The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

http://www.emerald-library.com

Transformational leadership Large-scale

innovation
and the implementation of programs

large-scale innovation
programs Received October 1998
309

Femke Geijsel, Peter Sleegers and Rudolf van den Berg Accepted February 1999
University of Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Keywords Leadership, Innovation, Implementation, Teachers' changed practices,
Educational improvement, The Netherlands
Abstract Examines the nature of transformational leadership and its relation to teachers'
changed practices within the context of Dutch large-scale innovation. Presents two qualitative
studies and a survey. The qualitative studies produced three dimensions of transformational
leadership: vision, individual consideration, and intellectual stimulation. Within the framework of
the survey, these dimensions were further operationalized and exploratively related to teachers'
concerns, teachers' learning activities, and teachers' changed practices. The results indicate the
significance of the dimensions of transformational leadership in relation to changed teacher
practices. The results also suggest the significance of intervening constructs for future research
into the impact of leadership on changed teacher practices.
In The Netherlands, as in many other countries, schools are becoming
increasingly responsible for the implementation of large-scale innovations
initiated by government policy. Large-scale innovations can be distinguished
from small-scale innovations by their complexity, multidimensionality, and
need to accomplish several objectives simultaneously (van den Berg, 1992). In
order to implement these innovations in a successful manner, major changes in
the organization of schools are necessary. Salisbury and Conner (1994) refer to
these changes as transitions that disrupt people's expectations with regard to
their job content and thereby produce new concerns and feelings of uncertainty.
This makes specific leadership necessary. For minor or small-scale changes,
traditional leadership seems to be sufficient. In the case of large-scale
innovation, however, traditional leadership is simply not good enough (e.g.
Leithwood, 1992; Mitchell and Tucker, 1992). Over the last decade, more and
more empirical evidence has emerged for the importance of transformational
leadership within the context of implementing large-scale innovation programs
(e.g. Leithwood et al., 1996). Transformational leadership appears to be
necessary to drive teachers to the higher levels of concern and motivation that
are needed for such kind of educational improvement (van den Berg and
Sleegers, 1996a; Leithwood, 1994).
The purpose of the studies presented in this article was to examine
transformational leadership in the context of the implementation of large-scale
innovation programs by teachers in The Netherlands. The results of the studies Journal of Educational
provide greater insight into transformational leadership across nations and Administration, Vol. 37 No. 4, 1999,
pp. 309-328.# MCB University
cultures. Press, 0957-8234
Journal of Theoretical framework
Educational Transformational leadership is a term used increasingly in relation to large-
Administration scale innovation in education (e.g. Leithwood, 1994). This form of leadership is
considered crucial for the implementation of large-scale innovations by
37,4 teachers (van den Berg and Sleegers, 1996a). The concept was originally
developed in the non-school literature on leadership. Disillusionment with the
310 outcomes of traditional task-oriented leadership had also led to new theories of
transformational leadership (e.g. Bass, 1990).

Transformational leadership in non-educational settings

With Weber's (1964) ideas on power and charisma in mind, Burns (1978) drew
attention to the concept of ``transforming'' leadership to emphasize the
significance of the interaction between leader and followers. Burns
distinguished two forms of interaction: transactional and transforming.
According to Burns, transactional leadership occurs when a person interacts
with another person for the purpose of exchanging valued things with no
mutual pursuit of a higher purpose. In contrast, transforming leadership occurs
``when one or more persons engage with others in such a way that leaders and
followers raise one another to higher levels of motivation and morality'' (Burns,
1979, p. 382).
Based upon Burns' theoretical ideas, Bass and his associates (e.g. Bass, 1985;
Bass and Avolio, 1994) have developed a model of transformational leadership
and performed extensive survey research into the nature of such leadership.
Whereas Burns considers transactional and transformational leadership to be
opposites, Bass and Avolio (1994) present the two types of leadership as part of
a single dimension. Transactional leadership fosters the basic needs of
followers, emphasizes the transaction or exchange between leaders and their
followers, and is characterized by management by exception and contingent
reward. Management by exception involves behavior on the part of the leader
in response to problems arising from the practices of the others in the school.
Contingent reward means that the leader tells the staff what to do to be
rewarded for their efforts (Leithwood, 1994). Transactional leadership is
generally sufficient to maintain the status quo in schools. In order to achieve
change and innovation, however, transformational leadership is necessary to
``motivate others to do more than they originally intended and often even more
than they thought possible'' (Bass and Avolio, 1994, p. 3). Transformational
leaders achieve superior results by operating in keeping with the four Is (cf.
Bass and Avolio, 1994, pp. 3-4):
(1) Idealized influence which involves being role models for their followers.
(2) Inspirational motivation which involves motivating and inspiring
followers by providing meaning and challenge to their work.
(3) Intellectual stimulation which involves stimulating followers' efforts to
be innovative and creative.
 (4) Individualized consideration which involves paying special attention to Large-scale
each individual's needs for achievement and growth. innovation
Bass and his associates have conducted considerable research into the programs
dimensions of transactional and transformational leadership.
Transformational and transactional leadership are indeed related in the sense
that transformational leadership augments transactional leadership: 311
transformational leaders score higher on dimensions of transactional
leadership than non-transformational leaders. Very successful leaders of
business innovations have also been found to score significantly higher on
dimensions of transformational leadership than matched leaders of established
businesses (Bass, 1990). In the current area of continuing demands for
innovations in school organizations, it is therefore not surprising that the
concept of transformational leadership is being applied increasingly.

Transformational leadership in educational settings

The research into transformational leadership in educational settings was
initiated by Leithwood and his colleagues from the Ontario Institute for Studies
in Education (Toronto, Canada) in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Leithwood's
research concerns not only the nature of transformational school leadership but
also the internal processes of transformational school leaders and the effects of
such leadership on the school, teacher, and student outcomes. With regard to
internal processes of transformational school leaders, Leithwood and Stager
(1989) report high levels of problem-solving expertise. The results of
Leithwood's studies into the nature of school leadership (based on the
aforementioned work of Burns and Bass) have revealed specific dimensions of
transformational school leadership and behaviors associated with each of these
dimensions. Within the wide range of dimensions, the following three
dimensions of transformational school leadership appear to be most relevant
(Leithwood et al., 1996):
(1) charisma/inspiration/vision which means inspiring teachers to be
engaged in their work by developing, identifying, and articulating a
particular vision;
(2) individual consideration which means concern and respect for the
personal feelings and needs of teachers; and
(3) intellectual stimulation which means challenging teachers to
professionalize themselves in such a manner that the organization is
learning as a whole.
These three dimensions of transformational school leadership strongly
resemble the four Is of Bass and Avolio (1994). The one difference consists of
the two Is (Idealized influence and Inspirational motivation), which are
combined in Leithwood's dimension of charisma/ inspiration/ vision. The other
dimensions identified in Leithwood's studies but with less evidence for their
relevance are: structuring, culture building, high performance expectations,
Journal of and modelling. The dimensions of transactional leadership appear to have
Educational conflicting relevance (contingent reward) or to be irrelevant (management by
Administration exception) for school leaders (Leithwood et al., 1996).
With regard to the nature of the relationship between transformational and
37,4 transactional school leadership and its effects on educational improvement,
Silins (1994) reports some relevant findings. In keeping with the
312 aforementioned researchers, Silins finds transformational leadership to be
reflected in the three core dimensions: charisma/inspiration, individual
consideration, and intellectual stimulation. Transactional leadership appears to
be defined positively by contingent reward and negatively by management by
exception. Furthermore, Silins found transactional school leadership to indeed
be strongly dependent on transformational school leadership, which is also in
conformance with the aforementioned notions from Bass.
Leithwood et al. (1996) report on the effects of transformational school
leadership on the perceptions of leader effectiveness, the behaviors of teachers,
teachers' psychological states, organizational learning, organizational
improvement, the school culture, and students. Most of the observed effects and
especially the stronger ones could be ascribed to the three most relevant
dimensions of transformational leadership mentioned above.
By finding empirical evidence for the existence of transformational
leadership in schools, Leithwood and his associates made it clear that
transformational leadership is indeed important for schools in current society.
In this article, the nature of transformational leadership in Dutch schools and
the relationship between transformational school leadership and teachers'
changed practices (as a result of the implementation of large-scale innovation
programs) will be examined. In The Netherlands, a tendency towards
decentralized policy together with increasing competitive forces and the
debureaucratization of Dutch society are making it necessary for schools to
improve education and implement large-scale innovation more autonomously
(Sleegers and Wesselingh, 1995). This means that transformational leadership
is likely to be of importance in Dutch schools (cf. van den Berg and Sleegers,
1996a). Two qualitative studies and a survey in the areas of secondary and
primary education in The Netherlands were conducted to provide greater
(international) insight into the importance of transformational leadership for
educational improvement.

Method of the two qualitative studies

Sample
In 1993, a small group of Dutch researchers developed a strategy to examine
the innovative capacity of schools (cf. van den Berg and Sleegers, 1996a). First,
a review of the literature on innovative organizations was undertaken to define
the main components with transformational leadership discerned as one of
these components. Then, two qualitative studies were undertaken to examine
the components in greater detail. For the purposes of the present article, only
the data with regard to transformational leadership will be presented. For a full
description of the studies, the reader is referred to van den Berg and Sleegers Large-scale
(1996b) and Geijsel et al. (1999). innovation
For the first qualitative study, a group of high innovation and a group of low programs
innovation secondary schools were selected. This selection was based on two
criteria: the school began early with the preparation for a current compulsory
innovation at that time, and the school has a tradition of quickly and frequently
implementing innovations. For the second qualitative study a group of high 313
innovation and a group of low innovation primary schools were selected. In
addition to the two preceding criteria, the selection for this study was based on
a third criterion: the opinions of the external school supporter from the region
on the innovative practices of the school.
Table I shows the number of schools, teachers, and school leaders that
participated in the research.
The teachers and school leaders from the selected schools were interviewed.
In both studies, the interview questions were grouped under a number of topics
and served to guide the interview. Also in both studies, the implementation of a
large-scale innovation program was taken as the starting point for the
interviews.

Data analysis
All of the interviews were audio recorded and transcribed. The interview
protocols constituted the raw material of the two studies and qualitative
analyses were undertaken. All of the protocols were divided into a number of
text fragments. In the first study, each text fragment was then assigned to a
keyword to indicate the subject of the text. This assignment of keywords was
performed with the aid of the computer program KWALITAN (Peters et al.,
1989), which is a database program that enables one to order raw (interview)
material in a simple manner. The keywords were further ordered on the basis
of the conceptual framework stemming from the review of the literature on
innovative organizations. The final keywords from the first study constituted
the starting point for the qualitative data analysis of the interview protocols in
the second study. With the aid of a computer program called TEXT-TABLE
(Welten and Janssen, 1993), the text fragments were classified into categories.
These categories were then classified as pertaining to one of the components of
innovative capacity. This classification was largely based on the available
literature. For a more detailed description of the review of literature, the

High innovation Low innovation

schools schools Total

Secondary education Five schools Four schools Nine schools

(1992-1993) ± 25 teachers ± 21 teachers ± 46 teachers
Primary education Six schools Four schools Ten schools Table I.
(1993-1994) ± 39 teachers ± 15 teachers ± 54 teachers Samples of both
± six school leaders ± four school leaders ± ten school leaders qualitative studies
Journal of research design, and the methods of data collection and analyses for both
Educational studies, the reader is referred to van den Berg and Sleegers (1996a; 1996b) and
Administration Geijsel et al. (1999).
37,4 Reliability
In qualitative research, intersubjectivity is an important method for
314 determining the reliability of the analyses. Intersubjectivity means consensus
between researchers. Smaling (1992, pp. 170-3) describes three traditional forms
and two alternative forms of intersubjectivity.
Consensual intersubjectivity refers to consensus between the researchers on
the interpretation of the data. The data analyses in each of the present studies
were conducted by two researchers with both of their judgements considered
equal. Consensus was reached on each of the text fragments. The assignment of
the keywords and categories to the components of innovative capacity was an
iterative process in which the research supervisors were also involved. In this
process, consensus was also reached in the end. Intersubjectivity by
regimentation refers to a strict regulation of the data-collection techniques to
minimize any differences between the researchers. For this purpose, all of the
interviews in the first study and the first six interviews in the second study
were conducted by the two interviewers in each other's presence. One
interviewer asked the questions while the other critically listened. Afterwards,
each interview was carefully evaluated with an eye to the conduct of consistent
and similar interviews. Intersubjectivity by explicitness refers to being as
explicit as possible about the materials, methods, design, and motives for the
selection of these. For this purpose, each of the steps in the present studies was
carefully described and justified (van den Berg and Sleegers, 1996b; Geijsel,
1994; Geijsel et al., 1999). A less widespread form of intersubjectivity is
argumentative subjectivity. This is based on the assumption that the growth of
scientific knowledge cannot continue without discussion and argumentation.
According to Smaling (1992), methodological discussion as well as equality
between the researchers are of central importance to this form of
intersubjectivity. Both occurred in this study. Dialogical intersubjectivity, also
a less widespread form of intersubjectivity, means that consensus is necessary
not only between researchers but also between the researchers and the
respondents. This can be gained by providing feedback and considering the
reactions of the respondents to the feedback. In the present studies, each of the
participating schools received a feedback report. The school also had the
opportunity to discuss the report with the researchers, and a few of the schools
did this.

Findings of the qualitative studies

The findings with regard to transformational leadership in secondary
education are presented in Table II. As mentioned above, the interviews were
analyzed qualitatively by relating the statements of the interviewees to key
words. For a full description of these key words, the reader is referred to van
 Total number of Total number of Large-scale
statements for high statements for low innovation
Key word innovation group innovation group
programs
Task construction
Realization of a target idea 53 18
No common educational vision 5 20
Team building 33 2
315
Contact
Low-barrier school leadership 11 5
High-barrier school leadership 7 11
Initiatives
Stimulated 34 8
Not stimulated 3 14
Personnel policy Table II.
Cultural maintenance 7 0 Overview of key words
Personnel care 12 3 relevant to
Decision making transformational
On the basis of staff meetings 14 4 leadership for each
group of secondary
Source: Table from van den Berg and Sleegers (1996a, p. 681) schools

den Berg and Sleegers (1996b). In Table II, those key words with a relatively
large difference in the numbers of statements produced by the 46 interviewees
from the high and low innovation schools are shown.
These results show school leaders in high innovation schools to attempt to
create and realize a target idea (realization of a target idea). In low innovation
schools, this proved to be much less the case (no common educational vision).
School leaders in high innovation schools also appeared to create a supportive
atmosphere among the members of the teaching team (team building). The
contact between the school leaders and the teachers was also judged to be
satisfactory in the high innovation schools (supportive school leadership). In
addition, initiatives in high innovation schools were stimulated by the school
leaders; this was less so in the low innovation schools. In high innovation
schools, the school leaders considered it important to maintain or improve the
existing culture. School leaders also paid a lot of attention to the well-being of
the teachers (personnel care). In the high innovation group, strategic decisions
were also predominantly made in the staff meeting.
In summary, the school leaders in the high innovation secondary schools
showed more vision and more support, more stimulation of initiatives, more
care for the personnel as well as the cultural climate in the school, and more
involvement in decision making than the school leaders in the low innovation
secondary schools.
The findings with regard to transformational leadership in primary
education are presented in Table III. Again, the interviews were analyzed
Journal of Total number of Total number of
Educational statements for high statements for low
Key words innovation group innovation group
Administration
37,4 Vision 38 17
No vision 1 43
Charisma 22 0
316 No charisma 0 38
Innovation 62 7
Traditional teaching 0 26
Sufficient individual feedback 27 5
Insufficient individual feedback 4 12
Adequate delegation 48 5
Table III. Inadequate delegation 12 38
An overview of key Joint goals 41 2
words relevant to Collaborative culture 41 2
transformational Joint responsibility 7 2
leadership for each No joint responsibility 0 47
group of primary
schools Source: Table from van den Berg and Sleegers (1996a, p. 685)

qualitatively by relating statements of the interviewees to key words. The key

words of the previous study were the basis for this analysis. In Table III, all of
the key words pertaining to transformational leadership in this study with 64
interviewees are shown along with the number occurring in high versus low
innovation schools. For a full description of these key words, the reader is
referred to Geijsel (1994).
The school leaders in the high innovation primary schools were found to
have a clear vision of education and their school. The leaders in these schools
also had a certain charisma that inspired the teachers, but they could also take
a firm position when necessary. The school leaders in the high innovation
schools were found to work continuously on the realization of their vision,
consciously initiate innovations, and use their powers of persuasion to motivate
the team. At the same time, the leaders showed respect for the ideas of others
and understanding for their personal needs and feelings. They delegated
responsibilities without disregard. A great deal of attention was also paid to the
creation of a joint plan of responsibility. In such a way, collaboration became
self-evident and could be further stimulated. The school leaders in the low
innovation schools showed a very different image. Many of the respondents in
these schools were of the opinion that their school leader had no educational
vision. The school leaders' ideas on teaching in these schools were conservative
and in favor of traditional teaching. These school leaders also initiated,
motivated, and inspired much less than the school leaders in high innovation
schools. Personal needs and feelings were rarely considered and the delegation
of responsibility was inadequate. The school leaders in the low innovation
schools also made little attempt to create a shared plan of responsibility for
innovation and change.
 In summary, the school leaders in the high innovation primary schools Large-scale
showed more vision, more charisma, more teaching reform, more individual innovation
feedback, better delegation, more joint responsibility, and a more collaborative programs
culture than the school leaders in the low innovation primary schools.

Conclusions and interpretation

With regard to the nature of transformational leadership in Dutch schools, both 317
studies show high innovation schools to have more transformational leadership
than low innovation schools. Interpretation of the found key words in terms of
the theoretical dimensions as presented earlier results in three dimensions to
stand out, i.e. vision[1] (the realization of a target idea; no common educational
vision; (no) vision; (no) charisma; joint goals), individual consideration (low/
high-barrier school leadership; personnel care; (in)sufficient individual
feedback), and intellectual stimulation ((not) stimulated initiatives; innovation;
traditional teaching). These findings of the qualitative studies constitute the
starting point for our survey research. This survey research was initiated to
further examine the dimensions of transformational leadership in Dutch
schools. In the next sections, the framework, method, and findings of the
survey will be described.

Framework of the survey

The purpose of the survey research was to examine dimensions of
transformational school leadership. More specifically, such dimensions were
considered as important conditions for changed teacher practices (van den Berg
and Sleegers, 1996a). Following current views on the conceptualization of
leadership (Duke, 1996), we focused on followers' perceptions of their
leadership and conceptualised the dimensions of transformational leadership
as forms of social influence (i.e. Gronn and Ribins, 1996; Hallinger and Heck,
1996). In line with this, vision is seen as more than merely a statement written
down by the school leader (Maehr and Midgley, 1996). Vision exists when
teachers participate in the creation and maintenance of the school's vision.
Individual consideration means that the teachers feel that they are respected
and experience concern for their personal feelings and needs. It is less
important who exactly is responsible for these concerns as long as good work
and effort is recognized. Intellectual stimulation means teachers feel themselves
intellectually and professionally challenged and stimulated. Also, teachers
should experience financial support for their professional development.
If teachers indeed experience vision, individual consideration, and
intellectual stimulation in the way as just described, impact on teacher
practices can be expected. Following Hallinger and Heck's (1996) assumption
that such impact is likely to be indirect by nature, the relationship between
leadership dimensions and changed teacher practices is to be placed within a
more comprehensive model including several intervening constructs.
Transformational leadership, as described in the first sections of this article,
involves motivating and inspiring teachers to innovate and perform in better
Journal of ways. Besides a direct influence on the implementation of innovations
Educational (teachers' changed practices), an indirect influence of vision, individual
Administration consideration, and intellectual stimulation through teachers' attitudes and
learning activities is assumed. Teachers' attitudes towards innovations largely
37,4 consist of concern, as shown by research based on the Concerns-Based
Adoption Model (Hall and Hord, 1987; van den Berg, 1993). Such research has
318 shown the concerns of individual teachers to greatly influence the
implementation of innovations in schools. In turn, transformational school
leadership can be expected to influence the degree to which teachers experience
concerns. For instance, clear consideration of teachers' needs and feelings as
well as the development and clarification of a vision (both dimensions of
transformational leadership) can make teachers more self-confident with
regard to their own capabilities and less afraid of what is to come. Intellectual
stimulation for teachers (the third dimension of transformational leadership)
can be expected to influence the degree to which teachers develop activities to
learn professionally. If teachers indeed undertake such learning activities, then
this will probably have a positive impact on the degree to which the teachers
actually implement the innovation and change their practices.
In the context of the present study, teachers' concerns and learning activities
in addition to the dimensions of leadership and changed teacher practices were
examined. The following conceptual framework for the survey of
transformational leadership was adopted (see Figure 1).
As can be seen, the conceptual framework implies direct as well as indirect
influences of transformational leadership on teaching practices with teachers'
concerns and teachers' learning activities serving as intermediate variables. In
the following sections, the conceptual framework will be exploratively and
empirically verified.

Method of the survey

Sample
The survey took place in Dutch Agricultural Training Centers (ATCs). ATCs
provide pre-vocational education and senior secondary vocational education in
the area of agriculture. Each of the 18 ATCs in The Netherlands was asked to
participate in this study. Fourteen ATCs agreed to participate. All teachers of

Vision Teachers’
concerns

Teachers’
Individual changed
consideration practices

Teachers’
Figure 1. learning
Intellectual
Conceptual framework stimulation activities
of the survey
the participating schools received the questionnaires from their superiors; 49 Large-scale
percent responded for a total of 1,249 teachers. innovation
Of the teachers responding, 662 worked in the so-called pre-vocational programs
department of the ATC and were confronted with the implementation of a new
core curriculum for the first two or three years of secondary education. This
innovation program is known as basic education. The other 587 responding
teachers worked in the senior secondary vocational department of the ATC and 319
were confronted with the implementation of new structures for evaluating
pupil achievement. This innovation program is called qualification structure.
Both of the innovation programs imply specific changes, steered by
government policy. Both of the programs call for greater autonomy and
responsibility for pupils with regard to their own learning process and
emphasize such skills as knowledge application, problem solving, and peer
cooperation.

Variables in the study

Each of the variables derived from the conceptual framework was
operationally defined by a number of items. The formulation of these items was
partly based on actual statements of the interviewees of the qualitative studies.
The nine items for vision refer to teachers' involvement in developing a vision.
Individual consideration refers to the appreciation and respect the school
leaders have for the teachers as individuals (eight items). Intellectual
stimulation refers to the support school leaders provide for the professional
development of teachers (three items). Concerns refer to teachers' concerns with
regard to the day-to-day pressures brought about by the need to reform and
implement innovations (ten items). As mentioned above, this variable is
derived from research based on the Concerns-Based Adoption Model (CBAM)
in The Netherlands and Belgium (cf. van den Berg, 1993). Consideration of this
research (cf. van den Berg and Vandenberghe, 1995) led us to relate concerns to
implementation of innovation in general and not a specific part of an
innovation program (Geijsel, 1994). Learning activities refer to initiatives that
individual teachers undertake to improve their teaching capability (six items).
Changed practices measure educational improvement by asking questions
about teachers' changed practices as a result of changed teaching materials and
methods (ten items). This variable relates to the implementation of a particular
innovation program and thus the interpretation of its outcomes differs for the
two groups of teachers. Consequently, the results of both groups of teachers are
analyzed separately.
To verify the validity of the items, several teachers from different schools
were asked to check the quality of the items. Their remarks were taken into
account. These items were then placed in a questionnaire, which also contained
items referring to other variables. For a full description of this questionnaire
and survey results, the reader is referred to Ross et al. (1996). For the items on
vision, individual consideration, concerns, and changed practices the
respondents were provided with the following response categories: (1) I
Journal of disagree; (2) I disagree a little; (3) I agree a little; and (4) I agree. For the items on
Educational intellectual stimulation and learning activities, the respondents were provided
Administration with the following response categories: (1) never; (2) sometimes; (3) often; (4)
always.
37,4 On the basis of factor analyses, the unidimensionality of each variable was
examined and scales were constructed. The results of these analyses,
320 summarized in the Appendix, showed the items for each variable to be
unidimensional with the exception of intellectual stimulation and learning
activities. The KMO-value[2] of these variables showed the scale construction
to be less appropriate. Reliability analyses, also summarized in the Appendix,
showed the reliability of most of the scales to be satisfactory according to the
reliability coefficients (Cronbach's alpha). Two scales appeared to be less
reliable: intellectual stimulation (due to the relatively small number of items)
and learning activities.
The descriptive statistics for each of the variables are presented in Table IV.
It appears that the teachers in both departments of the ATCs think quite
positively about the extent of transformational leadership in their schools. The
teachers report frequent participation in the creation of a vision. They also
report their superiors to show respect and appreciation for them as individuals.
With regard to intellectual stimulation, the teachers are quite often supported
in their professional development. Furthermore, the teachers do not feel very
concerned about the day-to-day pressures brought about by the innovations.
The teachers also report frequently undertaking learning activities. The
teachers in the senior vocational department seem to have changed their
practices a little bit more than the teachers in the pre-vocational department;
both groups indicate that their teaching practices have not radically changed,
however.

Findings of the survey

The relations between the variables in the conceptual framework were
exploratively examined by means of correlational and multiple regression
analyses. The results of the correlational analyses for the teachers of the pre-
vocational department are presented in Table V. In Table VI the results of the

Pre-vocational group Senior vocational group

M SD N M SD N

Vision 2.93 0.64 628 2.79 0.68 583

Individual consideration 3.19 0.61 628 3.02 0.65 581
Table IV. Intellectual stimulation 2.78 0.61 615 2.62 0.70 574
Mean (M), standard Concerns 2.15 0.69 628 2.27 0.65 580
deviation (SD), and Learning activities 2.73 0.47 629 2.74 0.43 584
number of respondents Changed practices 2.44 0.78 530 2.65 0.74 524
(N) for the variables for
both groups of teachers Notes: To compute these results, the following items were recoded: ic6, is1, c3, and c4 (cf.
(four point scale) Appendix)
correlational analyses for the teachers of the senior vocational department are Large-scale
presented. innovation
Almost all of the correlations were found to be significant and point in the programs
expected direction. An increase in the degree of concerns correlates with a
decrease in each of the other variables. Apparently, the extent to which
teachers feel concerns for the day-to-day pressures of implementing
innovations corresponds to a less vision, less individual consideration, less 321
intellectual stimulation, less learning activities, and less changed teaching
practices. All of the remaining correlations were positive, which means that the
extent to which teachers perceive the dimensions of transformational
leadership corresponds to the extent to which they undertake learning
activities and change their practices in response to an innovation. In both
groups of teachers[3], the three dimensions of leadership appeared to correlate
quite strongly, which could suggest a common factor of leadership. Also, the
leadership dimensions correlated moderately with concerns. Furthermore,
learning activities moderately correlated with concerns and changed practices.
Multiple regression analyses can produce a better understanding of the joint
influence of the independent variables on the dependent variables. Such
analyses can also reveal paths between antecedents, intermediate variables,
and dependent variables. To explore the paths between the variables in the
conceptual framework a series of multiple regression analysis was computed
for both groups of teachers (pre-vocational and senior vocational group). These
included: treating changed practices as the dependent variable with all other

1 2 3 4 5 6

Vision (1) ± 0.53 0.26 ±0.22 0.11 0.28

Individual consideration (2) ± 0.35 ±0.16 n.s. 0.16
Intellectual stimulation (3) ± ±0.25 0.15 0.12
Concerns (4) ± ±0.33 ±0.17 Table V.
Learning activities (5) ± 0.25 Correlations between
Changed practices (6) ± variables for the
teachers of the pre-
Notes: n = 662; p < 0.05; n.s. = not significant vocational department

1 2 3 4 5 6

Vision (1) ± 0.57 0.37 ±0.24 0.16 0.11

Individual consideration (2) ± 0.42 ±0.31 0.15 n.s.
Intellectual stimulation (3) ± ±0.18 0.18 0.09
Concerns (4) ± ±0.29 ±0.21 Table VI.
Learning activities (5) ± 0.23 Correlations between
Changed practices (6) ± variables for the
teachers of the senior
Notes: n = 587; p < 0.05; n.s. = not significant vocational department
Journal of variables as predictors; or treating concerns and learning activities as
Educational dependent variables with vision, individual consideration, and intellectual
Administration stimulation as predictors.
Results of the regression analyses for changed practices, concerns, and
37,4 learning activities are shown in Figures 2 and 3. Only statistical significant
effects (p < 0.05) were included in these figures. Along with each arrow within
322 the figures the standardized partial regression coefficients (path coefficients)
are reported. The first figure (Figure 2) concerns the teachers in a pre-
vocational department (n = 662).
First, for changed practices there were significant effects of vision and
learning activities. Apparently, the implementation of an innovation program
will result in more changes in teaching practices when teachers in pre-
vocational education have perceived more vision. Also, the more learning
activities teachers undertake, the more they change their teaching practices as
a result of an innovation program. These effects explain 12 percent of the
variance in the dependent variable (F(2,491) = 34.81, p = 0.000). Second, the
results in Figure 2 show significant negative effects of vision and intellectual
stimulation on concerns. Apparently, the more vision and intellectual
stimulation is perceived by the teachers of pre-vocational education, the less
concerns they have with regard to the day-to-day pressures of innovation.

Vision β = .26
R2 = .08 R2 = .12

Figure 2. β = –.17 Concerns

Changed
practices
Standardized regression
coefficients of Individual
significant relationships consideration β = –.20
for changed practices-P β = .20
Learning
in pre-vocational activities
education
β = .14 R2 = .02
(R2 = adjusted R Square) Intellectual
stimulation
(method = stepwise)

β = –.10
Vision
R2 = .11
β = .10
Figure 3. Concerns β = –.15
Standardized regression R2 = .07
coefficients of Individual Changed
significant relationships consideration β = –.26 practices
for changed practice-S in Learning
senior vocational activities β = .19
education
β = .14 R2 = .04
(R2 = adjusted R Square) Intellectual
stimulation
(method = stepwise)
These two effects on concerns account for 8 percent of the variance (F(2,610) = Large-scale
28.19, p = 0.000). Third, a significantly positive effect of intellectual stimulation innovation
on learning activities is shown. The more teachers experience intellectual programs
stimulation from their superiors, the more learning activities they undertake.
This effect explains only 2 percent of the variance in learning activities (F(1,611)
= 12.44, p = 0.001).
In addition to evidence supporting a direct effect of vision on changed 323
practices, the results presented in Figure 2 suggest a modest indirect effect of
intellectual stimulation on changed practices with learning activities as the
intermediate variable.
In Figure 3, the significant results for the set of multiple regression analyses
concerning teachers in a senior vocational department are presented (n = 587).
Again, this figure shows the regressions for three dependent variables. First,
a significant negative effect of concerns and a significant positive effect of
learning activities on changed practices was observed. It appears that the more
concerns the teachers of senior vocational education have regarding the day-to-
day pressures of innovation, the less they change their teaching practices as a
result of the innovation program. Also, the more learning activities teachers
undertake, the more they change their teaching practices as a result of the
innovation program. These two effects explain 7 percent of the variance in the
dependent variable (F(2,516) = 20.77, p = 0.000). Second, the results in Figure 3
show significant negative effects of vision and individual consideration on
concerns. Apparently, the more vision and individual consideration the
teachers of senior vocational education perceive, the less concerns they have.
These effects account for 11 percent of the variance in concerns (F(2,567) = 34.69,
p = 0.000). Third, significantly positive effects of vision and intellectual
stimulation on learning activities were observed. The more teachers experience
vision and intellectual stimulation from their superiors, the more learning
activities they undertake. These effects explain only 4 percent of the variance in
learning activities (F(2,568) = 12.27, p = 0.000).
While there appears to be no direct effect of the dimensions of leadership on
the changed practices of teachers in senior vocational education, there are
modest indirect effects of all three dimensions of transformational leadership
on changed practices through the intermediate variables (concerns and
learning activities).

Conclusions and implications

In this article, qualitative and quantitative analyses were undertaken to
examine the nature of transformational leadership in Dutch schools. On the
basis of the qualitative analyses three important dimensions of
transformational leadership were identified: vision, individual consideration,
and intellectual stimulation. A survey study was then undertaken to explore
the impact of these dimensions of transformational leadership on teachers'
changed practices as a result of the current innovation program. Two
constructs were taken to mediate this relationship: teachers' concerns for the
Journal of day-to-day pressures of innovation and teachers' learning activities. The
Educational dimensions of transformational leadership were operationalized according to
Administration current perspectives on the concept of leadership in such a manner that not so
much the actual behavior of the leader himself but more the actual impact of
37,4
the leader on his or her followers was emphasized. The results of the qualitative
analyses (i.e. statements of the interviewees) were used for the formulation of
324 items on vision, individual consideration, and intellectual stimulation. With
regard to the results of the survey, it can be concluded that vision, individual
consideration, and intellectual stimulation indeed indirectly influence teachers'
changed practices through teachers' concerns and learning activities. Vision
also seems to directly influence teachers' changed practices but only for one
group of teachers within the sample. In addition, it must be concluded that
teachers' learning activities by itself has an important impact on teachers'
changed practices.
So, the findings of the studies presented in this article show vision,
individual consideration, and intellectual stimulation as dimensions of
transformational leadership to be relevant for changed teacher practices in
Dutch schools. Further research into dimensions of transformational leadership
is therefore important. Also, our findings are consistent with Hallinger and
Heck's (1996) assumption that relatively most leadership impact is likely to be
indirect by nature. This calls for the use of comprehensive models for further
study of the impact of transformational leadership including intervening
constructs like teachers' concerns and learning activities. The modest
percentages of explained variance indicate that besides these two constructs
also other intervening contructs could be of importance. Currently, several
studies into the impact of dimensions of transformational school leadership are
conducted in The Netherlands and also in Belgium. Like the studies presented
in this article, this research is part of a broader examination of the innovative
capacities of schools. In addition to the dimensions of transformational
leadership, teachers' concerns, teachers' learning activities, and teachers'
changed practices, the contributions of collaboration among teachers,
participation in decision making, and job satisfaction are also being examined
with the use of advanced statistical procedures (i.e. Lisrel analyses). In such a
manner, we will hopefully gain greater insight into the nature of
transformational leadership and its impact on educational improvement.

Notes
1. The authors choose to speak of vision instead of Leithwood's charisma/inspiration/vision
because vision is most commonly accepted in Dutch society.
2. The KMO value indicates the extent to which a collection of items is appropriate for factor
analyses.
3. To compare the results of the pre-vocational and senior vocational groups, the covariances
between the variables were also computed. These results are not reported here, because
they showed the same pattern as the correlations.
References Large-scale
Bass, B.M. (1985), Leadership and Performance beyond Expectations, The Free Press, New York, NY. innovation
Bass, B.M. (1990), Bass & Stogdill's Handbook of Leadership, 3rd ed., The Free Press, New York,
NY.
programs
Bass, B.M. and Avolio, B.J. (1994), Improving Organizational Effectiveness through
Transformational Leadership, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Berg, R. van den (1992), ``Transformational education policy: schools as strategic organization'', 325
Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 440-59.
Berg, R. van den (1993), ``The concerns-based adoption model in The Netherlands, Flanders and
the United Kingdom: state of the art and perspective studies'', Educational Evaluation,
Vol. 19, pp. 51-63.
Berg, R. van den and Sleegers, P. (1996a), ``Building innovative capacity and leadership'', in
Leithwood, K.A. (Ed.), International Handbook of Educational Leadership and
Administration, Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 653-700.
Berg, R. van den and Sleegers, P. (1996b), ``The innovative capacity of schools in secondary
education: a qualitative study'', International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education,
Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 201-23.
Berg, R. van den and Vandenberghe, R. (Eds) (1995), Wegen van betrokkenheid: Reflecties op
onderwijsvernieuwing, (Ways of Concerns: Reflections on Educational Improvement),
Zwijsen, Tilburg.
Burns, J.M. (1978), Leadership, Harper & Row, New York, NY.
Burns, J.M. (1979), ``Two excerpts from leadership'', Educational Leadership, Vol. 36, pp. 380-3.
Duke, D.L. (1996), ``Perception, prescription, and the future of school leadership'', in Leithwood,
K., Chapman, J., Corson, D., Hallinger, Ph. and Hart, A., International Handbook of
Educational Leadership and Administration, Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 841-72.
Geijsel, F. (1994), ``Het innovatief vermogen van scholen in het basisonderwijs'', (``The innovative
capacity of primary schools''), University of Nijmegen (Departement of Educational
Sciences), Nijmegen.
Geijsel, F., Berg, R. van den and Sleegers, P. (1999), ``The innovative capacity of schools in
primary education: a second qualitative study'', International Journal of Qualitative Studies
in Education, accepted, in press for spring 1999.
Gronn, P. and Ribbins, P. (1996), ``Leaders in context: postpositivist approaches to understanding
educational leadership'', Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 452-73.
Hall, G.E. and Hord, S.M. (1987), Change in Schools Facilitating the Process, State University of
New York Press, Albany, NY.
Hallinger, Ph. and Heck, R.H. (1996), ``Reassessing the principal's role in school effectiveness: a
review of empirical research, 1980-1995'', Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 32
No. 1, pp. 5-44.
Leithwood, K.A. (1992), ``The move toward transformational leadership'', Educational Leadership,
Vol. 49 No. 5, pp. 8-12.
Leithwood, K.A. (1994), ``Leadership for school restructuring'', Educational Administration
Quarterly, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 498-518.
Leithwood, K.A. and Stager, M. (1989), ``Expertise in principals' problem solving'', Educational
Administrative Quarterly, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 126-61.
Leithwood, K., Tomlinson, D. and Genge, M. (1996), ``Transformational school leadership'', in
Leithwood, K., Chapman, J., Corson, D., Hallinger, Ph. and Hart, A., International
Handbook of Educational Leadership and Administration, Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 785-840.
Maehr, M.L. and Midgley, C. (1996), Transforming School Cultures, Westview Press, Oxford.
Journal of Mitchell, D.E. and Tucker, S. (1992), ``Leadership as a way of thinking'', Educational Leadership,
Vol. 49 No. 5, pp. 30-5.
Educational Peters, V., Wester, F. and Richardson, R. (1989), ``Kwalitatieve analyse in de praktijk en
Administration Handleiding bij Kwalitan versie 2'', (``Practising qualitative analyses and handbook of
37,4 Kwalitan version 2''), University of Nijmegen (Department of Methodology), Nijmegen.
Ros, A.A., Swinkels-Kuijlaars, H.P.C., Theunissen, J.J.C.M., Visser, J.J.C.M., Jongmans, C.T. and
Geijsel, F. (1996), ``Over vernieuwingen gesproken'', (``Talking about innovation''),
326 University of Wageningen (Department of Agricultural Education)/KOMPACTGROEP,
Wageningen/'s-Hertogenbosch.
Salisbury, D.F. and Conner, D.R. (1994), ``How to succeed as a manager of an educational change
project'', Educational Technology, Vol. 34 No. 6, pp. 12-19.
Silins, H.C. (1994), ``The relationship between transformational and transactional leadership and
school improvement outcomes'', School Effectiveness and School Improvement, Vol. 5 No. 3,
pp. 272-98.
Sleegers, P.J.C. and Wesselingh, A. (1995), ``Dutch dilemmas: decentralisation, school autonomy
and professionalisation of teachers'', Educational Review, Vol. 47 No. 2, pp. 199-207.
Smaling, A. (1992), ``Varieties of methodological intersubjectivity: Relations with qualitative and
quantitative research and with objectivity'', Quality & Quantity, Vol. 26, pp. 169-80.
Weber, M. (1964), The Theory of Social and Economic Organization (A.M. Henderson and T.
Parsons, translators), The Free Press, New York, NY.
Welten, V. and Janssen, J. (1993), ``Teksttabel: een gecomputeriseerde methode voor het
analyseren van tekstuele data'', (``Texttable: a computerized method for analyzing textual
data''), University of Nijmegen (Departement of Psychology of Culture and Religion),
Nijmegen.

Appendix. Scaling of variables

Vision
KMO-value = 0.92; 47.1 percent explained variance in factor analysis for pre-vocational group.
KMO-value = 0.92; 52.5 percent explained variance in factor analysis for senior vocational group.

Items:
vis1 In our school, we have a clear vision of what is meant by ``good education''.
vis2 In our school, we know what is going on.
vis3 In our school, we know about educational developments outside the school.
vis4 In our school, one pays attention to my ideas about education.
vis5 In our school, we discuss what we want to achieve with our lessons.
vis6 In our school, I am constantly motivated to consider my own educational practices
critically.
vis7 It is expected that I think about the strategies of our school with regard to educational
practices.
vis8 In our school, we consider our joint goals critically.
vis9 In our school, new ideas are brought up regularly.
Alpha: 0.88 (n = 574; pre-vocational group), 0.89 (n = 543; senior vocational group).

Individual consideration
KMO-value = 0.91; 50.6 percent explained variance in factor analysis for pre-vocational group.
KMO-value = 0.91; 56.3 percent explained variance in factor analysis for senior vocational group.
Items: Large-scale
ic1 If I have problems concerning my work, I can count on my superiors to support me. innovation
ic2 I have the feeling that my superiors are kindly disposed to me. programs
ic3 My superiors have respect for the work of teachers.
ic4 My superiors show interest in me as a person.
ic5 My superiors take my educational opinions seriously. 327
ic6 My superiors rarely talk about the things that go well at school.
ic7 My superiors show their appreciation for the work that I do.
ic8 My superiors appreciate teachers taking initiative in our school.
Alpha: 0.88 (n = 593; pre-vocational group), 0.88 (n = 543; senior vocational group).

Intellectual stimulation
KMO-value = 0.63; 44.4 percent explained variance in factor analysis for pre-vocational group.
KMO-value = 0.64; 61.1 percent explained variance in factor analysis for senior vocational group.

Items:
is1 In our school, it is difficult to get financial support for training activities.
is2 My superiors create opportunities for teachers to develop professionally.
is3 In our school, teachers have opportunities to participate in training activities during
working hours.
Alpha: 0.67 (n = 550; pre-vocational group), 0.68 (n = 529; senior vocational group).

Concerns
KMO-value = 0.91; 42.7 percent explained variance in factor analysis for pre-vocational group.
KMO-value = 0.88; 47.5 percent explained variance in factor analysis for senior vocational group.

Items
c1 I worry about the rate of educational development currently initiated by the government.
c2 I wish everything would carry on in the same way as much as possible.
c3 I consider myself capable of dealing with all changes at this time.
c4 The current flow of innovations is a challenge for me as a teacher.
c5 All these changes and innovations make me feel like I am losing control of my profession
as a teacher.
c6 Because of all the changes at the time I don't know where I am as a teacher.
c7 Because of all the changes at the time I wonder if I can still handle the content of my job.
c8 Because of all the changes at the time I increasingly doubt my capacity to practice my
profession.
c9 Because of all the changes at the time I feel left to my own devices.
c10 Because of all the educational developments I no longer know what my teaching should
be about.
Alpha: 0.88 (n = 604; pre-vocational group), 0.88 (n = 563; senior vocational group).
Journal of Learning activities
KMO-value = 0.71; 27.1 percent explained variance in factor analysis for pre-vocational group.
Educational KMO-value = 0.67; 34.7 percent explained variance in factor analysis for senior vocational group.
Administration
37,4 Items
la1 I take initiatives to develop professionally.
328 la2 Even if participation is not obligatory, I participate in training programs.
la3 I keep myself informed on developments within the field.
la4 In my lessons I experiment with various didactic methods.
la5 I use the reactions of the pupils to improve my teaching practices.
la6 I discuss the problems that I experience at work with my colleagues.
Alpha: 0.67 (n = 604; pre-vocational group), 0.61 (n = 570, senior vocational group).

Changed practices
KMO-value = 0.92; 54.5 percent explained variance in factor analysis for pre-vocational group.
KMO-value = 0.91; 53.3 percent explained variance in factor analysis for senior vocational group.

Items: Compared to the period before the innovation program ...

cpA ... my instruction is less whole-class oriented.
cpB ... pupils have to work on tasks more frequently (instead of listening to the teacher).
cpC ... I more frequently give pupils tasks involving small-scale research.
cpD ... my teaching is more about practical matters.
cpE ... the examples that I give are more practical.
cpF ... my pupils work more autonomously.
cpG ... I use more varied teaching methods and instructional formats.
cpH ... I use more varied teaching materials.
cpI ... I place more emphasis on the way problems should be dealt with instead of the
problem itself.
cpJ ... I differentiate more.
Alpha: 0.92 (n = 498; pre-vocational group), 0.92 (n = 492, senior vocational group).