Professor Alma Harris
University of Warwick
England, United Kingdom

What is the case for distributed leadership and what are the challenges associated with spreading leadership across the school?

Introduction

Looking at the school improvement field it would appear that the most recent studies point towards the importance of capacity building as a means of generating and sustaining school improvement. At the core of the capacity-building model, it has been argued, is ' distributed leadership along with social cohesion and trust ' (Hopkins and Jackson, 2003:95) Leadership, from this perspective, resides in the human potential available to be released within an organisation. Implicit within the distributed leadership model are the leadership practices of teachers, either as informal leaders or in a formal leadership role as a head of department, subject coordinator or teacher mentor (Harris and Muijs, 2003). The implication from the current school improvement literature is that distributed leadership can assist schools in building the internal capacity for development.

In the USA, Canada and Australia the notion of ' teacher leadership ' is particularly well developed and grounded in research evidence. This model of leadership, like distributed leadership, implies a redistribution of power and a re-alignment of authority within the organisation. It means creating the conditions in which people work together and learn together, where they construct and refine meaning, leading to a shared purpose or set of goals. Evidence would suggest that, where such conditions are in place, leadership is a much stronger internal driver for school improvement and change. In practice, this means giving authority to teachers and empowering them to lead. Taking this perspective, leadership is a fluid and emergent entity, rather than a fixed phenomenon. It implies a different power relationship within the school where the distinctions between followers and leaders tend to blur. It also opens up the possibility for all teachers to become leaders at various times and suggests that leadership is a shared and collective endeavour that can engage the many, rather than the few.

The distributed perspective focuses on how leadership practice is distributed among formal and informal leaders. Distributed leadership incorporates the activities of the many individuals in a school who work at mobilising and guiding other teachers in the process of instructional change (Spillaine et al, 2001). It extends the boundaries of leadership significantly as it is premised upon high levels of ' teacher involvement ' and encompasses a wide variety of ' expertise, skill and input ' (Harris and Lambert, 2003: 16). Engaging many people in leadership activity is at the core of distributed leadership in action. Hopkins and Jackson (2003:99) suggest it is where ' leadership and organisational growth collide and by definition, it is dispersed or distributed ' . In this sense distributed leadership is essentially concerned with harnessing and enhancing the skills and knowledge of all those within an organisation to create a common culture that functions positively and effectively. There is a wide range of evidence that reinforces the importance of distributed leadership on subsequent school and teacher performance. Much of this work is located in the school improvement and teacher development/leadership fields.

The challenges of distributed leadership

While the research evidence highlights the advantages of distributed forms of leadership, there are inevitable and inherent difficulties associated with its widespread adoption and adaptation within schools. It would be naïve to ignore these. Clearly, schools as traditional hierarchies with the demarcations of position and pay-scale are not going to be instantly responsive to a more fluid and distributed approach to leadership. Furthermore, there are inherent threats to status and the status quo in all that distributed leadership implies.

• Firstly, distributed leadership requires those in formal leadership positions to relinquish power to others. Apart from the challenge to authority and ego, this potentially places the head or principal in a vulnerable position because of the lack of direct control over certain activities. In addition, there are financial barriers, as formal leadership positions in schools carry additional increments. Consequently, to secure informal leadership in schools will require heads to use other incentives and to seek alternative ways of remunerating staff who take on leadership responsibilities.
• Secondly, the ' top-down ' approaches to leadership and the internal school structures offer significant impediments to the development of distributed leadership. The current hierarchy of leadership within both primary and secondary schools means that power resides with the leadership team, ie, at the top of the school. In addition, the separate pastoral and academic structures in schools, the subject or department divisions, plus the strong year-level groupings present significant barriers to teachers working together. These structures can actively prevent teachers attaining autonomy and taking on leadership roles within the school as they demarcate role and responsibility.
• Finally and most importantly, distributed leadership poses the major challenge of how to distribute development responsibility and authority and, more importantly, who distributes responsibility and authority. From the two studies, it is clear that a ' top-down ' approach to distributed leadership is possible and that giving improvement or development responsibilities to teachers offers a means of empowering others to lead. But it will be important to ensure that distributed leadership is not simply misguided delegation. Instead, it implies a social distribution of leadership where the leadership function is stretched over the work of a number of individuals and where the leadership task is accomplished through the interaction of multiple leaders (Spillane, 2002: 20). It implies inter-dependency rather than dependency, embracing the ways in which leaders of various kinds and in various roles share responsibility.

The research evidence would also suggest that the success or otherwise of distributed leadership within a school can be influenced by a number of interpersonal factors, such as relationships with other teachers and school management. The importance of these is evident, both with respect to teachers ' ability to influence colleagues and with respect to developing productive relations with school management, who may in some cases feel threatened by teachers taking on leadership roles.

Where next?

In many countries there is a contemporary policy shift towards collaboration, partnership and networking among schools. This policy drive is now firmly established, with collaboration being viewed as the prime mechanism for securing higher achievement and improved learning outcomes. This policy imperative not only represents a move away from competition between schools but also places teachers, districts, researchers and schools centre stage in school improvement efforts. To achieve successful partnerships, collaboration, and networking between schools will inevitably necessitate distributed forms of leadership and collective agency.

The ascendancy of distributed leadership as a concept and a theory represents a significant shift in thinking about leaders, leadership and leadership development. It not only challenges the mythology of individualistic leadership but also reclaims leadership for teachers and others working in schools. Undoubtedly, more research is needed to give this new leadership perspective greater legitimacy but, as the association between distributed leadership and improved student and school performance becomes clearer, so the opportunities for more teachers to be leaders will increase. This is surely to be welcomed?

References

Day, C, Harris, A, Hadfield M., Tolley, H. & Beresford, J. (2000). Leading Schools in Times of Change. Milton Keynes, Open University Press.

Fullan, M (2001). Leading in a Culture of Change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Wiley.

Harris, A and Chapman, C (2002). Effective Leadership in Schools in Challenging Circumstances, Final Report. National College for School Leadership.

Harris, A and Muijs, D (2003). Teacher Leadership: A Review of Research, NCSL and GTC websites.

Harris, A and Lambert, L (2003). Building Leadership Capacity for School Improvement, Milton Keynes, Open University Press.

Harris, A (2004). ' Distributed Leadership: Leading or Misleading? ' In Educational Management and Administration, Vol. 32, No. 1.

King, M B et al (1996). ' Participatory Decision Making ' . In King, M.B. (ed.). Restructuring for Authentic Student Achievement: The impact of culture and structure in 24 schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Ovando, M (1996). ' Teacher Leadership: Opportunities and Challenges ' . In Planning and Changing 27(1/2): 30-44.

Spillane, J, Halverson, R and Diamond, J (2001). Towards a Theory of Leadership Practice: A Distributed Perspective Northwestern University, Institute for Policy Research Working Article.

1. For a full account of methodology - refer to final reports (Day et al, 1999: Harris and Chapman, 2002).

About the author

Professor Alma Harris is Director of the Institute of Education, at the University of Warwick, in England, in the UK.

Buy publications by the author

Contribute a discussion paper to this year's online conferences on the transformation of education