School Leadership Models: Global

Perspectives
Professor Tony Bush
Introducing Professor
Tony Bush
Professor of Educational Leadership, University of Nottingham,
UK

President, British Educational Leadership, Management and

Administration Society (BELMAS) – www.Belmas.org.uk

Editor-in-Chief, Educational Management, Administration and

Leadership (ranked in Q1 in the Social Sciences Citation Index)

Visiting professor, researcher, consultant or invited keynote

speaker in 26 countries
Purpose of the Presentation

To discuss the
To examine
nature of To answer your
different school
leadership in the questions
leadership models
21st century
 Leadership is based on influence not formal power

Leaders influence followers to behave in specific ways

What do we Leadership is linked to vision – providing a sense of direction for the school

mean by Visions should be based on the specific needs of schools and their communities
– but is this possible when government policies need to be followed?

leadership? Visions should be based on clear professional values – but ‘whose values?’ –
teachers?, leaders?, government’s?

(Bush 2020)
 Themes Management Leadership
Main focus Implementation Values and
and efficiency purposes
Power Positional Influence
authority
Comparing
Structure Hierarchy Agency
Management and
Processes Technical-rational Open and fluid
Leadership (source:
Bush 2019) Accountability Vertical Multi-directional
Work allocation Delegation Distribution

Relationships Transactional Transformational

 The purpose and value of leadership
models/Tujuan dan nilai model
kepemimpinan

• To explain and understand leadership behaviour/Untuk menjelaskan

dan memahami perilaku kepemimpinan
• To guide school leadership practice/Untuk memandu praktik
kepemimpinan sekolah
• As a component of leadership preparation and CPD/Sebagai
komponen persiapan kepemimpinan dan CPD
• To provide a conceptual ‘tool kit’ for school leaders/ untuk
menyiapkan perangkat alat konseptual bagi para pemimpin sekolah
 Most models are
There are many
Leadership
‘solo’: linked to
school leadership individual leaders –
models – this is usually school heads

Models: An ‘crowded’ territory-

ada banyak model
or principals-
Kebanyakan
kepemimpinannya

Introduction
kepemimpinan di model solo/terkait
sekolah.ini adalah pemimpin individual-
wilayah ramai itu biasanya Kepala

-Model A few models are

‘shared’ – based on
sekolah
Important
Kepemimpi mltiple leaders and
team work
distinction between
leaders and

nan: Sebuah Beberapa model

'dibagikan' –
leadership
Perbedaan penting

Pengantar berdasarkan banyak

pemimpin dan kerja tim
antara pemimpin
dan kepemimpinan
 Managerial Leadership

Solo Transformational Leadership

Models: An Transactional Leadership

Introduction Moral Leadership

These are all discussed in subsequent slides

 Based on formal Authority is linked to The principal’s position
the hierarchy – more is more important than
roles – positional power at higher his/her personal
leadership levels qualities

Accountability is Danger of ‘managerialism’ –

adherence to procedure is This model is
vertical – to the given a higher priority than dominant in
hierarchy (internal responding to student or
and external) stakeholder needs centralised systems

Managerial
Leadership
 Transformation means significant systemic or school-based
change

Leaders are assumed to ‘transform’ schools through inspiring

teachers and others to greater effort and better quality

It links to vision-building, establishing and pursuing goals, and expecting high

performance, leading to school improvement and better learning outcomes

Transformationa It may be seen as ‘heroic’ and ‘charismatic’ leadership

l Leadership
It may be regarded as vehicle for control over teachers

Is ‘transformation’ imposed by governments, or a genuine

school-based process?

What happens when the transformational leaders departs?

 This is based on exchange between leader and followers

The employment contract provides rewards (salary and

benefits) in exchange for staff work, commitment and
Transactional cooperation

Leadership Principals may be able to offer ‘rewards’ (promotion, approval,

good references, allocation to preferred classes) in exchange for
loyalty

However, the exchange process may not engage staff beyond

the specific transaction and does not build long-term trust
 Leadership based on the values and beliefs of leaders

This may also be called ethical, authentic or spiritual leadership

Moral Spiritual leadership may be linked to faith schools, where the

Leadership
values are religious

However, moral leadership is not necessarily spiritual and values

may be derived from family or peer groups

There can be problems and discomfort where values differ

within a school – for example a secular teacher working in a
faith school
 Participative leadership

Shared Distributed leadership

Models: An
Introduction Instructional leadership?

(Other models include collaborative and democratic leadership)

 Based on group decision-making (team work?)

Participation is consistent with democratic principles

(entitlement to participate)

Participative Participation is assumed to increase school effectiveness

Leadership
Participation includes all ‘legitimate’ stakeholders – but who is
legitimate (teachers, students, parents, etc)?

Participation can ease the burden on school principals

 The most popular leadership model in the 21st century (more
journal submissions than any other model)

DL is independent of formal leadership and may arise anywhere

in the school

DL is based on influence (‘soft power’), not formal positional

Distributed
authority

DL provides leadership ‘density’ – more leaders

Leadership Principals may resist distribution to preserve their power, or

welcome it to reduce their workload

Is distributed leadership ‘delegation in disguise’?

Evidence of ‘allocative distribution’ in centralised countries, for

example in Malaysia (Bush and Ng, 2019)
 Instructional leadership
M
ayF
b
o
ec
lau
b
seel
o
d
asn
‘lea
teac
d
ersh
i
h
in
g
p
a
n
fd
o
rlear
learn
n
i
in
n
g
g
’

M
a
y

b
e

s
h
a
r
e
d

m
o
d
e
l

i
f

e
x
e
r
c
i
s
e
d

w
i
d
e
l
y

b
y

p
r
i
n
c
i
p
a
l
s
,

s
e
n
i
o
r

l
e
a
d
e
r
s

a
n
d

m
i
d
d
l
e

l
e
a
d
e
r
s
Contingent leadership
MOST LEAD UNDERS
TANDIN
LEADE ERSHI G
RSHIP P IS LEADER
MODE ‘CON SHIP
MODEL
LS TINGE S
ARE NT’ PROVID
PARTI ON ES A
AL ‘TOOL
01 BUT
THE KIT’ FOR
SETTI LEADER
THERE S–
IS ‘NO NG, ‘CHOOS
SINGL NOT E THE
‘ONE- RIGHT
E TOOL
BEST SIZE- FOR
TYPE’ FITS- EACH
JOB’
ALL’
 Leadership accounts for up to 27% of variation in student
outcomes (second only to classroom teaching)

No documented case of school improvement ‘in the absence of

talented leadership’ (Leithwood et al 2006:5)

Conclusion Leadership has a greater influence on schools and students

when it is widely distributed (Leithwood et al 2006)

Instructional leadership has a greater impact on student

outcomes than other models (Robinson et al 2008), because it
targets student learning

However, leadership should be sensitive to culture and context,

not ‘one-size-fits-all’