Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 224 (2016) 540 – 545

6th International Research Symposium in Service Management, IRSSM-6 2015, 11-15 August
2015, UiTM Sarawak, Kuching, Malaysia

Investigating the Relationship of Adaptive Leadership and

Leadership Capabilities on Leadership Effectiveness in Sarawak
Schools
Madline Jayana,*, Khuan Wai Bingb, Kamurudin Musac
a, b, c
UPSI, 53900 Tanjong Malim Perak Malaysia

Abstract

When the National Educational Blueprint was launched in 2013, it had explicitly articulated its intention to provide an education
system that would take into account the challenges of the 21st century. Adaptive leadership which originates from evolutionary
biological sciences perspective has made significant strides toward the understanding of leadership in Knowledge-Era as an
adaptive process in an unpredictable 21st century environment (Heifetz, 2004). This research was an attempt to take the first step
toward the integration of leadership competence with capability that might lead to anticipated leadership effectiveness leadership
in Sarawak schools. First, this paper defined the adaptive leadership (Heifetz, Karnia & Kramer, 2004). Second, it explained how
leadership capabilities (Hazy, 2004) could be used to compliment leadership competency in adaptive leadership to ensure
leadership effectiveness. Third, this paper explained the leadership effectiveness processes based on Vanderbilt assessment for
leadership effectiveness in schools (Porter, Polikoff, Goldring, M urphy, Elliot & M ay, 2010). Finally, it discussed the
implications of adaptive leadership and leadership capabilities on leadership effectiveness in Sarawak schools particularly.
©
© 2016
2016TheTheAuthors. Published
Authors. by by
Published Elsevier Ltd.Ltd.
Elsevier This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of Universiti TeknologiMARA
Peer-review under responsibility of the Universiti Teknologi M ARA Sarawak.
Sarawak

Keywords: adaptive leadership; leadership capabilities; leadership effectiveness; sequential equation modelling

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +6-084-644-296; fax:+6-084 -644- 295.

E-mail address: maxaurelius1@outlook.com

1877-0428 © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the Universiti Teknologi MARA Sarawak
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.05.433
 Madline Jayan et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 224 (2016) 540 – 545 541

1. Introduction

The 21st century poses a mu ltitude of unpredictable challenges against the existing knowledge and practices
(Goldstein, 2008). What are thought to be solvable may go hang -wire despite the desperation to dissolve some of the
challenges. The occurrences of several ill-fated events around the globe have turn things upside down and the design
of organisations has demanded many critical minds to address them adaptively and effectively (Marion, 2008).
First, the failure to address Katrina in 1996 crisis for examp le, was an examp le of the A merican Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) leadership failure to address critical issues by not adapting to the existing
resources of present time but instead channelled responses via red-taped pipeline (Stephenson and Bonabeau, 2007).
Second, after weeks of failure to trace the disappearance of Malaysia Airline Boeing 737-200 flight MH370 on
the 6th of Mac 2014 has made the Search and Rescue (SAR) efforts joint by 24 countries almost like a ‘wild-goose
chase’ as reported by Astro Awani on 28th March 2014. Evidently, what is thought technically solvable is actually
adaptively challenging (Heifetz, 2004).
Third, the new age challenges that derive fro m globalisation, technology exp losion and the implication of
terroris ms is the reality o f the g lobal need to adapt to current context (Barkema, Bau m & Mannix, 2002; Schneider,
2002).
Fourth, almost everything must adapt to everything else (Linsky and Lawrence, 2011).Th is simp ly means nothing
moves in isolation and any intervention into the system triggers consequences, intended or not, they need adaptation,
capability and effective responses (Linsky & Lawrence, 2011).
Drawing fro m the above mentioned scenarios, Malaysia herself is of no exception in facing the new age
challenges. In this sense, an educational institution emergency is, when it fails to deliver; a crisis is when it loses its
role. The question whether Malaysia’s educational institutions are in crisis or in an emergency, the answer lies in
how well Malaysia’s educational leaders adapt to their new environment and how fast they learn new leadership
capabilities in order to lead effectively.

1.1. Difficulties of adaptive leadership in schools

Schools treat adaptive challenges and technical challenges with no differences. However, Figure 1 illustrates
different types of solutions for technical problems, adaptive problems or challenges or the comb ination of both
technical and adaptive challenges for different types of situations.
Type I or what Heifet z (2004) describes as technical challenges may be very co mp lex and critically important but
they have known solutions that can be implemented by current know-how knowledge (Heifetz, Grashow & Linsky,
2009).

T able 1. Distinguishing technical challenges and adaptive challenges.

Situation Kind of challenge Problem definition Solution Locus of work
T ype I T echnical Clear Clear Authority
T ype II T echnical and adaptive Clear Requires learning Authority &stakeholders
T ype III Adaptive Requires learning Require learning Stakeholders
Source: Linsky & Lawrence, 2011; Heifetz, Grashow & Linsky, 2009; Heifetz et.al, 2004

As illustrated by Table 1 problems or challenges do not rigidly occur in fixed form as either solely as ‘technical’
or ‘adaptive’ but may co me mixed both with technical and adaptive elements intertwined (Linsky & Lawrence,
2011;Heifetz, Grashow & Linsky, 2009; Heifetz, 2004Type II refers to clear problems but unkno wn solution.
Type III adaptive challenges on the other hand, neither the problem nor the solution is exp licit (Heifet z, Grashow
& Linsky, 2009). In this sense, in order to make progress, it must go beyond authoritative expert ise and they are by
tolerating losses and generating new capabilit ies to thrive anew (Linsky & Lawrence, 2011;Heifet z, Grashow &
542 Madline Jayan et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 224 (2016) 540 – 545

Linsky, 2009; Heifetz et.al, 2004). In order to understand the problem and generate applicable solutions, learn ing
must occur (Heifetz, 1994).

1.2. Difficulties of leadership capabilities in schools

Similar to ‘leadership’ and ‘management’, concepts like ‘co mpetence’ and ‘capability’ remain poorly understood
with co mparat ively little shared meaning ev ident across educational organisation (Scott, Coates & Anderson, 2008).
Yet the term ‘co mpetence’ is used as fundamental to develop coherent strategy for succession planning and
education leadership selection, development, performance management and support (Scott, Coates & Anderson,
2008) despite the emerging need to recognizes ‘capability’ in current environment (Duignan, 2004).

1.3. Difficulties of leadership effectiveness in schools

Adair (1983) postulates that school leadership effectiveness involves juggling three overlapping do mains in an
organisation: group maintenance needs, tasks needs and individual needs. He goes on to suggest elements (or
process) in each of these leadership domains including defining tasks, planning, briefing (co mmun icating),
controlling, evaluating, motivating, o rganizing and setting examp le. Clark, Lott and Astuto (1984) highlight the
importance of planning, imp lementing and evaluating in school imp rovement process while others have suggested
similar lists of leadership processes.
This study adapts six key processes as proposed by Vanderbilt Ass essment of Leadership in Education ((Murphy,
Go ldring, Cravens, Elliot & Porter, 2011). The six key processes outline the ‘how’ leadership effectiveness can be
achieved in schools (Goldring, Porter, et. al. 2009).

1.4. Research questions

1. Is there any significant correlat ion between adaptive leadership and leadership capabilit ies in Sarawak
school?
2. Is there any significant relat ionship between adaptive leadership and leadership effectiveness in Sarawak’s
schools?
3. Is there any significant relationship between leadership capabilities and leadership effectiveness in
Sarawak’s schools?
4. Does the research measurement instrument validate the relat ionship between adaptive leadership and
leadership capabilities in Sarawak schools?
5. Does the research measurement instrument validate the relationship between leadership capabilit ies and
leadership effectiveness in Sarawak’s schools?

2. Research method

The research design for this study is what Hair, Black, Babin & Anderson (2014) termed as mult ivariate data
analysis. The multivariate analysis technique is chosen for the fact that they enable organisations create knowledge
(Hair, Black, Babin & Anderson, 2014) and thereby it is expected to provide similar impact on this study.
This study proposes that there is a correlat ion between adaptive leadership and leadership capabilities. This study
also proposes that there are significant relat ionships between adaptive leadership with leaders’ effectiveness and also
between leadership capabilities with leaders’ effectiveness as shown in Figure 1.
 Madline Jayan et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 224 (2016) 540 – 545 543

2.1. Survey-based research

A traditional survey-based quantitative data collection will be used in this study. The survey questionnaire will be
administered via the online service. The selection of online survey administering is due to the facts that s ince the
samples are working individuals. Hence, limitations in term of time, focus and willingness are expected.

2.2. Research instruments

The research instrument for this study consists of three main scales namely, adaptive leadership scale, leadership
capabilities scale and leadership effectiveness scale which are adapted from other studies.

2.3. Pilot test

In order to ensure the reliability and validity of the study research instrument pilot test will be conducted
(Cresswell, 2005). The test will include the test of the statements, appropriateness of terminology and syntax,
questionnaire sequencing, comp letion time and response rate (Ticehurst & Veal, 2000). The study instrument will
undergo several testing procedures before fully administered to the intended samp le as proposed by Churchill,
(1995).

2.4. Research sample characteristics

T able 2. Research sample.

School T ype of Organisation Leader Senior Assistants Subordinates
SMK Julau 2 School 1 3 30
SMK Julau School 1 3 30
SMK Pakan School 1 3 30
SMK Pusa School 1 3 30
SMK Kabong School 1 3 30
SMK St. Augustine School 1 3 30
SMK DP Kedit School 1 3 30
SMK Ulu Layar School 1 3 30
SMK Saratok School 1 3 30
SMK Beladin School 1 3 30
T otal 10 30 300

2.5. Measuring

T able 3. Summary of research questionnaire.

Part Contents
Part 1 Respondent demographic profile
Part 2 Adaptive leadership - based on Adaptive leadership Competency Profile is adapted from Heifetz (2004).
Part 3 Leadership capabilities - based on leadership theories for 21st century leadership adapted from Hazy (2004).
Part 4 Leadership effectiveness - based on Vanderbilt Leadership Assessment is adapted from Porter, Polikoff,
Goldring, Murphy, Elliot and May (2010).
544 Madline Jayan et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 224 (2016) 540 – 545

2.6. Data analysis

Two statistical techniques will be used to analyse research data. The first statistical technique is the descriptive
statistical technique that includes means, standard deviations and frequencies. The second statistical technique is the
structural equation modelling (SEM ) that includes Exp loratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Con firmatory Factor
Analysis (CFA).

2.6.1. SEM procedures

T able 4. Summary of SEM procedures

Stage Description
Stage 1 Defining individual constructs is to determine which item to be used as measured variables.
Developing the overall measurement model is to measured variables with constructs and draw a path
Stage 2
diagram for the measurement model.
Designing a study to produce empirical results is to evaluate the adequacy of the sample size, select
Stage 3
estimation method and the missing data approach.
Stage 4 Assessing measurement model validity is to assess GOF and construct validity of measurement model.
Stage 5 Specify structural model is to convert measurement model to structure model.
Assess structure model validity is to assess GOF, significance, direction and size of structural
Stage 6
parameter estimates.

2.6.2. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)

Exp loratory Factor Analysis refers to an interdependent technique whose primary purpose is to define the
underlying structure among variables in the analysis.

2.6.3. Confirmatory Factor Analysis

Confirmatory Factor Analysis refers to the way to test how all measured variables represent a s maller nu mber of
constructs.

2.6.4. Good-of Fit

Hair, Black, Babin and Anderson (2014) suggests that model fit co mpa res the theory to reality. It is done by
assessing the similarity of the estimated covariance matrix (theory) to observed covariance matrix (reality). In a
perfect research the observed and the estimated matrices would be the same (Hair, Black, Babin and Anderson,
2014). The closer the value of the two matrices are to each other, the better the model is said to be fit (Hair, Black,
Babin & Anderson, 2014).

2.6.5. Ethical consideration

Participation in this study is voluntary and subjects will not be exposed to any unreasonable discomforts, risks or
violations of hu man rights. An application of approval will be submitted to concerned authorities as described
earlier in this chapter. A letter of info rmed consent will be signed by participating schools as a st atement of agreeing
to the survey and data collection procedures.
 Madline Jayan et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 224 (2016) 540 – 545 545

Adaptive Leadership
Leadership
Effectiveness

Leadership Capabilities

Fig. 1. Research path diagram.

3. Reflection: practical implications and limitations

It is hope that this study may provide an opening through which adaptive leadership and leadership capabilities
can find real-world applicat ion in terms of leadership effect iveness in Sarawak schools. Causal relationship will be
established and an evaluation of relationship of adaptive leadership and leadership capabilities on leadership
effectiveness in Sarawak schools may possibly will be revealed. If such a relationship is observed, leadership
practitioners in Sarawak schools may take the first step forward effectively impacting adaptive leadership and
leadership capabilit ies. Sarawak school leadership effectiveness is ultimately depends upon a mult itude of other
factors beyond adaptive leadership and leadership capabilities but this study may shed light on leadership fits the
challenges of the 21st century.

References

Adair, J. (1983). Effective Leadership. Hants. England: Gower Publishing.

Barkema, H. G., Baum, J.A., & Mannix, E.A. (2002). Management challenges in new time. Academy of Management Journal, 45(5), 916-930
Churchill, G.A. (1995). Marketing Research Methodology Foundation (6 thed.). Orlando, Florida: The Dryden Press
Clark, D. L., Lotto, L. S., & Astuto, T. (1989). Effective schools and school improvement: A comparative analysis of two lines of inquiry.
Educational Administration Quaterly, 30, 41-68.
Clark, D. L., Lotto, L. S., & McCarthy, M. (1980). Why do some urban schools succeed? Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa.
Cresswell, J.W. (2005). Educational research: Planning, Conducting and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research (22 nd ed.). NJ:
Merrill Prentice Hall.
Duignan, P. (2004). Forming Capable Leaders: From Competencies to Capabilities. New Zealand Journal of Educational Leadership, 19(2), 5-
13.
Goldstein, J. A. (2008). A conceptual foundations of complexity science: Development and main constructs, Complexity Leadership, Part.1:
Conceptual Foundations. Information Age Publishing.
Hair, J. F, Black, W. C, Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2014). Multivariate Data Analysis., Edinburg Gate, Harlow Essex: Pearson Education
Limited.
Hazy, J. K., 2004. Leadership in Complex Systems: Meta-Level Information Processing Capabilities that Bias Exploration and Exploitation. The
George Washington University.
Heifetz, R. A. (1994). Leadership without easy answer: Cambridge Harvard University Press.
Heifetz, R. A., Kania, J.V., & Kramer, M.R., (2004), “Leading Boldly”, Stanford Social Innovation Review, .22(3), 20-32.
Heifetz, R. A., Grashow, A., Linsky, M., (2009). The Practice of Adaptive Leadership: Tools and Tactics for Changing Your Organization and
the World. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business Press.
Linsky, M., & Lawrence, J., (2011). Adaptive Challenges for School Leadership. Available at http://www.sagepub.com/upm-data/39881-
970857023964.pdf
Marion, R. (2008). Complexity Theory for organisations and organisational leadership. Complexity Leadership, Part 1: Conceptual foundations.
Charlotte, North Carolina: Information Age Publishing.
www.infoagepub.com
Porter, A. C., Polikoff, M.S., Goldring, Ellen. B., Murphy, J., Elliot, S.N., & May, H. (2010). Investigating the validity and reliability of the
Vanderbilt Assessment of Leadership in Education. The Elementary School Journal, 111(2), 314-335.
Stephenson, J. (1992). Capability and quality in higher education. In J. Stephenson & S. Weil (Eds.), Quality in Learning. London: Kogan Page.