Distributed Leadership

The third leadership style related to collegial models is distributed leadership which has been at the center of

attention of scholars in the 21st century (Gronn, 2010). Harris (2010) also mentioned that this leadership style is

one of the most significant approaches within the context of educational leadership in the past decade. This kind of

leadership is detached from the positional authority and is based on the competencies and skills of members in the

organizational chart. In this way, Harris (2003) stated that distributed leadership focuses on seeking and utilization

of expertise wherever it exists in the organization regardless of the organizational positions of the skilled members.

In summary and in the context of educational institutions, distributed leadership is a leadership approach in which

collaborative working is undertaken between individuals who trust and respect each other’s contribution and

happens most effectively when people at all levels engage in action, accepting leadership in their particular areas of

expertise and finally requires resources that support and enable collaborative environments.
• The purpose of distributed leadership is to increase the leadership capacity within a
school so that the school can improve and grow in an authentic manner, with no tricks,
stunts or game-playing. It allows a school to genuinely become a more effective
educational institution as a result of leaders within it collectively pulling in the same
direction, guided by the same vision and values towards a common set of goals.

• Ultimately, distributed leadership is about giving leaders in schools ownership by

empowering them to lead their teams and drive forward their strategies that contribute
towards the whole-school priorities.
Defining distributed leadership
• As Harris (2004:13) indicates, ‘distributed leadership concentrates on engaging expertises
wherever it exists within the organization rather than seeking this only through formal position
of role’. She claims it ‘is characterized as a form of collective leadership’(ibid.:14) and she notes
that collegiality is ‘at the core of distributed leadership’(ibid.:15) but adds that it involves both
vertical and lateral dimensions of leadership practice, suggesting a link to both formal and
collegial models.

• Gronn (2010:70) refers to a normative switch ‘from heroics to distribution’, but also cautions
against a view that distributed leadership nescessarily means any reduction in the scope of the
principal’s role.

• Hartley (2010:27) argues that ‘its popularity may be pragmatic: to ease the burden of
overworked headteachers’.

• Lumby(2009:320) adds that distributed leadership ‘does not imply that school staff are
necessarily enacting leadership any differently’ .
Modes of distribution

• Bennett et al.(2003:3) claim that distributed leadership is an emergent property of

a group or network of individuals in which group members pool their expertise.

• Harris and Chapman(2002), say that there should be ‘redistribution of power’, not
simply a process of ‘delegated headship’.

• Hopkins and Jackson (2002) argue that formal leaders need to orchestrate and
nurture the space for distributed leadership to occur, suggesting that it would be
difficult to achieve without the active support of school principals.
Impact of Distributed Leadership

Helen S. Timperley argued in Curriculum Studies that schools should not rely on one leader
to solve all the problems in a particular school because few individuals have the these
abilities. Also, any policy modifications made by the leader will fall apart when the leader is
not available to maintain these modifications. However, if the changes are implemented by
several leaders who agree to the changes, these leaders can all work together to maintain
them. Also, instead of managing these modifications, leaders can change the norms,
principals and beliefs held by the members of the school so that all the staff members will
maintain the changes. But to change these beliefs, the leadership must change the overall
school culture, which can only occur through face-to-face interactions.
• So, how does distributed leadership work in schools? There are three key principles to
distributed leadership – autonomy, capacity and accountability. Each are of equal
importance and all are inter-dependent. How I myself have interpreted this leadership
model is illustrated in the Venn diagram:
Barriers to distributed leadership
• The existing authority structure in schools and colleges provides a potential barrier to the
successful introduction and implementation of distributed leadership.

• Harris(2005:169) argues that ‘the creation of collegial norms’ are essential and adds that
teachers need time to meet if collective leadership is to become a reality. She adds that
cordial relationships are required with school managers, who may ‘feel threatened’ (ibid.)
by teachers taking on leadership roles.

• However the research does show that distributed leadership has the potential to expand
the scope of leadership, leading to enhanced student overcomes while developing the
formal leaders of the future.
 COLLEGIALITY AND GENDER

• Gender is either of the two sexes (male and female), especially when considered with reference to
social and cultural differences rather than biological ones. The term is also used more broadly to
denote a range of identities that do not correspond to established ideas of male and female.
Collegiality and gender considered as a group is ‘social interaction between the genders’ or
‘encouraging women and girls to join fields traditionally dominated by the male gender’

• In addition to concerns of faculty status, factors such as gender and ethnicity can complicate
things when seeking a general conceptualization or a definition of collegiality.
• The report also showed activities between male and female collaborators (especially mentors) were
different in many forms for the faculty studied. For example, males tended to find mentors in less time
than females, though faculty of both genders reported finding or being assigned a mentor with the same
frequency. Also, females in the study reported less contact with their mentors but of a more complex
nature, including both professional and personal issues as areas covered in mentoring relationship.

• There still is a question as to what degree a particularly gendered perspective affects how that person
defines collegiality. Additionally, it can be said that there is a desire for a collegial environment, such as
those studied by Absher (2009) – including women and minority faculty – but there is a question of
whether or not caution is exercised in assuming that collegiality means the same to everyone across
strata and social constructs. The literature studied does not approach this issue, but there is the possibility
that if a male or female faculty member is asked to define collegiality in detail that there may be gender-
based trends in certain institutions, disciplines or national/cultural contexts.
A good teacher gathers blessings from everyone, even Allah
Almighty.
Just learning is not enough. Prophet Muhammad (SAW) made it clear that a knowledge
not used for benefit was indeed no knowledge.