A head teacher’s leadership behaviour when developing the leadership capacity of a school

Abstract

This article is based on findings drawn from a qualitative case study of a compulsory school in Iceland, where the aim was to investigate how the leadership behaviour of the head teacher had made an impact on the development of the leadership capacity of the school. The leadership behaviour of the head teacher was analysed according to a conceptual framework developed by Lambert (2006). Lambert’s framework is divided into three phases, where the leadership behaviour of the head teacher is described as instructive, transitional and high leadership capacity, depending on where the school is situated on its way from low to high capacity. Within each level, the leadership behaviour of the head teacher is evaluated according to his personal attributes, how he works with school members; and how he uses formal authority. The leadership capacity of a school is seen as an organizational-wide skilful engagement in the field of leadership. A clear connection is made between the leadership capacity of the school and the school’s improvement, since the former is regarded as a necessary condition for sustainable school improvement. The head teacher is seen as a key factor in building the leadership capacity of a school and sustaining school improvement. It has been found that head teachers who succeed in school improvement have certain characteristics, abilities and behaviours in common that others lack or have to a lesser degree (Lambert, 2006). A school was chosen for the study that had the reputation for having made a positive shift in its culture and educational goals, and where the same head teacher had been leading the school from the beginning of this shift to the time of the research. To collect data for the case, thirty visits were made to the school in the school year of 2008–2009. The data comprised observations, examination of documents, semistructured interviews, informal conversations with staff, focus group interviews with students and support staff and a survey sent to parents. Data was analysed as the study went along, and themes that emerged used to guide further steps. The findings indicated that the head teacher possessed qualities needed to build high school leadership capacity and had taken action accordingly. His personal attributes and leadership behaviour had been of great importance in the process of developing the leadership capacity of the school. His leadership behaviour was in agreement with Lambert’s (2006) theory and framework. The head teacher started his headship in the instructive phase but steadily developed towards the transitional phase and at the time of the study he worked with the majority of teachers at the high leadership capacity phase. He also had the ability to move between different phases as needed. The head teacher’s personal attributes fell into the high leadership capacity phase. He was organized, a continuous learner, and built his work on his personal values and vision. He continued to coach instructional improvement, was visible, provided support, and developed a structure that encouraged reciprocal relationships. When working with school members, he was in many respects in the high leadership phase. This particularly applied to how he co-operated with other members of the school leadership team, teachers and students; although he also worked with them in the transactional phase. He worked mostly with parents and support staff, according to the instructive phase, however. The head teacher’s use of formal authority was in the transactional phase, which could be seen by the way he insisted on professional development, teamwork and inquiry and how he paced improvement work. The working methods of high leadership capacity were constantly being developed within the school. The findings showed that the head teacher remained personally important for school improvement. The future development of school’s leadership capacity depends on how well he manages to involve all groups and individuals (parents, support staff, new teachers etc.) in the improvement of the school and develop the distribution of leadership even further. The findings indicated the importance of the head teacher in building the leadership capacity of a school. They also indicated the existence of what Gronn (2008, 2010) describes as leadership hybridity in schools, where both hierarchical and heterarchical leadership styles are simultaneously existent in the school.