Article

Educational Management
Administration & Leadership
Leadership emergence and 2022, Vol. 50(4) 672–693
ª The Author(s) 2020

development: Organizations Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1741143220940324
shaping leading in early journals.sagepub.com/home/ema

childhood education

Leanne Gibbs

Abstract
Early childhood education (ECE) effects positive outcomes for children, but outcomes depend
upon the quality of the program with which children engage. Program quality is positively influ-
enced by effective leadership; yet we do not fully understand how effective leadership emerges and
develops within ECE sites. This lack of knowledge potentially compromises the development of
effective leadership and, subsequently, a child’s right to high-quality ECE. This paper, therefore,
contributes to the field of research on ECE leadership development by describing a qualitative
Australian study that investigated leadership cultivation. The mini-ethnographic case study
examined the emergence and development of leadership in three high-quality, diversely governed
ECE settings. Findings of the study suggest the practice of leading is foundational for positional
leadership roles and is enabled by the practice architectures of an organization. Practice archi-
tectures comprise cultural-discursive, material-economic and social-political arrangements.
Arrangements, found within organizations, included cultures of trust, use of professional knowl-
edge and language, collaborative development of philosophy, democratic allocation of resources,
sharing of power and openness to activism, disruption and creativity. Such arrangements play an
important role in the emergence and development of leading and therefore offer organizations
alternative ways to consider leadership cultivation.

Keywords
Leadership, emergence, leadership development, practice architectures, mini-ethnographic case
study, early childhood education

Introduction
According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2017), early child-
hood education (ECE) lays the foundations for children’s skill development, learning and well-
being. Furthermore, high-quality ECE enhances the impact on children’s intellectual, emotional

Corresponding author:
Leanne Gibbs, Charles Sturt University, School of Teacher Education, Panorama Ave, Bathurst, New South Wales 2795,
Australia.
Email: lgibbs@csu.edu.au
Gibbs: Leadership emergence and development 673

and life trajectories, and therefore plays an important role in civil societies (Heckman, 2011; Sylva
et al, 2010; The Front Project, 2019). Researchers argue that the effectiveness of an ECE program
is shaped by leadership (Coleman et al., 2016; Siraj-Blatchford and Manni, 2007; Waniganayake
et al., 2017). Despite this influence, there is a paucity of research on leadership development within
ECE sites (Mistry and Sood, 2012; Stamopoulos and Barblett, 2018). In response to this lack of
research, a study of the emergence and development of leadership in ECE organizations was
carried out and is described in this paper. The study of emerging and positional leadership inves-
tigated the organizational arrangements that create the conditions for leadership development and
explored the implications and opportunities for ECE sites.
To begin, the context for leading in ECE in Australia is outlined. The international research on
effective leadership and development of leadership is then examined. The paper goes on to describe the
study that investigated the phenomena of the emergence and development of leadership and the
enabling organizational practices or ‘arrangements’ (as per Kemmis et al., 2014 and described below)
on three diversely governed Australian early childhood education sites. The mini-ethnographic case
study used methods that were designed to capture the unique nature of emergence and development of
the practice of leading (Raelin, 2019; Wilkinson, 2017). The theoretical perspective of ‘leading as
practice’ informed the framing and implementation of the study. This theoretical perspective is defined
by a fundamental belief that leadership occurs as practice rather than as a replicable set of traits and
characteristics (Raelin, 2016). Furthermore, for this study, leading was conceptualized as a practice
occurring as a relational activity within a collective; a dynamic activity that can be undertaken by
anyone and is not limited to those in formal leadership roles (Wilkinson et al., 2010). This conceptua-
lization accommodates both emerging and positional leaders and their practices.
The research study found that practices of effective leadership were fostered and shaped by the
organizational arrangements within ECE sites. The term ‘arrangements’ refers to the conditions
that shape the unfolding practices of leadership. According to Kemmis et al. (2014), there are three
kinds of arrangements found within a site: the cultural-discursive (evident in culture and lan-
guage); the material-economic (evident in the physical spaces and material resources); and the
social-political arrangements (evident in relationships and power). At the sites investigated in this
study, the arrangements created the conditions for the development of effective leading and
leadership. To explore the findings and implications for organizations, the context for the enact-
ment of leadership in Australian ECE is first described.

Leading in Australian ECE

Alchin et al. (2019) note that leadership in Australian ECE is enacted in an environment of constant
change in policy and funding investment, with complicated market models and human resource
regimes. In this complex environment, leaders often assume positional leadership roles reluctantly.
Krieg et al. (2014) assert that this reluctance is partly due to hierarchical and controlling con-
ceptualizations of leadership that do not align with educators’ principles. Conversely, educators
may believe they lack influence if they do not hold a formal leadership title (Diamond, 2014).
When educators do assume formal positions, often due to unexpected or unplanned personnel
changes, they may lack adequate knowledge to enact the complex role with confidence. The
professional requirement for independent decision may conflict with strict adherence to compli-
ance (Sims et al., 2018). Additionally, leaders may not undertake critical reflection to adequately
theorize their leadership and, according to Coleman et al. (2016), this lack of reflection could
compromise effective leadership practice.
674 Educational Management Administration & Leadership 50(4)

Effective leadership and governance practices are identified within Quality Area 7 of the Aus-
tralian, evidence-based, assessable National Quality Standards (Australian Children’s Education and
Care Quality Authority, 2016). Quality Area 7: Leadership and Governance includes practices of
collective vision-building, goal-sharing, good communication and the building of a professional
learning community. This standard reflects international research on leadership practices within
effective ECE sites. Leadership practices that contribute to effective ECE sites were identified by
researchers in two key international studies. The Effective Leadership in Early Years Study (ELEYS)
Siraj-Blatchford and Manni (2007), and the Coleman et al. (2016) study of 25 Sure Start centres in
the United Kingdom, both found that contextual literacy (an astute ‘reading’ of situations and
people), a commitment to collaboration, and a dedication to children’s learning outcomes were
characteristic of leadership within effective early childhood sites. A clear vision for child and family
outcomes, using evidence to drive improvements; using business skills strategically; facilitating open
communication; embracing integrated working; motivating and empowering staff; and being com-
mitted to their own learning and development were also identified as markers of effective leadership
(Coleman et al., 2016). Alchin et al. (2019) note that such an extensive range of practices, to be
enacted by positional leaders, makes the integration of organizational and pedagogical leadership
increasingly unachievable in the complex landscape of an Australian ECE site.
Despite the increasing demands upon positional roles in ECE and an improved understanding of
what makes leadership effective, there is an absence of systemic support for leadership develop-
ment in Australia. For instance, there is no mandated preparation for the role of positional lead-
ership within Australian early childhood settings; leadership development is contingent upon an
organization’s priorities and resources (Gibbs, 2019a). Torii et al. (2017) note this lack of support
for leadership development represents a lost opportunity for the greater achievement of high-
quality education and care in Australia. One potential reason for the lack of mandated preparation
and support for leadership is that, whilst we know what makes effective leadership, less is known
about how leadership develops within ECE sites. Indeed, research on leadership emergence and
cultivation in ECE is a developing field, as is explored below.

Research examining the emergence and development of leading and

leadership in ECE
Whilst effective leadership has the capacity to influence ECE quality, individuals and organiza-
tions do not generally prioritize leadership development, and challenges persist (Gibbs, 2019a). A
lack of adequate leadership cultivation in ECE was identified as early as 1993 by Kagan and
Bowen (in Ebbeck and Waniganayake, 2003). In 2003, Ebbeck and Waniganayake cited obstacles
to leadership development in ECE as institutional bias, lack of recognition, poor training, personal
attributes and ambivalence towards power. In 2009, the Australian National Early Childhood
Strategy identified leadership development as foundational to high-quality ECE and encouraged
organizations to ‘grow and support leaders’ (Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality
Authority, 2017b). Inertia on the agenda of leadership preparation, however, continued. Indeed, in
2011, the Australian Productivity Commission’s investigation into future workforce requirements
identified the lack of professional development for leadership and governance to enhance the
quality of ECE settings and to build the capability of the workforce (Productivity Commission,
2011). Researchers continue to argue that a lack of broad-ranging, structured and evidence-
informed approaches to development inhibits the establishment of sustainable leadership in ECE
(Nuttall., 2016; Torii et al., 2017; Waniganayake and Stipanovic, 2016).
Gibbs: Leadership emergence and development 675

Recent studies on leadership in ECE have focused on the development of individual positional
leaders’ knowledge and characteristics. For example, an Australian study by Stamopoulos (2015)
developed an approach to leadership development though the Professional Learning Action Model
(PLAR). The model, comprising professional development days, action research, action learning and
networking, resulted in participants’ improved perceptions of individual leadership strength (Stamo-
poulos, 2015). Additionally, the development of individuals’ leadership capacity through reflective
inquiry was explored in two research studies. The first study analysed the influence of oral inquiry on
leadership development (Nicholson and Kroll, 2015). The case study research found that skills and
dispositions were strengthened, through reflection, to navigate complex dilemmas in daily practice.
The second qualitative study, with three ECE leaders, used purposive sampling of autobiographical
accounts to analyse leader reflections (Layen, 2015). Layen concluded that critical reflection,
through autobiographical documentation, had a constructive impact on the participants’ view of
themselves as leaders. Reflective inquiry continues to be proposed as a strategy to develop critical
awareness for leadership development (Aubrey, 2019). The capacity of reflective inquiry as a path-
way for development of effective leadership, however, is unconfirmed.
Some researchers maintain that leadership preparation pathways should be embedded in formal
study at undergraduate and postgraduate level within the university system (Diamond, 2014;
Waniganayake and Stipanovic, 2016). They argue that a more complete approach to the develop-
ment of learning pathways is needed for leadership to advance the profession. Current leadership
development initiatives mostly target positional leaders (Ryder et al., 2011; Stamopoulos, 2015;
Talan et al., 2014); however, the conceptual frame is beginning to broaden. For example, Rodd
(2012) and Vijayadevar et al. (2019) highlight the importance of developing people who do not
formally occupy leadership positions in ECE. They believe all educators within the profession
should be encouraged to engage in the discourse on leading and to access opportunities that build
and develop leadership.
Researchers also maintain that leadership development initiatives and research must be set
within a systems approach (Nuttall, 2016) and must consider the unique context and complexity
of ECE settings, the government policy context, the workforce profile and the need for universal
development of leadership (Productivity Commission, 2011; Rodd, 2012; Waniganayake and
Stipanovic, 2016). Researchers continue to note that development cannot occur as an isolated
program but must be set within an ecology of social systems within an organization (Mistry and
Sood, 2012; Waniganayake et al., 2015; Zinsser et al., 2016). Despite these arguments, the devel-
opment of leadership as an organizational practice has remained largely unexplored. This review of
the research therefore highlighted an opportunity to study the emergence of leadership and how
organizational arrangements develop leadership within ECE sites. Two primary research questions
were consequently posed for the study:

What dispositions (knowledge, skills, and values) underpin leading and leadership?
How do organizational arrangements enable and constrain the emergence and development of leading
and leadership within exemplary early childhood settings?

Theoretical framing for the study

Complexity leadership theory and the theory of practice architectures provided the theoretical
frames for the study. Together, the theories account for the complexity of ECE leadership and
676 Educational Management Administration & Leadership 50(4)

maintain a strong link with practice. Both theories are concerned with emergence, self-
organization in complex environments, universal leadership development and interdependence
of practices (Uhl-Bien and Arena, 2017; Wilkinson and Kemmis, 2015). The coalescence of the
theories enriched the research study by providing a conceptual landscape on which to constantly
reflect. (Hall, 1999).
Complexity leadership theory, as the ontological frame for the study, provided a contemporary
framework for leading and leadership in the complex landscape of ECE sites (Uhl-Bien and Arena,
2017; Gibbs, Wong and Press, 2019b). The theory conceptualizes leadership as an emergent and
developing practice in an environment that is constantly changing (Lichtenstein et al., 2006; Uhl-
Bien and Marion, 2011). Complexity leadership theory rejects individual power and control in order
to build collective leadership. The model of complexity leadership theory, identified for this study
and proposed by Uhl-Bien et al. (2007), is built around three functions. These functions, common to
ECE organizations, are: (1) administrative leadership – accounting for compliance and administra-
tion; (2) adaptive leadership – influencing through collective dynamics; and (3) enabling leadership –
creating the structural conditions for creativity and innovation (Marion and Gonzales, 2013).
The Theory of Practice Architectures (TPA), interwoven with complexity leadership theory,
served as the data collection and analytical frame. As a site-based theory, TPA is a theoretical and
analytical resource for examining professional practice (Mahon et al., 2017). It is both a lens and a
framework to examine ‘what practices are; how practices happen; how they are shaped, con-
strained and enabled; and what practices do’ (Mahon et al., 2017: 17). The theory helps to
illuminate the arrangements on each site that shape the practice of leading. These arrangements
are identified as the cultural-discursive (evident in culture and language), material-economic
(evident in physical spaces and material resources), and social-political (evident in relationships
and power) arrangements. The theory also assists in understanding how governance practices may
influence the practices of leading.

Study design
Research questions, theory and the need for an in-depth analysis of organizational arrangements
guided the study design. Mini-ethnographic case study methodology (Fusch and Ness, 2017) was
selected to enable the integration of ethnography and case study methods. Whilst the period for
ethnographic observation is shortened in this methodology, the in-depth examination of individual
sites as cases facilitates a fine-grained analysis. The fine-grained analysis, in this study, aimed to
illuminate the dispositions of leaders evident in their practices, and then the organizational
arrangements within the site that shaped those practices.
Methods were designed to capture the practices of leading, along with insights into leader
dispositions and the organizational arrangements that made emergence and development of lead-
ership possible. Research methods were ‘narrative, ethnographic, aesthetic and multi-modal . . . [to]
capture concurrent collective and dialogical social practices’ (Raelin, 2019: 1) in accordance with a
study of practices. Methods for data collection included field observations and discussions,
unstructured interviews, Dialogic Cafés (described below) and document analysis. Observations
were guided by a table that was developed after an extensive review of the literature on effective
leadership practices (Table 1). The table was a map that integrated complexity leadership theory
(Hazy and Uhl-Bien, 2015; Marion and Gonzales, 2013) with observable ‘effective’ leadership
practices drawn from empirical research by Siraj-Blatchford and Manni (2007) and Coleman et al.
(2016), as well as ‘quality’ measures for leadership and governance from the Australian National
 Table 1. Tool for observation of practices that support the emergence and development of leadership. The tool was developed with reference to Australian
Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority, 2017a; Coleman et al., 2016; Hazy, 2015; Kemmis et al., 2014b; Marion and Gonzales, 2013; Siraj-Blatchford and
Manni, 2007. Note this was the original table used for ethnographic observations and research questions were subsequently refined.
Could be seen in practices (but are not limited to)

Australian Children’s Education

Could be present in Siraj-Blatchford and and Care Quality Authority
Research questions arrangements of the Manni (2007) Coleman et al. (2016) (2016) Hazy and Uhl-Bien (2015)

What dispositions Cultural-discursive Communicate well Contextual literacy The induction of educators, Encourage openness to surprises to
(knowledge, skills, and Material-economic Contextual literacy Embracing integrated coordinators and staff learn/do not punish failure
values) underpin leading Social-political Critical reflection working members
and leadership? Enabling leadership (as Commitment to Engaging responsively Commitment to continuous Provide clear roles, task-specific
defined by Marion ongoing Committed to own improvement training, and follow-up on
and Gonzales professional and others’ Performance of educators, expected activities
(2013)) development learning coordinators and staff
Builds team culture Motivating and members is evaluated, and
Encourages and builds coaching staff individual development plans
community are in place
partnership
Uses evidence to
drive improvement
and outcomes

How do organizational Enabling leadership (as Ensure shared Engaging responsively Communicate well Articulate an idealized future with
arrangements enable and defined by Marion understandings, shared values and aspirations
constrain the emergence and Gonzales meanings and goals Ask each person to invest their
and development of (2013)) Communicate well energy and resources in the
leading and leadership organization
within exemplary early Clarify in-group/out-group
childhood settings? boundaries perhaps by using ‘us’
versus ‘them’ language

(continued)

677
678
Table 1. (continued)
Research questions
May include:
Organizational language and
communication
Organizational resources
networks of professional
relationships and
communication
Could be seen in practices (but are not limited to)
Australian Children’s Education
Could be present in Siraj-Blatchford and and Care Quality Authority
arrangements of the Manni (2007) Coleman et al. (2016) (2016) Hazy and Uhl-Bien (2015)
Administrative Builds learning Motivating staff Effectively documented policies Make people feel they are part of
leadership (as community and procedures something valued and significant
defined by Marion Builds team culture Uses business skills Appropriate governance Use resource allocation authority to
and Gonzales strategically arrangements ‘kill’ dead-end projects or wasteful
(2013)) Administrative systems are activities
established and maintained Establish specific task targets,
dependencies and deliverables
Provide resources and space to try
new things and new directions
Encourage broad adoption of
innovations that have been vetted
Build trust that individuals will have
access to shared resources
Adaptive leadership Identify and articulate Community building. Initiate and
(as defined by a collective vision Communicate well perform inclusion rituals like
Marion and Communicate well Clear vision Commitment to ongoing group celebrations. Bring diverse
Gonzales (2013)) professional development experiences and perspectives
Understanding of ECE Encourage critical reflection together and support differences
Statement of philosophy of opinion
Form small teams and rotate
membership often to break-up
stale thinking
Initiate and perform inclusion rituals
like group celebrations
Gibbs: Leadership emergence and development 679

Quality Standards (Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority, 2016). Using the
table, the practices of all educators were observed, not just the practices of those educators who
held positional leadership roles
Participants’ ‘effective’ practices of leading were identified using the table. Field notes then
described leadership enactment in detail and added rich descriptions of interactions. For example, a
mentoring exchange that took place in the outdoor playground was observed and documented.
Unstructured interviews captured further insights into the dispositions and practices of individuals’
leading within the collective of educators. The Dialogic Café was subsequently used to illuminate
more about the organizational practices and the perceptions of those individuals who work within
the sites. The Dialogic Café is a semi-structured conversation that creates knowledge through
collaborative inquiry (Fouché and Light, 2011; Jorgenson and Steier, 2013). This method, as a
participant-led focus group, reveals new ideas and questions for analysis and an in-depth explo-
ration of the research questions. In the Dialogic Café, participants are provoked to pose their own
questions. The questions form a basis for critical dialogue and emerging themes. Document
analysis was used to cross-check the data, and documents included communications, policy,
meeting agendas, role descriptions, assessment and rating reports, quality improvement plans and
professional development plans.
Ethics approval for this study was received from the Charles Sturt University Human Research
Ethics Committee. All potential participants received information detailing the purpose of the
study and the procedure for engagement. The researcher met with staff teams on each site to
discuss the values driving the research project and the context for participation. It was important
that participants understood this was a study of leadership emergence and development and that
through their involvement, self-identity could change, and power might shift within their places of
work. Written informed consent was subsequently received from participating educators, centre
directors and senior leadership teams prior to the study commencement.

Participants
The study size was guided by the minimum accepted size of an ethnographic study (Creswell and
Poth, 2017; Mason, 2010) and the anticipated point of saturation where no new themes are revealed
through analysis (Fusch and Ness, 2015; Mac Naughton, Rolfe, Siraj-Blatchford, 2001). Study
sites were centre-based long daycare (for children birth to six years) or pre-school (for children
three to six years) and were recruited for the following three reasons. Firstly, a site’s participation
was dependent upon the achievement of a National Quality Standard rating of Exceeding in all
elements of all quality areas, indicating that the highest level of quality had been achieved within
the legislated accreditation system1 (Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority,
2017c). Secondly, each site was licensed for between 40 children and 60 children, indicating that a
similar level of complexity was experienced by educators and leaders. Thirdly, sites were chosen to
represent diversity in governance arrangements typical of ECE in Australia (not-for-profit: gov-
ernment, board, parent managed; for-profit: individual, franchise, corporate). Sites therefore
included not-for-profit (community and local government) and for-profit (private owner franchi-
see) governance models.
The diversity in governance models effected variations in sites’ policy and procedures for
operation, receipt and allocation of funding and fiscal resources, resources for leadership devel-
opment and protocols for decision making (Waniganayake et al., 2017). These activities, influ-
enced by management structures, contributed to some conditions for leadership development, as
680 Educational Management Administration & Leadership 50(4)

did customary governance arrangements within all sites, compliance with all laws, regulations and
funding policy. All ECE sites, regardless of the governance model, were licensed by their state
government authority and operated within state and national laws. On each site, organizational
management teams supported ECE program improvement for the achievement of the National
Quality Standards. A total of 28 individuals on the three ECE sites participated in the study, and 24
participants subsequently took part in interviews. Details of participant qualifications, role and
leadership designations, years of experience and years of working within the sites are summarized
in Table 2. Table 2 appears after the brief description of individual sites below.
The two long daycare sites and one pre-school site were located in two Australian cities. A
summary of the participating sites2 and their governance structures follows.

Robson Early Childhood Education Centre

Robson Early Childhood Education Centre is a community-based long daycare centre in a large
Australian regional city. The centre is one of 30 services of an incorporated association, with a long
history of operation. A voluntary board of directors is responsible for the functions, roles, duties
and obligations of organizational governance. The centre is licensed for 40 children from birth to
five years.

Discovery Early Learning Centre

Discovery Early Learning Centre is a privately owned centre in an inner-city suburb of a large
Australian city. The centre is one of 30 services that are privately owned and operated by fran-
chisees. The ECE franchise was established 20 years ago. In this governance model, individual
franchisees take responsibility for the functions, roles, duties and obligations of organizational
governance. The centre is licensed for 60 children from birth to five years.

Rondure Pre-school
Rondure is a municipal managed pre-school in a suburb of a large Australian city. The centre is one
of 15 services operated by the local government for the last 35 years. The general manager is
responsible for the functions, roles, duties and obligations of organizational governance and
delegates these activities to local government officers. The centre is licensed for 54 children from
three to five years.

Data collection
Data collection took place over six days within each of the three sites (18 days total). Emerging and
positional leaders were identified by their effective practices of leading, according to the above-
mentioned observation tool and reflective annotations. Subsequent field discussions led into unstruc-
tured interviews that ran for a period of 45–60 minutes. Emergent questions in interviews were
guided by study questions and the TPA and were informed by observations and field notes. Each
participant was interviewed once; however, clarifying follow-up interviews were conducted with
three positional leaders. Interviews were audio-recorded and professionally transcribed. All study
participants were invited to one of two Dialogic Cafés. The conversations of the Dialogic Cafés were
documented by participants on large pieces of paper and these were subsequently used for analysis.
 Table 2. Participant summary.

Yrs Yrs within

Site Participant Role Positional Emerging Qualifications Experience site

Robson Early Childhood Education 1 Educator X Certificate III 7 1

Centre 2 Educator X Certificate III 2 2
3 Educator X Diploma 4 2
4 Educator X Diploma/ B Ed (ECE/UG) 4 2
5 Educator/ Room X Diploma 12 3
Leader
6 Educator/ Room X Diploma 20 5
Leader
7 ECT/ Educational X Early Childhood Teacher 10 1
leader
8 Centre director X Diploma/Management Dip 15 2
9 Manager X B Ed (ECE) 25 10
10 Manager X B Ed (ECE) Grad Dip 25 20
11 CEO X B Ed (ECE) 40 30
Discovery Early Learning Centre 12 Educator X Cert III 4 3
13 Educator X Cert III/ B Ed Prim (UG) 6 2
14 Teacher X B Ed (ECE) (UG) 3 >1
15 Educator/ Room X Diploma 5 2
leader
16 ECT/ Outdoor leader X B Ed (ECE) 8 3
17 ECT/ Educational X B Ed (ECE)/ Fine Arts 10 4
leader
18 Centre director X Cert III/ B Sports 6 5
Management
19 CEO X B Ed (ECE) 25 20
Rondure Pre-school 20 Educator X Certificate III 24 10
21 Educator X Diploma 28 16
22 Early Childhood X B Ed (ECE) 20 6
Teacher
23 Centre director X B Ed (ECE) 26 4
24 Manager X B Ed (ECE) 30 10
Total 24 14 10

681
682 Educational Management Administration & Leadership 50(4)

Analysis
Analysis of data occurred in two phases using the TPA as a framework. The practices of leading
and the organizational arrangements that enabled and constrained the emergence and development
of leadership on each site were examined (Kemmis et al., 2014). Emerging and positional leaders
were initially identified on each ECE site using the observation tool (Table 1). Follow-up field
notes and unstructured interviews augmented data on the observed practices of leading embodied
in leaders’ dispositions. According to the theory, dispositions comprise knowledge, skills and
values (Kemmis et al., 2014). Specifically, knowledge is evident in the ways or practices of saying
things. Skills and capabilities are evident in ways or practices of acting. Values are evident in the
ways or practices of relating (Kemmis et al., 2014). In phase one of the analysis the NVivo
software program was used to code the data under the areas of knowledge, skills and values.
Coding rigour was strengthened by using a codebook and guiding materials developed specifically
for TPA analysis in ECE.3
At the second stage of analysis, a ‘table of invention’ (see Figure 1) was completed for each site
and used to analyse unstructured interviews, Dialogic Cafés and documents. The table of invention
is an interpretive tool that includes a ‘set of topics or viewing platforms’ (Kemmis et al., 2014: 224)
to consider practices and the arrangements that make practices possible. This particular table of
invention reflects the site of ECE. The table, used to analyse each ‘case’, considers the traditions
and landscapes of sites where practices happen, the practices of leading, dispositions of leaders and
the cultural-discursive, material-economic and social-political arrangements that enable and con-
strain practices.

Findings
The findings of the research are described here in two parts. First, the practices of leading,
exemplified in the emerging and positional leaders’ dispositions, are identified and described.
Then the organizational arrangements that enabled and constrained those practices and disposi-
tions are examined.

The practices of leading

The research study found that emerging and positional leaders were practising effective leadership
in their daily work context. Effective leadership practices that were common to all sites are
described below as dispositions (that is, knowledge, skills and values), according to the TPA
(Kemmis et al., 2014).

Knowledge
On each site, all emerging and positional leaders’ decision making and language was informed by
professional knowledge on children’s development and the mandated policy documents for stan-
dards and learning frameworks (Department of Education Employment and Workplace Relations,
2009). Emerging leaders took risks in pedagogical decision making and in the use of financial
resources (for example; to include a child whose additional needs did not fit the funding guide-
lines). Their risk taking was informed, however, by professional knowledge of regulations and
policy. On the sites, all leaders regularly discussed the quality standards and the importance of
compliance with laws and regulations. Emerging and positional leaders actively updated their
Gibbs: Leadership emergence and development 683

Figure 1. Sample table of invention.

knowledge of quality standards. They participated in professional development to enrich their

practice and subsequently for high achievement in the assessment of National Quality Standards.

Skills
Emerging and positional leaders demonstrated confidence in their decision making and in con-
tributing to meetings. Regardless of their qualifications and experience, emerging leaders pre-
sented ideas and led conversations in team meetings. They raised innovative solutions and
challenged accepted ways of operating to create change. For example, Discovery Early Learning
Centre and Rondure Pre-school were compelled to change physical environments due to variations
684 Educational Management Administration & Leadership 50(4)

in ages and inclusion needs of the children. Significant changes to standard set-ups were under-
taken in both sites with ideas initiated by emerging leaders. When emerging leaders were offered
the opportunity to take part in collaborative work, they embraced opportunities to participate
equally. The practices of emerging and positional leaders on each site contributed to the effec-
tiveness of the program for children, families and colleagues. The externally assessed measures of
quality, for site operation and education, were upheld through the practices of empirically deter-
mined leadership (Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority, 2017b; Coleman
et al., 2016; Siraj-Blatchford and Manni, 2007). Leaders demonstrated contextual literacy through
their ability to read the situation and take account of the people involved. They therefore worked
confidently within the dynamic, constantly evolving nature of the organization (Siraj-Blatchford
and Manni, 2007).

Values
Emerging and positional leaders’ values underpinned their actions. Throughout each site emerging
and positional leaders consistently talked of vision and philosophy as foundational to practices of
leading. They expressed a personal alignment with philosophical principles of the ECE organiza-
tion. Innovation, change and disruption to standard operation were initiated by emerging and
positional leaders. They were creative in approaches to problem solving; for example increasing
children’s access to the outdoors with an excursion ‘pedagogy’ that included all ages, from babies
to five-year-olds. Personal values relating to social justice and activism were enacted in, for
example, demands for appropriate educator remuneration, and enabling children’s access to
high-quality ECE.
Practices of emerging and positional leaders, expressed as dispositions, contributed to the
collective achievement of high-quality ECE. Subsequent data analysis found that the practices
of leading exemplified in the dispositions described above were enabled and constrained by the
cultural-discursive, material-economic and social-political arrangements within each ECE site.
The paper now goes on to describe these arrangements.

Organizational arrangements
Cultural-discursive arrangements
Cultural-discursive arrangements, common to each ECE site, appeared to create the conditions for
emergence and development of leadership on each site. These organizational arrangements com-
prised cultures of trust, the use of professional knowledge and language, and development of
philosophy and values, as is further discussed below.
A culture of trust on all sites encouraged leadership. For example, Theresa (P20), an emerging
leader at Rondure, explained:

We are all able to have leadership in the work that we do. We are all able to have our own ideas, our
own personalities, our own interests, our own passions and desires. We are the ones making that
happen. I can run that program with the trust of (positional leader) to go and lead it.

When they felt trusted by positional leaders, emerging leaders were confident to make decisions
regarding regulatory compliance and to implement innovative pedagogical practice. This confi-
dence was fortified with the use of professional knowledge gained through acquiring qualifications
Gibbs: Leadership emergence and development 685

and post qualification training on regulations. For example, Frida (P17), a recently appointed
educational leader, studied the early childhood laws and regulations via training provided by the
organization. The knowledge gained meant her pedagogical decision making was informed by the
law rather than by hearsay.

I feel that’s more empowering because I can say I’ve got something to argue with rather than just a flat
out ‘Well that’s ridiculous! That can’t be right!’ . . . actually, going and finding out why.

Professional language, learnt in preservice training, was used commonly across all sites and
promoted professionalism and early childhood professional identity. This language encouraged
a culture of collective effort to lead the vision and mission of a high-quality educational program
for children and families. Language within organizational policy was inclusive and engendered a
sense of responsibility. As an example, the Governance and Management policy of Robson
emphasized the importance of values and philosophy in all parts of the organization. In this policy,
compliance with laws and regulations was documented as a responsibility for all employees,
educators, positional leaders and organizational management. Additionally, the language of trust
and inclusion were embedded in all organizations’ statements of philosophy and vision and these
themes became part of participants’ everyday language during professional conversations. As an
example, the philosophy of Discovery included the sentence ‘We respect the importance of trust,
and how this defines our relationships with children and families.’ All emerging leaders consis-
tently referred to this principle of trust throughout interviews, when talking about children, them-
selves and positional leaders. For example, Fleur (P14) initially talked about trust in relation to the
children.

I guess the trust the educators have with the children really shows . . . I feel that’s probably a big thing –
that there’s lots of trust that children are capable.

Later in the interview she noted that a site goal was to ensure educators were more respected in
the community:

It’s starting here and giving everyone that voice and that trust to be able to do amazing things and share
[them] with the community.

This emerging leader’s reference point was the language of the vision and philosophy.
The development of vision and philosophy varied on the sites. At Robson and Rondure senior
leaders guided the establishment of vision and philosophy and then site leaders worked with staff
teams to refine the language of the document. At Discovery Early Learning Centre, the process was
different as the vision and philosophy were collaboratively built ‘from the ground up’ with all staff.
Both approaches to philosophy development appeared to increase emerging and positional leaders’
professional knowledge and collective practice.

The material-economic arrangements

The common material-economic arrangements that created the conditions for emergence and
development of leadership across the three sites comprised themes of physical space, allocation
of resources and professional learning for leadership.
686 Educational Management Administration & Leadership 50(4)

Physical spaces shaped the emergence and development of leading on all sites. Whilst the
supervision of children remained a key focus for educators during play periods, participants on two
of the sites also engaged in coaching and mentoring and held pedagogical conversations in the
outdoor play spaces during program hours. The physical space on the third site was structurally
more complex with obstructed sight lines and multiple floor levels. This complex physical struc-
ture constrained such ‘on the go’ coaching conversations. Informal coaching conversations took
place, instead, in a shared lunchroom where people gathered from across the managing organiza-
tion. Conversations fostered a ‘cross-fertilization’ of ideas from multiple perspectives and
appeared to enrich the abovementioned practices of leading such as the development of innovative
solutions to problems in collaboration with others.
The allocation of resources and room layout on sites facilitated effective team communica-
tion and enabled innovative pedagogical decision making. For example, at Discovery Early Learn-
ing Centre, resources were difficult to access physically. Educators were frustrated in their
initiatives as they had to leave play spaces to gather program materials. Due to localized decision
making, the centre director and owner, Shannon (P18), was able to expedite physical changes to the
site and teaching initiatives were enabled.
Professional learning initiatives on each site highlighted the diverse approaches taken to building
leadership capacity. The approaches were characterized by unique organizational governance arrange-
ments that influenced the professional development philosophies and available resources. At Robson
Early Childhood Education Centre, educators nominated themselves or were invited to participate in a
formal leadership course that ran over a period of a year. The comprehensive program, comprising
training sessions, practical experiences and a research project, was made possible by the structure of
the organization and its capacity to deploy resources. Participants built skills, knowledge and confi-
dence to undertake leadership roles in the future. As Magda (P9), a positional leader, explained:

A manager might notice someone who is showing some of those dispositions, traits of being a leader,
they want a bit of a career change, their aspirational . . . they’re looking for a career pathway, then we
will target those people to help support them through a process of getting to know what the role of a
manager looks like, what some of the expectations are.

Team members of Rondure Pre-school took part in an external leadership program that was
delivered to leaders across the organization (not just ECE). The focus of the program was leading
in a complex landscape and the need to be flexible or ‘agile’. The larger organization was under-
going significant change due to local government mergers. Positional leaders said these approaches
to development were useful in preparing them for an unknown future and they were able to share
knowledge with teams to increase agility and confidence. At Discovery Early Learning Centre,
professional learning for leadership was targeted and individualized. Positional leaders on the site
and across the franchise were committed to building leaders within the organization. Positional
leaders took advantage of professional learning that was offered by the franchise and, in turn,
offered opportunities for emerging leaders. The concept of complexity was embedded in all
organizations’ professional learning programs for leadership development.

Social-political arrangements
The social-political organizational arrangements that made the emergence and development of
leadership possible on each site comprised role equality, the sharing of power, openness to
Gibbs: Leadership emergence and development 687

activism, disruption and creativity, and comprehensive programs of employment induction.

Governance structures of the three sites appreciably influenced social-political arrangements
on each site.
Role equality was evident in staff meetings and professional development events. Meeting
agendas were often emergent, and discussion was led by both emerging and positional leaders.
For example, at Rondure Pre-school, the staff meeting was led by an ECE student. This action
was not planned but arose, unchallenged, during the meeting as the student confidently talked
about her passions and interests. The team encouraged her leadership in this exchange. Such
contributions to decisions and strategic direction were welcomed regardless of qualifications and
years of experience. Theresa (P20), an emerging leader at Rondure, expressed the openness to
contributions like this:

There is room at the table for everyone. Like you’ve knocked on the door at dinner time, ‘come and eat
with us’. The door is always open. No matter who you are, no matter where you’ve come from, you are
welcome here. I think that’s something I really connect to.

Role equality was, however, contested where hierarchical language was used. For example, on
one site, the term ‘chain of command’ was used in everyday language and some emerging leaders
felt disempowered as a result. This hierarchical language was embedded in the governance tradi-
tions and policy documents of the site and guided the use of power.
The sharing of power influenced the implementation of regulations on each site. For example,
knowledge of the regulations at Discovery Early Learning Centre resulted in the educational leader
defining her own role. The freedom for site-based decision making, as a franchisee, made this
possible. Frida (P17), a recently appointed educational leader, noted that:

It all comes back to the idea that there is no right way to do it according to the powers-that-be. There’s
nothing that states how the job has to be done, it just states that you must have one (educational leader).
So, from that perspective it gave us the flexibility to look at the former educational leader’s strengths
versus my strengths and how I could bring other things to the role and do the role a little bit differently.

Activism and disruption were encouraged on each site. On two of the sites emerging leaders and
children were protesting over both climate change and educator remuneration. A ‘stop work’
action at Discovery was encouraged and funded by site leaders, demonstrating solidarity for
educators. Creativity was also cultivated. Participants believed the ability to create and innovate
were fundamental to job satisfaction and leadership growth. Koral (P21), an emerging leader,
talked about her reasons for working at Rondure:

This is a place where I want to be at this point because it’s passionate, it’s forward thinking, it’s all
these things that I love, and it challenges me as well. You don’t want to go to a place that it’s all the
same every day. That’s not the place that I want to be.

Contextual literacy was enhanced on each site through comprehensive employment induction
programs. Educators received guidance on performance expectations and professional responsi-
bilities. The leadership team of Robson Early Childhood Education Centre gave new employees an
overview of the history and governance structure of the organization. At Discovery Early Learning,
leaders were oriented to theories of leadership and collectively created position descriptions.
688 Educational Management Administration & Leadership 50(4)

The influence of governance practices on the development of

leadership and implications for organizations
The study findings offer an insight into organizational arrangements, common to exemplary early
childhood sites, that shape the emergence and development of the practice of leadership. The study
also highlighted how governance arrangements can influence the distribution of power, the use of
language, policy language and development along with the allocation of resources for leadership
development on each ECE site (Waniganayake et al., 2017). The study revealed a range of
implications and potential opportunities for ECE organizations, as described below. Findings are
discussed within the analysis frame of the TPA and the ontological frame of complexity leadership
theory.
Findings on the cultural-discursive arrangements and their influence on leadership practices
suggest organizations could reflect on building a culture of trust, the use of professional knowledge
and language, and the collective development of vision and philosophy for the cultivation of
leadership (Ronnerman et al., 2017). It is important to note that the development of trust is
challenging in a complex culture of compliance. Risk taking and innovative pedagogical practice
must be aligned with regulations (Author). Highlighting professional responsibility and knowledge
in policy and organizational communication can, however, increase emerging and positional
leaders’ capacity to act with confidence as boundaries are known and understood. The knowledge
of boundaries is key to successful enactment of complexity leadership theory (Hazy and Uhl-Bien,
2015).
Philosophy can become a reference point for all staff when emerging and positional leaders
intentionally embed philosophy language in everyday conversations. All leaders were found to
benefit from an in-depth reflection on the organizational vision and philosophy. This finding
supports the view that vision, philosophy and inclusive practices are foundational to high-
quality early childhood programs. Such practices also support educators’ conviction in leading
socially just practice (Siraj-Blatchford and Manni, 2007; Wilkinson, 2017).
Findings regarding material-economic arrangements suggest organizations could consider how
the use of physical spaces and allocation of material resources can support the development of
leading. Discrete physical spaces, separate from children, are useful areas for educators to discuss
pedagogical initiatives and decision making. But there may be value in encouraging innovative
approaches to the layout of the physical environment and the discursive culture on the sites to
accommodate coaching conversations. Leaders could encourage informal coaching conversations,
in tandem with supervision of children, to enrich the practices of emerging leaders. It is important,
however, to balance the well-being of educators with multi-tasking in sites so as not to intensify the
workload (Harrison et al., 2019).
Findings also suggest that despite differences in governance arrangements and availability of
resources, all organizations should target both emerging and positional leaders for leadership
development. Programs would ideally focus on the complexity of current environments, admin-
istrative and enabling strategies and should comprise a range of methods designed to build both
individual and collective capacity on ECE sites (O’Neill, 2018; Uhl-Bien and Arena, 2017).
Findings regarding social-political arrangements suggest that organizations could foster equal-
ity through community building in meetings with emergent and educator-driven agendas (Hazy
and Uhl-Bien, 2015; Siraj-Blatchford and Manni, 2007). Emerging leaders could also be encour-
aged to speak confidently and to present innovations that lead to positive changes in educational
practice. Findings indicate organizations could reflect on the use of hierarchical language and how
Gibbs: Leadership emergence and development 689

it is embedded in everyday language. A review of existing policies could reveal the unintentional
preservation of centralized leadership models. Collective approaches to changing policy language
may subsequently promote equality.
Organizations might also actively create a culture of activism, creativity and an environment
where different perspectives are valued (Hazy and Uhl-Bien, 2015). All employees could be
oriented to the history and traditions of their organizations and oriented to the administrative,
adaptive and enabling elements of leadership roles (Uhl-Bien and Marion, 2007). This strategy
may enhance contextual literacy and enrich leadership practices (Siraj-Blatchford and Manni,
2007).

Limitations
The strength of a mini-ethnographic case study methodology, for the study of leadership emergence
and development, is its capacity to generate rich and thick data and to provide detailed insights into a
small number of cases (Fusch and Ness, 2017). Stake (1995) argues, however, that case study
research is not generalizable and findings can be reliant on the researcher’s depiction of the cases.
The study was conducted only in ‘exemplary’ sites, thus narrowing the focus of the investigation.
Additionally, the study did not specifically compare and correlate years of experience and time in
roles with effective leadership practice, as this was not a study of the leaders themselves. Although
these factors were considered in the analysis it was important to focus instead on the enabling and
constraining organizational arrangements.
Despite these limitations, this research study offers an in-depth insight into organizational
practices and their capacity to cultivate and shape leadership. Therefore, this insight could serve
as a source of reflection for organizations as they undertake the important project of leadership
development. The study is the first of its kind to investigate the conditions that enable leadership
emergence in ECE and potentially provides a foundation for a large-scale study that tests the
generalizability of the findings.

Conclusion
This study asserts that leadership is underpinned by the practice of leading – a dynamic activity
that is not limited to those in formal leadership roles. Findings of the study suggest that the practice
of leading acts as a foundation for positional leadership roles and contributes to the achievement of
high-quality ECE. The study found that the cultural-discursive, material-economic and social-
political arrangements within ECE sites create the conditions for the cultivation and development
of leadership. The diversity of governance practices across sites enabled the examination of a range
of organizational arrangements. The findings indicate that organizations should resist a formulaic
approach to leadership development. Instead, they can focus on successful common organizational
arrangements for leadership cultivation and development whilst considering the unique influence
of their own governance practices and traditions.

Acknowledgements
The author wishes to acknowledge the contribution of each of the ECE sites, along with the continuing
guidance and support of her supervisors, Fran Press, Tamara Cumming and particularly Sandie Wong with
regard to this article.
690 Educational Management Administration & Leadership 50(4)

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or
publication of this article.

Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD
Leanne Gibbs https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6461-6267

Notes
1. ECE settings rated at this level demonstrate consistently high-quality practices as defined by the National
Quality Standards and confirmed by the assessment and rating process.
2. All participating sites and individual participants are identified by pseudonyms.
3. Guiding materials (unpublished) for analysis were developed specifically for analysis of practices in ECE.

References
Alchin I, Arthur L and Woodrow C (2019) Evidencing leadership and management challenges in early
childhood in Australia. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood 44(3): 285–297.
Aubrey CA (2019) What early childhood leadership for what kind of world? Contemporary Issues in Early
Childhood 20(1): 65–78.
Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority (2016) Quality Area 7 [online] Available at:
http://www.acecqa.gov.au/Leadership-and-service-management (accessed 25 February 2020).
Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority (2017a) Guide to the National Quality Standard.
Canberra: Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority.
Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority (2017b) Leadership and management in educa-
tion and care services. An analysis of Quality Area 7 of the National Quality Standard. In: ACECQA (ed)
Occasional Papers. Sydney: ACECQA, pp. 1–61.
Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority (2017c) NQF Snapshot Q4 2016. Sydney:
Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority.
Coleman A, Sharp C and Handscomb G (2016) Leading highly performing children’s centres. Educational
Management Administration & Leadership 44: 775–793.
Creswell J and Poth C (2017) Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches.
Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Department of Education Employment and Workplace Relations (2009) Belonging, Being & Becoming: The
Early Years Learning Framework for Australia. Canberra: Dept. of Education, Employment and Work-
place Relations
Diamond A (2014) Pre-service early childhood educators’ leadership development through reflective engage-
ment with experiential service learning and leadership literature. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood
39: 12–20.
Ebbeck M and Waniganayake M (2003) Early Childhood Professionals: Leading Today and Tomorrow.
Australia: Elsevier.
Fouché C and Light G (2011) An invitation to dialogue: ‘The World Café’ in social work research. Qualitative
Social Work 10: 28–48.
Gibbs: Leadership emergence and development 691

Fusch P, Fusch G and Ness L (2017) How to conduct a mini-ethnographic case study: A guide for novice
researchers. The Qualitative Report 22(3): 923–941.
Fusch P and Ness L (2015) Are we there yet? Data saturation in qualitative research. The Qualitative Report
20(9): 1408.
Gibbs L (2019a) Management, Leadership and Governance in Early Childhood Education (Australia).
Bloomsbury Education and Childhood Studies. [online] Available at: https://becs-bloomsbury.com/arti
cle?docid¼b-9781350996298&tocid¼b-9781350996298-011&st¼ (accessed 25 February 2020).
Gibbs L, Press F and Wong S (2019b) Complexity leadership theory: a framework for leading in Australian
early childhood settings. In: Strehmel P, Heikka J, Hujala E, Rodd J and Waniganayake M (eds) Lead-
ership in Early Education in Times of Change. Germany: Verlag Barbara Budrich, pp. 173–186.
Hall S (1999) A conversation with Stuart Hall. The Journal of the International Institute 7(1).
Harrison L, Wong S, Press F, Gibson M and Ryan S (2019) Understanding the work of Australian early
childhood educators. Journal of Research on Childhood Education 33: 521–537.
Hazy JK and Uhl-Bien M (2015) Towards operationalizing complexity leadership: How generative, adminis-
trative and community-building leadership practices enact organizational outcomes. Leadership 11: 79–104.
Heckman JJ (2011) The economics of inequality: The value of early childhood education. Education Digest
77(4): 4.
Jorgenson J and Steier F (2013) Frames, framing, and designed conversational processes: Lessons from the
world cafe. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 49: 388–405.
Kemmis S, Wilkinson J, Edwards-Groves C, et al. (2014) Praxis, practice and practice architectures. In:
Kemmis S, Wilkinson J, Edwards-Groves C, et al. (eds) Changing Practices, Changing Education. Berlin:
Springer, pp. 25–41.
Krieg S, Smith KA and Davis K (2014) Exploring the dance of early childhood educational leadership.
Australasian Journal of Early Childhood 39: 73–80.
Layen S (2015) Do reflections on personal autobiography as captured in narrated life-stories illuminate
leadership development in the field of early childhood? Professional Development in Education 41:
273–289.
Lichtenstein B, Uhl-Bien M, Marion R, et al. (2006) Complexity leadership theory: An interactive perspective
on leading in complex adaptive systems. Emergence: Complexity and Organization 8: 2.
Mac Naughton GE, Rolfe SA and Siraj-Blatchford IE (2001) Doing Early Childhood Research: International
Persepectives in Theroy and Practice. Open University Press.
Mahon K, Francisco S and Kemmis S (2017) Exploring Education and Professional Practice: Through the
Lens of Practice Architectures. Singapore: Springer
Marion R and Gonzales LD (2013) Leadership in Education: Organizational Theory for the Practitioner.
Waveland: Waveland Press.
Mason M (2010) Sample size and saturation in PhD studies using qualitative interviews. Forum qualitative
Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research 11(3).
Mistry M and Sood K (2012) Challenges of early years leadership preparation: A comparison between early
and experienced early years practitioners in England. Management in Education 26: 28–37.
Nicholson JM and Kroll L (2015) Developing leadership for early childhood professionals through oral
inquiry: Strengthening equity through making particulars visible in dilemmas of practice. Early Child
Development and Care 185: 17–43.
Nuttall J (2016) Leadership for professional practice development in early childhood education: from ‘per-
formance management’ to ‘system development’. Australian Educational Leader 38: 14–17.
O’Neill C and Brinkerhoff M (2018) Five Elements of Collective Leadership. Washington: Redleaf Press.
692 Educational Management Administration & Leadership 50(4)

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2017) Starting Strong 2017: Key OECD Indi-
cators on Early Childhood Education and Care. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Productivity Commission (2011) Early Childhood Development Workforce. Melbourne: Australian
Government.
Raelin JA (2016) Introduction to Leadership-as-Practice: Theory and Application. Francis: Taylor and
Francis Inc.
Raelin JA (2019) Toward a methodology for studying leadership-as-practice. Leadership. Published Online-
First. DOI: 10.1177/1742715019882831.
Rodd J (2012) Building leadership expertise of future early childhood professionals. Journal of Early Child-
hood Teacher Education 22: 9–12.
Ronnerman K, Grootenboer P and Edwards-Groves C (2017) The practice architectures of middle leading in
early childhood education. International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy 11(1): 1–20.
Ryder D, Chandra Y, Dalton J, et al. (2011) The development process of an early childhood education
leadership programme: A distributed leadership perspective. Journal of Educational Leadership, Policy
and Practice 26: 62–68.
Sims M, Waniganayake M and Hadley F (2018) Educational leadership: An evolving Role in Australian early
childhood settings. Educational Management Administration & Leadership 46: 960–979.
Siraj-Blatchford I and Manni L (2007) Effective Leadership in the Early Years Sector: The ELEYS Study.
London: Institute of Education Press.
Stake R (1995) The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Stamopoulos E (2015) The professional leadership and action research training model: Supporting early
childhood leadership. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood 40(4): 39–48.
Stamopoulos E and Barblett L, (2018) Early Childhood Leadership in Action: Evidence-based Approaches
for Effective Practice. Crows Nest: Allen & Unwin.
Sylva K, Melhuish E, Sammons P, et al (2010) Early Childhood Matters: Evidence from the Effective Pre-
school and Primary Education Project. London: Routledge.
Talan T, Bloom P and Kelton R (2014) Building the leadership capacity of early childhood directors: an
evaluation of a leadership development model. Early Childhood Research & Practice 16(1)
The Front Project (2019) A Smart Investment for a Smarter Australia. [online] Available at: http://thefront
project.org.au/images/downloads/Cost-benefit%20analysis_brochure.pdf (accessed 8 July 2020).
Torii K, Fox S and Cloney D (2017) Quality is Key in Early Childhood Education in Australia. Policy Papers.
Melbourne: Mitchell Institute.
Uhl-Bien M and Arena M (2017) Complexity leadership: Enabling people and organizations for adaptability.
Organizational Dynamics 46: 9–20.
Uhl-Bien M and Marion R (2007) Complexity leadership: A framework for leadership in the twenty-first
century. In: Uhl-Bien M and Marion R (eds) Complexity Leadership Part 1; Conceptual Foundations.
North Carolina: Information Age Publishing.
Uhl-Bien M and Marion R (2011) Complexity leadership theory. In: Bryman A, Collinson D, Grint K,
Jackson B and Uhl-Bien M (eds) The Sage Handbook of Leadership. London: SAGE, pp. 468–482.
Uhl-Bien M, Marion R and McKelvey B (2007) Complexity leadership theory: Shifting leadership from the
industrial age to the knowledge era. The Leadership Quarterly 18: 298–318.
Vijayadevar S, Thornton K and Cherrington S (2019) Professional learning communities: Enhancing colla-
borative leadership in Singapore early childhood settings. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood 20:
79–92.
Waniganayake M and Rodd J (2015) Thinking and Learning about Leadership: Early Childhood Research
from Australia, Finland and Norway. Sydney: Community Child Care Co-operative.
Gibbs: Leadership emergence and development 693

Waniganayake M and Stipanovic S (2016) Advancing leadership capacity: Preparation of early childhood
leaders in Australia through a coursework masters degree. Journal of Early Childhood Education
Research 5(2): 268–288.
Waniganayake M, Cheeseman S, Fenech M, et al. (2017) Leadership: Contexts and Complexities in Early
Childhood Education. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.
Wilkinson J (2017) Leading as a socially just practice: Examining educational leading through a practice lens.
In: Mahon K, Fransisco S and Kemmis S (eds) Exploring Education and Professional Practice. Berlin:
Springer, pp. 165–182.
Wilkinson J and Kemmis S (2015) Practice theory: Viewing leadership as leading. Educational Philosophy
and Theory 47: 342–358.
Wilkinson J, Olin A, Lund T, et al. (2010) Leading praxis: Exploring educational leadership through the lens
of practice architectures. Pedagogy, Culture and Society 18: 67–79.
Zinsser KM, Denham SA, Curby TW, et al. (2016) Early childhood directors as socializers of emotional
climate. Learning Environments Research 19: 267–290.

Author biography
Leanne Gibbs is a PhD candidate at Charles Sturt University in Australia. She holds the position
of Senior Manager, Engagement and Translation with Early Start at the University of Wollongong.
She has worked as principal researcher at a large public provider of early childhood education and
has held leadership positions in the delivery of early childhood education, professional develop-
ment and advocacy. Her research interests are leadership and policy in early childhood education.