Advertisement

Doing Leadership: The Significance of Inter-personal Relationships?

  • Ciaran Sugrue
Chapter
Part of the Studies in Educational Leadership book series (SIEL, volume 20)

Abstract

There is general recognition among participants that staff relationships are critical to positive working environments, to everyday routines, and moving a school forward with a degree of collaboration, purpose and cohesion. However, in a system where teacher mobility is more static than stable, heavily circumscribed since teachers are employed by individual schools rather than districts, there is a tendency to privilege ‘good’ relationships. Principals are acutely aware that the interstices of these interpersonal dynamics as both conduit and constraint on their agency as leader and their professional (re-)formation. Consequently, personal agency through which leadership is enacted entails elements of exchange that are functionally transactional but, depending on their quality, regularity and density have potential to build trust in ways that sow the seeds of transformation. These exchanges become more pressured and intense as versions of NPM increasingly find their way into policy prescriptions; principals are obliged to deal with the tension between demands of performativity and the maintenance of positive professional relationships. How these interpersonal leadership (in-)tensions are ‘navi-gotiated’ over time is the focus of this chapter. They create what I describe as the Zone of Proximal Distance (ZPD) with significance for leadership preparation and CPD more generally.

Keywords

Interpersonal Relation School Leader School Community Professional Relationship Emotional Labour 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Achinstein, B. (2002). Community, diversity and conflict among schoolteachers the ties that blind. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  2. Biesta, G. (2007). Why “what works” won’t work: Evidence-based practice and the democratic deficit in educational research. Educational Theory, 57(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blase, J. (1998). The micropolitics of educational change. In: A. Hargreaves, A. Lieberman, M. Fullan, & D. Hopkins (Eds.), International handbook of educational change (Vol. Part 1, pp. 544–557). Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  4. Blase, J., & Anderson, G. (1995). The micropolitics of leadership: From control to empowerment. London: Cassell Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bryk, A., & Schneider, B. (2002). Trust in schools a core resource for improvement. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  6. Bryk, A., Sebring, P., Rollow, S., & Eaton, J. (1998). Charting Chicago school reform. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  7. Bryk, A., Camburn, E., Seashore Louis, K. (1999). Professional community in Chicago elementary schools: Facilitating factors and organizational consequences. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35(Special Issue), 751–781.Google Scholar
  8. Clark, C. (2001). Talking shop: Authentic conversations and teacher learning. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  9. Copland, M. A. (2001). The myth of the Superprincipal. Phi Delta Kappan, 82(7), 528–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Day, C., & Gu, Q. (2010). The new lives of teachers. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Day, C., & Sachs, J. (2004). International handbook on the continuing professional development of teachers. Maidenhead: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Day, C., Sammons, P., Leithwood, K., Hopkins, D., Gu, Q., Brown, E., et al. (2011). Successful school leadership linking with learning and achievement. Maidenhead: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  13. DES. (2011). Circular number 008/2011 to the management authorities, principal teachers and teachers of primary schools. From http://www.education.ie/en/Circulars-and-Forms/Active-Circulars/cl0008_2011.pdf
  14. Elmore, R. (2004). School reform from the inside out policy, practice and performance. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Falkenberg, T. (2007). On the grounding of teacher education in the human condition. Journal of Educational Thought, 41(3), 245–262.Google Scholar
  16. Fink, D. (1999). Good school/real school: The lifecycle of an innovative school. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  17. Fullan, M. (1992). What’s worth fighting for in headship? Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Gunter, H., Rogers, S., & Woods, C. (2010). Personalization the individual, trust and education in a neo-liberal world. In E. A. Samier & M. Schmidt (Eds.), Trust and betrayal in educational administration and leadership (pp. 199–215). London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. Hardin, R. (2008). Trust. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  20. Hargreaves, A. (1984). The significance of classroom strategies. In A. Hargreaves & P. Woods (Eds.), Classrooms and staffrooms the sociology of teachers and teaching (pp. 64–85). Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Hargreaves, A. (1990). Individualism and individuality: Reinterpreting the teacher culture. Paper presented at the symposium ‘Tension in Teachers’ Culture, Career and Context, at AERA, Boston MA.Google Scholar
  22. Hargreaves, A. (1994). Changing teachers, changing times. London: Cassell.Google Scholar
  23. Hargreaves, A. (2003). Teaching in the knowledge society. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Hargreaves, A., & Fink, D. (2005). Sustainable leadership. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.Google Scholar
  25. Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and organizations software of the mind. Intercultural cooperation and its importance for survival. New York/London: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  26. Kelchtermans, G. (2009). Who I am in how I teach is the message. Self-understanding, vulnerability and reflection’. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 15, 257–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kelchtermans, G. (2011). Professional responsibility persistent commitment perpetual vulnerability. In C. Sugrue & T. Dyrdal Solbrekke (Eds.), Professional responsibility: New horizons of Praxis (pp. 113–126). London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  28. Kelchtermans, G., Piot, L., & Ballet, K. (2011). The lucid loneliness of the gatekeeper: Exploring the emotional dimensions in principals' work lives. Oxford Review of Education, 37(1), 93–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kohn, M. (2008). Trust self-interest and the common good. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Leithwood, K., Mascall, B., & Strauss, T. (Eds.). (2009). Distributed leadership according to the evidence. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Lieberman, A., & Miller, L. (Eds.). (2001). Teachers caught in the action: Professional development that matters. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  32. Lortie, D. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  33. Lortie, D. (1998). Unfinished work: Reflections on schoolteacher. In A. Hargreaves, A. Lieberman, M. Fullan, & D. Hopkins (Eds.), International handbook of educational change (Vol. 1, pp. 145–162). Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lowney, C. (2003). Heroic leadership best practices from a 450 year-old company that changed the world. Chicago: Loyola Press.Google Scholar
  35. May, L. (1996). The socially responsive self. Social theory and professional ethics. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Osguthorpe, R. D. (2008). On the reasons we want teachers of good disposition and moral character. Journal of Teacher Education, 59(4), 288–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York/London: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  38. Sockett, H. (1993). The moral base for teacher professionalism. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  39. Spillane, J. (2006). Distributed leadership. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.Google Scholar
  40. Spillane, J., & Diamond, J. B. (Eds.). (2007). Distributed leadership in practice. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.Google Scholar
  41. Stone, D. (2002). Policy paradox. The art of political decision making (Rev. Ed.). New York/London: W. W. Norton and Company.Google Scholar
  42. Sugrue, C. (2011). Leadership: Professionally responsible rule bending and breaking? In C. Sugrue & T. Dyrdal Solbrekke (Eds.), Professional responsibility: New horizons of praxis (pp. 127–143). London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ciaran Sugrue
    • 1
  1. 1.School of EducationUniversity College DublinBelfield, DublinIreland

Personalised recommendations