ORGANIZATIONAL LEADERSHIP
In organizational leadership, leaders help set strategic goals for the organization while
motivating individuals within the organization to successfully carry out assignments in order to
realize these goals. In the school setting, the school leader helps set the goals/targets for the school
and motivates teachers, parents, learners, non-teaching personnel and other members of the
community to do their task to realize the school goals.
Organizational leadership works towards what is best for individual members and what is
best for the organization as a group at the same time. Organizational leadership does not sacrifice
the individual members for the sake of the people nor sacrifice the welfare of the group for the
sake of individual members. Both individual and group are necessary.
Organizational leadership is also an attitude and a work ethic that empowers an individual
in any role to lead from the top, middle, or bottom of an organization. Applied to the school setting,
the school leader helps anyone from the organization not necessarily from the top to lead others.
An example of this leadership which does not necessarily come from the top of the organization is
teacher leadership.
Leadership Versus Management
Are leadership and management synonymous? Is a leader a manager or is a manager a
leader? If I am a good leader, does it follow that I am a good manager? Or if I am a good manager,
am I at the same time a good leader? Not necessarily.
School Head Must be Both a Leader and a Manager
A school head must be both a leader and a manager.
A school head leads the school and community to formulate the vision, mission, goals, and
school improvement plan. This is a leadership function. One sees to it that this plan gets well
implemented on time and so ensures that the resources needed are there, the persons to do the job
are qualified and available. This is a management function. Imagine if the school head is only a
leader. You have the vision, mission, goals, and school plan but no implementation. The plan is
good only in paper. If you do the task of a manager only, you will be focusing on the details of the
day-of-day implementation without the big picture, the vision and mission. So, it is a big picture
for connect and meaning. This means that it is best that a school head is both a leader and a
manager.
Table 1. Comparison of a Manager and a Leader
MANAGERS versus LEADERS
Managers
Leaders
Administer
Innovate
Their process is transactional; meet
Their process is transformational;
objectives and delegate tasks.
develop a vision and find a way forward.
Work Focused
The goal is to get things done.
They are skilled at allocating work.
People Focused
The goals include both people and
results. They care about you and
want you to succeed.
Have Subordinates
They create circles of power and
lead by authority.
Have Followers
They create circles of influence and
lead by inspiring.
Do Things Right
Do the Right Thing
Managers enact the existing culture
Leaders shape the culture and drive integrity.
and maintain status quo.
Dubrin, Andrew E. (2006). Essentials of management. Mason, OH 45040: USA
Types of Skills Demanded of Leaders
Leaders use 3 broad types of skills: 1) technical, 2) human and 3) conceptual. Technical
skills refer to any type of process or technique like sending e-mail, preparing a power point
presentation. Human skill is the ability to work effectively with people and to build network. This
is also referred to as people skills or soft skills.
Conceptual skill is the ability to think in terms of models, frameworks and broad
relationships such as long range plans. In short, conceptual skills deal with ideas while human skill
concerns relationship with people and technical skills involve psychomotor skills and things. The
ideal school leader possesses all three.
Leadership Styles
Here are the leadership styles: autocratic, consultative, democratic, and laissez faire.
Autocratic leaders do decision making by themselves. Consultative leaders allow
participation of the members of the organization by consulting them but make the decision
themselves. This is what happens in consultation meetings called by schools when they increase
tuition fees. Sometimes education stakeholders get disappointed that their suggestions are not
carried after school leaders have consulted them. They do not understand that consultation does
not necessarily mean approval stakeholders suggestions.
Democratic leaders allow the members of the organization to fully participate in decision
making. Decisions are arrived at by way of consensus. This is genuine participation of the members
of the organization which is in keeping with school empowerment.
In laissez faire or free-rein leadership styles, leaders avoid responsibility and leave the
members of the organization to establish their own work. The leadership style leads to the kanyakanya mentality, one of the weaknesses of the Filipino character. There will be no problem if the
situation is deal, i.e. each member of the organization has reached a level of maturity and so if
members are left to themselves they will do only what is good for the organization. On the other
hand, it will be chaos if each member will do as one please even if it is against the common good.
The consultative and democratic leadership styles are the only ones that allow for
participation of the members of the organization. Between the consultative and democratic styles
of leadership, the democratic style is genuinely participative because it abides by the rule of
majority.
The Situational Leadership Model
In situational leadership, effective leaders adapt their leadership style to the situation of the
members of the organization, i.e., to the readiness and willingness of group members. Paul Hersey
and Kenneth H. Blanchard (1996) characterized leadership style in terms of the amount of task
behavior and relationship behavior that the leader provides to their followers. They categorized all
leadership styles into four behavior styles, which they named S1 to S4.
Table 2. Behavior Styles in Situational Leadership
S1
S2
S3
Selling/Directing
Telling/Coaching Participating/Supporting
Individuals lack the Individuals are more Individuals are
able to do the task; experienced and able to do
specific skills
required for the job however, they are the task but lack the
in hand and they are demotivated for the confidence or the
job or task.
willing to work at
willingness to take on
Unwilling
to
do
the
the task. They are
responsibility.
task.
novice but
enthusiastic.
S4
Delegating
Individuals are
experienced at the
task, and
comfortable with
their own ability to
do it well. They
are able and
willing to not only
do the task, but to
take responsibility
for the task.
If the group member is able, willing and confident (high readiness), the leader uses a
delegating leadership style. The leader turns over the responsibility for decisions and
implementation to the members. On the other hand, if the group members have low readiness, i.e.
unable and unwilling, the leader resorts to telling the group members what to do.
In short, competent members of the organization require less specific direction than less
competent members. Less competent people need more specific direction than more competent
people.
Among these leadership styles, no one style is considered best for all leaders to use all the
time. Effective leaders need to be flexible, and must adapt themselves according to the situation,
the readiness and willingness of the members of the organization.
Servant Leadership
Robert K. Greenleaf (1977) coined the paradoxical term servant leadership. How can one
be a leader when one is a servant? That’s the common thinking. But the paradox is Greenleaf’s
deliberate and meaningful way of emphasizing the qualities of a servant leader.
He describes the servant
…servant first. It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve. Then conscious choice
brings one to aspire to lead. The best test is: do those served grow as persons: do they, while being
served, become healthier, wiser, freer, more autonomous, more likely themselves to become
servants? And, what is the effect on the least privileged in society; will they benefit, or, at least,
not be further deprived? (Greenleaf, 1977, 2002)
The first desire of the servant leader is to serve. How? By leading. The greatest teacher of
humankind, Jesus Christ, was a servant-leader. He taught His disciples “he who wants to be great,
must be the servant of all”. The life of the Greatest Teacher was a life of total service to all.
We often hear the term “public servants” to refer to appointed and elected officials of the
government to emphasize the fact that they indeed are servants of the people. Their first duty is to
serve and in serving, they lead. They don’t think of their power as leaders first. If they do, they
tend to become more conscious of their power or make their importance felt over their constituents
and forget that if ever they are given power it is to serve their people. Someone said “power
corrupts”. And it does, when leaders think first of their power and
forget the very reason why such power was given, i.e. to serve. The greatest teacher said:
“… and whoever wants to be first among you must be slave.” (Matthew 20: 27)
The greatest among you shall be your servant.” (Matthew 23: 11)
“If anyone wants to be first, he must be the last of all and the servant of all.” (Mark 9:
35)
“You know how the pagan rulers make their powers felt. But it shall not be this way among you.
Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant.”
(Mark 10: 43)
His whole life was a life of service. In fact, He wanted to impress this idea of servant
leadership by doing something dramatic in His last days on earth. He washed the feet of His
apostles. Washing the feet was the work of a servant in His time. He wanted to etch in the memories
of His apostles the idea that leaders are supposed to be “foot-washers”. Leaders are supposed to
be servants of all.
Servant leadership seeks to involve others in decision making, is strongly based in ethical
and caring behavior, and enhances the growth of workers while improving the caring and quality
of organizational life.
The school head who acts as a servant leader forever remembers that one is there to serve
one’s teachers, the students, the parents etc. and NOT the teachers, learners, parents to serve one.
Transformational Leadership
Robert Kennedy once said: “Some men see things as they are, and ask why. I dream of
things that never were, and ask “why not.” Those who dream of things that never were and ask
“why not” are not transformational leaders. The transformational leader is not content with status
quo and sees the need to transform the way the organization thinks, relates and does things. The
transformational school leaders see school culture as it could be and should be, not as it is and so
plays one’s role as visionary, engager, learner, collaborator, and instructional leader. As a
transformational leader one makes positive changes in the organization by collaboratively
developing new vision for the organization and mobilizing members to work towards that vision.
To do this the transformational leader combines charisma, inspirational leadership and
intellectual stimulation to introduce innovation for the transformation of the organization.
.
Sustaining Change
For reforms to transform, the innovations introduced by the transformational leader must
be institutional and sustained. Or else that innovation is simply a passing fad that loses its flavor
after a time. A proof that an innovation introduced has transformed the organization is that the
result or effect of that change persists or ripples even when the transformative leader is gone or is
transferred to another school or gets prompted in the organization.
We feel most comfortable with our old pair of shoes. We like to live in our comfort zones
and so sometimes we don’t welcome change. And yet if we want improvement in the way we do
things in our organization, in our school or if we want to improve in life we must be willing to
change. The transformational leader ought to deal with resistance to change to succeed. There will
always be resisters to change. To ensure that the innovation one introduces leads to the
transformation of the organization. Morato of Bayan ABS-CBN,
(2011) gives the following advice:
1. seek the support of the stakeholders – The teachers must build a “strong coalition of
allies in order to push for any meaningful change that would yield results.
Innovations cannot be forced upon the teachers, the students, the parents, the
community without serious consequences.”
2. get people involved early and often – Resistance drops off in proportion to the
involvement of participants. You may not to expect 100-percent support from any
individual who was not personally involved in a change that affected one’s work. It
is
best to set up networks to reach out to as many people as possible.
3. plan a communication’s campaign to “sell” the innovation – Morata (2011) asserts:
“The change envisioned must cascade downwards to the last lesson plan and ripple
sidewards to win the support of major stakeholders”.
4. ensure that the innovation is understood by all – The benefits and costs must be
appreciated and weighed carefully.
5. consider timing and phasing – These are highly critical; missteps might backfire
and
lack of sensitivity to stakeholders might lead to resistance.
Morato described the successful innovations in several schools innovations in the Philippines.
THE SCHOOL HEAD IN SCHOOL-BASED MANAGEMENT (SBM)
The Meaning of School-Based Management (SBM)
School-based management is a decentralized management initiative by developing power
or authority to school heads, teachers, parents and students. SBM is a strategy to improve education
by transferring significant decision-making authority from the DepEd Central Office, regional
offices, division offices to individual schools. SBM provides principals, teachers, students, and
parents greater control over the education process by giving them responsibility for decisions about
the budget, personnel, and the curriculum. Through the involvement of teachers, parents, and other
community members in these key decisions, SBM can create more effective learning environments
for children.
SBM and the Principle of Subsidiarity
SBM is in keeping with the principle of subsidiarity which states that it is the people at the
same. This tenet holds that “nothing should be done by a larger and more complex organization
which can be done as well by a smaller and simpler organization. In other words, any activity
which can be performed by a more decentralized entity should be done by that more decentralized
entity.” Those in the higher echelon are far removed from that scene and are therefore not as
involved and as informed as those from below.
Advantages of SBM
The following are strengths of SBM:
- Allow competent individuals in the schools to make decisions that will improve learning
- Give the entire school community a voice in key decisions
- Focus accountability for decisions
- Lead to greater creativity in the design of programs
- Redirect resources to support the goals developed in each school
- Lead to realistic budgeting as parents and teachers become more aware of the school’s financial
status, spending limitations, and the cost of its programs
- Improve morale of teachers and nurture new leadership at all levels
SIP – School Improvement Plans
Legal Basis of SBM
The Philippine Constitution provides that Congress shall enact a local government code
that will institutionalize a system of decentralization (Article 10, Sec. 3) whereby local government
units shall be extended more power, authority… The Local Government Code in
1991 is a fulfillment of this Constitutional provision.
This means that long before the Department of Education (DepEd) legally introduced
decentralization in schools through School-Based Management (SBM) in 2001 through the
enactment of RA 9155, local government units were already empowered for local governance. RA
9155, Basic Governance Act transfers the power and authority as well as the resources to the school
level. School empowerment is based on the assumption that the school heads including teachers,
key leaders in the community, parents know best the root and solution to the problem.
Conditions for the Success of SBM
- Teachers, school heads must be given the opportunity to make choices. They must actively
participate in school improvement planning.
- The involvement of parents and teachers must be strongly encouraged and highly welcomed.
- Stakeholders must participate in the development of a School Improvement Plan. They must
have a say on resource allocation to meet specific needs.
- Higher authorities must actively encourage thoughtful experimentation and innovation in an
atmosphere where mistakes are viewed as learning experiences. They must be willing to share
their authority with the academic and the larger community.
- Teachers must develop reflection, problem solving.
In addition, based on international experience, the following must be present for SBM to succeed
in schools:
- have basic resources
- have developed an effective school support system
- are provided with regular information on their performance
- are given advice on how they may improve
- emphasize the motivational element in the management work of the principal
The success of SBM very much depends on the school head.
Table 3. Functions of a School Head
Roles
Functions
Visionary
principal,
Lead in setting the vision,
motivator, advocate and
mission and goals of the
planner
school
Builder of networks and Organize/expand school,
community and local
support systems
government networks and
groups that will actively
participate in school
improvement
Lead in developing the
School Improvement Plan
with their participation of the
staff and the community
Lead in developing and
maintaining the School
Management Information
System
Curriculum developer
Create a physical and
psychological
climate
conducive to teaching and
learning
Knowledge/Skills/Attitudes
Required
Change and future orientation
Networking, organizing,
social mobilization, advocacy
Development of teamwork,
building consensus and skills
in negotiation and conflict
resolution
Participatory planning and
administrative management
Generation and use of data
and information as basis for
planning and management
Development of collective
accountability for school and
student performance
Fiscal Resource Manager
Localize
and
implement Designing of the curriculum
school curriculum
to address both national
goals, local needs and
aspirations
Encourage development and Creation of an open learning
system based on several
use of innovative
resource materials rather than
instructional methods
on single textbooks
focused on improving
learning outcomes,
Participatory and peer-based
increasing access to basic
instructional supervision
education, improving the
holding power of schools and
addressing specific local
problems
Administer and manage all Fund management
personnel, physical and fiscal
resources of the school
Serving
as
model
for
Encourage and accept
transparency
and
donations, gifts, bequests and
accountability especially in
grants for educational
financial management
purposes and report all such
donations to the appropriate
offices
Factors of School Effectiveness Based on Research
Effective practices need to be institutionalized for them to be part of the school culture.
School autonomy has a positive relationship with student performance when accountability
measures are in place and/or when school principals and teachers collaborate in school
management (OECD, 2012). China and Singapore have been devolving more responsibility to the
school level (Stewart, 2008). In Finland, accountability rests on the trust placed by families and
government in the professional competence of teachers (Stewart, 2008).
In the Philippines, the Third Elementary Education Project (TEEP, 2005) conducted a study to
determine the effect of School-Based Management on student performance using the
administrative dataset of all public schools in 23 school districts over a 3-year period, 20032005.
The results showed that the introduction of SBM had a statistically significant, although small,
overall positive effect on average school-level scores in 23 school districts. With SBM, significant
decision-making authority was transferred from state and district offices to individual schools.
SBM provided principals, teachers, students, and parents greater control over the education process
by giving them responsibility for decisions about the budget, personnel, and the curriculum.
Through the involvement of teachers, parents, and other community members in these key
decisions, SBM can create more effective learning environments for children (Office of Research
Education/Consumer Guide). To further strengthen the School-Based Management practice re-
emphasize the centrality of the learners and the involvement of relevant community in basic
education service delivery, the Department of Education embarked on revisiting the SBM
framework, assessment process and tool to improve on already recognized successful SBM
practices across the regions (DO 83, s. 2012). To institutionalize decentralization efforts at the
school level and in line with Republic Act No. 9155 also known as Governance of Basic Education
Act of 2001, the Department of Education provided School-Based Management Grants as
additional funds to public elementary and secondary schools,… to augment the school fund on
Maintenance and other Operating Expenses (DO 45, s. 2015).
Philippine Accreditation System for Basic Education (PASBE)
The institutionalizing of SBM was strengthened with the introduction of PASBE which was
launched through DepEd Order No. 64, s. 2012. Accreditation is a process of selfevaluation and
peer-review to ensure that quality standards agreed upon by stakeholders are understood,
implemented, maintained, and enhanced for continuous improvement of learner outcomes (DepEd
DO 20, s. 2013 (PASBE Supplemental Guidelines to DepEd Order No. 83, s. 2012).
The agreed upon standards of quality or effective schools are grounded on the four principles of
A Child-and-Community-Centered Education Systems (ACCESs), namely:
1. principle of effective leadership
2. principle of community-based learning
3. principle of accountability for performance and results
4. principle of convergence to harness resources for education
The school’s level of SBM practice can either be:
Level I - Developing
Level II - Maturing
Level III – Advanced
A school that reaches the highest level of SBM practice qualifies for an accredit status.
A school in Level I, Developing, means that the school is developing structures and mechanisms
with acceptable level and extent of community participation and impact on learning. A school in
Level II, described as Maturing, means that the school is introducing and sustaining continuous
improvement process that integrates wider community participation and significantly improves
performance and learning outcomes. Level III, Advanced (Accredited) means that the school is
ensuring the production of intended outputs/outcomes and meeting all standards of a system fully
integrated in the local community and is self-renewing and self-sustaining.
In conclusion, PASBE is a means to institutionalize SBM, the granting of more autonomy to
schools for them to chart their destiny to grow in effectiveness continuously.
Factors that Contribute to School Effectiveness
1. Human factors
These include a dynamic school head, highly selected competent and committed teachers,
highly motivated pupils with high expectations, and a supportive community.
2. Non-human factors, processes
These refer to clear and shared vision-mission (focus), high expectations/ambitious standards,
emphasis on accountability, aligned curriculum, instruction and assessment with
state/DepEd
standards, efficiency or optimal utilization of resources and facilities,
collaboration and
communication, focused professional development, and global and
future orientation.