanings of leadership. Northouse (2018) defined leadership as � a process whereby an individual in� uences a group of in- �a process whereby an individual in� uences a group of in- a process whereby an individual in� uences a group of in - dividuals to achieve a common goal ’ (p. 5). Yukl (2013) provided this definition: �leadership has been defi ned in terms of traits, behaviours, in� uence, interac- leadership has been defined in terms of traits, behaviours, in� uence, interac - tion patterns, role relationships, and occupation of an administrative position ’ (p. 2). Additionally, Bass and Bass (2008) stated that the definition of leadership is broad and can be defined based on many concepts, such as personality, a pro - cess, purposeful behaviour, an exercise of in� uence, power, a differentiated role, and a symbol. Obviously, leadership emphasises three key points: 1) the leader who best affects the followers and encourages them, 2) the followers who follow the leader and trust him, and 3) the leadership processes that include behaviour and strategies that enable an institution to achieve its target goal. In higher education institutions, academic leadership is more impor - tant than ever in organising and managing colleges and universities. Academic leadership in� uences students’ achievement, the quality of the academic pro - gramme, the scientific research, faculty and staff performance, and the rela - tionship with the community and stakeholders (Vilkinas et al., 2009). � To be successful, academic leaders need to develop a broad understanding of how their college or university is structured and functions, and simultaneously un - derstand the loci of decision making on institutional issues ’ (Hendrickson et al., 2013, p.1). Obviously, academic leaders must acquire knowledge and skills to deal with environmental changes, high competition, and new demands. Aca - demic leadership includes specific tasks, functions, and responsibilities execut - ed by academic leaders’ behaviours and actions. Siddique et al. (2011) found that academic leaders in� uence their institu - tions by making them more effective. They serve students better academically, personally, and professionally. Also, academic leaders work to improve the quality of faculty and motivate them. Hendrickson et al. (2013) stated several roles for academic department chairs, including � creating a culture of adapta- �creating a culture of adapta- creating a culture of adapta - tion and change, developing a shared vision and mission, embracing con�ict to - ward problem resolution, developing an academic and intellectual community, the big five factors of personality traits and leadership practices of academic ... 4 fostering growth and professional development, and developing evaluation processes and strategic plans ’ (p. 295). Gmelch (2019) reviewed many studies conducted in the last three decades, and he identified the most important roles and duties for the academic department chair as follows: � represent department to administration, maintain conducive work climate, develop long-range goals, recruit and select faculty, enhance quality of teaching, manage department re - sources, solicit ideas to improve department, evaluate faculty performance, in - form faculty of institutional concerns, and teach and advise students ’ (p. 14). In other words, the department chairs are responsible for leading academic affairs, administrative duties, and moving toward vision and intended goals. Leadership scholars have endeavoured to study leadership through multiple approaches, including personality traits, behavioural, situational, and leader-and-follower relations (Hughes et al., 2006). Yukl (2013) also added the power-in� uence approach and integrative approach. These approaches are dis - cussed in many theories developed by scholars to describe the nature of lead - ership and its consequences. These approaches are also interrelated and inter - active. These two approaches are elaborated below to understand and explore what personality traits and behaviours determine leadership in general and higher education. The personality approach is one of the most important in studying lead - ership behaviour. In many studies, scholars concentrate on the specific person - ality traits that clearly differentiate leaders from subordinates (Jago, 1982; Bass & Bass, 2008). Researchers considered the traits approach to explain and justify how personality traits of leaders in� uence and shape their leadership behav - iours (Bryman, 1992; Dinh et al., 2014). More specifically, many researchers are interested in investigating visionary and charismatic leadership (Antonakis & Day, 2018; Bass & Bass, 2008; Bennis & Nanus, 2007; Nadler & Tushman, 2012). The personality trait is a reliable and valid approach for understanding and explaining leadership behaviours. Personality is � the dynamic and organized set of characteristics pos- �the dynamic and organized set of characteristics pos- the dynamic and organized set of characteristics pos - sessed by a person that uniquely in� uence his or her cognitions, motivations, and behaviours in various situations ’ (Ryckman, 2008, p. 4). Also, personality is � the organized pattern of distractive traits of a specific person ’ (Bass & Bass, 2008, p. 103). Larsen and Buss (2017) wrote that � the personality is in� uenced by traits that the person is born with and how they develop over time ’ (p. 15). Therefore, a person’s personality refers to consistent and distinguished differ - ences among individuals. Researchers have been interested in studying personality and identi - fying the differences among individuals. Many psychologists and researchers c e p s Journal 5 emphasise that these traits are the most important domain for gaining knowl - edge about the nature of personality (Amelang et al., 1991; Goldberg, 1993; Larsen & Buss, 2017). There are two ways to define traits. The � first views traits as the internal properties of persons that cause their behaviours. The second views traits as descriptive summaries of behaviours ’ (Larsen & Buss, 2017, p. 91). Clearly, traits are characteristics that describe how individuals are different from each other. Northouse (2018) stated that throughout the twentieth century, research - ers conducted many overviews regarding the traits approach. These overviews emphasise that the traits of the leader in� uence the leadership process. Kirkpat - rick and Lock (1991) pointed out that � it is unequivocally clear that leaders are not like other people ’ (p. 59). Additionally, several personality traits of leaders were determined, including � intelligence, insight, responsibility, initiative, per- �intelligence, insight, responsibility, initiative, per- intelligence, insight, responsibility, initiative, per - sistence, self-confidence, extroversion, cooperativeness, in� uence, dominance, motivation, integrity, ability, conscientiousness, openness, agreeableness, and emotion ’ (Northouse, 2018, p. 22). In other words, leaders have diff erent per- ’ (Northouse, 2018, p. 22). In other words, leaders have diff erent per- (Northouse, 2018, p. 22). In other words, leaders have different per - sonality traits from followers. To identify and classify personality traits, researchers provided some personality models, including the hierarchical model, the 16-factor model, the circumplex taxonomy model, and the five-factor model (Larsen & Buss, 2017). In this study, the five factors model will be employed because 1) it has broad traits, 2) it is a persuasive model, 3) and in recent decades, this model has been proven reliable and valid to describe the most important traits of personality (Bass & Bass, 2008). In recent decades, researchers have studied the basic factors that de - scribe the most significant aspects of personality (McCrae & Costa, 1987; Pea - body & Goldberg, 1989; Goldberg, 1993). These basic factors are called � the big five factors model of personality’ , which are 1) neuroticism, 2) extraversion, 3) openness to experience, 4) agreeableness, and 5) conscientiousness (Goldberg, 1990; Costa, 1994; Larsen & Buss, 2017). These five factors will be elaborated on the following paragraphs. Neuroticism refers to the person’s tendency to experience worry, insecuri - ty, distress, emotionality, nervousness, and tension (Bass & Bass, 2008; Goldberg, 1990). Neurotic persons are negative and pessimistic (George, 1996; Williams, 1997). Neuroticism includes these facets: � anxiety, angry hostility, depression, im- �anxiety, angry hostility, depression, im- anxiety, angry hostility, depression, im - pulsiveness, vulnerability and self-consciousness ’ (Costa, 1994, p. 228). Extraversion refers to people who are called enthusiastic, officious, and assertive individuals (Bass & Bass, 2008; Barrick & Mount, 1991, 1993). They are optimistic and positive and see the world favourably (George, 1996). This factor the big five factors of personality traits and leadership practices of academic ... 6 includes six facets: � warmth, gregariousness, assertiveness, activity, excitement- seeking and positive emotion ’ (Costa, 1994, p. 228). The openness to experience factor refers to people with imagination, creativity, curiosity, and intellect (Bass & Bass, 2008; Goldberg, 1990). These people tend to be creative, informed, and insightful (Goldberg, 1990). This fac - tor’s facets are � fantasy, aesthetics feelings, actions, ideas and values ’ (Costa, 1994, p. 228). Agreeableness means that a person tends to be sympathetic, accepting, cooperative, and nurturing (Bass & Bass, 2008; Goldberg, 1990). They are more likely friendly and pleasant. The agreeableness factor includes six facets: � trust, straightforwardness, altruism, compliance, modesty, and tender mindedness ’ (Costa, 1994, p. 228). Conscientiousness refers to persons who tend to be dependable, organ - ised, controlled, responsible, hardworking, efficient, and ambitious (Barrick & Mount, 1991, 1993; Goldberg, 1990). They are more ethical and moral individu - als. This factor includes six facets: � competence, order, dutifulness, achievement striving, self-discipline and deliberation ’ (Costa, 1994, p. 228). The leadership behaviour approach relates to the behaviours of leaders, which means � what leaders do and how they act ’ (Northouse, 2010, p. 69). The study of leaders’ behaviour is a significant approach to understanding the lead - ership phenomena because � behaviour is o � en easier to measure and can be ob- �behaviour is o � en easier to measure and can be ob- behaviour is o �en easier to measure and can be ob - served ’ (Hughes et al., 2006, p. 199). Relevant literature and scholars argue the history of the leadership behaviour approach. Y ukl (2013) states that � the behav- �the behav- the behav - iour approach began in the early 1950s […] to pay closer attention to what man - agers actually do on the job ’ (p. 12). In higher education institutions, T ahiraj and Krek (2022) provide a framework for academic leaders to plan changes to ac - complish better outcomes according to organisational culture. This emphasises that leadership behaviour refers to leaders’ practices, actions, and styles toward the activities, functions, responsibilities, and demands of the job. The behaviour approach is rooted in earlier studies at Ohio State Uni - versity (Hemphill et al., 1951; Hemphill & Coons, 1957; Halpin, 1957; Stogdill, 1963), and University of Michigan (Cartwright & Zander, 1960; Katz & Kahn, 1966; Likert, 1961, 1967). Later, in the 1960s, Blake and Mouton studied leader - ship behaviour and provided their model, the � Managerial Grid’. This model was revised and renamed the � Leadership Grid’ (Blake & Mouton, 1964, 1978, 1985; Blake & McCanse, 1991). Clearly, the behaviour approach focuses on the two dimensions of being task-oriented and relations-oriented, which produce different leadership behaviours. In the last two decades of the twentieth century, a group of scholars c e p s Journal 7 conducted several studies to investigate leadership behaviour. Kouze and Pos - ner conducted research using surveys and questionnaires and analysed many cases of leadership to look into the leadership dynamic. They pointed out five common leadership behaviours or practices, which include � (1) model the way, (2) inspire a shared vision, (3) challenge the process, (4) enable others to act, and (5) encourage the heart ’ (Kouze & Posner, 2017, p. 12�13). Th ese fi ve prac- ’ (Kouze & Posner, 2017, p. 12�13). Th ese fi ve prac- (Kouze & Posner, 2017, p. 12�13). These five prac - tices will be discussed below. � Model the way’ is a significant behaviour for leaders to earn the respect of others. Leaders are required to be a good example. They must align their actions with shared values. Leaders must share values, principles, and beliefs. Their daily actions must demonstrate leaders’ values, principles, and beliefs. Model the way enables leaders to win the regard and the right of employees to lead them (Kouze & Posner, 2017). � Inspire a shared vision’ means that leaders must be able to imagine the future and have a vision for their organisations. They must be able to achieve a vision and dream. Leaders see a clear vision and inspiration as tools for move - ment and change. Leaders must inspire others, share their vision, and encour - age them to believe in it. Clear goals, enthusiasm, and communication are im - portant to inspire a shared vision (Kouze & Posner, 2017). � Challenge the process’ concerns innovative things, services, and pro - cesses. Leaders need to look outside to change the status quo. They search for new opportunities and improvement. Change requires taking risks, recognising new ideas, embracing these ideas, and accepting challenges. Leaders must learn from their daily actions and practices. They increase the possibility of success and meet challenges (Kouze & Posner, 2017). � Enable others to act’ refers to dreams and goals that teams’ actions have achieved. Leaders need to establish good teams by fostering trust, relationships, deep competence, confidence, collaboration, feeling strong, capability, commit - ment, and accountability. Leaders must engage and involve all individuals in the work environment. Leaders are required to empower others and increase self-determination. These practices enable others to take risks and make chang - es. Enabling others helps leaders to complete tasks and achieve goals by making that possible for others (Kouze & Posner, 2017). � Encourage the heart’ means leaders must inspire others to carry out their work and duties. The most powerful means to do that is recognition. Leaders must recognise contributions by others and appreciate all individu - als’ excellence. Also, leaders must acknowledge successful aspects and provide positive feedback and support. This will enhance individuals’ morale, contri - butions, and cooperation. Encouragement enables leaders to link individuals’ the big five factors of personality traits and leadership practices of academic ... 8 performance with rewards. Leaders must ensure that the individuals benefit from their behaviours aligned with the organisation’s values (Kouze & Posner, 2017). These five leadership behaviours and practices enable academic leaders to do their best and accomplish the most important things. The literature and empirical studies indicate that different leadership behaviours and personality traits are linked. Yahay (2011) found that there are relationships between personality types and transformational and transactional leadership. Solaja et al. (2016) found a connection between leadership commu - nication style and personality traits. More specifically, leadership behaviours and styles are related to the big five factors of personality traits as one approach to studying personality. Alkahtani et al. (2011) argued that the big five factors of personality traits were positively correlated between managers’ leadership and their lead-changing capabilities. Simic and Ristic (2017) found a statisti - cally significant correlation between the big five factors of personality traits and leadership styles and that the dominant correlation was between transactional leadership and extraversion. Mahdinezhad et al. (2018) revealed that the effec - tive behaviours of academic leaders relate to effective academic leadership in higher education. Zulfqar et al. (2021) discovered that academic leaders’ de - velopment programmes in� uence their leadership behaviours and practices. Plainly, personality traits and leadership behaviours in� uence academic depart - ment chairs’ actions and practices to carry out their roles and responsibilities. This body of literature and study findings corroborate that the personal - ity traits of academic department chairs in� uence their leadership behaviours and practices so that there is no separation between the personality traits and leadership behaviours and practices. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate if the big five factors of personality traits can predict the leadership practices of academic department chairs. Research Questions In this study, these questions were answered: 1. T o what extent can the big five factors of personality traits predict the lead - ership practices of academic department chairs in modelling the way? 2. T o what extent can the big five factors of personality traits predict the leader - ship practices of academic department chairs in inspiring a shared vision? 3. To what extent can the big five factors of personality traits predict the lead - ership practices of academic department chairs in challenging the process? 4. T o what extent can the big five factors of personality traits predict the lead - ership practices of academic department chairs in enabling others to act? c e p s Journal 9 5. T o what extent can the big five factors of personality traits predict the lead - ership practices of academic department chairs in encouraging the heart? Method Participants This study was conducted in Saudi Arabia. The academic department chairs of 28 Saudi Public Universities were the target population of this study for whom � the researcher wishes to generalise the results of the study ’ (Ary et al., 2010, p. 149), whereas the accessible population is � the population of subjects accessible to the researcher for drawing a sample ’ (Ary et al., 2010, p. 149). The researcher selected universities randomly. Therefore, the accessible population for this study includes all academic department chairs in the following uni - versities: King Abdulazizes University, Imam Mohammed Bin Saud University, King Fasil University, King Kalid University, Tabu University, Jouf University, Majmaah University, and Taif University. Thus, the sample was drawn from the accessible population in these eight selected universities, which includes 423 participants, as described in Table 1. Table 1 Description of study participants (N = 423) Variables Type n % Gender Male 181 43% Female 242 57% Years of Leadership Experience Less than 5 years 102 24% 5–10 years 130 31% More than 10 years 191 45% Scientific Degree Assistant Professor 80 19% Associate Professor 212 50% Full Professor 131 31% Total of Participants 423 100% Instruments The instrument of this study was a questionnaire. This study used two instruments to collect the data. The first instrument was the Big Five Personal - ity Inventory, designed to measure personality traits. This inventory helped to understand the structure of personality and why leaders act the way they do. The original version of this inventory was developed by Costa and McCrae in the big five factors of personality traits and leadership practices of academic ... 10 the 1980s and 1990s (Costa & McCrae, 1985, 1992). John et al. (2008) developed the short version of this inventory, which includes �44 items in five dimensions: neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, and consci - entiousness’ (p. 157). The researcher obtained permission from the authors to use the Big Five Personality Inventory as an instrument in this study for empirical study purposes. Next, the researcher adapted the Big Five Personality Inventory to a short version for academic department chairs. It included 15 items in 5 dimen - sions: neuroticism (3 items), extraversion (3 items), openness to experience (3 items), agreeableness (3 items), and conscientiousness (3 items). Finally, the rating scale was a five-point scale (disagree, slightly disagree, neutral, slightly agree, agree). This study measured the validity of the developed short form of the Big Five Personality Inventory. The Pearson Correlation Coefficient was used as presented in Table 2. Finally, the reliability was calculated using Cron - bach’s Alpha for the dimensions in Table 3. Table 2 Pearson Correlation Coefficient of the Big Five Personality Inventory (N = 423) ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). Table 3 Cronbach’s Alpha Scores for the Reliability of the Big Five Personality Inventory (N = 423) Dimensions Number of items Cronbach’s Alpha Neuroticism 3 0.749 Extraversion 3 0.836 Openness to experience 3 0.872 Agreeableness 3 0.860 Conscientiousness 3 0.902 All items 15 0.908 Conscientiousness Agreeableness Openness to experience Extraversion Neuroticism The Correlation Coefficient Items The Correlation Coefficient Items The Correlation Coefficient Items The Correlation Coefficient Items The Correlation Coefficient Items 0.974** 13 0.889** 10 0.887** 7 0.877** 4 0.815** 1 0.949** 14 0.880** 11 0.919** 8 0.855** 5 0.837** 2 0.969** 15 0.889** 12 0.874** 9 0.876** 6 0.391** 3 0.888** 0.899** 0.790** 0.872** 0.507** c e p s Journal 11 The second instrument used in this study was the Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI). This instrument is rooted in the earlier work of Kouze and Posner, who investigated leadership practices in science in 1980. They devel - oped this inventory to describe the behaviours that label their practices (Kouze & Posner, 2007, 2012, 2017). � The Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI) includes 30 items divided into five dimensions: model the way, inspire a shared vision, challenge the process, enable others to act, and encourage the heart. Each di - mension consists of 6 items ’ (Kouze & Posner, 2017, p. 5). To employ the Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI) as a second instru - ment in this study, the researcher did the following. First, permission to use this inventory was obtained from the authors. Then, a short version of this in - ventory was developed to make it a more usable and applicable form for the participants. The short version included 15 items in five dimensions: model the way (3 items), inspire a shared vision (3 items), challenge the process (3 items), enable others to act (3 items) and encourage the heart (3 items). Finally, the rat - ing scale was three-point (seldom, sometimes, always). This short version of the Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI) ensured the correlation between items and dimensions of this inventory. The Pearson Correlation Coefficient was used as presented in Table 4. Lastly, Cronbach’s Alpha was calculated to ensure reli - ability, as presented in Table 5. Table 4 Pearson Correlation Coefficient of the Leadership Practices Inventory (N = 423) ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). Model the way Inspire a shared vision Challenge the process Enable others to act Encourage the heart Items The Correlation Coefficient Items The Correlation Coefficient Items The Correlation Coefficient Items The Correlation Coefficient Items The Correlation Coefficient 1 **0.855 4 **0.844 7 **0.851 10 **0.791 13 **0.783 2 **0.933 5 **0.901 8 **0.894 11 **0.823 14 **0.836 3 **0.911 6 **0.755 9 **0.807 12 **0.786 15 **0.862 **0.881 **0.889 **0.852 **0.803 **0.824 the big five factors of personality traits and leadership practices of academic ... 12 Table 5 Cronbach’s Alpha Scores for the Reliability of the Leadership Practices Inventory (N = 423) Dimensions Number of items Cronbach’s Alpha Model the way 3 0.882 Inspire a shared vision 3 0.782 Challenge the process 3 0.805 Enable others to act 3 0.701 Encourage the heart 3 0.713 All items 15 0.928 Research Design This quantitative study was a predictive research design. The main aim of the predictive study is to investigate � the extent to which a criterion behav- �the extent to which a criterion behav- the extent to which a criterion behav - iour pattern can be predicted ’ (Gall, et al., 2007, p. 421). The predictive research design allows researchers to discover whether multiple variables are linked and determine the magnitude of the correlation between two or more variables (Fraenkel et al., 2012; Warener, 2020). Therefore, the predictive research design is used to predict an existing phenomenon. This predictive research design includes two variables, � the variable that is used to make the prediction is called predicator variable, the variable about which the prediction is made is called criterion variable ’ (Fraenkel et al., 2012, p. 333). In this predictive research design, the predictor variable was independent, while the criterion variable was dependent. This means the degree to which the predictor variable can predict the criterion variable. To achieve the purpose of this study, this predictive research design enables the researcher to investigate the degree to which the big five factors of personality traits can predict the five leadership practices of academic department chairs. Thus, the predictor variable was a per - sonality trait, while the criterion variable was a leadership practice. The data was collected during the 2023 academic year. These procedures were followed. First, permission was received to use these questionnaires in this study. Second, official permission was obtained to distribute the questionnaires to chosen universities in Saudi Arabia. Third, the online questionnaires were distrib - uted to participants through online links. They clicked on the online links and an - swered the questionnaires. Fourth, the researcher made the online questionnaire links available for five weeks. Fi� h, the participants were sent a reminder message to encourage them to answer the questionnaires. Finally, three weeks later, the re - searcher closed the online questionnaire links and began a data analysis process. c e p s Journal 13 To analyse the data, descriptive and inferential statistics were used. The frequencies and percentages were computed to describe the participants of the study. Also, the coefficient of correlation was computed to measure the validity of the questionnaires. Then, the Cronbach Alpha was calculated to measure the reliability of the questionnaires. Finally, multiple regression was used to answer the study questions, and the results were reported according to the chosen (p< .05) significance level . Results This section presents the results that answer the questions of this study: 1. To what extent can the big five factors of personality traits predict the leadership practices of academic department chairs in modelling the way? To answer this question , multiple regression was calculated, and the results were presented in Tables 6 and 7. Table 6 Model summary of regression analysis between the big five factors of personality traits and the leadership practices in modelling the way (N = 423) p F Df R² R Model *.000 119.16 5 .588 .767 1 *Regression is significant at the 0.05 level. Table 6 shows that the overall regression model analysis was statisti - cally significant, F (5, 417) = 119.16, p = .000, R² = .588. This means that the big five factors of personality traits as predicator variables positively predict the leadership practices in modelling the way. Table 7 Model coefficients analysis between the big five factors of personality traits and leadership practices in modelling the way (N = 423) p t β B Predictor Variables .293 -1.053 -.035 -.033 Neuroticism .204 1.273 .070 .070 Extroversion *.000 4.023 .176 .193 Openness to experience .123 1.544 .097 .101 Agreeableness *.000 11.855 .743 .654 Conscientiousness * Regression is significant at the 0.05 level the big five factors of personality traits and leadership practices of academic ... 14 In Table 7, the results revealed the coefficients to look at for each of the predictors separately. The amount of unique variance of predictors is as follows. Two predictor variables were statistically significant and predicted the leader - ship practices in modelling the way, respectively conscientiousness ( β = .743, t = 11.855, p = .000) and openness to experience ( β = .176, t = 4.023, p = .000). In contrast, three predictor variables were not statistically significant in predicting the leadership practices in modelling the way that were neuroticism ( β = -.035, t = -1.053, p = .293), extroversion ( β = .070, t = 1.273, p = .204), and agreeable - ness ( β = .097, t = 1.544, p = .123). 2. To what extent can the big five factors of personality traits predict the leadership practices of academic department chairs in inspiring a shared vision? To answer this question , multiple regression was calculated, and the results were presented in Tables 8 and 9. Table 8 Model summary of regression analysis between the big five factors of personality traits and the leadership practices in inspiring a shared vision. (N =423) P F Df R² R Model *.000 69.16 5 .453 .673 1 * Regression is significant at the 0.05 level. Table 8 displays that the overall regression model analysis was statisti - cally significant, F (5, 417) = 69.16, p = .000, R² = .453. This means that the big five factors of personality traits as predicator variables positively predict the leadership practices in inspiring a shared vision. Table 9 Model coefficients analysis between the big five factors of personality traits and the leadership practices in inspiring a shared vision. (N = 423) p t β B Predictor Variables .066 1.842 .071 -.066 Neuroticism *.002 3.192 .201 .201 Extroversion *.001 3.200 .161 .176 Openness to experience *.000 5.247 .381 .395 Agreeableness *.000 3.634 .263 .230 Conscientiousness * Regression is significant at the 0.05 level. c e p s Journal 15 The results in Table 9 display the coefficients of all predictors separately. The amount of unique variance of these predictors is as follows. Four predic - tor variables were statistically significant and predicted the leadership practic - es in inspiring a shared vision, respectively agreeableness ( β = .381, t = 5.247, p = .000), conscientiousness ( β = .263, t = 3.634, p = .000), openness to experi - ence ( β = .161, t = 3.200, p = .001), and extroversion ( β = .201, t = 3.192, p = .002). In contrast, one predictor variable was not statistically significant in predict - ing the leadership practices in inspiring a shared vision: neuroticism ( β = .071, t = 1.842, p = .066). 3. To what extent can the big five factors of personality traits predict the leadership practices of academic department chairs in challenging the process? To answer this question , multiple regression was used, and the results were presented in Tables 10 and 11. Table 10 Model summary of regression analysis between the big five factors of personality traits and the leadership practices in challenging the process (N = 423) p F Df R² R Model *.000 26.673 5 .242 .492 1 * Regression is significant at the 0.05 level. Table 10 illustrates that the overall regression model analysis was statis - tically significant, F (5, 417) = 26.673, p = .000, R² = .424. This means that the big five factors of personality traits as predicator variables positively predict the leadership practices in challenging the process. Table 11 Model coefficients analysis between the big five factors of personality traits and the leadership practices in challenging the process (N = 423) p t β B Predictor Variables *.000 3.628 .165 .133 Neuroticism *.037 2.089 .155 .135 Extroversion .838 .204 .012 .011 Openness to Experience .237 1.185 .101 .091 Agreeableness *.025 2.242 .191 .145 Conscientiousness * Regression is significant at the 0.05 level. the big five factors of personality traits and leadership practices of academic ... 16 The results in Table 11 illustrate the coefficients of all predictors sepa - rately. The amount of unique variance of these predictors is as follows. Three predictor variables were statistically significant in predicting the leader - ship practices in challenging the process, respectively neuroticism ( β = .165, t = 3.628, p = .000), extroversion ( β = .155, t= 2.089, p= .037), and conscien - tiousness ( β = .191, t = 2.242, p = .025). In contrast, two predictor variables were not statistically significant to predict the leadership practices in challenging the process: openness to experience ( β = .012, t = .204, p = .838) and agreeableness (β = .101, t = 1.185, p = .237). 4. To what extent can the big five factors of personality traits predict the leadership practices of academic department chairs in enabling others to act? To answer this question , multiple regression was calculated, and the results were presented in Tables 12 and 13. Table 12 Model summary of regression analysis between the big five factors of personality traits and the leadership practices in enabling others to act (N =423). p F Df R² R Model *.000 20.998 5 .201 .448 1 * Regression is significant at the 0.05 level. Table 12 reveals that the overall regression model analysis was statisti - cally significant, F (5, 417) = 20.998, p = .000, R² = .448. This finding means that the big five factors of personality traits as predictor variables positively predict leadership practices in enabling others to act. Table 13 Model coefficients analysis between the big five factors of personality traits and the leadership practices in enabling others to act (N =423). p t β B Predictor Variables *.000 -5.131 -.239 -.196 Neuroticism .158 1.414 .108 .095 Extroversion *.000 4.404 .210 .202 Openness to Experience .560 .584 .051 .047 Agreeableness *.000 4.741 .414 .319 Conscientiousness * Regression is significant at the 0.05 level. c e p s Journal 17 The results in Table 13 reveal the coefficients of all predictors separately. The amount of unique variance of these predictors is as follows. Two predic - tor variables were statistically significant to predict the leadership practices in enabling others to act, respectively conscientiousness ( β = .414, t = 4.741, p = .000) and openness to experience ( β = .210, t = 4.404, p = .000). While two predictor variables were not statistically significant to predict the leadership practices of enable others to act, extroversion ( β = .108, t = 1.414, p = .158), and agreeableness ( β = .051, t = .584, p = .560). Neuroticism ( β = -.239, t = -5.131, p = .000) was negatively statistically significant in predicting the leadership practices enabling others to act. 5. To what extent can the big five factors of personality traits predict the leadership practices of academic department chairs in encouraging the heart? To answer this question , multiple regression was calculated, and the results were shown in Tables 14 and 15. Table 14 Model summary of regression analysis between the big five factors of personality traits and the leadership practices in encouraging the heart. (N = 423). p F Df R² R Model *.000 47.889 5 .365 .604 1 * Regression is significant at the 0.05 level. Table 14 shows that the overall regression model analysis was statistically significant, F (5, 417) = 47.889, p = .000, R² = .365. This finding means that the big five factors of personality traits as predicator variables positively predicted the leadership practices in encouraging the heart. Table 15 Model coefficients analysis between the big five factors of personality traits and the leadership practices in encouraging the heart. (N =423). p t β B Predictor Variables *.028 -2.211 -.092 -.048 Neuroticism *.000 -3.627 -.246 -.139 Extroversion *.002 3.149 .171 .105 Openness to Experience *.000 3.554 .278 .162 Agreeableness *.000 4.942 .383 .189 Conscientiousness * Regression is significant at the 0.05 level. the big five factors of personality traits and leadership practices of academic ... 18 The results in Table 15 show the coefficients of all predictors separately. The amount of unique variance of these predictors is as follows. Three predic - tor variables were statistically significant and predicted the leadership practices in encouraging the heart, respectively conscientiousness ( β = .383, t = 4.942, p = .000), agreeableness ( β = .278, t = 3.554, p = .000), and openness to expe - rience ( β = .171, t = 3.149, p = .002). In contrast, two predictor variables were negatively statistically significant and did not predict the leadership practices in encouraging the heart: extroversion ( β = -.246, t = -3.627 , p = .000) and neuroti - cism (β = -.092, t = -2.211, p = .028). Discussion A body of related literature and several empirical studies highlighted that leaders’ personalities have in� uenced leadership behaviours and practices as a complex phenomenon. In this study, the results showed that the big five factors of personality traits predictor variables predict the leadership practices of academic department chairs. This result is similar to other studies that con - firmed that personality traits are related to a variety of leadership behaviours and practices, including transformational and transactional leadership, com - munication, and lead-changing (Judge et al., 2002; Y ahay et al., 2011; Alkahtani et al., 2011; Solaja et al., 2016; Simic & Ristic, 2017). In the context of higher education institutions, this study indicates that the big five factors of personal - ity traits of academic department chairs in� uence their leadership. The results indicate that conscientiousness and openness to experience positively and significantly predicted the leadership practices in modelling the way. Academic department chairs practice model the way through respecting others, observing rights, showing a good example, and sharing values and be - liefs (Kouze & Posner, 2017). These results are consistent with other studies’ results and related literature, which indicate that conscientiousness includes having ideas and values, organisation, control, responsibility, and dutifulness. Openness to experience includes being active, insightful, and curious and re - quires having imagination and good values (Barrick & Mount, 1991, 1993; Bass & Bass, 2008; Costa, 1994; Goldberg, 1990). It can be remarked that this result is logically parallel to the body of related literature. Thus, it can be concluded that conscientiousness and openness to experience enable academic depart - ment chairs to practice model the way in their leadership. The study found that agreeableness, conscientiousness, openness to experience, and extroversion positively and significantly predicted leader - ship practices in inspiring a shared vision, which contains many personality c e p s Journal 19 characteristics and traits such as the ability to imagine the future, propose the vision, make change, encourage the team, communicate with others, and have enthusiasm (Kouze & Posner, 2017). These results are similar to previous re - search results and literature, which conclude that agreeableness, conscientious - ness, openness to experience, and extroversion include insightfulness, creativ - ity, imagination, and enthusiasm, optimistic traits that support the academic department chairs to be inspired and visionary (Barrick & Mount, 1991, 1993; Bass & Bass, 2008; Costa, 1994; Goldberg, 1990). Additionally, agreeableness and conscientiousness are the most significant predictors in inspiring a shared vision because the related literature found these two predictors are more related to trust, cooperation, straightforwardness, control, responsibility, hard work, and competence (Bass & Bass, 2008; Costa, 1994). According to these results, neuroticism, extroversion, and conscien - tiousness positively and significantly predicted leadership practices in chal - lenging the process. The practices of academic department chairs challenge the process by taking risks, seeking improvement, recognising new ideas, accepting the challenge, learning from daily actions, and increasing success (Kouze & Posner, 2017). These results may indicate that the personality traits neuroticism, extroversion, and conscientiousness support leaders in challenging the process. Other research and literature found that neuroticism relates to vulnerability, worry, and a tendency to experience, and extroversion relates to positivity, gre - gariousness, and assertiveness. Finally, conscientiousness relates to dependabil - ity, control, hard work, and striving to achieve (Barrick & Mount, 1991, 1993; Bass & Bass, 2008; Costa, 1994; Goldberg, 1990). Two predictor variables positively and significantly predicted the lead - ership practices in enabling others to act: conscientiousness and openness to experience. For academic department chairs, enabling others to act requires establishing and leading a good team, maintaining truthful relationships, col - laborating with others, empowering and encouraging others, and having com - mitment and accountability (Kouze & Posner, 2012; Kouze & Posner, 2017). Similar to other studies, these results could indicate that these two predicators contain traits that reinforce academic leaders to empower others to act, which indicates that conscientiousness refers to a person who is dependable, ambi - tious, ethical, and moral, while openness to experience refers to a person who is curious, intellectual, creative, and has ideas (Barrick & Mount, 1991,1993; Bass & Bass, 2008). Finally, the results revealed that three predictor variables positively sig - nificantly predicted the leadership practice in encouraging the heart, includ - ing conscientiousness, agreeableness, and openness to experience. Academic the big five factors of personality traits and leadership practices of academic ... 20 department chairs encourage the heart because they have to appreciate the individual’s excellence, provide support and feedback, recognise performance, enhance morale and contributions, and align the benefits with values (Barrick & Mount, 1991, 1993; Bass & Bass, 2008; Costa, 1994; Goldberg, 1990). Such results may indicate that these three personality traits enable academic lead - ers to continue to encourage the heart in their leadership practices, which are consistent with the results of other studies and research, which confirmed that conscientiousness relates to organised, ethical, morale, and efficiency; agreea - bleness includes cooperativeness, trust, and altruism; and openness to experi - ence relates to ethics, values, and feelings (Barrick & Mount, 1991, 1993; Bass & Bass, 2008; Costa, 1994; Goldberg, 1990). Conclusion This study examined whether the big five factors of personality traits can predict leadership practices of academic department chairs. The main conclu - sion is that they significantly predicted the leadership practices of academic department chairs. Additionally, the study revealed that the big five factors of personality traits differed in their ability to predict leadership practices. This conclusion indicates that the impact of personality traits has varied in each leadership practice. Based on the study’s results, academic leaders must consider personal - ity traits as an important dimension when selecting and assigning academic department chairs and other academic leaders at all levels at higher education institutions. Moreover, further research must be conducted to understand per - sonality traits and leadership practices better. It could be useful to conduct a deep study about the impact of the facets of each of these big five factors of personality traits on leadership practices. Further studies are needed to exam - ine the in� uence of new variables, such as gender and age, on the correlation between the big five factors of personality traits and leadership practices. References Alkahtan, A., Abu-Jarad, I., & Sulaiman, M. (2011). The impact of personality and leadership styles on leading change capability of Malaysian Managers. Australian Journal of Business and Management Research, 1(2), 70�99. http://www.ajbmr.com/articlepdf/ajbmr_v01n02_06.pdf Amelang, M., Herboth, G., & Oefner, I. (1991). A prototype strategy for the construction of a creativ- (1991). A prototype strategy for the construction of a creativ - ity scale. European Journal of Personality, 5 (4), 261�285. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2410050402 Antonakis, J., & Day, D. (2018). The nature of leadership. SAGE. c e p s Journal 21 Ary, D., Jacobs, L., Sorensen, C., & Razavieh, A. (2010). Introduction to research in education. Wadsworth. Barrick, M., & Mount, M. (1991). The big five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta- analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44(1), 1�26. Barrick, M. & Mount, M. (1993). Autonomy as a moderator of the relationship between the big five personality dimensions and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78 (1), 111�118. Bass, B., & Bass, R. (2008). The Bass Handbook of leadership, theory research & managerial applica- tions. Free Press. Bennis, W ., & Nanus, B. (2007). Leaders: the strategies for taking charge. Harper Business. Blake, R., & McCanse, A. (1991). Leadership dilemmas-grid solutions. Gulf. Blake, R., & Mouton, J. (1964). The managerial gird. Gulf. Blake, R., & Mouton, J. (1978). The new managerial gird. Gulf. Blake, R., & Mouton, J. (1985). The new managerial gird III. Gulf. Bryman, A. (1992). Charisma and leadership in organizations. Sage. Cartwright, D., & Zander, A. (1960). Group dynamics: Research and theory. Evanston, Row Peterson. Costa, P . (1994, July). Work and personality: Use of the NEO PI-R in industrial/organizational psychol- ogy [Paper presentation]. International Congress of Applied Psychology 1994, Madrid, Spain. Costa, P ., & McCrae, R. (1985). The neo personality inventory manual. Psychological Assessment Resources. Costa, P ., & McCrae, R. (1992). Four ways five factors are basic. Journal of Personality and Individual Differences, 13(6), 653�665. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(92)90236-I Dinh, J., Lord, R., Gardner, W ., Meuser, J., Liden, R., & Hu, J. (2014). Leadership theory and research in the new millennium: Current theoretical trends and changing perspectives. The Leadership Quar- terly, 25(1), 36�62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.11.005 Fraenkel, J., Wallen, N., & Hyun, H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education. Mc- Graw Hill. Gall, M., Gall, J., & Borg, R. (2007). Educational research: An introduction. Pearson Education . Gmelch, W . (2019). The call for department chair leadership: why chairs serve, what they do, how they develop, how long they serve, and is there life a �er chairing. International Journal of Leadership and Change, 7(1), 9�19. https://digitalcommons.wku.edu/ijlc/vol7/iss1/1 George, J. (1996). Trait and state affect. In K. Murphy (ed.), Individual differences and behavior. Jossey-Bass. Goldberg, L. (1990). An alternative description of personality: The big-five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1216�1229. Goldberg, L. (1993). The structure of phenotypic personality traits. American Psychologist, 48, 26�34. Halpin, A. (1957). The observed leader behavior and ideal leader behavior of aircra � commanders and school superintendents. In R. M. Stogdill & A. E. Coons (eds.), Leader behavior. Its description and measurement. Ohio State University: Bureau of Business Research. Hemphill, J., & Coons, A. (1957). Development of the leader behavior description questionnaire. In the big five factors of personality traits and leadership practices of academic ... 22 R. M. Stogdill & A. E. Coons (eds.), Leader behavior: Its description and measurement. Ohio State University: Bureau of Business Research. Hemphill, J., Seigel, A., & Westie, C. (1951). An exploratory study of relations between perceptions of leader behavior, group characteristics, and expectations concerning the behavior of ideal leaders. Ohio State University: Personnel Research Board.   Hendrickson, R., Lane, J, Harris, J., & Dorman, R. (2013). Academic leadership and governance of higher education. Stylus. Hughes, R., Ginnett, R., & Curphy, G. (2006). Leadership enhancing the lessons of experience. McGraw-Hill. Jago, A. (1982). Leadership: Perspectives in theory and research. Management Science, 28(3), 315�336. John, O., Naumann, L., & Soto, C. (2008). Paradigm shi� to the integrative big five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and conceptual issues. In O. P . John, R. W . Robins, & L. A. Pervin (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 114�158). Guilford. Judge, T., Bono, J., Ilies, R., & Gerhardt, M. (2002). Personality and leadership: A qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 765−780. Katz, D., & Kahn, R. (1966). The social psychology of organizations. Wiley. Kirkpatrick, S., & Locke, E. (1991). Leadership: Do traits matter. The Executive, 5, 48�60. Kouze, J., & Posner, P . (2007). The leadership challenge. Jossey-Bass. Kouze, J., & Posner, P . (2012). The leadership challenge. Jossey-Bass. Kouze, J., & Posner, P . (2017). The leadership challenge. Jossey-Bass. Kouze, J., & Posner, P . (2017). LPI: Leadership practice inventory. https://2u.pw/zGdFN0q Larsen, R., & Buss, D. (2017). Personality psychology: Domains of knowledge about human nature. McGraw Hill. Likert, R. (1961). An emerging theory of organizations, leadership and management. In L. Petrullo & B. M. Bass (eds.), Leadership and interpersonal behavior. Holt Rinehart & Winston. Likert, R. (1967). The human organization. McGraw-Hill. Mahdinezhad, M., Mansor, M., Rmbeli, N., Hashim, E., & Shahhosseini, M. (2018). Effective Aca - demic Leadership: Key Aspects of Leader Behavior in Higher Education. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 8(9), 657�665. http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v8-i9/4646 McCrae, R., & Costa, P . (1987). Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52 , 81�90. Nadler, D., & Tushman, M. (2012). Leadership for organizational change. Jossey-Bass. Northouse, P . (2010). Leadership: Theory and practice. SAGE. Northouse, P . (2018). Leadership: Theory and practice. SAGE. Peabody, D., & Goldberg, L. (1989). Some determinants of factor structures from personality-trait descriptors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57 , 552�567. Ryckman, R. (2008). Theories of personality. Thomson Wadsworth. Simic, J., & Ristic, M. (2017). The Relationship between personality traits and managers leadership c e p s Journal 23 styles. European Journal of Social Sciences Education and Research, 11 (2), 195�200. Siddique, M., Aslam, H., Khan, M., & Fatima, M. (2011). Impact of academic leadership on faculty’s motivation, and organizational effectiveness in higher education system. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(8), 184�191. Solaja, O., Idowu, F., & James, A. (2016). Exploring the relationship between leadership communica - tion style, personality traits and organizational productivity. Serbian Journal of Management, 11 (1), 99�117. Stogdill, R. (1963). Manual for the Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire form XII. Ohio State University: Bureau of Business Research. Stogdill, R. (1974). Handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research. Free Press. Tahiraj, I., & Krek, J. (2022). Organizational culture in public university: A case study in Kosovo. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 12 (3), 127�147. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.1198 Vilkinas, T., Ladyshewsky, R., & Saebel, J. (2009). Academic leadership: building capacity. Learning and Change Teaching Council. Warener, R. (2020). Applied Statistics I: Basic Bivariate Techniques. SAGE. Williams, S. (1997). Personality and self-leadership. Human Resource Management Review, 7, 139�155. Y ahaya, N., Taib, M., Ismail, J., Shariff, Z., Y ahaya, A., Boon, Y ., & Hashim, S. (2011). Relationship between leadership personality types and source of power and leadership styles among managers. African Journal of Business Management, 5 (22), 9635-9648. Yukl, G. (2013). Leadership in organizations. Pearson. Zulfqar, A., Valcke, M., Quraishi, U., & Devos, G. (2021). Developing academic leaders: evaluation of a leadership development intervention in higher education. SAGE Open, 11(1), 1�15. Biographical note Mohammed Ali Assiri, PhD, is an associate professor in the field of educational leadership at the Faculty of Education, King Khalid University, Saudi Arabia. His research interests include leadership behavior, ethics of lead - ership, strategic planning, human resources management, school reform lead - ership, academic leadership, quality and accreditation management, knowledge management, and current issues in higher education.