Running Head: LEADERSHIP

Meaning, Context, and Nature of Leadership

Pamela R. Hudson Bailey

George Mason University

Meaning, Context, and Nature of Leadership

A leader is only a leader if he or she has followers. The tone and success for the entire school is set by how a leader reacts and involves his or her followers. In this paper the role of the leader will be defined, mainly in the context of change. Whether using theories, management systems, a cyclic approach, or key functional concepts, the role of the stakeholders will always play an important part with regard to the overall vision. Some of the common themes that run through each of the literature reviews include power, purpose, needs leading to wants, and vision. Each of these commonalities, implemented in varying degrees and methods, will lead to successful schools and a staff this is productive, meeting the needs of all students, the ultimate goal.

Organizational Approach to Leadership

Theory X and Theory Y are discussed by Owens and Valesky (2007) with the more successful schools following the latter. Leadership is approached by understanding the organization and its management systems. The overall management of a school is the responsibility of a leader but just because one is a manager does not necessarily make one a leader. System 4, a Theory Y system, is about having complete trust and confidence in subordinates by the leader. Concepts included in system 4 involve stakeholders making decisions, vertical and horizontal communication, rewarding motivation, positive interaction between leader and follower, large measure of trust and confidence, and the responsibility for actions and completion of requested activities placed on the stakeholders. Leaders that employ this Theory Y approach will guide stakeholders to share a commitment to the organization, its’ objectives, vision and purpose, resulting in work satisfaction. However, a stakeholder’s needs must be met prior to being able to be motivated to want to participate in the organization. Owens and Valesky refer to this idea as the Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory of Motivation. Once the needs are met then the motivational factors will be effective, leading to job satisfaction. Creating an environment where all parties may grow, leaders and followers with a common purpose and vision, will result in achieving the organization’s goals.

Leadership in Relationship to the Followers

Whereas Owens and Valesky (2007) approached leadership through the lens of the organization, J. M. Burns (1979) discussed the role of a leader in relationship to the followers. He states that a leader holds power but just because one has power does not mean that one is a leader. Influencing followers to do something that he or she might not normally do represents the relationship between the values and wants of the followers with a leader. Skillfully using his or her communication skills and power, a leader will determine the needs, wants and motivational levels of all followers. Bringing all parties together for a common purpose will result in a situation that is productive and desirable. Transactional and transformational leadership are two types of leadership styles in which the purpose of the leader and follower have merged with both parties mutually supporting each other. Power may then be equated to how and to what extent a leader influence his or her followers with regard to their motivation and to the common purpose resulting from the communication and interactions between leader and follower.

Involvement of the Followers

Getting everyone involved is also one of the key topics presented by Christopher Day (2007). Communicating to the followers a clear vision and purpose to aid in promoting a sense of ownership of the proposed process, and eventually the product, is essential. In order to do so a leader must become aware of his or her follower’s needs, wants and motivational levels. Day reveals a four phase development process that will aid a leader in the progression toward a satisfactory product, the building up of each person and of the entire group as a whole unit to improve student achievement. The first phase has five steps: stimulating the teaching and learning environment, insuring security within the school, establishing behavior and attendance policies, involving the community, and improving instruction. A shared vision, a common purpose, and meeting the needs and wants of all parties are crucial in order to insure success in meeting the five steps. Leading by example and extensive communication between all parties is of the utmost importance during the first phase. The second phase, also five steps, is when all stakeholders begin to take ownership in the process and the product. Coming back to the table, re-evaluating the vision, is the first step in order to sustain improvement. Additional steps include distributing the leadership to promote team building, placing trust in the staff, integrating students as a valuable resource, continued professional development toward improving instruction, and adding peer observations and evaluations to involve the staff in promoting better teaching and learning methods. The third phase used data obtained from the first two phases to go deeper into the previous steps. Lastly, a continued assessment of the excellence and creativity of the school and all stakeholders is the fourth step.

Being optimistic about student achievement should never end if the leader, and his or her followers, wants continued growth. In all four phases Day includes the leader’s vision and purpose and takes into consideration the follower’s needs, wants, and motivational levels. The “power” of the leader is based on the end product, the building up of each person and of the entire group as a whole unit to improve student achievement. Day’s cycles of development for change are more explicitly explained by each phase of growth whereas Marjorie Heller and William Firestone (1995) present how a leader should approach change using key functions.

Leadership Functions

Heller and Firestone (1995) review six leadership functions that will enable change without assigning roles to specific individuals. Having a common vision so that the goals meet the needs of stakeholders and the purpose is understood by all is the first function. Expectations on how and what is to be done in order to meet the vision should be explained in detail. Heller and Firestone posited that teachers will stumble without these details. Obtaining resources is the second function. Individuals, time, materials, facilities, knowledge, and ideas are all resources that should be utilized efficiently and effectively in order to provide teachers with learning situations and models. Recognizing and encouraging teachers, formally and informally, is the next function. The type of recognition given should be considered in relation to the individual. The fourth function is to adhere to specific operating procedures that will correlate the vision to all processes within the school. Monitoring the actions and outcomes, the fifth function, is necessary to insure that your goals are being met. Lastly, leadership should handle disruptions from within and without the school so that the vision, and the procedures necessary to meet the vision, may be accomplished. Heller and Firestone are not as concerned with who performs these tasks but that are done. The vision of the administration is top priority and a higher level of power is employed to see the vision through to fruition with the participants actively involved.

A Leader’s View of Leadership

Relating leadership of change to one specific individual’s life was the goal of Jill Sperandio (2006). She quoted Kanter as saying that effective leaders were ‘the right people in the right place at the right time’. Kotter’s model for change leadership was reviewed by Sperandio and includes team-building, creating and selling one’s vision, and maintaining the important elements of an organization. Correlating these aspects with the life of Sir George White reinforced that he was in the right place to sell his vision that still maintained the organizational beliefs. White was concerned with the needs and wants of his employees, the public, and the government, using his knowledge to motivate and empower the individuals to feel that they were the most important part of the team.

Relating charisma to leadership, Ilies, Judge, and Wagner (2006) state that “…leaders promote organizational change by articulating a clear vision and creating a strong bond with followers that leads to acceptance of the vision.” This statement would also apply to leadership for change and Sir George White’s actions as he led change in his business and in education. Participants are the most important aspect of leadership because without them there would be no need for leadership. Owens and Valesky (2007) state that “…leadership, and administration as well, means working with and through people to achieve organizational goals.”

Conclusion

The concept of leadership is inseparable from a “…followers’ needs and goals” according to Burns (1979). The path taken by the various authors may be different but a clear vision was the main theme of each. Levels of power, implied by most of the authors, varies according to the approach and expectations described. The strong bond of the followers, recognizing their needs, encouraging them to acknowledge the purpose behind the vision, will result in a successful outcome of the goals of the leader. Defining leadership is multi-faceted and involves many variables (Novicevic, M. M., Harvey, M. G., Buckley, M. R., Brown-Radford, J. A., & Evans, R., 2006). Novicevic et al. (2006) state that knowing oneself will enable the leader to react to others with confidence. This will apply to each of the styles mentioned above, transactional, transformational, leadership for change, and charismatic leadership.

References

Burns, J. M. (1979). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.

Day, C. (2007). Sustaining the turnaround: What capacity building means in practice.

International Studies in Educational Administration, 35(3), 39-48.

Heller, M. F., & Firestone, W. A. (1995). Who’s in charge here? Sources of leadership for

change in eight schools. The Elementary School Journal, 96(1), 65-86.

Illies, R., Judge, T., & Wagner, D. (2006). Making sense of motivational leadership: The trail

from transformational leaders to motivated followers. Journal of Leadership and

Organizational Studies, 13(1), 1-22.

Novicevic, M. M., Harvey, M. G., Buckley, M. R., Brown-Radford, J. A., & Evans, R. (2006).

Authentic leadership: A historical perspective. Journal of Leadership and Organizational

Studies, 13(1), 64-76.

Owens, R. G., & Valesky, T. C. (2007). Organizational behavior in education: Adaptive

leadership and school reform (9^th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Owens, R. G. (2001). Organizational behavior in education: Adaptive leadership and school

reform (7^th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Sperandio, J. (2006). Vision and leadership in educational administration: Sir George White of

Norwich. Journal of Educational Administration and History, 38(1), 73-88.