The 7th International Conference on Educational Research:
13-14 September 2014, Faculty of Education, Khon Kaen University, Thailand
Full Paper for the ICER 2014
Title of the Paper: Innovative Leadership affecting High Performance Organization
in Schools under The Secondary Educational Service Area Office 21
Viangvivut Tumtool ( tviangvivut@kkumail.com)
Dr. Wallapha Ariratana ( wallapha@kku.ac.th)
1. Abstract
The objectives of this research were to 1) study level of the innovative leadership of
school administrators in The Secondary Educational Service Area Office 21 2) study level of
high performance organization of schools in The Secondary Educational Service Area
Office 21 3) study the relation between the innovative leadership of school administrators
and high performance organization of schools in The Secondary Educational Service Area
Office 21 and 4) study the innovative leadership of school administrators affecting the high
performance organization of schools in The Secondary Educational Service Area Office 21.
The sample were administrators and teachers of schools in The Secondary Educational
Service Area Office 21, total of 317 persons .The tool was the questionnaire as rating scale 5
levels. The statistics used frequency , percentage , mean , standard deviation , Pearson
correlation coefficient and multiple regression analysis.
Research findings were as follows;
1. The innovative leadership of school administrators in The Secondary Educational
Service Area Office 21 indicated a “high” level. The highest average was the ethical and
accountability and the lowest was the changing in vision.
2.The high performance organization of school in The Secondary Educational
Service Area Office 21 indicated a “high” level. The highest average was the ability to
talent management and the lowest was the ability to created high performance works.
3.The innovative leadership of school administrators correlated with the high
performance organization of school in The Secondary Educational Service Area Office 21
statically at the 0.05 and the correlation indicated a “high” level.
4.The four aspects of innovative leadership of school administrators affected the
high performance organization of school with statistical significance at the .05 level. These
could be formed as follows;
The Regression Equation of Unstandardized Score:
𝑌̂i = 0.50 + 0.43(X6) + 0.26(X5) + 0.10(X4) + 0.08(X1)
The Regression Equation of Standardized Score:
𝑍̂y = 0.46(ZX6) + 0.29(ZX5) + 0.13(ZX4) + 0.01(ZX1)
Keywords: Innovative leadership, High performance organization
2. Introduction
According to the study of surrounding for Education and Thai Education Situation in
World Stage, there were recommendations : the efficiency and effectiveness of overall Thai
Education System should be evaluated. (The Office of The Education Council, 2013) It was
found that the quality from administration and management with high potentiality as well as
readiness in Educational Management, was only 17% which was low. It was necessary to
provide school development to be High Performance Organization in order to move, adjust,
and search for direction to be able to surpass the competitors from both of national and
international level for serving the ASEAN Community by school management for being High
Performance. The school administrators had to improve and modify the style as well as work
The 7th International Conference on Educational Research:
13-14 September 2014, Faculty of Education, Khon Kaen University, Thailand
practice method in school through innovation as an instrument for moving the
implementation to accomplish its goal. The Innovative Leadership was the application of
administrators’ competency in leading the organization by considering different factors
including the transformational vision, creative thinking, organizational climate development,
risk management, administrators’ morality and team working and participation. The
administrators had to use these factors as major processes in development with better
competitive competency level. Many organizations in Thailand tended to give an importance
to the innovation. (Payat Wootirong, 2012) Therefore, the school administration and
management to be higher level of competitive competency and sustainable, it was necessary
for the leaders to use the innovation for constructing product and solving the problem or
developing the organization in administration and management leading to success according
to goal.
The Office of Secondary Educational Service Area 21 included responsible area in 2
provinces as Nongkai, and Buengkan Provinces. Its area was ranged in a long line of 360
kilometers along Kong River which was next to Lao’s Democratic Republic, a major member
of AEC, including 56 schools under jurisdiction. The students in each area with different
contexts, vision, organization for moving the Secondary School Management for improving
level of learning achievement including quality base don universal standard. But, according
to O-NET found that the learning achievement in most of schools in 2012 academic year in
lower level than the national average value in every Learning Substance. (The Office of
Secretariat in Educational Council, 2013) In addition, the academic skill competition in
national level to be awarded in top, was small number compared with the other Educational
Service Areas. The findings from entrance examination in Higher Education were very little.
It was caused by low level in innovative leadership of school administrators. Consequently,
the researcher as an administrator in a school under jurisdiction was interested in studying the
innovative leadership affecting the high performance organization of schools under
jurisdiction that which aspect should be included in approach for school management to be
high performance organization, and the guidelines for improving and developing the
Educational Management of school to be in higher level than criterion of national education
standard as well as increasing the potentiality for competition of Thai Education in universal
level.
3. Research Questions
1. What is the level of innovative leadership of school administrators under the The
Secondary Educational Service Area Office 21?
2. What is the level of high performance organization of school administrators under
The Secondary Educational Service Area Office 21?
3.How were relationship between innovative leadership of school administrators with
high performance organization of schools under The Secondary Educational Service Area
Office 21?
4. What factors of Innovation Leadership are affecting to high performance
organization of schools under The Secondary Educational Service Area Office 21?
4. Research Objectives
1. To study the level of Innovative Leadership of school administrators, under The
Office of Secondary Educational Service Area 21.
2. To study the level of High Performance Organization of schools under The Office
of Secondary Educational Service Area 21.
3. To study the relationship between school administrators’ Innovative Leadership,
and
High erformance Organization of schools, under The Office of Secondary Educational
Service Area 21.
The 7th International Conference on Educational Research:
13-14 September 2014, Faculty of Education, Khon Kaen University, Thailand
4. To study the Innovative Administrators’ Leadership Factors affecting the High
Performance Organization of schools, under The Office of Secondary Educational Service
Area 21.
5. Research Methodology
5.1 Target Group,
1,771 persons of school administrators and teachers, under The Office of Secondary
Educational Service Area 21.
5.2 Variables
Independent Variables consisted of 6 aspects of school administrators’ Innovative
Leadership including : 1) the transformational vision, 2) creativity, 3) team working and
participation, 4) morality and accountability, 5) risk management, and 6) innovative
organizational climate. The Dependent Variable was High Performance Organization.
5.3 Data Collection
The researcher entered to the area asking for cooperation in responding the
Questionnaire, and collected back by himself implementing during the second semester of
2013 academic year.
Samples, Krejcie and Morgan’ Table at 95% confident level was administered
(Chatupume Ketchaturad, 2012) in determining the samples. The Multi-stage Sampling was
used for selecting the samples based on school size. Then, Stratified Random Sampling was
administered. The obtained samples were 56 basic schools, under jurisdiction of The Office
of Secondary Educational Service Area 21, 2013 academic year, classifying into 29 small
sized schools, 18 medium sized schools, and 9 large sized schools. Te key informants were
272 teachers, and 45 school administrators.
5.4 Instruments
5.3.1 The research instrument was the Questionnaire including 3 Parts. Part 1,
was the Questionnaire asking the respondents’ demographic data, as the Checklist. Part 2,
was the Questionnaire asking the level of school administrators’ Innovative Leadership
including 6 aspects, as 5 Level Rating Scale. The criterion for grading was applied from
Likert. Part 3, was the Questionnaire asking level of High Performance Organization, as as 5
Level Rating Scale. The criterion for grading was applied from Likert.
5.3.2 The instrument validation
1. The Index of Congruence was found by The Questionnaire asking 5 experts’
opinion. The criterion for
consideration was the IOC value from 0.50 up (Boonchom
Srisaad, 2011) It was found that every item obtained
the IOC ranged between 0.841.00. In addition, the IOC of total issue of Questionnaire was = 0.89.
2. The Reliability of instrument was found by Trying out the Questionnaire with
teachers and school administrators, in Sangkom Wittaya School, under The Office of
Secondary Educational Service Area 21, with similar context with the samples, 30 schools.
Then, the Reliability value was calculated by Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient : 𝛼) (Sampan
Panpruek, 1999) The Reliability was calculate again after being used. The Reliability of total
issue was = 0.96.
5.4 Data Analysis
The respondents’ demographic data were analyzed by using the Frequency and
Percentage, and presented in Table as well as description.
Conclusions of the findings
1. The findings of study in school administrators’ Innovative Leadership in schools,
under The Office of Secondary Educational Service Area 21, found that in overall, the
average value of practice, was in “High” level in every item. Considering the first 3 orders,
found that the highest level was in the Morality and Accountability. The second order
The 7th International Conference on Educational Research:
13-14 September 2014, Faculty of Education, Khon Kaen University, Thailand
included: the Team Working and Participation, and the Innovative Organizational Climate.
The aspect with lowest level of average value, was the Transformational Vision.
2. The findings of High Performance Organization in schools, under The Office of
Secondary
Educational Service Area 21, found that in overall, the average value of
practice, was in “High” level, ranking in order as follows: the highest level was in the
Competency in Maintaining Intelligent Staffs . The second order included: the Adjustment
Ability with Changes. The aspect with lowest level of average value, was the Competency
in Constructing the High Efficient Performance respectively.
3. The relationship between the school administrators’ Innovative Leadership, and
High Performance Organization of schools, under The Office of Secondary Educational
Service Area 21, found that the Pearson Product Moment Coefficient between the school
administrators’ Innovative Leadership, and High Performance Organization of schools under
The Office of Secondary Educational Service Area 21, there was significant relationship at
0.05 level. There was relationship in every aspect of school administrators’ Innovative
Leadership including: the innovative organizational climate, the risk management, the
morality and accountability, the team working and participation, the transformational vision,
and the creative thinking with High Performance Organization of schools in “High” level.
4. The school administrators’ Innovative Leadership affecting the High Performance
Organization of schools under The Office of Secondary Educational Service Area 21, found
that the school administrators’ Leadership affecting 4 out of 6 aspects of the High
Performance Organization in schools. The Multiple Correlation Coefficient was = 0.89.
The innovative organizational climate, the risk management, the morality and accountability,
and the transformational vision entered into the equation with Multiple Correlation
Coefficient was = 0.88. It was indicated that all of 4 variables affecting the High
Performance Organization of schools under The Office of Secondary Educational Service
Area 21, at .05 significant level. In addition, according to the data analysis of decision
making coefficient (R2), found that the administrators’ Innovative Leadership affecting 4
aspects of the High Performance Organization concluding: The innovative organizational
climate, the risk management, the morality and accountability, and the transformational
vision could predict that the it would affect the High Performance Organization of schools
under The Office of Secondary Educational Service Area 21, for 80% at .05 significant level.
6. Conclusions and Discussions
6.1 Conclusions
1. The findings of study in school administrators’ Innovative Leadership in schools,
under The Office of Secondary Educational Service Area 21, found that in overall, the
average value of practice, was in “High” level in every item. Considering the first 3 orders,
found that the highest level was in the Morality and Accountability. The second order
included: the Team Working and Participation, and the Innovative Organizational Climate.
The aspect with lowest level of average value, was the Transformational Vision.
2. The findings of High Performance Organization in schools, under The Office of
Secondary Educational Service Area 21, found that in overall, the average value of practice,
was in “High” level, ranking in order as follows: the highest level was in the Competency
in Maintaining Intelligent Staffs . The second order included: the Adjustment Ability with
Changes. The aspect with lowest level of average value, was the competency in constructing
the High Efficient Performance respectively.
3. The relationship between the school administrators’ Innovative Leadership, and
High Performance Organization of schools, under The Office of Secondary Educational
Service Area 21, found that the Pearson Product Moment Coefficient between the school
administrators’ Innovative Leadership, and High Performance Organization of schools
under The Office of Secondary Educational Service Area 21, there was significant
relationship at 0.05 level. There was relationship in every aspect of school administrators’
The 7th International Conference on Educational Research:
13-14 September 2014, Faculty of Education, Khon Kaen University, Thailand
Innovative Leadership including: the innovative organizational climate, the risk
management, the morality and accountability, the team working and participation, the
transformational vision, and the creative thinking with High Performance Organization of
schools in “High” level.
4. The school administrators’ Innovative Leadership affecting the High Performance
Organization of schools under The Office of Secondary Educational Service Area 21, found
that the school administrators’leadership affecting 4 out of 6 aspects of the High Performance
Organization in schools. The Multiple Correlation Coefficient was = 0.89. The innovative
organizational climate, the risk management, the morality and accountability, and the
transformational vision entered into the equation with Multiple Correlation Coefficient was
= 0.88. It was indicated that all of 4 variables affecting the High Performance Organization
of schools under The Office of Secondary Educational Service Area 21, at .05 significant
level. In addition, according to the data analysis of decision making coefficient (R2), found
that the administrators’ Innovative Leadership affecting 4 aspects of the High Performance
Organization including: The innovative organizational climate, the risk management, the
morality and accountability, and the transformational vision could predict that the it would
affect the High Performance Organization of schools under The Office of Secondary
Educational Service Area 21, for 80% at .05 significant level.
6.2 Discussions
This research aimed to study the level of school administrators’ innovative leadership,
and high
performance organization in schools under The Office of Secondary
Educational Service Area 21, and to find the relationship between these 2 variables to
develop Regression Equation for predicting the level of school administrators’ innovative
leadership, affecting the high performance organization, found that:
1. The level of of school administrators’ innovative leadership, in overall, the average
value of practice was in “high” level every item. The highest level of average value, was the
morality and accountability. It indicated that the administrators under The Office of
Secondary Educational Service Area 21, emphasized on the administrators with ethics,
morality, good governance relevant to the good national management principle. (Ministry of
Education, 2003)
2. The level of High Performance Organization, in overall, the average value of
practice, was in “high” level in every item. The highest level of average value, was the
competency in maintaining the intelligent staffs. It was supported with Annual Report 2013
(Office of Civil Official Commission, 2012) in “The High Achievement Officials” that the
officials with high potentiality, were the most valuable resources in organization.
Consequently, the development of high performance organization, human resource should be
emphasized in first priority of development of different parts in organization.
3. The analysis findings of relationship level from Pearson Product Moment
Correlation Coefficient between the Secondary Educational Service Area 21, and to find the
school administrators’ innovative leadership, and high performance organization, found that
there was positive relationship in every factor at .05 significant level. The aspect with
highest level of average value, was the innovative organizational climate. It was supported
by research findings of Wootipong Pakdeelao (2011) that the
innovative
organizational climate, needed to included the system administration and management as well
as resources in organization in order to promote and support the innovation development in
order to create the value and advantage in competition for organization continuously and
sustainably.
4. The analysis findings of Multiple Regression Coefficient from 4 variable out of 6
variables,
the Multiple Regression Coefficient were ranged from 0.87 to 0.89 as
The 7th International Conference on Educational Research:
13-14 September 2014, Faculty of Education, Khon Kaen University, Thailand
follows: the innovative organizational climate, the risk management, the morality and
accountability, and the transformational vision, could predict that it would affect the high
performance organization of schools under The Office of Secondary Educational Service
Area 21, for 80% at .05 significant level.
7.Recommendations
7.1 Recommendations from this study
1) The school administrators should develop the transformational vision to be
occurred in school by encouraging the teachers and community to collaborate in establish the
progressive strategy for putting the vision into practice focusing on participatory working, the
use of research process in problem solving and work development, the provision of
information technology system for being used by the staffs and students in order to access
body of knowledge as well as staff development to obtain knowledge and competency in
using the information technology.
2) The High Performance Organization of Schools, found that the aspect with highest
level of average value, was the Competency in Constructing High Efficient Work. Therefore,
the schools should use new management systems by using the technology, and increasing the
instrument or providing the instrument for enhancing the use of instrument as well as
information technology thoroughly which would lead to the development of high efficient
performance.
3) The relationship between school administrators’ Innovative Leadership, and the
High Performance Organization, found that the first priority of creation for High
Performance Organization of schools, the school administrators had to create Innovative
Organizational Climate to be occurred in schools. The second order, included the Concrete
Risk Management in schools, the school administrators’ Morality and Standard of Practice
based on Professional Code of Conduct, and the transformational vision. So, the school
administrators should organize these factors in schools appropriately which would cause the
efficient and accepted implementation of schools as well as high performance organization.
7.2.Recommendations for future Research
1) The school administrators’ innovative leadership affecting the high performance
organization, should be studied by classifying the size of successful school with recognized
performance in general.
2) The model and indicator of innovative leadership affecting the high performance
organization of school, should be studied in order to be concretely used by the school
administrators.
Reference
[1] Ministry of Education. (2003). National Education Act 1999, and the Revised Issue
(the 2nd Issue) 2002And Ministry Rule and Compulsory Education Act 2002.
Bangkok;
The Express Transportation Organization of Thailand (ESO)
[2] Ketchaturad, Chatupoome. (2002). Educational Research: Theory into Practice.
(ND)
[3] Srisaad, Boonchom. (2011). Basic Research. The 9th Ed.
[4] Rooncharoen, Teera. (2012). A Research Report \in Situation and Problem of Basic
Administration and Management of Schools in Thailand. Bangkok:
The Office of Policy and Plan, and Educational Standard, Religion, and Culture.
[5] Wootirong, Payak. (2012). Innovcation Management from Best Practice Approach.
The 7th International Conference on Educational Research:
13-14 September 2014, Faculty of Education, Khon Kaen University, Thailand
Bangkok: Chiulaloingkorn University Printing.
[6] Panich, Wijan. (2012). The Learning Technique for Students in the 21st Century.
Bangkok:
Sodsri-Sariswong Foundation.
[7] Chiengkoon, Wittayakon. (2010) Situation of Thai Education 2008/2009:
Educational Role and
Economic and Social Development. Center of Educational Information
Technology,
Office of Secretariat.
[8] Pakdeelao, Wootipong. (2011). A Study of Characteristic of Innovation
Organization:
A Case Study of Rewarded Innovation Organization. Master of Science Thesis
in Human
Resource Development and Organization, Faculty of Human Resource,
The National Institute of Development Administration.
[9] Office of The Education Council. (2013). Situation of Thai Education in World Stage
2013.
Bangkok.
[10] Office of Civil Service Commission. (2012). Annual Report of High Achievement
Officials.
Bangkok.
[11] Office of Secondary Educational Service Area 21. (2013). A Report of Annual
Action 2012.
[12] Rojwattanawiboon, Onanong. (2010). Development of Model in Innovation
Leadership.
Master of Education Thesis in Public Administration, The National Institute of
development Administration.
[13] Panpruek, Sampan. (1999). Applied Statistic for Research. Khon Kaen: Khon Kaen
Printing.