06 Hmef5023 T2

Topic  Effective
Leadership
2 Behaviours and
Attitudes
LEARNING OUTCOMES
By the end of this topic, you should be able to:
1. Compare the leadership traits which were gathered by the earlier
studies on leadership with the present findings on them;
2. Evaluate the relationship between leadership behaviours and
achievement studies conducted worldwide;
3. Discuss the possible explanations on the effectiveness or the
ineffectiveness of the leadership behaviours; and
4. Discuss the ethical concepts in school leadership.
 INTRODUCTION
Knowledge about effective leadership behaviours and attitudes is vital especially
for leaders or would-be leaders so that they would know what personal qualities
to develop within themselves as well as management approaches utilised to
achieve the best possible cooperation from their subordinates, and in the end the
total achievement of the organisational objectives.
The general characteristics of effective leaders described in Topic 1 earlier would

be incorporated within your approaches as leaders utilising one of the styles or a
combination of a few which might work in some situations while in others,
different approaches might be needed. Let us read and understand the following
deliberations on some more theories that may provide us with more information
on leadership behaviours and attitudes.
Copyright © Open University Malaysia (OUM)
TOPIC 2 EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP BEHAVIOURS AND ATTITUDES  45
2.1 TRAIT THEORIES

In the 1920s and 1930s, leadership research focused on trying to identify the traits
that differentiated leaders from non-leaders. These early leadership theories
were content theories, focusing on „what‰ an effective leader is, not on „how‰ to
effectively lead. The trait approach to understanding leadership assumes that
certain physical, social and personal characteristics are inherent in leaders. Sets of
traits and characteristics were identified to assist in selecting the right people to
become leaders.
(a) Physical traits include being young to middle-aged, energetic, tall and
handsome.
(b) Social background traits include being educated at the „right‰ schools and
being socially prominent or upwardly mobile.
(c) Social characteristics include being charismatic, charming, tactful, popular,

cooperative and diplomatic.
(d) Personality traits include being self-confident, adaptable, assertive and

emotionally stable.
(e) Task-related characteristics include being driven to excel, accepting of

responsibility, having initiative and being results-oriented.
Trait theories identify traits to assist in selecting leaders since traits are related to
leadership effectiveness in many situations. The trait approach to understanding
leadership supports the use of tests and interviews in the selection of managers.
The interviewer typically attempts to match the traits and characteristics of the
applicant to the position. For example, most interviewers attempt to evaluate how
well the applicant can work with people.
Criticisms of the Traditional Trait Theory

Trait theory has not been able to identify a set of traits that will consistently
distinguish leaders from followers. Instead, trait theory posits key traits for
successful leadership (drive, desire to lead, integrity, self-confidence, intelligence
and job-relevant knowledge) yet does not make a judgment as to whether these
traits are inherent in individuals or whether they can be developed through
training and education. No two leaders are alike. Furthermore, no leader possesses
all of the traits. Comparing leaders in different situations suggests that the traits of
leaders depend on the situation. Thus, traits were de-emphasised to take into
account situational conditions (contingency perspective).

46  TOPIC 2 EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP BEHAVIOURS AND ATTITUDES
Though trait theories were developed during the earlier part of the 20th century,
they are still useful to some extent in selection of personnel because they can
give an indication of the suitability of the candidates for the organisation. The
combination of these trait theories with other more recent leadership theories can
give us a thorough knowledge of the important leadership theories that would be
of great help to all leaders.
2.2 BEHAVIOURAL THEORIES

The behavioural theorists identified determinants of leadership so that people
could be trained to be leaders. They developed training programmes to change
managersÊ leadership behaviours and assumed that the best styles of leadership
could be learned.
2.2.1 Theory X and Theory Y

Mc Gregor (1960), described Theory X and Theory Y in his book, The Human Side
of Enterprise. Theory X and Theory Y each represent different ways in which
leaders view employees. Theory X managers believe that employees are motivated
mainly by money, are lazy, uncooperative and have poor work habits while
Theory Y managers believe that subordinates work hard, are cooperative and have
positive attitudes.
(a) Theory X
Theory X is the traditional view of direction and control by managers.
(i) The average human being has an inherent dislike of work and will
avoid it if he can.
(ii) Because of this human characteristic of dislike of work, most people

must be controlled, directed and threatened with punishment to
get them to put forth adequate effort toward the achievement of
organisational objectives.
(iii) The average human being prefers to be directed, wishes to avoid

responsibility, has relatively little ambition and wants security above
all.

Theory X leads naturally to an emphasis on the tactics of control ă procedures

and techniques for telling people what to do, for determining whether they
are doing it and for administering rewards and punishment. Theory X
explains the consequences of a particular managerial strategy. Because its
assumptions are so unnecessarily limiting, it prevents managers from seeing
the possibilities inherent in other managerial strategies. As long as the
assumptions of Theory X influence managerial strategy, organisations will
fail to discover, let alone utilise the potentialities of the average human being.
(b) Theory Y
Theory Y is the view that individual and organisational goals can be
integrated.
(i) The expenditures of physical and mental effort in work are as natural
as play or rest.
(ii) External control and the threat of punishment are not the only means
for bringing out effort toward organisational objectives.
(iii) Commitment to objectives is a function of the rewards associated with

their achievement.
(iv) The average human being learns, under proper conditions, not only to
accept but also to seek responsibility.
(v) The capacity to exercise a relatively high degree of imagination,

ingenuity and creativity in the solution of organisational problems is
widely, not narrowly, distributed in the population.
(vi) Under the condition of modern industrial life, the intellectual

potentialities of the average human being are only partially utilised.
Theory YÊs purpose is to encourage integration, to create a situation in which

an employee can achieve his goals best by directing his efforts toward the
objectives of the organisation. It is a deliberate attempt to link improvement
in managerial competence with the satisfaction of higher-level ego and self-
actualisation needs.
Theory Y leads to a preoccupation with the nature of relationships, with

the creation of an environment which will encourage commitment to
organisational objectives and which will provide opportunities for the
maximum exercise of initiative, ingenuity and self-direction in achieving
them.

2.2.2 Ohio State University

The first major investigation into leadership behaviour, also called leadership
styles, was conducted in 1945 by researchers in the Bureau of Business Research,
Ohio State University. From their research, they identified two distinct dimensions
of leadership; task behaviour and relationship behaviour. The task behaviours
which were referred to as „initiating structures‰ focused on behaviours such
as organising work, allocating responsibilities and scheduling work activities.
The relationship behaviours called „consideration‰ included behaviours such as
building mutual respect and trust between leaders and subordinates.
Figure 2.1: The Ohio State Leadership Quadrants

Source: Hersey & Blanchard (1982)
The researchers concluded that the two dimensions were separate and distinct and
therefore leadership behaviour was plotted on two separate axes (see Figure 2.1).
These studies led to the development of the Leadership Behaviour Description
Questionnaire (LBDQ), an assessment instrument for the identification of the
leadership orientation of the leader.
2.2.3 University of Iowa

Another approach to leader behaviour focused on identifying the best leadership
styles. Work at the University of Iowa identified democratic (participation and
delegation), autocratic (dictating and centralised) and laissez-faire styles (group
freedom in decision making).

2.2.4 Managerial Grid

Blake and Mouton as cited in Hersey and Blanchard (1982), expanding on and
refining the work of the researchers at the Ohio State University, developed
the Leadership Grid, initially called the Managerial Grid. Utilising the same
theoretical constructs of task accomplishments, and the development of personal
relationships as used by the LBDQ, they called the two dimensions of leadership
behaviour „concern for production‰ and „concern for people‰ (see Figure 2.2).
Figure 2.2: The managerial grid leadership style

Source: Hersey & Blanchard (1982)
The Leadership Grid, although similar to the LBDQ that measured how leader
actions were perceived by others, is an attitudinal model for „portraying types of
leadership behaviour and their various potential combinations‰. Thus, it is a
measure of the predisposition of the leader.
The grid consists of two intersecting axes, the horizontal axis measuring concern
for people and the vertical axis measuring concern for production. Each dimension
was measured on a nine-point scale. Therefore, theoretically the ideal leader
would be measured at 9-9 on the scale, that is, high consideration and high
structure (team).

The grid identifies five leadership styles as stated in Table 2.1.
Table 2.1: Five Leadership Styles Identified by the Leadership Grid
Leadership Styles Explanation

Country Club Emphasis on the needs of people and on relationships.
Impoverished Exertion of minimum effort to get work done is appropriate to
maintain organisational membership.
Team Focus on interdependence and commitment to the organisationÊs
purpose.
Task Emphasis on efficiency with minimum human involvement.
Middle Road Leader balances „the necessity to get out work while maintaining
morale of the people at a satisfactory level‰.
The leadership grid is based on the assumption that there is an effectiveness

dimension that is not extreme at the lower end of the dimensions, but combines
both concerns for production and concerns for people.
Concurrent with and complementing the Ohio State studies were the studies
conducted by the University Of Michigan Survey Research Centre. According to
Moorhead and Griffin (1998), the focus of these studies were to identify the
leadership characteristics that resulted in effective group performance.
These studies identified two basic forms of leadership behaviours that mirrored
those identified by the Ohio state studies. These were production or job-centred
leader behaviour and employee-centred leader behaviour. Summarising the
findings of the Michigan studies:
(a) More effective leaders tend to have relationships with their subordinates that
are supportive and enhance the followersÊ sense of self-esteem than do less
effective ones.
(b) More effective leaders use group rather than person-to-person methods of
supervision and decision making than do less effective ones.
(c) More effective leaders tend to set higher performance goals than do less
effective ones.

SELF-CHECK 2.1
1. Name the set of traits and characteristics that were identified as traits
that can assist in selecting the right people to become leaders.
2. What are the assumptions of leaders regarding subordinates whose

philosophies are based on Theory X and Theory Y?
3. What are the leadership styles of the „Managerial Grid Leadership

Style‰? Explain.
ACTIVITY 2.1
1. „Leaders are born, not made‰. Do you agree? Discuss.
2. „Leaders with Theory Y orientation are more successful than
leaders with Theory X orientation.‰ Discuss.
3. Some people contend that „laissez-faire‰ style of leadership in
almost all situations is a disaster. Do you agree?
Share your answers with your coursemates in myINSPIRE online forum.
2.3 THE LEADERSHIP STYLE

In this subtopic, we will discuss the leadership style in greater detail by looking
into the situations style.
2.3.1 Situations Style

Shifting the focus from classical leadership styles, traits and behaviours,
researchers began concentrating on the effects of situational variables on
leadership styles. Emerging from this new thinking are the contingency models
and the Hersey and Blanchard (1982) situational leadership theory that focus on
the relationship between the leadership style and the readiness of the subordinate.

The contingency model of leadership behaviour, also known as the Least Preferred
Co-worker (LPC) theory is based on the instrument developed by Fiedler (1967) to
measure leader effectiveness. It is the most well-known and empirically tested of
the contextual or situational models. In this theory, leader effectiveness is viewed
as a function of leader behaviour and contextual factors. As noted by Hoy and
Miskel (1991), Fiedler was careful in underscoring the critical distinction between
leadership style and leadership behaviour.
As he explained, „important leadership behaviours of the same individual differ

from situation to situation, while the need structure which motivates these
behaviours may be seen as constant‰. Thus, the emphasis was on the leadership
style which was reflected in the behaviour. In this contingency model, leader
personality traits were either task motivated behaviour or relationship motivated.
Fiedler (1967) identified three major contextual variables:
(a) Leader Position Power

The variable position power based on the extent to which leaders motivate
or punish and is predicated on the degree of authority the leader has: that is
the legitimate authority to hire or promote an employee.
(b) Leader-member Relationship

Leader-member relations refer to group atmosphere, attraction to leaders,
the level of loyalty and the existence of friction within the group.
(c) Task Structure

Task structure refers to the clarity of the tasks, the clarity of roles for each
group member and the clarity of the instruction for task completion.
As alluded to previously, Fiedler developed the LPC as the instrument of

measurement. The contextual variables were measured on a continuum ranging
from most to least favourable. Leader-member relations were measured as good
or bad, task structure as high or low, and position power as strong or weak. Fiedler
and his colleagues maintained that leader effectiveness was contingent upon the
interaction between the leaderÊs personality, or leadership style and the contextual
variables. Therefore, when the relations were good, task structure high, and
position power strong, the context was designated most favourable and leadership
was most effective.

The path-goal theory developed and refined by Martin Evans and House in the
1970s, also adopts the contingency conceptualisation of leadership. The theory
proposes that subordinatesÊ performances, perceptions of work goals, personal
goals and paths to goal attainment are influenced by leadership behaviours.
The model identifies four leadership behaviours. These are directive- and
achievement-oriented behaviours which represent the initiating structure
dimension of the Ohio State LBDQ studies, and participative and supportive
behaviours which find support in the consideration dimension. There has not been
much empirical support for this model and consequently, its utility value is
limited.
The other contingency theory model that created an impact on leadership theory
was Vroom and YettonÊs decision making model which was revised and expanded
by Vroom and Jago in 1974 and again in 1984, and recreated by Vroom and Jago in
1988 to address issues of validity. The model while similar to the path-goal theory,
in seeking to prescribe the most suitable leadership style to a given situation,
focuses on the extent to which subordinates should be involved in the decision-
making process. In this regard, it proposes that the degree to which subordinates
be allowed to participate in decision making should depend on the characteristics
of the situation. The goal of the model is to ensure quality decisions and acceptance
of these decisions by the subordinates.
An important contribution to leadership theory was the introduction of the

reciprocity of the influence of organisation on the style of leadership. Hersey and
Blanchard (1982) argued that leadership behaviour could affect the effectiveness
of the organisation, and the changes in the organisation affect the next leadership
intervention. In this approach, leadership is defined as „working with and through
people to accomplish a particular organisational goal and suggests that leader
behaviour should vary in response to the maturity or development level that the
follower or followers exhibit on a specific task, function or objective that the leader
is attempting to accomplish‰.
Therefore, it is implied that the maturity level of the subordinate, defined in

terms of job maturity and psychological maturity, influences leader behaviour.
Subordinates are rated in competence and commitment on a continuum from
high to low. A high-maturity subordinate had both high job maturity (that is, task
relevant skills and knowledge) and psychological maturity (that is, self-confidence
and self-esteem), while the low maturity subordinate lacked these attributes.

According to Hersey and Blanchard (1982) and Hersey, Zigarmi and Zigarmi
(1987) depending on the level of maturity, the leader employed more directive or
more supportive behaviour. As can be seen in Figure 2.3, the theory identifies the
four leadership patterns or styles deemed appropriate for the four situations of
maturity, suggesting that as the group becomes more experienced, more willing
and able to take responsibility for the tasks, the style of leadership behaviours
changes from an emphasis on directing to the delegation of responsibility.
Figure 2.3: The four basic leadership styles

Source: Hersey, Zigarmi & Zigarmi (1987)
It is a dynamic model of leadership in which the role of the leader is to „provide

the necessary leader behaviour while simultaneously helping the group mature
and assume more of the leadership itself‰.
2.3.2 Conclusion
The challenge remains in identifying the leadership styles and behaviours that
maximise effectiveness-concern, for organisational tasks and efficiency-concern
for relationships. Almost all theorists acknowledge that success of the organisation
depends on both. This challenge is no different for the school as an organisation.

However, the challenge is even more acute because notwithstanding the various
conceptualisations and the political interpretations of effectiveness, using the
jargon of industry, the production methods of the school are individualised to the
different operators (teachers). Additionally, and adding to the challenge, the final
products are varied, individualised, often cannot be measured and even when
beneficial to the individual, sometimes are not what is appreciated by the wider
society.
It is in this milieu that the principal as designated leader functions. Yet, his role is
critical to the success of the school. Hoy and Miskel (1991), in citing Warren Bennis,
encapsulated this sentiment when they argued that the principal is responsible for
the effectiveness of the school, provides the anchor and guiding purpose especially
in times of change and upheaval, and play a key role in alleviating the publicÊs
concern about the schools.
SELF-CHECK 2.2
1. What is the „least preferred co-worker theory‰?
2. What is „the path-goal theory‰? Explain.
3. What is the „decision-making model theory‰?
ACTIVITY 2.2
1. Explain the three major contextual variables identified by Fiedler

(1967) namely:
(a) Leader position power;
(b) Leader-member relationship; and
(c) Task structure.
2. Discuss when you would use each of the four basic styles
(supporting, coaching, delegating and directing) in a school
situation.

2.4 SELECTING THE BEST LEADERSHIP STYLE

Selection of the best style in leadership is not an easy task because different
situations and different subordinates need different styles. The other more
important variable that must be taken into consideration is the leader personality
and inclinations. If the leader is more comfortable with a style, it would be difficult
for him to change into another personality style. The most that he can do is try to
adapt himself to the needs of the situation. If the situation needs him to be a coach
but he lacks the quality of a good coach then he needs to combine it with other
approaches that he is comfortable with because not everybody has the ability to
adopt all of them equally well.
At present, the focus of leadership is achievement of the objectives which has been
planned. The measure of success is usually in terms of studentsÊ achievement in
schools. The following literature review provides us with some findings on the
relationship between leadership styles and approaches and studentsÊ achievement
which can be used as a basis of our reflections on what we have done as leaders in
our own ways.
2.4.1 Principal Leadership Style and Achievement

There is ample evidence to show that there is a direct relationship between school
climate and student achievement in school, and similarly, there is consensus that
the leadership style by the principal is the significant factor in shaping the learning
environment to facilitate student learning. The leader who articulates clear goals,
holding high expectations of students and teachers, and exercising strong
educational leadership were instrumental in the schools achieving their goals.
Principal leadership behaviours and school achievement at the secondary level

noted the following:
(a) At the secondary level, teacher and principal perceptions about how the
principal governs the school are strongly related to the manner in which
the principal is perceived to organise the schoolÊs programme and to the
principalÊs role in building a productive school climate.
(b) They concluded that the principal, through manipulating a series of

leadership style variables at the school level, can have a positive influence on
school achievement.

(c) Azumi and Madhere (1983) examined principal leadership style as a

determinant of principal effectiveness. They found that principals who
utilised a system which incorporated rich feedback and focused on
socialisation as a way of achieving the organisational goals had greater
teacher conformity and, as a result, higher student achievement than those
who relied on programming and sanctions as methods of control.
(d) Jackson, Logsdon and Taylor (1983) concluded from their research of low-
income public schools in the District of Columbia that city schools could be
effective for low income African-American students. For this study, they
looked at four schools that were instructionally effective for poor students
and four schools of similar student population that were not effective. Unlike
what they observed in the ineffective schools, the principals of the effective
schools maintained firm and centralised control with a strong task and
academic orientation.
Their discipline codes were clear and strictly enforced. They monitored
achievement, were supportive of teachers and students and rewarded
achievement. Using EdmondsÊ (1979) analogy, these principals were
„tyrannical‰ in their expectations and demands for „achievement regardless
of student background‰. They insisted that all students be brought to a
minimum level of mastery of the basic skills.
(e) Andrews, Soder and Jacobson (1986) investigated the relationship between
perceptions of the principal as instructional leader and the average gain in
California Achievement Test Scores. They tested the hypothesis that children
who attended schools administered by principals who were strong
instructional leaders evidenced greater increases in NCE scores for total
reading and total mathematics than children who attended schools led by
those who were not strong instructional leaders.
From their analysis, they found that there were significant differences
in reading and mathematics between the schools in which the principals
received the highest ratings and the other two groups of schools. Based on
these results, they concluded that particularly for schools that catered to the
historically low achieving groups of students, teachersÊ perceptions of the
principal as a strong instructional leader were critical to student achievement
in reading and mathematics.
(f) Heck (1992), unlike most scholars in leadership behaviours, looked at

the leadership performances of principals in high performing and low
performing schools at both the elementary and secondary levels. His specific
interest was the principalÊs instructional leadership interactions that would
best serve as a predictor of school achievement level.
His conclusions suggested that while there existed contextual differences in

principal leadership based on school level, these „were less important than
the differences associated with the performance level of the school‰. The
assumption derived from this finding was that principal instructional
leadership behaviour was predictive of school outcomes.
(g) As Heck (1993) explained, the principalsÊ actions influenced student

outcomes mainly through „activities that coordinate, monitor and enable
teachers to work more effectively with students‰. Heck had investigated the
relationship among contextual variables, in-school processes that focused
on principal and teacher interactions and student outcomes in secondary
schools in Singapore.
His results indicated that despite the effects of context variables such as
school size, type of school and teacher experience on student outcomes, these
variables „did not appear to influence the perceptions of the principalÊs
strategic interactions with teachers in the areas of governing the school,
building school culture/climate, and instructional organisation‰, areas that
have direct impact on student achievement.
This finding verified AndrewsÊ contention that, „teachersÊ perceptions of

their work environment is so important, that the power of the principalÊs
leadership so pervasive, that it has a measurable‰ though indirect „impact
on student learning‰.
(h) Cheng, (1994) using data from the large-scale research project „Education
Quality in Hong Kong Primary Schools‰ investigated the principalÊs
leadership as a critical factor for school performance. For this study, he
integrated Bolman and DealÊs (1991) four leadership orientations in
organisations: structural leadership, human resource leadership, political
leadership and symbolic leadership, and SergiovanniÊs (1984) five
component leadership model of the principal: technical leadership, human
leadership, educational leadership, symbolic leadership and cultural
leadership.
From the mentioned earlier, Cheng (1994) proposed the following five
dimensions of the principalÊs leadership:
(i) Structural leadership: the extent to which the principal thinks clearly
and logically, develops clear goals and policies and holds people
accountable for results.
(ii) Human leadership: the extent to which the principal is supportive and
fosters participation.

(iii) Political leadership: the extent to which the principal is persuasive and
effective in building alliances and support, and solving conflicts.
(iv) Symbolic leadership: the extent to which the principal is inspirational

and charismatic.
(v) Educational leadership: the extent to which the principal encourages

professional development and teaching improvement.
Cheng (1994) measured principal leadership on the five dimensions. In

addition to this, he measured teachersÊ individual performances, teachersÊ
group level performances, organisational factors and student performances
which comprised self-concept, attitudes to peers, attitudes to the school,
attitudes to teachers, attitudes to learning, feeling of homework overload and
intention to dropout.
The results of the correlations between leadership and the school

performance variables showed that there was a significant positive
relationship between all dimensions of leadership and teacher morale, level
of professionalism, disengagement and feeling of unnecessary overload.
Also, all the dimensions of leadership were positively related to studentsÊ
attitudes towards their school. What is significant about this study was the
focus on student performance that was not based on test scores.
(i) Citing the limitations of using test scores as a measure of student outcomes,
Leithwood and Jantzi, (1999) also investigated the relationship between
transformational leadership and student outcomes not based on test scores,
but on student engagement with school.
From Transformational School Leadership Effects: A replication by

K. Leithwood and D. Jantzi, (1999), School Effectiveness and School
Improvement, in their explanation for the selection of the outcome variables,
they stated that the „extent of studentsÊ participation both inside and outside
the school‰ and „the extent to which students identify with school and feel
they belong‰ is a „reliable predictor of variation in such student outcomes as
social studies, math and language achievement‰.
They assessed the direct and indirect effects of transformational leadership

on student engagement in school. The results of the analysis indicated that
transformational leadership had a weak but statistically significant effect on
student identification. Even though the direct effects of transformational
leadership on classroom conditions were negative and weak, combined with
school conditions, they explained 17 per cent of the variation in classroom
conditions.

2.4.2 Conclusion
From the mentioned review of the principal as leader, it is clear that he plays a
critical, even if often fuzzy, role in overall school effectiveness. The principal, in
many cases, did not seem to be really important in the academic process of the
school due to the fact that they did not participate directly in all activities that
contribute to the success of the school. But does it mean that the principal ship role
is unimportant? The answer to this question is obvious because a ship without its
captain will definitely not reach its destination.
Unlike other organisations, there is no clear path to improved production and

efficiency because the end products are people and whatever quality that they
have might not be observable immediately. Besides that, other variables play their
parts in moulding the end products which are very complex. The complexity and
dynamism of the school, and the competing demands on the principal and the
continually changing contexts of schooling often defy anyoneÊs best type of
leadership. However, these same factors of complexity and changing situations
make the leadership the critical stabilising factor in the school.
SELF-CHECK 2.3
1. Cite the research studies that show the principal leadership styles
is significantly correlated with school achievement.
2. What makes students from low-income families perform well
academically?
3. Name the characteristics of the principals that are related to
academic achievement.
4. According to Andrews, Soder and Jacobson (1986), the number of
principals who are strong instructional leaders is significantly
related to greater increase in examination scores. Explain.

ACTIVITY 2.3
1. Describe the findings of Heck (1992) regarding leadership

behaviours and school achievement.
2. Explain what you understand by the statement „⁄ that principals

being Âone step removed from the direct instructional processÊ had
an indirect effect on student outcomes‰.
3. In about 100 words write a summary of all the research studies on

school leadership and school achievement.
4. Discuss how the principal plays the role of a structural leader,

human leader, political leader, symbolic leader and educational
leader.
2.5 THE ETHICAL PRACTICE OF EDUCATIONAL

LEADERSHIP
In this subtopic, you will be exposed to the ethical practice of educational
leadership.
2.5.1 Concept of Ethics in Leadership

The word „ethics‰ is derived from a Greek word ethos, which means customs,
conduct and character. Ethics is concerned with the kinds of values and morals a
person or a society finds desirable and appropriate. Thus, ethics is concerned with
the virtuousness of a person and their motives. A set of ethics will provide a system
of principles that can guide leaders in choosing the right from wrong decisions and
the good from bad decisions.

Leadership is defined as a process in which the leader influences the others to

reach a common goal. The influence dimension requires the leaders to make an
impact on the lives of those being led. This means leaders carry the ethical burden
and responsibility to be sensitive to how their leadership affects followersÊ lives.
Ethics and leadership cannot be separated because ethics is embedded in

everything we do, and it is a part of our humanity. Ethics in society enable
the society to regulate activities of individuals and groups to avoid
misunderstandings and conflicts. Rebose (2001) considers ethics as a part of
natural law. According to him natural law „refers to the parameters that define the
milieu of being, what follows from the essential nature of humanity‰. Ethics have
to be learnt because it is not inborn, and our schools are the place where ethics are
taught and practised so as to ensure future citizens are able to live harmoniously
within civilised society.
Schools, are by nature, ethical since they are directed to human improvement, yet
schools are also organisations for interaction between human beings and as such
they sometimes fall short of ethical standards. An ethical school is characterised
by an ethical culture. This means that the ethical nature of the core business of
schools, namely their devotion to the well-being of young people, remains at the
forefront and that ethical concerns embedded in schoolsÊ everyday activities are
explicit, accepted and openly acknowledged.
The concept of ethics in leadership centres not only the moral character of the
leader, but also on the ethical values inscribed in the leaderÊs personal portfolio of
goals, perceptions, expressions and actions. An ethical leader, in the end, is not
only able to maintain integrity within him but is adept at influencing others to act
ethically as well. Furthermore, the more ethical a leader is, the more likely he is to
exhibit superior job performance, exhibit a high level of concern for the students
and set a positive example.
Ethics is an essentially communicative action that progresses through an intricate

methodology arbitrated through a deliberate dissemination of ethical values.
Educational leadership is especially concerned with the integrity of the processes
of ethical decision making and achievement that leaders and followers collectively
put into practice. Schools have consistently been viewed throughout history as a
moral institution designed to propagate and endorse issues of high morality and
appropriate ethical decision making.

Educational leaders are frequently forced to make decisions that place more value
on some morals than on others. Because of this, and the limited power of the
student voice in the overall conduct of educational leaders, the leaderÊs conduct
must be consciously moral and ethical. Hence to truly maintain status as an ethical
educational leader, the responsibility to promote ethical conduct must be rooted
not so much in technical expertise, but in basic human understanding.
Communities continually claim to want stronger school leaders with visions for
change that do not rest comfortably amid the status quo. They want leaders who
are not afraid of change and who understand that the ethical dilemmas of todayÊs
youth are far more extreme than in the past. The educational leadersÊ personal
ethical standards are therefore paramount in facilitating the creation of a thriving,
well-adjusted and morally grounded new millennium generation.
There are five principles that provide a foundation for the development of sound
ethical leadership. The origin of these five principles can be traced back to the times
of Aristotle and their importance has been discussed in various other disciplines
ranging from biomedics to business and from counselling psychology to
leadership in education.
(a) Ethical Leaders are Respectful of Others

Leaders treat others with respect and that means allowing subordinates to be
themselves, valuing their individual differences and being tolerant of their
beliefs, attitudes and values.
(b) Ethical Leaders are Ready to Serve Others

Leaders put the welfare of their subordinatesÊ foremost in their plans. Such
leaders are altruistic and behind this service principle, ethical leaders believe
in contributing to the greater good of others. In practice, ethical leaders are
follower-centred, place othersÊ interest foremost in their work and act in
ways that benefit others.
(c) Ethical Leaders are Just

Ethical leaders are concerned about being fair and just. As resources are
scarce, conflicts often occur between subordinates about fair distribution of
rewards. It is, therefore, important that leaders have a fair way of distributing
rewards. Beauchamp and Bowie (1988) suggested that in the distribution of
rewards, leaders must apply the rules that each person has an equal share or
opportunity; reward according to individual need; according to that personÊs
rights; according to individual effort; according to societal contribution and
according to merit or performance.

(d) Ethical Leaders are Honest

Leaders who are honest do more than tell the truth. They are open to others
and represent reality as fully and a completely as possible. Being honest
builds up trust and that is important for the progress of an organisation.
Thus, it is important to reward honest behaviour within the organisation.
(e) Ethical Leaders Build Community

Good leaders influence their subordinates to achieve a common goal. An
ethical leader is one who takes into account the purposes of everyone
involved in the group and is attentive to the interest of the community. An
ethical leader demonstrates an ethics of caring and does not ignore the needs
of others.
2.5.2 Conclusion
A very important aspect of leadership is ethical administrative behaviour that is
usually correlated with effective management of schools. A principal with strong
ethical norms is a person with principles who can be trusted by all to deliver
results. An ethical principal will ensure that all his promises will be fulfilled. The
school is considered by society as the moral institution where ethics and moral
education is embedded in the curriculum, while teachers are supposed to be the
bastion of high ethical and moral values where society will look up to educate its
children in ethics and morality.
The question that is always playing in our minds as teachers and members of our
society is „Are the school ready to play its role in this matter effectively?‰ The
answer to this question differs from one another because of the different views
aired by various interested parties. What is more important is to ensure that our
schools have principals who are well-trained in managing their schools and have
strong moral and ethical values.
SELF-CHECK 2.4
1. When you refer to „ethics in leadership‰ what are the important

qualities that a leader should have?
2. Name the areas of management where high ethical standards are

needed.

ACTIVITY 2.3
1. What do you understand by natural law according to Rebose (2001)?
2. „Schools are by nature ethical since they are directed to human

improvement, yet schools are also organisations for interaction
between human beings and as such they sometimes fall short of
ethical standards‰. Discuss this statement.
3. What are the ethical norms of the classical world view and the
modern worldview? Discuss.
4. Discuss some of the ethical issues that school leaders must face
daily in schools.
 This topic discussed both early trait theories and the more modern trait and
personality theories.
 Various leadership styles are discussed and it is concluded that there are two
orientations in leadership ă either toward relationships or task completion.
 The topic also reviewed international research on educational leadership with

its connection to student achievement and school performance.
 The ethical practice of educational leadership is given emphasis and the focus
is on the central issues of ethics with those in the leadership role.
 The topic concluded with a section on how leaders behave ethically ă are
respectful of others, are ready to server others, are just, are honest and build
community.

Behavioural theories Managerial grid

Ethics in leadership Situation style
Leadership style Trait theories
Andrews, R., & Soder, R. (1987). Principal leadership and student achievement.
Educational Leadership, 44 (6), 9ă11.
Andrews, R. L., Soder, R., & Jacob, D. (1986). Principal role, other school variables,
and academic achievement, by ethnicity and SES. Paper presented at the
annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San
Francisco, California, USA.
Azumi, J. E., & Madhere, S. (1983). Professional, power and performance: The
relationship between administration control, teacher conformity and student
achievement. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American
Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York,

NY: Free Press.
Bass, B. M. (1990). Bass and StogdillÊs handbook of leadership: Theory, research

and managerial applications (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.
Beauchamp, T. L., & Bowie, N. E. (1988). Ethical theory and business (3rd ed.).
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Beck, L. G., & Murphy, J. (1994). Ethics in educational leadership programs: An

expanding role. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (1994). Looking for leadership: Another search partyÊs
report. Educational Administration Quaterly, 30 (1), 77ă96.
Bossert, S. (1988). School effects. In N. Boyan (Eds.), The Handbook of Research on

Educational Administration. New York, NY: Longman.
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York, NY: Harper Row.
Cheng, T. C. (1994). PrincipalÊs leadership as a critical factor for school

performance: Evidence from multi-level of primary schools. School
Effectiveness and School Improvement, 5 (3), 299ă317.
Edmonds, R., & Frederiksen, J. (1979). Search for effective school: The
identification and analysis of city school that are instructionally effective for
poor children. Cambridge, MA: Center for Urban Studies.
Edwards, P. I. (1984). Perceived leadership behaviours and demographic

characteristics of principals as they relate to student reading achievement.
Florida Educational Research and Development Council Research Bulletin,
18 (2), 1ă87.
Fiedler, F. E. (1967). New approaches to effective leadership. New York, NY: John
Wiley.
Fiedler, F. E. (1997). Situational control and a dynamic theory of leadership. In

K. Grint (Ed.), Leadership. Classical, contemporary and critical approaches
(pp. 126ă148). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fullan, M. G. (1992). Successful school improvement: The implementation

perspective and beyond. Buckingham, England: Open University Press.
Gardner, H. (1995). Leading minds: An anatomy of leadership. New York, NY:

Basic Books.
Grint, K. (1997). Leadership: Classical, contemporary and critical approaches.

Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hallinger, P., & Murphy, J. (1985). Assessing the instructional behavior of

principal. The Elementary School Journal, 86 (2), 217ă247.

Heck, H. R. (1992). PrincipalÊs instructional leadership and school performance:

Implication for policy development. Educational Evaluation and Policy
Analysis, 14 (1), 21ă34.
Heck, R. H. (1993). School context, principal leadership and achievement: The case
of secondary school Singapore. The Urban Review, 25 (2), 151ă166.
Heck, R., Larsen, T., & Marcoulides, G. (1990). Principal leadership and school
achievement: The validation of a causal model. Educational Administration
Quarterly, 26 (2), 96ă145.
Hersey, P. (1984). The situational leader. New York, NY: Warner.
Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1982). Management of organization behavior:

Utilizing human resources. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1977). The management of organizational

behaviour. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hersey, P., Zigarmi, D., & Zigarmi, P. (1987). Leadership: Different folks.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Heifetz, R. A. (1994). Leadership without easy answers. Cambridge, MA: Belknap

Press.
Hoy, W. K., & Miskel, C. G. (1991). Educational administration: Theory research

and practice. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
Jackson, S. A., Logsdon, D. M., & Taylor, N. E. (1983). Instructional leadership

behavior: Differentiating effective from ineffective low income urban
schools. Urban Education, 18 (1), 59ă70.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1995). The leadership challenge. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Lichtenberg, J. (1996). What are codes of ethics for? In M. Coady & S. Bloch (Eds.),
Codes of ethics and the professions (pp. 13ă27). Melbourne, Australia:
Melbourne University Press.
Liethwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (1999). Transformational school leadership effects: A

replication. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 10 (4), 451ă479.

Leitner, D. (1994). Do principals affect student outcomes: An organizational

perspective. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 5 (3), 219ă238.
Longstaff, S. (1994). What is ethics education and training? Annandale, VA: The
Federation Press.
Longstaff, S. (1994). Ethics for the public sector. Annandale, VA: The Federation
Press.
McGregor, D. (1960). The human side of enterprise. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
Morhead, G., & Griffin, R. W. (1998). Organizational behavior: Managing people

and organizations (5th ed.). New York, NY: Houghton Mifflin.
Rebose, R. W. (2001). The ethics of educational leadership, Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Merill Prentice Hall.
Sadler, P. (1997). Leadership. London, England: Kogan.
Sergiovanni, T. J. (1992). Moral leadership: Getting to the heart of school

leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Sergiovanni, T. (1993). New source of leadership authority. In M. Sashkin and

H. J. Walberg (Eds.). Educational leadership and social culture. Berkerly, CA:
McCutchan Publishing Corp.
Sergiovanni, T. (1984). Leadership and excellence in schooling. Educational

Leadership, February, 41(5), 4ă13.
Stogdill, R. M. (1974). Handbook of leadership. A survey of theory and research,

New York, NY: Free Press.
Van Maurik, J. (2001). Writers on leadership. London, England: Penguin.
Vroom, V. H., & Jago, A .G. (1980). An evaluation of two alternatives to the Vroom-
Yetton normative model. Academy of Management Journal, 23 (2), 347ă355.
Wright, P. (1996). Managerial leadership. London, England: Routledge.
Yukl, G. (1994). Leadership in organizations (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ:

Prentice Hall.

06 Hmef5023 T2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

06 Hmef5023 T2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

06 Hmef5023 T2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Topic  Effective

The general characteristics of effective leaders described in Topic 1 earlier would

2.1 TRAIT THEORIES

(c) Social characteristics include being charismatic, charming, tactful, popular,

(d) Personality traits include being self-confident, adaptable, assertive and

(e) Task-related characteristics include being driven to excel, accepting of

Criticisms of the Traditional Trait Theory

Copyright © Open University Malaysia (OUM)

2.2 BEHAVIOURAL THEORIES

2.2.1 Theory X and Theory Y

(ii) Because of this human characteristic of dislike of work, most people

(iii) The average human being prefers to be directed, wishes to avoid

Copyright © Open University Malaysia (OUM)

Theory X leads naturally to an emphasis on the tactics of control ă procedures

(iii) Commitment to objectives is a function of the rewards associated with

(v) The capacity to exercise a relatively high degree of imagination,

(vi) Under the condition of modern industrial life, the intellectual

Theory YÊs purpose is to encourage integration, to create a situation in which

Theory Y leads to a preoccupation with the nature of relationships, with

Copyright © Open University Malaysia (OUM)

2.2.2 Ohio State University

Figure 2.1: The Ohio State Leadership Quadrants

2.2.3 University of Iowa

Copyright © Open University Malaysia (OUM)

2.2.4 Managerial Grid

Figure 2.2: The managerial grid leadership style

Copyright © Open University Malaysia (OUM)

The grid identifies five leadership styles as stated in Table 2.1.

Table 2.1: Five Leadership Styles Identified by the Leadership Grid

Leadership Styles Explanation

The leadership grid is based on the assumption that there is an effectiveness

Copyright © Open University Malaysia (OUM)

2. What are the assumptions of leaders regarding subordinates whose

3. What are the leadership styles of the „Managerial Grid Leadership

Share your answers with your coursemates in myINSPIRE online forum.

2.3 THE LEADERSHIP STYLE

2.3.1 Situations Style

Copyright © Open University Malaysia (OUM)

As he explained, „important leadership behaviours of the same individual differ

Fiedler (1967) identified three major contextual variables:

(a) Leader Position Power

(b) Leader-member Relationship

(c) Task Structure

As alluded to previously, Fiedler developed the LPC as the instrument of

Copyright © Open University Malaysia (OUM)

An important contribution to leadership theory was the introduction of the

Therefore, it is implied that the maturity level of the subordinate, defined in

Copyright © Open University Malaysia (OUM)

Figure 2.3: The four basic leadership styles

It is a dynamic model of leadership in which the role of the leader is to „provide

Copyright © Open University Malaysia (OUM)

1. What is the „least preferred co-worker theory‰?

2. What is „the path-goal theory‰? Explain.

3. What is the „decision-making model theory‰?

1. Explain the three major contextual variables identified by Fiedler

(a) Leader position power;

(b) Leader-member relationship; and

(c) Task structure.

Share your answers with your coursemates in myINSPIRE online forum.