14 HMEE5013 Topic 10

Topic Leadersh
ip In
10 Schools
LEARNING OUTCOMES
By the end of this topic, you should be able to:
1. Define leadership, and relate the traits of leadership;
2. Identify the situational factors that need different practices of leadership;
3. Describe an effective leadership;
4. Describe the contingency model of leadership;
5. Analyse the importance of transformational leadership in schools;
6. Elaborate the evolutionary leadership theory; and
7. Elaborate the concept of distributed leadership in school management.
INTRODUCTION
Tun Dr. Mahathir Bin Mohamed is most famously known as being the fourth Prime
Minister of Malaysia from 1981 to 2003. He is accredited as having brought prosperity
and security to Malaysia today, bringing it up from an agrarian society to one of the most
developed in the South East Asian region.
Mahathir has been referred to as a leader who not only had charisma and public speaking
skills, but one who invested heavily in his countrys economic development. He has been
described as an intellectual, honest and communicative leader as well as one with a clear
vision. In 1991, Mahathir announced a new national objective, entitled vision 2020. This
vision, which
Copyright Open University Malaysia (OUM)

380 TOPIC 10 LEADERSHIP IN SCHOOLS
came to be under Mahathirs rule, shows the extent to which he wished to provide a
transformational change to his country. It also showcased how far reaching his sight was,
in the very essence of a visionary leader (Lujain, 2011).
In this topic, we will look into the various components of leadership and its factors. We
will also be looking at the models as well as the importance of leadership in school
management especially. Lastly, we will discuss the concept of distributed leadership in
school management
ACTIVITY 10.1
1. What are the attributes of a good leader?
2. Identify leadership behaviour of a principal in an excellent school. Describe

the excellent attributes that he has.
10.1 DEFINING LEADERSHIP

Leaders makes the difference. Many scholars have defined leadership as the act of
influencing followers to achieve goals (Katz & Kahn, 1966; Tannenbaum et al., 1961;
House et al., 2004). Hoy and Miskel (2013, p. 427) have defined leadership more
specifically as a social process in which an individual or a group influences behaviour of
others toward a shared goal.
SELF-CHECK 10.1
Define leadership. How do you know whether a person is a leader or a
manager?
10.2 THE NATURE OF ADMINISTRATIVE WORK

Many studies use a structured observation approach to examine what managers,
administrators and leaders do in their daily tasks. The following are some of the
descriptions of administrative work in the school setting (Chung & Miskel, 1989):
(a) Administrative work in schools is sometimes feverish and time consuming. School
administrators work for long hours and are often physically exhausted.

TOPIC 10 LEADERSHIP IN SCHOOLS 381
(b) School leaders use verbal media. Walking around the building and talking to
individuals and groups are common tasks of the school leaders.
(c) Administrative activities are inconsistent. Due to certain policies and regulations,
the administration changes gears and tasks very frequently
(d) Fragmented managerial work. The pace is rapid and frenzied, discontinuity is
prevalent and there is a short span of concentration.
To summarise, administrative work is similar across countries and organisations. In

addition, due to rapid growth in the global era, the nature of work for school
administrators is changing. Factors of technological advancement, competition to increase
achievements, high standard-based accountability and environmental competition
contribute to the change of the nature of work of school administrators (Hoy & Miskel,
2013).
ACTIVITY 10.2
Identify the administrative roles of a school principal in the area of curriculum

management.
10.2.1 Trait and Approach to Leadership

Aristotle once said that leaders are born. According to the trait approach, excellent
individuals inherited qualities and characteristics of a leader since they were born.
Leaders are thus considered as superior individuals that differentiate themselves from
other people due to qualities and abilities that they have inherited or obtained through
social circumstance (Bass, 2008). Many studies have been conducted to differentiate
unique traits or characteristics of leaders.
Earlier studies (Stogdill, 1948) found that physical characteristics (height, weight),
personality, task and interpersonal competence, intelligence and charisma were among the
unique traits dominated by a leader. However, recent studies show that inheritance,
learning and environmental factors do affect traits of a leader. In fact, the development of
research on traits can be divided into early and recent perspectives of leadership traits.

Early trait research

Early trait studies are the pure studies which examine leadership based on trait only.
Studies by Stogdill (1948) have identified 124 traits of leadership, and these have been
classified into five general categories:
(a) Capacity intelligence, alertness, verbal facility, originality, judgment;
(b) Achievement scholarship, knowledge, athletic accomplishments;
(c) Responsibility dependability, initiative, persistence, aggressiveness, self-

confidence, desire to excel;
(d) Participation activity, sociability, cooperation, adaptability, humour; and
(e) Status socioeconomic position, popularity.
Stogdill found that the trait approach by itself is negligible and confusing. He added that
one becomes a leader not because he possesses some combination of trait but because
impact of traits is contrasted by situations. Due to this, Stogdill has added another
dimension of situational dimensions for leadership.
Recent perspectives on leadership trait and skills

Even though studies by Stogdill have discouraged many other researchers from studying
leadership traits, industrial psychologists are still interested in studying leader traits and
leader effectiveness (Yukl 1981, 2002, 2010). This trend is significant in recent leadership
traits studies across different types of organisations and settings.
This new perspectives on leadership traits and skills produce more consistent findings.
Studies by Immegart (1988) has summarised intelligence, dominance, self-confidence and
high energy as traits associated to leaders. Stogdill (1981) after reviewing a new set of
163 traits, concluded with the new characteristics of leaders. According to him, a leader
will demonstrate these qualities:
(a) Responsibility and task completion;
(b) Vigour and persistence in pursuit of goals;
(c) Venturousness and originality in problem solving;
(d) Motivation to bring initiative in social situations;
(e) Self-confidence and sense of personal identity;
(f) Willing to accept consequences of decision and action;
(g) Ready to absorb interpersonal stress;

(h) Willing to tolerate frustration and delay;
(i) Ability to influence other persons behaviour; and
(j) Capacity to structure interaction systems to the purpose at hand.
The recent perspectives of traits are likely to be taken up as an effective trait for leaders
and it is clearly not supported by the assumption of the first generation trait theory that
leaders are born and not made. Rather, the recent perspectives of traits review leadership
trait as a more sensible and balanced approach that is influenced by both trait and
situations.
Studies by Judge, Piccolo and Kosalaka (2009) and Zaccaro (2007) have identified that
traits and skills are related to effective leadership. They found that personality traits,
motivation traits and skills are related to effective leadership. Table 10.1 summarises
traits and skills of effective leadership.
Table 10.1: Traits and Skills Associated with Effective Leadership
Personality Motivation Skills

Self-confidence Task and interpersonal Technical
Stress tolerance needs Interpersonal
Emotional maturity Achievement orientation Conceptual
Integrity Power needs
Extroversion Expectations
Self-efficacy
10.2.2 Situations and Leadership

The second generation of trait studies rejects the view that leaders are born (Bass, 1990;
2008), and researchers are attempting to identify specific leadership factors that are
associated with leaders success. These new views rely on leadership situations that
contribute to leaders behaviours and performances (Campbell et al., 1970; Lawler, 1985;
Vecchio, 1993). Such situational determinants of leadership influence leaders behaviour
in schools in terms of employees, organisation as well as internal and external
environments (see Figure 10.1)

Figure 10.1: Behaviour characteristics of educational leadership

Source: Hoy & Miskel (2013)
In fact, the nature of leadership studies in situational view relies on personal and
situational factors, even though there is very limited actual empirical evidence in the past
studies. Most of the time, the leader exerts influence; however, situation itself will
support and limit the influence of a leader (Bass, 2008).
10.2.3 Behaviours and Leadership

Early conceptualisation of leadership is dependent upon two distinct classifications of
leader behaviour the people and task. Now let us look at two famous studies of
leadership behaviour, the Ohio State University study and the managerial grid study.
The Ohio State and Related Leadership Studies

The Ohio State University (1940s) has produced a famous leader research instrument
known as the Leader Behaviour Description Questionnaire (LBDQ). LBDQ was
originally developed by John K. Hemphill and Alvin Coons in 1950 and it was refined by
Andrew Halpin and B.J. Winer in 1952. In order to measure leader behaviour
systematically, LBDQ has utilised two dimensions initiating structure and
consideration.
Initiating structure measures leader behaviour in terms of relationship between the leader
and employees with the concern on pattern of organisation, communication and work
procedure which are significant to employee performance. On the other hand,
consideration aspects measure personal leader behaviour such as friendship, warmth,
trust, interest and respect in the relationship between leader and individual employees. It
typically indicates employees satisfaction with the leaders and the work. Halpin (1966)
has identified four important findings from LBDQ:

(a) Leadership behaviour is characterised by initiating structure and consideration

dimensions;
(b) Most effective leaders are defined by having high initiating structure and high
consideration;
(c) Leaders and employees have different views on leadership behaviour. The leader is
more concerned on initiating structure while the employees are more concerned on
consideration; and
(d) A light similarity exists in how leaders say they should behave and how employees
view they do behave.
Apparently, these two dimensions are closely associated and one cannot neglect one
dimension to focus on another dimension. For example, if initiating structure is neglected,
the leaders impact on the school will be limited. Similarly, if consideration is neglected,
teachers satisfaction will also be decreased. Therefore, it is desired that the leader
integrates both initiating structure and consideration to drive school effectiveness.
Initiating structure and consideration have different names given by different scholars.
For instance, Hoy and Miskel (2013) prefer to use task behaviour to initiating
structure; and prefer to use relation behaviour to consideration, whereas Blake and
Mounton (1985) prefer to use production and people than task and consideration.
According to Hoy and Miskel (2013), there are four leadership styles used to describe
leader behaviour. There are relations style (high only in relation behaviour), dynamic
style (high in both task and relation behaviour), delegated style (low in both task and
relation behaviour) and task style (high only in task behaviour). The typology of leader
behaviour style is illustrated in Figure 10.2.

Figure 10.2: The typology of leadership behaviour

A Recent Perspective on Leader Behaviour

In 1985, the managerial grid developed by Blake and Mouton became famous. Similar to
the Ohio State LBDQ, the managerial grid assigned two distinctive dimensions
production and people concern. The most effective leaders are those who are high in both
production and people concern. Blake and Mouton posited that leaders behaviour must
be appropriate with the situation to be effective; however, they never mention specific
generalisations that could link appropriate behaviour to different situations (Yukl, 2002,
2010).
Eventually, Yukl has come out with three category frameworks of leadership behaviour
which combined many taxonomies and typologies. The three category leadership
behaviour frameworks are:
(a) Task-oriented behaviour;
(b) Relations-oriented behaviour; and
(c) Change-oriented behaviour.
Task-oriented and relations-oriented are similar to initiating structure and consideration,

but it has a more in depth explanation. The three category framework somewhat engages
the leader but according to Yukl, the external environments also play an important role in
effective leadership. Shortly, a leader should know when to use and balance the
behaviours depending on situations in the organisation.

10.2.4 Leadership Effectiveness

How does one measure effectiveness of leadership? It is not easy to do so because
effectiveness is regarded as complicated, multifaceted and subtle (Hoy & Miskel, 2013).
Notwithstanding, leadership effectiveness can be classified as having objective and
subjective dimensions. Objective dimensions of leadership effectiveness is defined by the
accomplishment of organisational goals, while the subjective dimensions can be defined
by perceptual evaluations of performance and overall satisfaction of organisational
members (Hoy & Miskel, 2013, p438). Therefore, leadership effectiveness has been
concluded into three outcomes:
(a) Perception of reputation and self assessment;
(b) Satisfaction of organisational members; and
(c) Organisational goal achievement.
Evaluation of performance of employees indeed is the decision of the leader. It is a

subjective judgement of the leader by himself. However, each individual may view
performance levels differently. Satisfaction of members of the organisation cannot be
ignored as it will affect the level of performance of the staff. Most of the time, the
effectiveness of a leader can be measured based on the achievement of the organisational
goals, job satisfaction, enhanced performance and self reputation (Table 10.2).
Table 10.2: Effectiveness Indicators of Educational Leaders
Personal Organisation Individual

Perceived reputation Goal accomplishment Satisfaction
Self-assessment Performance
10.2.5 Contingency Models of Leadership

Contingency approaches were among the most influential models of leadership in 1980s.
The contingency approaches (as illustrated in Figure 10.3) contain four sets of concepts,
namely the trait and skill of leaders, characteristic of situations, leaders behaviour and
effectiveness of leaders.

Figure 10.3: The contingency approaches of leadership

The contingency approaches outline two assumptions:
(a) Traits and skills of leaders together with the characteristics of situations are two
important factors to determine leaders behaviour and effectiveness; and
(b) Certain situational factors (teachers motivation, students ability, socioeconomic

status) can directly impact leaders effectiveness.
Thus, we can conclude that contingency approaches have specific conditions or

situational factors that moderate the relationship of leaders traits and behaviour with
their performance (Bryman, 1996). In this subtopic, we will examine three contingency
models of leadership:
(a) Instructional leadership;
(b) Fielders contingency model of leadership; and
(c) Substitutes for leadership model.
Instructional Leadership
As the name implies, instructional leadership focuses more on improvement of teaching
and learning as a technical core in school. At the end of the day, the instructional leaders
attempt to make changes in school factors such as curricular content, teaching methods,
assessment strategies and cultural norms for the sake of excellent academic outcomes.
Anyone who has contributed to the school including parents was classified as
instructional leadership before 1980s, but later instructional leadership only referred to
school principals (Hallinger, 2003, 2005, 2011; Hofman & Hofman, 2011). The
theoretical concept of principals as instructional leaders has attracted attention because
there were not many studies in describing the principals role in students learning
(Hallinger, 2003, 2005).

In 1985, Hallinger and Murphy proposed a model of instructional leadership that has
three dimensions as illustrated in Figure 10.4. Their model promotes principal behaviours
towards academic achievement and school effectiveness. They posited that the
principals instructional leadership is influenced by a variety of situational factors such
as student background, socioeconomics of the community, school climate as well as
teacher experience and competence. Therefore, they suggested that principals need to be
flexible and adapt their behaviours to different situations.
Figure 10.4: A model of instructional leadership

Source: Hallinger & Murphy (1985)
Later in 2005, Alig-Mielcarek and Hoy simplified the model of instructional leadership
into three functions:
(a) Defining and communicating goals;
(b) Monitoring and providing constructive feedback on teaching; and
(c) Promoting and emphasising professional development.
These three highly interrelated elements form a single second-order construct known as
instructional leadership, produced a reliable and valid measurement known as
Instructional Leadership Scale. Both Hallinger (2005) and Alig-Mielcarek and Hoy
(2004) agreed that effectiveness of instructional leadership was contingent upon the
academic press of the school climate. To date, the study on instructional leadership has
emerged from simple heroic conception to a contingency model of instructional
leadership (Figure 10.5).

Figure 10.5: A contingency model of instructional leadership

Fiedlers Contingency Model of Leadership

Fieldler (1967) developed the first major theory to study the contingency relationships of
the leadership. His theoretical model omitted leadership behaviour, but proposed the
Least Preferred Co-worker (LPC) model that encompasses leadership style (as a trait),
and three indicators of situational control and effectiveness.
(a) Leadership style of a leader portrays specific behaviours of the leaders based on
needs under various interpersonal situations. Using LPC, the employees will be
able rate their leader.
(b) Situational control implies the leaders power and influence on the implementation
of his plans, decisions and action strategies (Fiedler & Garcia, 1987). Three factors
that affect the situational control have been identified as position power, task
structure and leader-member relations.
(c) Effectiveness means the extent to which group members accomplish its primary
task. The effectiveness is measured based on net profit, cost per unit, percentage of
wins, and number of problems solved. The supervisor of the leader, group
supervisor or group performance are used to rate the effectiveness of a leader. But
apparently, the number of tasks accomplished is taken into the account of effective
measurement.
Three propositions of Fiedlers contingency theory are (Hoy & Miskel, 2013):
(a) High situational control: Task-oriented leader is more effective than relationship-
oriented leader.
(b) Moderate situational leader: Relationship-oriented leader is more effective than
task-oriented leader.
(c) Low situational control: Task-oriented leader is more effective than relationship-
oriented leader .
Hence, we can say Fiedlers leadership effectiveness is contingent upon matching the
appropriate leadership style with the situation.

Substitutes for Leadership Model

Contingency and other models of leadership assume that formal leadership is needed in
the organisation. However, Kerr and Jermier (1978) believe that there are substitute
factors that would lessen the effectiveness of a leader, and hence, they developed the
substitutes for leadership to explain this phenomenon.
The first concept is substitutes itself. Substitutes are referred to things that cause
leaders with either relation-oriented or task-oriented behaviours to become unnecessary
and redundant. In simple word, substitutes simply mean the situational aspects that reduce
or replace leaders ability to influence the attitudes, perceptions or behaviour of the
followers (Hoy & Miskel, 2013). Kerr and Jermier (1978) and Keller (2006) further
identified three potential factors to substitute a leader:
(a) Characteristics of employees: Abilities, training, experience and knowledge,

professional orientation, indifference toward reward;
(b) Characteristics of the task: Structured routine work, intrinsically satisfying
works, task feedback; and
(c) Characteristics of the organisation: Formalisation of roles and procedures,
flexibilities of rules and policies, work group cohesiveness and autonomy, spatial
distance between administrator and followers.
The second concept is neutralisers. The leaders behaviour is maintained but due to
certain situations he is not able to perform a particular action (Hoy & Miskel, 20134). For
example, take the principal lacking authority to punish a misbehaving teacher due to his
constraints. The other concepts in this model are enhancers and supplements.
Enhancer increases leader-outcome relationship while the supplements refer to employee
performance with direct influence from the leader.
The substitutes for leadership model refer to the relationship between leader behaviour
and effective performance that is moderated by employees, task and organisational
characteristics (Hoy & Miskel, 2013). This theory model explains that under certain
situations, a leader may have or may not have performed in his leadership. For example,
when the school has many talented, knowledgeable and experienced teachers, task-
oriented leadership will become irrelevant. The other example is when the task is able to
satisfy teachers internally; supportive leadership will not be necessary.

SELF-CHECK 10.2
By using the model of instructional leadership, identify the roles of a school

head in managing a school. Give appropriate example(s) to support your
arguments.
10.3 TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP

The basic framework for transformational leadership can be viewed using a continuum, a
full range leadership model (Bass, 1998). In the leadership continuum, there are three
main leadership styles identified, namely laissez-faire, transactional and transformational
leadership. The components of these three leadership styles are exhibited in Table 10.3:
Table 10.3: A Full-range of Leadership Continuum
Full-range Leadership Continuum

Laissez-Faire Transactional Leadership Transformational
Leadership Leadership
Non transactional Contingent reward Idealised influence-
or passive leadership attributed or charisma
Active management- Idealised influence
by-exception behaviour or
Passive management- charismatic action
by-exception Inspirational
motivation
Intellectual
stimulation
Individualised
Consideration
Laissez-faire Leadership
This type of leadership is classified as no transactions with the followers (Bass, 1998) or
the total absent of leadership. Apparently, the leaders do not take action on important
issues, fail to make decisions, ignore responsibilities, provide no feedback and allow
authority to be dormant. It is the most passive and least effective leadership style.

Transactional Leadership
The transactional leaders motivate their followers by giving rewards in exchange for their
great efforts and try to fulfil subordinates interests. When the rewards are granted to
excellent employees for their services, then we know that the leader is practising
transactional leadership.
As illustrated in Table 10.3, transactional leadership has three components or dimensions.

First, the contingent reward leadership is referred to leaders behaviour in
clarifying role and task demands and giving rewards contingent to employees
performance. In simple words, it is the mutual exchange between the leader and
employees. The employees get what they want in exchange for what the leader wants
(Kuhnert & Lewis, 1987).
The second component, active management-by-exception means the leaders put

emphasis on employees work to meet the standard. The leader will actively engage
in monitoring employees performance and take corrective actions when the problem
arises. The third component is passive management-by-exception where the leader is
only concerned when the problem has become serious.
Undeniably transactional leadership can be a very effective style under certain situations,
especially when it involves contingent rewards (Bass & Riggio, 2006). Of course, in
order to enhance organisational effectiveness, to obtain extra effort from the staff and to
increase job satisfaction among the employees, it is good to combine both the
transactional leadership with transformational leadership styles.
Transformational Leadership
In fact, this is an expansion of transactional leadership that goes beyond exchange of
reward. The transformational leaders inspire the followers to achieve the organisational
goals. They actively create awareness among the followers to achieve organisation goals;
and guide the followers to achieve excellent performance.
There are five components of transformational leadership (Hoy & Miskel, 2013):
(a) Idealised influence

Leaders build trust and respect in followers and exert them to accept radical and
fundamental changes in the ways individuals and organisations do their work. The
leaders will put aside their personal interest, and encourage, inspire and work
together with the followers towards goals accomplishment. Consequently, they gain
respect, admiration and trust from their followers. Followers, on the other hand are
willing to emulate leader behaviours.

(b) Attributed idealised influence

It is the subtype of idealised influence or charisma. The leaders are seen as
charismatic, confident, powerful and focused on higher-order ideals and ethics.
(c) Inspirational motivation

It is an emergent form of leaders behaviour that challenges the followers. The
leader instils trust among the followers that organisations problems can be solved;
and organisations goals can be achieved.
(d) Intellectual stimulation

Leaders take problem as a creativity challenge (Atwater & Bass, 1994).
Transformational leaders encourage innovation and creativity among the followers
by questioning regular actions, decision and beliefs; reframing problems and create
new approaches to solve old problems. In this way, followers will become active
and contribute their ideas and perspectives to be considered by the leaders.
(e) Individualised consideration

Leaders are concerned wtih followers need for achievement and growth. The
leaders identify the needs and strength of the followers (Atwater & Bass, 1994).
In brief, we can conclude that high-performing leaders seldom display laissez-faire

behaviour; instead they show high-level of transactional and transformational leadership.
In contrast, low-performing leaders often display laissez-faire behaviour and least
frequently demonstrate transformational behaviours.
ACTIVITY 10.3
Which leadership style is more suitable to be adopted at the workplace to face the
21st century challenges? Explain.

10.3.1 Theory and Research about Transformational

Leadership
The trust and identification with leaders are basics in achieving exemplary performance
in the organisation. Hence, transformational leaders will resort to staff motivation, job
satisfaction and performance management instead of practising transactional leadership.
In brief, transformational leadership demonstrates the following characteristics (Hoy &
Miskel, 2013):
(a) It goes beyond exchanging inducements for desired performance;
(b) It builds commitment towards organisations goals by empowering the followers;
(c) It reshapes needs, rebrands visions, focuses on long-term goals, inspires followers
to create success together, renews organisation to accommodate with the new
visions and responsible for self and others development;
(d) The leadership is developed from the personal values and beliefs of the leaders; and
(e) The transformational leaders provide feedback on work from new angles by
creating awareness towards organisational goals.
Situational Factors
Bass and Riggio (2006) highlighted that situational factors influence the effectiveness of
a leadership, especially during crisis situation. During the crisis situation,
transformational leaders should identify followers needs and prompt response according
to the situation. Transformational leaders stimulate the followers to the threats and
provide ways to achieve goals. Such situations that can influence transactional and
transformational behaviours are dynamic in external environments, organisational
structure and culture, public and private sectors, task and goals; and power distribution
between the leaders and followers. However, only transformational leadership can make
great impact regardless of situational conditions (Bass & Riggio, 2006).
Research
Many studies conducted on transformational leadership have discovered that
transformational leadership is more effective than transactional leadership, and ideal
leaders tend to practise transformational leadership in their organisation (Hoy & Miskel,
2013). Moreover, transformational leaders set higher performance to be achieved by
followers (Bass, 1988) and lead followers to exert greater effort (Yukl, 1999),
commitment and satisfaction (Hoy & Miskel, 2013). Hence, transformational leadership
tends to achieve higher rating using the MLQ.

Educational Settings
Leithwood and other researchers have aggressively conducted research on
transformational leadership in educational settings. Extended from the ideas of Burns and
Bass, Leithwood (1994) formulated eight dimensions model for educational setting using
the concept of transactional and transformational leadership. The eight dimensions are
building school vision, establishing school goals, providing intellectual stimulation,
offering individualised support, modelling best practices and important organisational
values, demonstrating high performance expectations, creating a productive school
culture, and developing structures to foster participation in school decision.
Generally, the framework by Leithwood is based on two generalisations:
(a) Transformational leadership directly influences school outcomes such as student

achievements; and
(b) Transformational leadership indirectly influences school outcomes via three critical
psychological characteristics of staff perceptions of school characteristics, teacher
commitment to change and organisational learning.
More recent studies by Leithwood and colleagues have produced a model of core
practices of successful leadership (Leithwood, Aitken & Jantzi, 2006; Leithwood et al.,
2006; Leithwood, Louis, Naderson & Wahlstrom, 2004). These scholars have integrated
open social systems into the model that includes input, throughput, and outcome variables
with transformational leadership as key processes.
Other researchers such as Silins (1992) and Kyung and Miskel (2006) found that
transformational leadership brings high impact to educational organisations than the
transactional leadership. On the other hand, Marks and Printy (2003) found that
transformational leadership produces higher quality in pedagogy when coupled with
instructional leadership. When Leithwood and Jantzi (2005) examine the effects of
transformational leadership in educational settings, they identified four conclusions (Hoy
& Miskel, 2013):
(a) Transformational leadership has significant and large effects on perceived
organisational effectiveness;
(b) Transformational leadership has positive and significant, but modest effects on
organisational objective and independent indicators of organisational effectiveness;
(c) Transformational leadership has promising but limited effects on independently

measured student outcomes; and

(d) Transformational leadership has modest but uniformly positive effects on student
engagement in school.
Numerous studies showed that transformational leadership is needed to help the school to
transform itself so that the school will be able to compete nationally and internationally
(Hoy & Miskel, 2013). However, leaders need to acquire appropriate abilities, skills and
behaviours that can be developed, taught and learned under formal or informal training to
enable them to become excellent leaders (Bass, 1998).
ACTIVITY 10.4
1. Explain how a transformational leader manages to achieve the
organisations goal.
2. Identify the situation(s) where Laissez-Faire leadership is most
appropriate to be used.
10.4 EVOLUTIONARY LEADERSHIP THEORY

Evolutionary leadership theory (ELT) is an intriguing analysis of the root of leadership
(Vugt & Ahuja, 2011). The assumption of this theory is that leadership and followership
emerge during the course of human evolution (Hoy & Miskel, 2013). There are several
terms that need to be defined to understand the evolutionary process of leadership. In fact,
a leader is an individual who is able to influence others to achieve goals whereas
followers are individuals who are voluntarily engaging their action with another over
someone or something (Hoy & Miskel, 2013).
The dark triad refers to a set of personality traits narcissism, Machiavellianism; and
psychopathy undesirable traits that are always on top of the power pyramid (Hoy &
Miskel, 2013). Leaders with a dark triad are classified as cunning, deceitful and able to
mask their sinister motives while controlling others; they may be nasty and even
successful. A natural leader is an individual who governs the organisation consistent
with the biases of ancestral psychology. However, natural leaders are involved in informal
social relations with their followers, they own expertise, they recognise that expertise is
widely distributed, avoid dark triads and avoid being dominant. In that, adaptation is a
trait or behaviour that changes over time and has potential benefits.

Assumptions
In the evolution process, a group of surviving humans that encompass leaders and
followers will be formed. Normally, this group needs cooperation and coordination
actions in order to survive. Meanwhile, leaderless groups will die out (Hoy & Miskel,
2013). In line to this, the leadership groups are psychological adaptations, programmed to
live together, to be led and to be obedient most of the time. As human beings, we need a
sense of belongingness; we display our roles as team players and are an integral part of a
group. After all, natural capacity expels humans to follow and to lead (Hoy & Miskel,
2013).
In terms of behaviour, the one that brings positive outcomes will gradually spread and
become fixed in the population in the evolutionary process. Those who are appointed as
leaders get leadership roles, but there is no guarantee of being either effective or
demonstrating morality. The ELT posits that the particular traits are associated with
initiative taking and intelligence is largely inherited and place people to power positions.
Certain individuals have the leadership package to lead others but under certain situation
circumstances, most people can assume leadership. In addition, ELT also acknowledged
motivated leaders chase for high social status, mainly with the three Ss salary, status
and sex.
Three important functions of leadership it will bind the group, it helps group to learn
new things, and it teaches others on how to lead (Hoy & Miskel, 2013). In brief, the
advantages of followership include group cohesion, knowledge in times of uncertainty,
and opportunities to be groomed for leadership.
Hypotheses
Over time, individuals are connected with cognitive ancestral leader profiles (CALPs) for
multi-tasking leadership. Unfortunately, CALPs produce mismatch results when it was
used to evaluate contemporary leaders. ELT listed some hypotheses why the followers
follow their leader. The hypotheses are:
(a) There is a threat to group unity;
(b) The leader guides and offers discussions on tasks and organisations;
(c) The leader inspires the follower to achieve the goals; and
(d) The followers have intrinsic desire to be led.
Analyses
Notably, ELT is the latest edition of leadership theories. Even though it is critically
appraised and carefully scrutinised, undeniably it opens up new landscape in leadership
and followership studies that combine many of the contemporary

leadership elements such as trait, behavioural, transactional and transformational

(charismatic) and contingency (situational).
In viewing the analyses of ELT, we found that some traits were associated with
leadership, for instance, extroversion, openness, intelligence, ambition, integrity,
competence, generosity and vision. In fact, like other leadership theories, ELT treated
followers as important components to leadership. Leaders, on the other hand, need to
learn to accommodate their leadership styles to different type of followers namely,
employees, supporters, loyalist or apprentices; to disciples. For example, the leader can
act as an inspirer to disciples, a teacher for apprentices, a defender for loyalists, a
figurehead for supporters and a provider for employees under different situations.
There is an abundance of evidence indicating that followers dislike power distance

between them and their leaders. They, hence, will form coalitions to balance the things in
the organisation. Definitely, the followers tend to follow leaders who can place the
welfare of the group higher than the leaders interests. Hence, the followers will develop
various strategies in response to the powerful gap such as act negatively towards
organisations through gossiping, form secret ballots, lobby for transparency in decision
making, post on media and public discussion of critical problems, disobey their leaders
and even leave the organisation when problem get serious.
Overall, the ELT highlights studies on followership that has had less focus compared to
leadership studies.
ACTIVITY 10.5
Inevitably, a leader may have a dark triad in himself. If you are the school head,
how will you avoid or deal with the dark side of yourself so that it will not be
obvious to your followers?

10.4.1 Leadership Recommendations from the

Evolutionary Leadership Theory
The following are recommendations from Vugt and Ahuja (2011) on the potential
improvement initiatives of the ELT on leadership and followership.
(a) Avoid over-romanticising leadership.
(b) Expose self potential expertise develop your own specialised skills and earn
respect from colleagues.
(c) Make informality a virtue natural leaders exhibit the qualities of informal
leaders.
(d) Favour and honour followers.
(e) Beware of the salary gap a huge gap of salary is a threat to dark triad leaders.
(f) Select competent leaders choose the leaders with the right knowledge, skills and
abilities to lead.
(g) Avoid nepotism avoid full family participation in the organisation especially the
complex ones because a wide array of talents other than from family members
would benefit the organisation.
(h) Beware of the dark side because of the potential for followers to develop
strategies to overcome the dark triad leaders.
(i) Do not judge leaders by their looks profiling leader based on their performance
and capability in inspiring followers toward achieving organisation goals and
vision.
SELF-CHECK 10.3
1. Discuss the contribution of ELT on leadership study.

2. How can a leader apply an ELT concept in his leadership practice?

10.5 DISTRIBUTED LEADERSHIP:

ACCORDING TO THE EVIDENT
Distributed leadership is another contingency leadership model that embraces leadership
by teams and groups (Hoy and Miskel, 2013). To date, there is a lot of empirical evidence
highlighting the association between distributed leadership and learning organisational
outcomes.
ACTIVITY 10.6
How is the distributed leadership being practised under the democratic style of
rule? Provide evidence to support your argument.
10.5.1 Distributed Leadership

New ideas of leadership styles have always attracted competing and conflicting
interpretations of the term, and so does distributed leadership. Generally, the concept of
distributed leadership has been associated to shared (Pearce & Conger, 2003),
collaborative (Wallace, 2002), democratic (Gastil, 1997) and participative (Vroom &
Yago, 1998) leadership. In educational settings, distributed leadership is used to explain
any form of devolved, shared or dispersed leadership concept (Harris, 2008; p. 173) or in
brief, everyone leads (Harris, 2007).
Due to organisational influence and direction, all leadership styles to some extent are
distributed, but it does not mean that everyone in the organisation will simultaneously
lead. Distributed leadership is regarding the individuals potential to lead but at the end,
how the leadership is exerted that matters. However, research by Leithwood et al. (2007)
has found different patterns of distributed leadership have contributed to higher
organisational improvement and change.
The conception of distributed leadership is understood through a dynamic organisational

entity (Harris, 2008, p. 174). According to Spillane et al. (2004), distributed leadership
comprises interaction of leaders, teachers and the situation as they influence instructional
practice. In other words, distributed leadership is shared amongst members of the
organisation and will influence organisational decision making (Harris, 2008). In the field
of organisational dynamics, the terms such as bossless team or a self-managed team are
used in similar way to describe distributed leadership (Barry, 1991; p761).

Barry found that distributed leadership forms a variety of roles and behaviours that can be
split apart, shared, rotated and used sequentially or concomitantly. In other words, at any
one time, many leaders are developed carrying complementary leadership roles. For
example, in school, as different individuals seek and openly assume leadership functions,
a dynamic pattern of distributed leadership will shift and change. Thus, the capability and
capacity of a leader is not fixed, but it can be further extended.
Another advantage of distributed leadership is giving opportunity to informal leaders in

the school to leading at appropriate times and the leader is given necessary support to
make changes or to innovate (Harris & Muijs, 2004). However, it does not remove the
formal leadership structures in the organisation. No matter in what way, the formal
leadership still controls the practice of distributed leadership in schools.
10.5.2 Distributed Leadership Theory

Many contemporary interpretations of distributed leadership theory are based on
Spillanes (2006) study. Spillanes study has been influenced by cognitive psychology
and focused on distributed cognition and activity theory. The theories question the
influence of social context on human interaction and learning. Both distributed cognition
and activity theories emphasise how social context influences human interaction and
learning. As according to Spillane, Halverson and Diamond (2001), the interdependence
of the individual and the environment means that human activity is distributed in the
interactive web actors, artefacts and the situation.
As big organisations, schools need to share complex social systems, and the need for
communication and learning to be distributed across the school system. Distributed
cognition implies that learning takes place through interactions within and across various
teams. Hence, distributed leadership practice emphasises shared and realised leadership
within extended formal and informal groups and networks (Harris, 2008). In school
settings, for example, teachers who are solving particular sets of pedagogical problems
will exhibit distributed leadership during decision making or taking particular actions.
Gronn (2000) viewed distributed leadership as emergent property of a group or a

network of interacting individuals. It simply means, the leadership is in the form of
concerted actions which are about the additional dynamics which happen when
individuals work together or that is the product of conjoint agency. Supported by the
teacher development and school improvement, its implication on organisational change
and development is enhanced and teachers have

greater chance to cooperate and be actively involved in the change and innovation
process.
When the concept of distributed leadership emerged in early 2000s, which was then
classified as a web leadership activity, the interaction stretched across people and
situations, where the study by Spillane et al. (2001) has also become famous. Spillane et
al. (2001) posited that distributed leadership is being practised when leadership is
assigned to many individuals and the task is accomplished through the interaction of
multiple leaders. In the educational practice in the elementary school, distributed
leadership is associated with the improvement of the quality of teaching and learning in
certain subject areas.
There have not been many studies that have successfully indicated the significant
contribution of distributed leadership in achieving organisational goals, but many findings
have shown a strong relationship between distributed leadership and organisational
performance (Harris, 2008). Graets (2000) has indicated the contribution of distributed
leadership on organisational change and Gold et al. (2002) also showed a significant
leadership contributed to the school success.
A study by Glickman et al. (2001) also showed contribution of distributed leadership on

schools improvement. Glickman et al. (2001) showed that varied sources of leadership
lead to improved student learning outcomes for all students over time. Another study by
Harris and Chapman (2002) also shared the same idea with Glickman et al. where they
found effective decision making made by heads who work with teams, contributed to the
improvement in the school performance (Harris, 2008).
10.5.3 Distributed Leadership and Student Outcomes

Many qualitative and quantitative studies have shown the influence of distributed
leadership on student outcomes. A quantitative study by Leithwood and Jantzi (2000)
posited that distributed leadership has positive influence on teacher effectiveness and
student engagement. They also noted that teacher leadership is far more significant than
principal leadership on student engagement after taking into account students homes and
family backgrounds. Similarly, the qualitative study by Silins and Mulford (2002) also
found that student outcomes are improved when the leadership is distributed to school
community and when teachers are empowered with job autonomy.
Another study by Harris and Muijs (2004) also identified a significant effect of teacher
involvement in decision making, student motivation and self-efficacy. They have
successfully shown that more distributed forms of leadership will have higher positive
effect on student outcomes. Moreover, there is an increase in
teachers and students morales when teachers are valued in the process of school
development and change.
10.5.4 Patterns of Distribution

Findings from a study by Leithwood et al. (2007) suggested that the patterns of leadership
in school affect the organisational performance. They also found the effects and impact of
distributed leadership on organisational outcomes when:
(a) The leadership is distributed to those who have, or can develop, the knowledge or
expertise of subordinates to perform leadership tasks as expected; and
(b) Distributed leadership is well-coordinated to achieve great result.
There are seven identified patterns of distributed leadership. The first three patterns are
spontaneous collaboration, intuitive working relation and institutionalised practice which
were derived from Gronns (2002) work. Another four patterns were extended from
Gronns holistic patterns when the role overlaps in a coordination fashion (Leithwood et
al., 2007):
(a) Spontaneous collaboration

Regulation of conducts by various expertise of different skills and knowledge for a
specific task and then disperse
(b) Intuitive working relations

Share roles by organisational members who then develop close working relations
(c) Institutionalised practice

Less systematic adaptation creates obvious committees and teams embodiments
(d) Planful alignment

The tasks of leaders have been given thoughtful consideration by others.
Agreements have been made among the sources of leadership and the best practice
of leadership
(e) Spontaneous alignment

Distribution of leadership tasks and functions with little or no planning. Decision of
who should perform specific leadership functions result in fortuitous alignment of
functions across leadership sources.

(f) Spontaneous misalignment

Quite similar to spontaneous alignment but it is different in its outcomes where it
affects the organisational productivity long or short term.
(g) Anarchic misalignment

Portrays active rejection of some or many leaders, of influence from others about
what they should be doing in their own sphere of influence. Consequently, those
leaders are highly independent, competing with others in achieving organisational
goals and access to resources.
Findings have suggested that spontaneous patterns of alignments have the greatest
potential for short-term positive organisational change (Leithwood et al., 2007). In
addition, planful alignment has the advantage of long-term organisational productivity.
However, spontaneous misalignment and anarchic alignment have the tendency of
negative effect towards short and long-term organisational change and development.
10.5.5 Commentary
Literature has acknowledged the importance of distributed leadership that is grounded in
activity rather than position or role. Among the contributions of distributed leadership
could be seen through (Harris, 2008):
(a) The positive impact on organisational development and change;
(b) Positive effect on student outcomes;
(c) Effect on working relationships within an organisation in terms of structural and

cultural boundaries;
(d) A new movement form of leadership from a person solo to a person plus;
and
(e) Exert the internal organisational capacity to develop, grow and innovate that helps
the organisation to achieve goals.
However, in educational settings, there is more likely a considerable challenge to

implement this new practice and way of working. Overall, there are barriers or obstacles
to implement distributed leadership due to three factors:
(a) Distance
Complexity of school organisations, physical space and geography separation are
the challenge in practicing distributed leadership in school.

The solution could be by providing an interactive ICT system to close distance

gaps.
(b) Culture
A new perspective of distributed leadership that sees a more organic, spontaneous
and share leadership have shifted the culture of top down leadership.
(c) Structure
The schools structure has become barrier to distributing leadership. Hence, schools
have to find ways of removing complex organisational structures and systems that
restrict organisational learning.
The following are the implications of practising distributed leadership:
(a) Formal leadership roles to create cultural condition and structural changes;
(b) School leaders to consider maximising leadership capacity and harnessing untapped
leadership potential;
(c) A new shift from a leader-follower to flatter leadership structures and patterns;
and
(d) Bear in mind that distributed leadership does not always function at its best, but
rather it depends on the growth state of the organisation, its readiness to change, its
culture and its developmental needs.
SELF-CHECK 10.4
Distributed leadership is associated with improved school performance.
However, there are barriers to practise the distributed leadership. Identify the
barriers that hinder distributed leadership to be practised in the school setting.

Leadership is a social process, in which the leader influences followers towards the
achievement of the organisational goals.
Personality and motivation traits influence the leadership practice.
Leadership skills can be learned and used to solve complex problems.
In the contingency approach, traits, skills and situations will influence leaders
behaviours and effectiveness. However, the best practice of leadership happens when
the leader matches appropriate behaviours (traits) to the situations.
Laissez-faire leadership means the absence of leadership, however, transactional

leadership rewards the followers in exchange for their great effort, and
transformational leadership inspires the followers to achieve organisational goals.
Evolutionary leadership theory is the analysis of leadership root which assumes that
leadership and followership are emerged along with human revolution. ELT focuses
on followership more than leadership.
Dark triads mean unwanted or unpleasant leader behaviours; however, neutral leaders
acknowledge followers expertise, avoid dark triads and avoid being dominant and
will adapt to changes over time to obtain potential benefits.
Distributed leadership portrays the sharing or collaboration of leadership to many

individuals or groups who have different expertise, skills and knowledge over the
duration of tasks.

Contingency model Patterns of distributed leadership

Distributed leadership Situational leadership
Evolutionary leadership theory Ohio State University
Laissez-Faire leadership Traits and skills of leadership
Leadership behaviour style Transactional leadership
Leadership effectiveness Transformational leadership
Leadership style
Alig-Mielcarek, J. M. & Hoy, W. K. (2005). Instructional leadership: Its nature, meaning,

and influence. In Hoy, W.K. and Miskel, C.G. (Eds.), Educational leadership and
reform (pp. 29-52). Greenwich, CT: Information Age
Atwater, D. C. & Bass, B. M. (1994). Transformational leadership in teams. In Bass,

B.M. and Avolio, B.J. (Eds.). Improving organizational effectiveness through
transformational leadership (pp. 48-83).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Barry, D. (1991). Managing the bossless team: lessons in distributed leadership.

Organisational Dynamic, 20(1), 31-47.
Bass, B. M. (1990). Bass & Stogdills handbook of leadership: Theory, research

and managerial applications (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.
Bass, B. M. (1998). Transformational leadership: industrial, military, and

educational impact. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bass, B. M. (2008). The Bass handbook of leadership: theory, research and

managerial applications (4th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press
Bass, B. M. & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Introduction. In Bass, B.M. & Avolio, B.J. (Eds.).
Improving organisational effectiveness through transformational Leadership (pp. 1-
9). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Bass, B. M. & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational leadership. (2nd ed.).

Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Blake, R. R. & Mouton, J.S. (1985). The managerial grid III. Houston, TX: Gulf.
Bryman, A. (1966). Leadership in organizations. In Clegg, S. R., Hardy, C. & Nord, W. R.

(Eds.), Handbook of organizational studies (pp. 276-292). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Campbell, J. P., Dunnette, M. D., Lawler, E. E. III, & Karl, E., Weick, J. (1970).
Managerial behaviour, performance and effectiveness. New York, NY: McGraw-
Hill.
Chung, K. A. & Miskel, C. (1989). A comparative study of principals administrative

behaviour. Journal of Educational Administration, 27(1), 45-57.
Fiedler, F. E. (1967). A theory of leadership effectiveness. New York, NY:

McGraw-Hill.
Fiedler, F. E & Garcia, J. E. (1987). New approaches to effective management.

Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
Gastil, J. (1997). A definition and illustration of democratic leadership. Oxford, England:

Oxford University Press
Glickman, C. D., Gordon, S. P. & Ross-Gordon, J. M. (2011). Supervision and

instructional leadership. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Gold, A., Evans, J., Early, P., Halpin, D. & Collabone, P. (2002). Principled principals?
Evidence from ten case studies of outstanding school teachers. Paper presented at
the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Associtation, New
Orleans, LA, USA.
Graetz, F. (2000). Strategic change leadership. Management Decisions, 38(8), 550-562.
Gronn, P. (2000). Distributed properties: a new architecture for leadership.

Educational Management and Administration, 28(3), 317-338.
Hallinger, P. (2003). Leading educational change: reflections on the practiceof

instructional and transformational leadership. Cambridge Journal of Education,
33(3), 329-351.

Hallinger, P. (2005). Instructional leadership and the school principal: A passing fancy
that refused to fade away. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 4(3), 221-239.
Hallinger, P. (2011). A review of three decades of doctoral studies using the principal
instructional rating scale: a lens on methodological progress ineducational
leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47(2),
271-306.
Hallinger, P. & Murphy, J. (1985). Assessing the instructional leadership behaviour of

principals. Elementary School Journal, 86(2), 217-248.
Halpin, A. W. (1966). Theory and research in administration. New York, NY:

Macmillan.
Harris, A. (2007). Distributed leadership: Conceptual confusion and empirical reticence.

International Journal of School Leadership, 10(3), 331-325.
Harris, A. (2008). Distributed leadership: According to the evidence. Journal of

Educational Administration, 46(2), 172-188.
Harris, A. & Chapman, C. (2002). Effective leadership in schools facing challenging

circumstances. Nottingham, England: National College for School Leadership
(NCSL).
Harris, A. & Muijs, D. (2004). Improving schools through teacher leadership.

London, England: Open University Press.
Hoffman, W. H. A & Hoffman, R. H. (2011). Smart management in effective schools:

effective management configurations in general and vocationaleducation in the
Netherlands. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47(4), 620-645.
House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W. & Gupta, V. (2004).
Culture, leadership and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hoy, W. K. & Miskel, C. G. (2008). Educational administration: Theory, research

and practice (9th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Hoy, W. K. & Miskel, C. G. (2013). Educational administration: Theory, research

and practice (11th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Immegart, G. L. (1988). Leadership and leader behaviour. In N.J. Boyan (Ed.),Handbook

of research on educational administration (pp. 259-277). New York, NY:
Longman.
Judge, T. A., Piccolo, R. G. & Kosalka, T. (2009). The bright and dark side ofleader traits:
A review and theoretical extension of the leader trait paradigm. Leadership
Quarterly, 20, 855-875.
Katz, D. & Kahn, R. L. (1978). The social psychology of organisations (2nd ed.).
New York, NY: Wiley.
Katz, D. & Kahn, R. L. (1966). The social psychology of organizations. New York, NY:
Wiley.
Keller, R. T. (2006). Transformational leadership, initiating structure and substitutes for

leadership: A longitudinal study of research and developmental team
performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(1), 202-210.
Kerr, S. & Jermier, J. M. (1978). Substitutes for leadership: their meaning and
measurement. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 22, 375-403.
Kuhnert, K. W. & Lewis, P. (1987). Transactional and transformational leadership: A

constructive/ developmental analysis. Academy of Management Review, 12(4),
648-657.
Lawler, E. E., III. (1985). Education, management style and organizational effectiveness.
Personnel Psychology, 38(1), 1-26.
Leithwood, K. (1994). Leadership for school restructuring. Educational Administration

Quarterly, 30(4), 498-518.
Leithwood, K., Aitken, R. & Jantzi, D. (2006). Making school smarter (3rd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Leithwood, K. & Jantzi, D. (2000). The effects of different sources of leadership on

student engagement in school. In Riley, K. & Louis, K. (Eds), Leadership for
change and school reform (pp. 50-66). London, England: Routledge.
Leitwood, K. & Jantzi, D. (2005). A review of transformational school leadership

research 1996-2005. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 4(3), 177-199.

Leithwood, K., Louis, K. S., Anderson, S. & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). Howleadership

influences student learning. Retrieved from
http://www.wallacefoundation.org/WF?KnowledgeCenter?
KnowledgeTopics/EducationLeadership/HowLeadershipInfluences
StudentLearning.htm.
Leithwood, K., Day, C., Sammons, P., Harris, A. & Hopkins, D. (2007). Leadership and
student learning outcomes, interim report. London, England: DCSF.
Lujain, 2011. Tun Dr. Mahathir bin Mohamad, the legendary leader. Retrieved from
http:cronkitehhh.jmc.asu.edu/blog/2011/tun-dr-mahathir-bin-mohamad-the-
legendary-leader/
Marks, H. M. & Printy, S. M. (2003). Principal leadership and school performance: An

integration of transformational and instructional leadership. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 39(3), 370-397.
Morrisey, M. (2000). Professional learning communities: an ongoing exploration.

Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.
Pearce, C. J. & Conger, C. (2003). Shared leadership: Reframing the hows and
whys of leadership. Thaousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Silins, H. C. (1992). Effective leadership for school reform. Alberta Journal of

educational Research, 38(4), 317-334.
Silins, H. & Mulford, W. (2002). Leadership and school results. In Leithwood, K.

& Hallinger, P. (Eds). Second international handbook of educationalleadership
and administration (pp. 561-612). Dordrecht. Netherlands: Kluwer.
Spillane, J. P. (2006). Distributed leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Spillane, J., Halverson, R. & Diamond, J. B. (2001). Towards a theory of leadership

practice: A distributed perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36(1), 3-34.
Spillane, J. P., Halverson, R., & Diamond, J. B. (2004). Towards a theory of leadership
practice: a distributed perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36(1), 3-34.

Stogdill, R. M. (1948). Personal factors associated with leadership: A survey of the

literature. Journal of Psychology, 25(1), 35-71.
Stogdill, R. M. (1981). Traits of leadership: A follow-up to 1970. In Bass, B.M.(Ed.),

Stogdills handbook of leadership (pp. 73-97). New York, NY: Free Press.
Tannenbaum, R., Weschler, I.R. & Massarik, F. (1961). Leadership and organization: A
behavioural science approach. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Vecchio, R. P. (1993). The impact of differences in subordinate and supervisor age on

attitudes and performance. Psychology and Aging, 8(1), 112-119.
Vroom, V. & Yago, A.I. (1998). Situation effects and levels of analysis in the studyof
leadership participation. Stamford, CT: JAI Press.
Vugt, V. M. & Ahuja, A. (2011). Naturally selected: The evolutionary science

ofleadership. New York, NY: Harper Business.
Wallace, M. (2002). Modelling distributed leadership and managementeffectiveness:

Primary school senior management teams in England and Wales. School
Effectiveness and School Improvement, 13(2), 163-186.
Yukl, G. A. (1981). Leadership in organization (5th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ:

Prentice Hall.
Yukl, G. A. (1999). An evaluation of conceptual weaknesses in Transformational and

charismatic leadership theories. Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 285-305.
Yukl, G. A. (2002). Leadership in organization (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Yukl, G. A. (2010). Leadership in organizations (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Zaccaro, S. J. (2007). Trait-based perspectives of leadership. American Psychologist,

62(1), 6-16.

14 HMEE5013 Topic 10

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

14 HMEE5013 Topic 10

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Topic Leadersh

1. Define leadership, and relate the traits of leadership;

2. Identify the situational factors that need different practices of leadership;

3. Describe an effective leadership;

4. Describe the contingency model of leadership;

5. Analyse the importance of transformational leadership in schools;

6. Elaborate the evolutionary leadership theory; and

7. Elaborate the concept of distributed leadership in school management.

Copyright Open University Malaysia (OUM)

1. What are the attributes of a good leader?

2. Identify leadership behaviour of a principal in an excellent school. Describe

10.1 DEFINING LEADERSHIP

10.2 THE NATURE OF ADMINISTRATIVE WORK

Copyright Open University Malaysia (OUM)

To summarise, administrative work is similar across countries and organisations. In

Identify the administrative roles of a school principal in the area of curriculum

10.2.1 Trait and Approach to Leadership

Copyright Open University Malaysia (OUM)

Early trait research

(b) Achievement scholarship, knowledge, athletic accomplishments;

(c) Responsibility dependability, initiative, persistence, aggressiveness, self-

(e) Status socioeconomic position, popularity.

Recent perspectives on leadership trait and skills

(b) Vigour and persistence in pursuit of goals;

(c) Venturousness and originality in problem solving;

(d) Motivation to bring initiative in social situations;

(e) Self-confidence and sense of personal identity;

(f) Willing to accept consequences of decision and action;

(g) Ready to absorb interpersonal stress;

Copyright Open University Malaysia (OUM)

(h) Willing to tolerate frustration and delay;

(i) Ability to influence other persons behaviour; and

(j) Capacity to structure interaction systems to the purpose at hand.

Table 10.1: Traits and Skills Associated with Effective Leadership

Personality Motivation Skills

10.2.2 Situations and Leadership

Copyright Open University Malaysia (OUM)

Figure 10.1: Behaviour characteristics of educational leadership

10.2.3 Behaviours and Leadership

The Ohio State and Related Leadership Studies

Copyright Open University Malaysia (OUM)

(a) Leadership behaviour is characterised by initiating structure and consideration

Copyright Open University Malaysia (OUM)

Figure 10.2: The typology of leadership behaviour

A Recent Perspective on Leader Behaviour

(b) Relations-oriented behaviour; and

(c) Change-oriented behaviour.

Task-oriented and relations-oriented are similar to initiating structure and consideration,

Copyright Open University Malaysia (OUM)

10.2.4 Leadership Effectiveness

(b) Satisfaction of organisational members; and

(c) Organisational goal achievement.

Evaluation of performance of employees indeed is the decision of the leader. It is a

Table 10.2: Effectiveness Indicators of Educational Leaders

Personal Organisation Individual

Source: Hoy & Miskel (2013)

10.2.5 Contingency Models of Leadership

Copyright Open University Malaysia (OUM)

Figure 10.3: The contingency approaches of leadership

The contingency approaches outline two assumptions:

(b) Certain situational factors (teachers motivation, students ability, socioeconomic

Thus, we can conclude that contingency approaches have specific conditions or

(b) Fielders contingency model of leadership; and