Runninghead: Distributed Leadership 1

Leadership in Educational Administration and Training

University of the West Indies

Department of School of Education

EDEA6309

ID#620048586

Dr. Powell

February 21, 2019.

Assignment: 1
Distributed Leadership 2

Distributive Leadership

Leadership is not about title or designation. It's about impact, influence and inspiration, (Robin,

n.d.). The concept of leadership has been variously defined; as respective authors have postulated

different opinions as to its definition. For Burns (1978), “Leadership occurs when persons engage with

others in such a way that leaders and followers raise one another to higher levels of motivation and

morality”, (p. 20). As for Jacob and Jaques (1990), leadership is a process of giving purpose

(meaningful direction) to collective effort, and causing willing effort to be expended to achieve

purpose. Bass expanded these definitions and added that,

“Leadership is an interaction between two or more members of a group that often involves a

structuring or restructuring of the situation and the perceptions and expectations of member. It

occurs when one group member modifies the motivation or competencies of others in the group.

Any member of the group can exhibit some amount of leadership” (1990)

With the proliferation of leadership definitions, it is not surprising that there exist varying styles of

leadership practiced by leaders. In this global competitive environment, effective leadership style is

necessary to reduce the attrition rate (Nanjundeswaraswamy & Swamy, 2014). An effective leader

influences followers in a desired manner to achieve desired goals. Different leadership styles may affect

organizational/ school effectiveness or performance (Nanjundeswaraswamy & Swamy, 2014); hence the

right blend of leadership style within the school environment is of tantamount importance. One of the

styles of leadership, distributed leadership will be discussed in this paper.

What is Distributed Leadership?

According to Hoy and Miskel (2005), distributed leadership means relying on multiple sources

of leadership across the organization to guide and complete numerous tasks that vary in size, complexity,

and scope. These include: recurring and routine tasks like staff meetings, unanticipated tasks like

emergencies and change functions like encouraging others, modifying existing procedures, handling
Distributed Leadership 3

disturbances. They further explained that distributed leadership is based on the acknowledgment that as

far as organizational management is concerned, leadership roles and positions should be shared (2005),

hence no one persons should be solely in charge of the operation of the institution. Goskey postulated

that “the basic philosophy underlining the approach of distributed leadership is the mobilization of shared

wisdom and common sense by creating synergy among the staff at organizations and maximization of

organizational efficiency, productivity, and competence which will ensure achievement and happiness in

the members of the organization” (2015).

Spillane et al., (2004) noted a distributed leadership perspective recognizes that there are multiple

leaders while Spillane (2006) asserted that a distributed model of leadership focuses upon the

interactions, rather than the actions, of those in formal and informal leadership roles. It is primarily

concerned with leadership practice and how leadership influences organizational and instructional

improvement.

Distributive Leadership in Practice

In the increasingly complex world of education the work of leadership will require diverse types

of expertise and forms of leadership flexible enough to meet changing challenges and new demands.

There is a growing recognition that the old organizational structures of schooling simply do not fit the

requirements of learning in the twenty-first century (Harris and Spillane, 2008).

The twenty-first century school requires school leadership to be distributive if it will meet the

demands being placed on it by its stakeholders. Wenger et al (2002) noted, as schools reposition and

redefine themselves, distributed, extended and shared leadership practices are more prevalent. As schools

engage with complex collaborative arrangements, distributed forms of leadership will be required to

‘cross multiple types of boundaries and to share ideas and insights’ (p.123)

Spillane argues that leadership happens in a variety of ways throughout the school and is

centred in the interactions between people. “Depending on the particular leadership task, school leaders’
Distributed Leadership 4

knowledge and expertise may be best explored at the group or collective level rather than at the individual

leaders level” (Spillane, Halverson and Diamond 2001 p.25), therefore leadership roles can be played by

multiple individuals, whether in formal or informal positions. Therefore leadership can either be from

the top-down or the bottom-up perspective.

Distributive leadership in practice requires that schools are no longer led by men and women

who have total power and no one else gets the opportunity to be involved in leading. But rather persons

at all levels of the school are brought into the pool of leaders who are working together for the upliftment

and successful running of the school. Ensuring it is a place where learning is taking place and the

environment supports student development.

In support of this idea, Harris (2004) notes the model of the singular, heroic leader is at last being

replaced with leadership that is focused upon teams rather than individuals and places a greater emphasis

upon teacher, support staff and students as leaders.

Top-down

A number of studies, summarized by Bennett Wise, Wood & Harvey (2003) suggested that an

important starting point towards the development of distributed leadership may be found in a ‘top down’

initiative from a strong leadership model where senior and formal leaders demonstrate significant

influence on the school’s culture. The idea of a strong leader might contradict gravely with the idea of

distributive leadership in and of itself, but is there really a contradiction? Is there not a need for someone

to oversee the process?

We are all aware that many teachers shy away or do not wish to take on leadership roles or

anything that goes outside their own class teaching; hence, there has to be someone who will mobilised,

guide and encourage others in the process. However, such an individual will desist from exerting overly

controlling behaviours and actively encourage and value innovative ideas from all members of the school.

This means providing time, space and opportunities and knowing when to step back to enable staff
Distributed Leadership 5

members to contribute and participate in decision making and to establish concerted action. Guidance is

about weaving together people, materials and organizational structures in a common cause (Obadara,

2013). Distributive leadership weaves a collective group of persons together to share in the leadership

experience within the school. It must be noted that distributed leadership does not mean that everyone

leads, but that everyone has the potential to lead at some point.

Bottom-up

The initiative can also come from ‘the bottom’ instead of top down. A ‘bottom up’ initiative is

more likely to derive from individuals or groups within the organisation who already are seen by

colleagues as having a leadership role or when there is a lack of strong leadership (Bennett et al., 2003).

Such an individual would take on leadership roles as the need arises, without necessary being asked to

do so. Such leadership could come from anyone that posses the skills and expertise needed for the overall

enhancement and development of the organization/school; be it teachers, students or parents. The bottom-

up approach to distributed leadership is not an assigned or designated leader; hence, it's not a paid job,

but rather ones working off their own initiative. It is also not permanent and does not necessarily means

that all at the bottom will lead, but rather that there exist openness if the need arises.

It must be noted that the top-down and bottom-up approach is something that both Spillane and

Duignan oppose. Spillane (2007) opined that his distributed leadership is not hierarchical but recognises

that leadership roles are played by different people at different times, once people are working together

to improve the teaching and learning of the school. While for Duignan (2006), he believed in working

together as a family; for the common good of all.

Types of Distributed Leadership

Humphrey (2010) has outlined three types of distributed leadership. These include collaborative,

collective and coordinated. The first type of distributed leadership is collaborative leadership.

Collaborative leadership is carried out by multiple leaders working together at one time and place, e.g.
Distributed Leadership 6

leading a faculty meeting or leading a workshop. It is grounded in the belief that all of us together can be

smarter, more creative, and more competent than any of us alone, (Hurley, 2011, p.3.)

The second type of distributed leadership is collective leadership. Collective leadership is

demonstrated when the work of the leader is performed separately but interdependently e.g. the visits by

vice-principals in conducting formative and the visit by the principal is conducting summative

evaluations.

The third and final type of distributed leadership style as expressed by Humphrey is the

coordinated leadership style. Coordinated leadership is leadership routines carried out in sequence,

e.g.using data from standardized assessments to influence instruction. From administration of tests,

analysis of results, to presentation in appropriate format for faculty meeting (Humphreys, 2010).

Evaluation of Distributed Leadership

Having given careful thoughts to all the literature being read, it is therefore my opinion that

distributed leadership is a good leadership style, and indeed a good practice to have in schools and by

extension any organization within this 21 century. This leadership approach lends itself to a new style of

management, that requires us to move away from the “my way or the high way belief”. Rather, this style

of leadership opens and invites all stakeholders to play a part in the affairs of their individual

organizations, hence developing sense of belonging, knowing that they have a say in the decision making

process. This therefore, removes the stigma of inferiority that so often many feel when it comes on to

leadership and by extension, decision- making within their individual organizations. Distributed

leadership as posited by Hoy and Miskel (2005), Spillane (2007) and Duignan (2006) carries with it

several advantages that may serve the overall good of any organization that chooses to utilize this style

of leadership; once the right foundations are laid for it to flourish. Several authors have outlined

numerous advantages as it relates to distributed leadership. However, for the purpose of this paper only
Distributed Leadership 7

three major advantages and disadvantages will be explored in detail.

Advantages

When leadership is distributed it improves the quality of decision making. This is so, as it leads

to a stronger sense of ownership. People tend to be more responsive and are more willing to accept

decisions made when they have a say in what goes on in the organization. Additionally, they also tend

to work at their optimal best when they are given opportunities to use their own expertise to complete a

given task. Woods (2004), opined that there is a recognition that various task requires different

expertise and that all the expertise does not reside in one person at the top. Gronn terms this pooling of

energies ‘concretive action’ and suggests that,

“It is about the additional dynamics which is the product of conjoint

activity – where people work together in such a way that they pool

their initiative and expertise, the outcome is a product or energy

which is greater than the sum of their individual actions” (Gronn 2000,

2002a,b in Woods et al p.441).

This therefore creates a sense of belonging and a climate of fulfilment. Hence, it reduces the

atmosphere in which individuals feel excluded from decision making process. Consequently, do not

view themselves as mere receptors of decisions made by principals or managers at the top of the

hierarchical structure. Thereby, making it a good leadership style.

Secondly, distributed style of leadership reduces autonomy and the issue of power. This is so as

no one person is solely responsible for making all the decisions pertaining to an organization or school.

Distributed leadership facilitates the meeting of great minds; in that, it allows multiple individuals to

have a say in what the big picture holds, instead of having just one person knowing what that big

picture happens to be. This notion is supported by Hoy and Miskel (2005, p. 404) who stated that
Distributed Leadership 8

“distributed school leadership is more than what individuals know and do; it is constructed through the

dynamic interaction of multiple leaders, followers, and their situation as particular leader tasks are

enacted.” This style of leadership is also a great facilitator of the emerging concept of teacher

leadership and challenges the notion that leadership was for the select gifted few, (Lambert, 2003).

Thirdly, another important advantage of distributed leadership that makes it a good leadership

style in my opinion, is that it emphasizes trust and honesty. This style of leadership requires that leaders

be open and honest in communication. One is not allowed to offer hypothetical situations or attempt to

be something or someone they are not in structure. But rather, it relies on leaders to present their

expertise/strengths at all times, even if it runs contrary to what other leaders may think or feel at the

time. Wheatley stated,

“Trust is necessary if teachers are to feel motivated in their work and if they are

to be allowed to initiate an activity and take responsibility for decision making.

Along with being trusted in their work, people also need support. People want to

talk about what they are doing – supporting these conversations is an essential

task of the leader. Trust, allied with support, is an underpinning value within the

concept of distributed leadership” (1999).

Disadvantages

Have reflected long and hard regarding this style of leadership and all that I like about it, I must

also admit that this style of leadership is not free of its own set of challenges, similarly to other styles

of leadership. If the right climate and culture is not created to adequately facilitate this style of

leadership, then it might result in more harm than good. Some of the draw back/ disadvantages of

practicing this style of leadership are as follow;

The first notable disadvantage that I have discovered with this style of leadership is that it
Distributed Leadership 9

requires leaders that have a strong sense of self, as well as to be confident about their abilities, so that

they may be willing to share their autonomy and power. If principals or managers are not confident

about self, then this might lead to problems within the school/organization, which may result in a

power struggle. Harris (2004) outlines that structural and cultural barriers operate within schools could

make it very difficult for some teachers to show leadership, especially in areas where decisions are not

in favour of those who holds hierarchical power. This struggle might result in those at the top of the

hierarchical structure feeling like their status quo is being threatened. This may revert to a climate

where trust is lacking, resulting in distortion within the school/organization, and thereby conflict of

interest, leading to grave fracas with the style of leadership.

Similarly, while the indulgence of many in the decision-making process provides more

individuals voice to be heard regarding decisions concerning them, this can also be a great deterrent.

This is so, as more people mean that more time is needed for all to lend their opinions to matters

concerning the organization. This can also result in a rather slow decision-making process, which can

be to the determent of the organization, especially in situations where a decision needs to be made

quickly.

The third and final notable disadvantage with this style of leadership is that it may result in work

overload on the path of teachers and other non-administrative staff, which might serve as a deterrent to

many. This work overload may in turn act as a barrier to the very purpose of the leadership approach.

this style of leadership was developed to eliminate, which will then put a strain on teaching and learning.

Mayrowetz (2008), stated that teachers can become overstressed by shared decision-making and the

benefits of participation do not necessarily accrue to better teaching practice or to the benefit of the school

as a whole, especially if teachers and organisational goals are not well aligned.

Recommendations

Having assessed the whole process of distributed styles of leadership, it has therefore led me to
Distributed Leadership 10

make the following recommendations. It is my view that distributed leadership style should not be

practice in isolation. This is so as there will be times when school leaders/ managers of organization

will need to make quick and spontaneous decisions regarding matters concerning the affairs of

school/organization; in such as case, this may not provide the opportunity for the consultation of the

many. Additionally, it is also my view that in practicing this style of leadership, school leaders must be

competent and exhibit high level of trust, as if one's staff does not have confidence in the abilities and

is not able to trust them. As a result, they may be very reluctant in taking on any additionally duties

outside the realm of classroom teaching, which was evident in a number of cases observed. In the same

breath, I strongly recommend that when utilizing this style of leadership, that time be allowed within

school hours. This will provide opportunities for leaders to be involved in the process to meet and share

their expertise; as well as, findings with fellow colleagues, instead of frequent use of individual's

personal time. On contrary, if this is not allowed, it may act as a great deterrent to the types of

individual that leaders may have at their disposal, as it may result in people shying away from anything

that infringed on their personal time, especially regarding school matter.

Conclusion
In the final analysis and having carefully analysed the arguments being postulated under this

style of leadership, I therefore believe that distributed style of leadership is indeed a good practice to be

utilized within training facilities and by extension other organizations. This is so as it sees the roles and

responsibilities of operating a school, or any organisation not being vested in the hands of one individual,

but rather the emergency of multiple leaders, having the opportunity to lead at some point, as the need

dictates. This practice as highlighted above, may result in more of the followers embracing and showing

a greater sense of ownership for decisions made within the organizations, as more individuals would had

a say in it. Likewise, this style of leadership can lead to the enhancement and development of teacher

leaders with the school environment and giving greater credence to expression by Lambert, that every
Distributed Leadership 11

teacher has the capability to lead at some point, once the right context is created. This must be noted

however, that while acting as an advantage may also act as a barrier in times when quick and spontaneous

decisions need to be made. Similarly, if leaders are not willing to relinquish their hold on power, then

this style of leadership will not work, as it requires that power be shared.

References

Bennett, N., Harvey, J.A., Wise, C. & Woods, P.A. (2003) Distributed leadership: A desk study. See

reviews at: http://www.ncsl.org.uk/literature

Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.

Duignan, P. (2006) Ethical Leadership: Key Challenges and Tensions. Melbourne,

Cambridge University Press

Goskey, S. (2015). Distributed leadership in educational institutions. Journal of Education and

Training Studies, 3(4), 110-118.

Gronn, P., 2008. The future of distributed leadership. Journal of Educational Administration, 46(2),

141- 158.

Harris, A. (2004) ‘Distributed leadership: leading or misleading’, Educational Management and

Administration, 32(1): 11–24.

Harris, A., Spillane, J. P (2008). Distributed leadership through the looking glass. British Educational

Leadership, Management & Administration Society (BELMAS), Vol 22(1): 31–34.

Hoy, W.K., C.G. Miskel, 2005. Educational administration: Theory, research and practice (7th ed.).

New York: McGraw Hill

Jacobs, T. O., & Jaques, E. (1990). Military executive leadership. In K. E. Clark & M. B. Clark (Eds.),

Measures of leadership (pp. 281-295). New Jersey: Leadership Library of America.

Lambert, L. (2003). Leadership redefined: an evocative context for teacher leadership. School Leader

ship and Management, (23)4, 421-430.

Distributed Leadership 12

Nanjundeswaraswanmy, T.S., & Swamy, D.R. (2014). Leadership style. Advance in

Management, 7(2), 57.

NCSL (2004). Distributed leadership in action: A study of current practice in schools. Full Report. Uni

versity of Cambridge in collaboration with the Eastern Leadership Centre, John MacBeath,

George KT Oduro, Joanne Waterhouse.

Obadara, O. (2013). Relationship between distributed leadership and sustainable school improvement.

Nigeria: Department of Educational Management Tai Solarin University of Education.

OECD (2009). Creating effective teaching and learning environments first results from TALIS

(Teaching and Learning International Survey), OECD Publishing

Timperley, H.S., 2005. Distributed leadership: Developing theory from practice. Journal of Curriculum

Studies, 37(4): 395-420.

Spillane, J.P., Halverson, R. & Diamond, J.B. (2004). Towards a theory of leadership practice: a

distributed perspective, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36(1): 3–34.

Spillane, J. P. (2006) Distributed Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

(www.sesp.northwestern.edu/docs)

Spillane, J. P. & Camburn E. (2006) The Practice of Leading and Managing: The Distribution of

Responsibility for Leadership and Management in the Schoolhouse. Paper presented at AERA

San Francisco. April 2006 (www.jstor.org : December 2006)

Spillane, J. P., Camburn E. & Lewis, G. (2006) Taking a Distributed Perspective in Studying School

Leadership and Management: Epistemological and Methodological Trade-Offs. Paper presented

at AERA San Francisco. April 2006 (www.sesp.northwestern.edu/dls : May 2007)

Wheatley, M. (1999) Goodbye, Command and Control, Educational Leadership (2000)

pp. 339-347. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Distributed Leadership 13