Leadership Skills in School and Business

School Administrator, Oct, 1998 by James H. Stronge

At least partially, his criticism of applying corporate leadership theories to schools seems to come from his rejection of top-down leadership in which theories "assume that hierarchy equals expertise." And if leadership means expertise is held by others and imposed on followers and "innovation," such as the total quality movement, is dictated from the top, then I agree. Standardizing work processes or connecting workers tightly to results doesn't always yield the desired results in educational circles. Simply put, the schoolhouse is neither the boardroom not the assembly line.

Plenty of other leadership theorists raise useful parallels despite the common warnings not to adopt business theories and practices wholesale for schools and then expect miracles. Yet I am convinced much of the leadership theory referenced here is germane for educational leaders.

Consider the congruence of leadership ideas and ideals that bubble up from both business leadership and educational leadership theories. Lee Bolman and Terry Deal, co-authors of Re framing Organizations, describe an effective leader as a social architect and a servant who supports and empowers others. Sergiovanni, in his book Moral Leadership, emphasizes the human potential of leadership, the importance of moral judgment (for example, judgment based on love, loyalty, outrage, duty, goodness, desire to help) and stewardship. He also argues that if we want theory to reflect emerging practice then we need to move the moral dimension in leadership away from the periphery and right to the center of practice.

Even a cursory look at the writings of Burns, Bennis, Gardner, Covey, Kouzes and Posner and a host of others reveals the heart of their collective theories: Leadership is morally purposeful and elevating. This is the central theme of educational leadership.

A different way to view the confluence of business and educational leadership theory is to juxtapose the standards espoused for educational leaders with business and popular press leadership theories. For comparison, I applied Katz's framework to educational leadership standards from the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education, the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium and the American Association of School Administrators' Standards for the Superintendency (see below).

Clearly, the professional association standards accentuate technical skill development more than the general leadership theorists, perhaps due to the perceived need to develop technical competence among school leaders (especially at the entry level) as a basis for practice. Nonetheless, considerable overlap exists between the two lists, particularly with regard to such human skills as communication, values and ethics.

One final comparison between business and educational leader characteristics can be found in a 1996 study conducted by Mike Richardson, Ken Lane and Jackson Flanigan in which they asked teachers to identify the attributes of superior principals. Using Kouzes and Posner's study of attributes of superior business managers, they asked teachers, "What are the characteristics of principals that make them leaders?"