Search the Case Studies
Search the Articles
Search the Membership
Search MirandaNet
MirandaNet Fellowship Casestudy
Membership List | Publications | Research | Specialist Area List | Braided Learning Ejournal
The Essential Qualities for Effective Leadership in Schools
ICT & Curriculum Specialist at an International school in Cairo Egypt.
Atif Hussain
Year of posting: 2013
Abstract:
Effective leadership can potentially be a subjective term. Every leader in his or her capacity as leader and position of responsibility may define effective leadership according to their own experiences, perceptions and/or ideals. Much discussion and literature exists on what the essential qualities for effective leadership are. It is important and beneficial to be familiar with the differing points of view, so that future leaders are able to adopt their own principles or qualities they consider necessary, enabling them to lead effectively.
Study
Effective leadership can potentially be a subjective term. Every leader in his or her capacity as leader and position of responsibility may define effective leadership according to their own experiences, perceptions and/or ideals. Much discussion and literature exists on what the essential qualities for effective leadership are. It is important and beneficial to be familiar with the differing points of view, so that future leaders are able to adopt their own principles or qualities they consider necessary, enabling them to lead effectively.
The aim of this critique is to analyse briefly the theories and qualities presented by some as key to effective leadership. As I am currently working in, and primarily interested in the role of effective leadership in schools, the literature and case studies I have selected have focused on leadership in schools and the examples used are also within this context. However, in many instances, the criteria for effective leadership may apply to other professions and institutions.
According to Hallinger’s and Heck’s findings, leadership as a mechanism to lead can be achieved through defining purposes, amongst others. In their view, defining purposes was an essential role of leadership. With regards to schools, laying out the purposes of the school provided the tools by which the leaders of the school were able to influence progress. Purposes in schools, for them included the vision, school mission and goals.
Hallinger and Heck argue that an important aspect of strong and effective leadership is vision. ‘A vision enables one to see facets of school life that may otherwise be unclear, raising their importance above other facets. The foundation of vision is moral or spiritual in nature.’[1] This argument that vision is derived from personal ideals is further supported by Roland Barth, where he states that vision provides the inspiration for leadership in education, and explains that such visions stem from our most important personal values.
The school mission, in Hallinger’s and Heck’s view, although often carelessly confused with vision or goals, comes into existence when the ‘personal visions of critical mass of people cohere into common sense of purpose within a community.’[2]
The similarity between vision and the mission lies in their moral implications. They also go on to point that the laying out of a vision or mission is the driving factor that sets a collective aim for all to work towards achieving, whilst not necessarily being able to measure them tangibly.
Goals on the other hand, are tangible targets that can be measured and monitored, focusing attention on specific areas, such as attendance, punctuality etc. Roland Barth makes and interesting contribution in understanding the difference between the role of mission, vision and goal, where he states ‘that educators do not jump eagerly out of bed at 6.00am and rush off to school because they wish to raise scores on achievement tests. Engaging in a shared quest to accomplish something special motivates educators.’[3]
An interesting point to note in Hallinger’s and Heck’s research is that whilst purposes do need to be clearly distinguished, the potential problem lies with the questions: who sets these purposes and to what degree do the others have a say in achieving the ‘shared’ missions? It is important to note that not only does an effective leader need to be able to provide purposes, but also be able to accept shared purposes from a team and move forward together. Hallinger and Heck fail to explicitly state whose responsibility it is when defining the vision. Whilst they do acknowledge that others may contribute to the vision, the emphasis of this role lies heavily with the leader. For Hallinger and Heck, ‘the power of a personal vision lies both in its impact on the leader’s own behaviour and in its potential to energise others.’[4] The possible danger with this view is that the leader’s strong conviction in his ideals, whilst may impact his own behaviour, and enthuse others, it leaves little room for negotiation where others may not share the same vision. It does not also consider the difficulty people encounter when trying to implement someone else’s vision that they fundamentally view as alien to or outside of their own ideals.
However, a reasonable conclusion from Hallinger and Heck’s findings is that the role of the leader is to have a vision. This may be used as a spring board to inspire others to define a new shared vision and consequently a shared mission. The setting of goals also follows a similar path where targets are collectively set in order to facilitate the shared mission.
Fullan and Hargreaves also give emphasis to the importance of a collective spirit and need for collaboration in their guidelines for heads. An obvious difference however, with Hallinger’s and Heck’s view is that according to Fullan and Hargreaves, the responsibility of setting a vision rests with the collective group and is not at all an individual one.
In providing their advice for heads, as leaders of schools, they list eight guidelines: 1) Understand the culture; 2) Value your teachers: promote their professional growth; 3) Extend what you value; 4) Express what you value; 5) Promote collaboration, cooptation; 6) Make menus, not mandates; 7) Use bureaucratic means to facilitate, not constrain; 8) Connect with the wider environment. The general ethoses in their eight guidelines indicate a strong sense of a collaborative approach where heads focus on leading with a sense of shared leadership where ‘shared leadership does not mean handing over the reins of power to opting out.’[5] According to Fullan and Hargreaves, understanding the culture requires an understanding of the existing shared values and norms of the school. The leader or head must therefore be sensitive to the culture that existed before his or her arrival and resist the temptation to change the culture according to the leader’s individual morals or principles. ‘Effective improvement means more than change. It also involves conserving what is good.’[6]
For Fullan and Hargreaves, valuing the staff and extending what the leader values is also necessary if the professional development of all members of staff is to be achieved. According to them, finding things to value in all the teachers, although is a difficult task; it is a necessary one for heads. And whilst it is crucial that incorrect practice is nipped in the bud, it is also necessary not to penalise teachers for not complying with the ‘preferred’ method or practice, but encourage teachers to share the good practice. ‘Valuing teachers who constantly seek to expand their repertoires and who search for opportunities to learn from their colleagues is more productive than endorsing a particular programme or method.’[7]
Perhaps the most controversial of the eight guidelines is Fullan and Hargreaves advice to promote and collaborate. In a sense this advice is consistently followed through and applied to the other guidelines and although not fundamentally at odds with what other authors or researchers claim, there is a degree of disagreement with regards to collaboration in setting a vision. For Fullan and Hargreaves, ‘My vision’, my teachers’, ‘my school’ are proprietary claims and attitudes which suggest an ownership of the school which is personal rather than collective, imposed rather than earned, and hierarchical rather than democratic.’[8] For Deal and Peterson on the other hand, the heads and leaders must be able to convince or win over the staff into conforming to the leader’s vision. The main area for disagreement here, is not in the notion of having a vision, but rather, as Fullan and Hargreaves put it, is in ‘whose vision is this?’[9] They do present an interesting case in that the vision should be collectively established, as otherwise it could be argued that leaders who define the vision are merely manipulating the other members of staff in discussions and attempt to make everyone else conform to their individual ideals.
Fullan and Hargreaves view greater collaboration as the ultimate essential for effective leadership. They not only believe in empowering teachers to contribute actively and passionately to leadership in their schools, but expect the heads role as one of facilitating rather than dictating. The school acts more as a community rather than an ownership by the head. ‘It is individuals and small groups of teachers and heads who must create the school and professional culture they want.’[10] Whilst they present a compelling argument to justify the importance of greater collaboration in setting the vision, there are potential problems when considering the application of such levels of collaboration to the practical realities and running of institutions such as schools.
If the vision is not initiated by the leader, and must come from collaboration, the possible difficulty lies in the different interests and priorities that lie within the institution as a whole. For instance, English, Science or ICT teachers would probably approach school visions with differing views. The absence of a central figure initiating the vision with a more objective eagle eye view of the school as a whole, can potentially result in visions or purposes that pull the school into different directions and lack coherence. Whilst Fullan and Hargreaves place rightful emphasis on the role of collaboration, it would be imperative to have a general framework provided by a leader who can unify the shared views and interests.
Hillary Lowe, also points to the use of effective collaboration in leadership however emphasises that this is achieved through the use of interpersonal skills and places the ability to work with people as amongst the most important qualities for future leaders. She has divided the leadership role into three general categories: personal effectiveness; managing people and teams; and organisational management and planning.
By personal effectiveness, Lowe focuses on the interaction between people when leading. Through the use of ‘emotional intelligence’ she encourages that leaders learn to know themselves and reflect on their own abilities when relating or interacting with others. She sites the ‘Johari window’ as a mechanism for helping leaders to self-reflect.
Lowe provides a more personal and self-assessing element to the essential qualities for effective leadership where emphasis is placed on the individual leader’s ability to communicate rather than distinguishing between the role of the leader and others. Leadership in her view is about the ability to work with different people where ‘leading and developing others often requires you to use different approaches in different situations.’[11] Lowe sites this as ‘situational leadership’ where adaptability is a very useful strength.
Lowe’s emphasis on the individual leader’s ability to work with others, although a necessary element, doesn’t clarify who decides the vision, as differed upon by Hallinger and Heck versus Fullan and Hargreaves. Although the inter-personal skills play a very important role in the leaders’ ability to lead, it could still be argued from the Fullan and Hargreaves perspective, that the great personal skills would enable a head to manipulate or convince his staff to follow his ideals and win them over. It does not necessarily equate to more of a spread of leadership or shared vision across the school or institution.
As mentioned before, the qualities for effective leadership are subjective and to a large extent depend on personal experiences and ideals. As Lowe states, ‘it has been suggested that the most effective leaders are flexible ones, adjusting their style to suite the context.’[12] Perhaps in a sense the use of these interpersonal skills and such flexibility can be combined with Hallinger and Heck’s need for purpose to produce a model more palatable to Fullan and Hargreaves, where ultimately, the leaders initial preferred vision can be discussed and collaborated with others, and adapted or abandoned if necessary to achieve a collective and shared vision.
As Alma Harris states, drawing from a conclusion of a research project that explored the level of effective leadership in secondary schools in ‘challenging circumstances’, ‘they had a high degree of emotional intelligence and that they were acutely aware of the need to build positive relationships with pupils, teachers and parents. They did this primarily through a process of empowerment and trust, engaging pupils, parents and teachers in decision making.’[13] She sites effective leaders as being people centred where leaders are able distribute leadership to others and combine a moral purpose with a readiness to collaborate.
Broadly speaking vision is a necessary aspect to effective leadership as indeed without a vision, leadership would be futile. Interpersonal skills enable leaders to deal and interact with people, removing personal and individual barriers that sometimes exist in professional settings, and allow leaders to collaborate and establish shared missions and goals. The shared leadership enables the heads and teachers to function as a community with collective ownership.
Atif Hussain
REFERENCES
Wallace, M. and Poulson, L. (2003) ‘Learning to read critically in educational leadership and management’. London: Sage.
Harris, A. (2002) ‘Effective Leadership in Schools Facing Challenging Contexts’. London: Routledge Falmer.
Fullan, M. and Hargreaves, A. (1992) ‘What’s worth fighting for in your school?’ Buckingham: Open University Press.
Wood, D. (2006) ‘The New Professional’s Handbook’. London: Hodder Education
[1] Hallinger, P. and Heck, R. ‘Understanding the contribution of leadership to school improvement’ in Wallace, M. and Poulson, L. (2003) ‘Learning to read critically in educational leadership and management.’ London: Sage, pp. 220.
[2] Hallinger, P. and Heck, R. ‘Understanding the contribution of leadership to school improvement’ in Wallace, M. and Poulson, L. (2003) ‘Learning to read critically in educational leadership and management.’ London: Sage, pp. 221.
[3] Hallinger, P. and Heck, R. ‘Understanding the contribution of leadership to school improvement’ in Wallace, M. and Poulson, L. (2003) ‘Learning to read critically in educational leadership and management.’ London: Sage, pp. 224.
[4] Hallinger, P. and Heck, R. ‘Understanding the contribution of leadership to school improvement’ in Wallace, M. and Poulson, L. (2003) ‘Learning to read critically in educational leadership and management.’ London: Sage, pp. 221.
[5] Fullan, M. and Hargreaves, A. (1992) ‘What’s worth fighting for in your school?’ pp. 122.
[6] Fullan, M. and Hargreaves, A. (1992) ‘What’s worth fighting for in your school?’ pp. 113.
[7] Fullan, M. and Hargreaves, A. (1992) ‘What’s worth fighting for in your school?’ pp. 116
[8] Fullan, M. and Hargreaves, A. (1992) ‘What’s worth fighting for in your school?’ pp. 119
[9] Fullan, M. and Hargreaves, A. (1992) ‘What’s worth fighting for in your school?’ pp. 119
[10] Fullan, M. and Hargreaves, A. (1992) ‘What’s worth fighting for in your school?’ pp. 139
[11] Lowe, H. (2006) ‘Preparing for leadership and management’ in Wood, D. (2006) ‘The New Professional’s Handbook’ pp. 107
[12] Lowe, H. (2006) ‘Preparing for leadership and management’ in Wood, D. (2006) ‘The New Professional’s Handbook’ pp. 107
[13] Harris, A. (2002) ‘Effective Leadership in Schools Facing Challenging Contexts’ pp. 23
MirandaNet Members can go to the Log on/off area to edit their own casestudies.
[Back]
