Abstract
The purpose of this interpretative phenomenological analysis was to investigate the complex, real-world problem of department chairs not knowing how to promote faculty well-being while balancing a multitude of workplace responsibilities. Consequently, there is a critical need to better understand how department chairs, middle managers, currently perceive and manage their role in promoting faculty well-being. In the absence of such knowledge, the development of effective approaches to provide support and professional development in the area of well-being promotion for department chairs will likely remain minimal. Rath and Harter’s definition of well-being was used to frame the study. This definition includes 5 components of well-being: purpose, social, financial, community, and physical. The study had 3 aims: to determine the perceptions of department chairs regarding their role in promoting faculty well-being; identify the influential factors department chairs consider when promoting faculty well-being; and identify techniques used by department chairs to promote faculty well-being. Three data collection tools were utilized in the research study, which included: a semi-structured interview, memo writing, and member checking. The 6-step interpretative phenomenological analysis framework established by Smith, Flowers, & Larkin guided the data analysis. The research study findings suggest that department chairs feel most comfortable promoting the components of purpose, social, and community well-being. While they feel less comfortable promoting faculty’s financial and physical well-being. Furthermore, department chairs in this research study make sense of their role in promoting faculty well-being through cultural influences established by the university, from past personal experiences and personal beliefs, theoretical requirements of the academic position, and through experiences with difficult faculty. A variety of leadership strategies were utilized by department chairs to promote faculty well-being. These included communication, supporting faculty development opportunities, encouraging social events, providing faculty flexibility, and using the wait and see method. The proposed solution to the complex, real-world problem is to supplement current professional development programs for department chairs with information that interweaves tenets of path-goal theory with findings from the current study and information on the five components of well-being.|Keywords: department chairs, well-being, interpretative phenomenological analysis, professional development