Abstract:

In recent years, Latino population growth has outpaced that of other ethnic groups. Latinos are the largest ethnic minority group in the United States (U.S.), the second largest population group only to Caucasians, and have the highest percent of workforce participation (Pew Hispanic Center, 2008b; United States Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics, n.d.a). Despite these statistics, Latinos are under-represented in leadership positions when compared to other ethnic groups (United States Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics, n.d.b). Mexican-Americans are the largest Latino subgroup. However, even though people of Mexican descent have been residing in what is now considered legal U.S. territory for the last 400 hundred years, this group has also continued to be under-represented in leadership, psychological, and workplace research literature (Barnett, del Campo, del Campo, & Steiner, 2003; Library of Congress, n.d.; United States Census Bureau, 2006b). The purpose of the present investigation was to explore the psychological characteristics that may contribute to Latino leadership by examining the Character Strengths of Mexican-American managers. The present study investigated within-country cross-cultural differences between Caucasian and Mexican-American managers in the U.S. workforce by examining Social Axioms and Character Strengths, respectively. A survey design was used to collect data via the Internet, and a MANOVA was used for data analyses. Results of the study indicated no significant main effects for Ethnicity on Social Axioms. There were main effects for Ethnicity and Role on Character Strengths. Findings included larger means for Mexican-Americans on Honesty, Social Intelligence, Perspective, and Prudence, as well as larger means for managers on 10 of 24 Character Strengths. No interaction effect was found for Ethnicity and Role on Character Strengths. Evidence for the discriminant validity of the Social Axioms and Character Strengths instruments as well as for the convergent validity of the Spirituality construct is presented. Scientific contributions, practical implications, and suggestions for future research are discussed.