Examination of the Blue Ocean Leadership Levels of Academic Staff According to Demographic Variables

This study analyzed the blue ocean leadership orientations of academic staff at universities in Gaziantep, Turkey using the validated Blue Ocean Leadership (BOL) scale. It examined BOL scores according to demographic factors including gender, age, education level, academic rank, university status, seniority, and administrative roles. A survey methodology was adopted, with 452 faculty members completing the BOL instrument which measures visionary thinking, trust-building, and motivational communication capacities. Bayesian quantitative analyses evaluated group differences and the multivariate impacts of covariates on leadership scores. The findings revealed no substantive BOL differences based on gender or employment at state versus private institutions. However, age and experience showed important linkages to leadership orientations, with academic staff in their mid-40s and those with 11-15 years seniority exhibiting significantly higher blue ocean leadership scores indicative of stronger capabilities in conveying inspirational vision, building trust, empathy, and fostering innovation. Doctorate qualifications also robustly predicted higher leadership scores compared to master's education, highlighting potential benefits of advanced expertise. But lack of variation across academic ranks suggested motivational leadership qualities are not necessarily hierarchical. Additionally, formal administrative duties did not translate to higher visionary leadership strengths. These novel insights address a need to understand connections between personal/professional attributes and multidimensional leadership specifically among higher education faculty and administrators. The patterns related to career stage, education level and experience can inform policies tailored to support different demographic subgroups. Fostering blue ocean leadership across diverse academic staff profiles can catalyze cultures of inspiration, innovation and exponential value within universities regionally and globally. Study limitations include localized scope and cross-sectional design; longitudinal tracking and comparative analyses can reveal further connections between academic demographics and strengths in empathy, trust-building and visionary communication.