Distributed leadership has joined the current pantheon of educational buzzwords. This represents a shift from a past that focused on positions and individuals as the keys to leadership. Unfortunately, the distributed perspective itself fails to capture much of the leadership activity that takes place in organizations. Specifically, activity that is inherently collaborative, interactive, and reciprocal is difficult to isolate and identify within the context of contemporary lenses of leadership, including distributed leadership. This article explores this conceptual terrain, through a review of scholarship and a discussion of empirical findings. It concludes that the lens of distributed leadership needs further conceptual development to effectively capture the dynamic nature of leadership in today's schools. The framework of emergent reciprocal influence is offered as an initial means of conceptualizing the complex and interactive forms of leadership that emerge within the context of collaborative activity in organizations.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BarnardC. I. (1960). The functions of the executive.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
2.
BellahR. N., MadsenR., SullivanW. M., SwidlerA., & TiptonS. M. (1985). Habits of the heart: Individualism and commitment in American life.New York: Harper & Row.
3.
BennettN., WiseC., WoodsP., & HarveyJ. A. (2003). Distributed leadership.Nottingham, United Kingdom: National College for School Leadership.
4.
CartwrightD. (1965). Influence, leadership, control. In MarchJ. G. (Ed.), Handbook of organizations (pp. 1–47). Chicago: Rand McNally.
5.
DahlR. A. (1961). Who governs? Democracy and power in an American city.New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
6.
EngeströmY. (1999). Activity theory and individual and social transformation. In EngeströmY., MiettinenR., & PunamäkiR.-L. (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 19–38). Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
7.
EngeströmY., & MiettinenR. (1999). Introduction. In EngeströmY., MiettinenR., & PunamäkiR.-L. (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 1–16). Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
8.
FirestoneW. A. (1996). Leadership roles or function? In LeithwoodK., ChapmanJ. D., CorsonD., HallingerP., & HartA. (Eds.), International handbook of educational leadership and administration (Vol. 1, pp. 395–418). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.
9.
GibbC. A. (1954). Leadership. In LindzeyG. (Ed.), Handbook of social psychology: Vol. 2. Special fields and applications (pp. 877–920). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
10.
GronnP. (2000). Distributed properties: A new architecture for leadership. Educational Management and Administration, 28(3), 317–338.
11.
GronnP. (2002a). Distributed leadership. In LeithwoodK. & HallingerP. (Eds.), Second international handbook of educational leadership and administration (pp. 653–696). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
12.
GronnP. (2002b). Distributed leadership as a unit of analysis. Leadership Quarterly, 13, 423–451.
13.
GronnP. (2003). The new work of educational leaders: Changing leadership practice in an era of school reform.London: Sage.
14.
HalversonR., & CliffordM. (2004, April). How the situation of practice shapes the implementation of new policies in schools.Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
15.
HemphillJ. K. (1952). Leader behavior description.Columbus: The Ohio State University, Personnel Research Board.
16.
Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium. (1996). Standards for school leaders.Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
17.
KatzD., & KahnR. L. (1966). The social psychology of organizations.New York: John Wiley.
18.
KuhnT. S. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
19.
LaveJ., & WengerE. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation.Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
20.
LeithwoodK., & RiehlC. (2003). What we know about successful school leadership.Philadelphia: Temple University, Laboratory for Student Success.
21.
LipskyM. (1980). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public services.New York: Sage.
22.
MintzbergH. (1973). The nature of managerial work.New York: Harper & Row.
23.
OgawaR. T., & BossertS. T. (1995). Leadership as an organizational quality. Educational Administration Quarterly, 31(2), 224–243.
24.
PounderD. G., OgawaR. T., & AdamsE. A. (1995). Leadership as an organization-wide phenomena: Its impact on school performance. Educational Administration Quarterly, 31(4), 564–588.
25.
SawyerR. K. (2003). Group creativity: Music, theater, collaboration.Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
26.
SawyerR. K., ScribnerJ. P., WatsonS. T., & MyersV. L. (2005). Talking leadership: Conversation analysis and distributed leadership. In HoyW. & MiskelC. (Eds.), Educational leadership and reform (pp. 169–185). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
27.
ScribnerJ. P., SawyerR. K., WatsonS. T., & MyersV. L. (2007). Teacher teams and distributed leadership: A study of group creativity and collaboration. Educational Administration Quarterly, 43(1), 67–100.
28.
ShartleC. L., & StogdillR. M. (1952). Studies in naval leadership.Columbus: The Ohio State University Research Foundation.
29.
SmylieM. A., ConleyS., & MarksH. M. (2002). Exploring new approaches to teacher leadership for school improvement. In MurphyJ. (Ed.), The educational leadership challenge: Redefining leadership for the 21st century (pp. 162–187). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
30.
SpillaneJ. P. (2005). Distributed leadership. Educational Forum, 69(2), 143–150.
31.
SpillaneJ. P., HalversonR., & DiamondJ. B. (2001). Investigating school leadership practice: A distributed perspective. Educational Researcher, 30(3), 23–28.
32.
SpillaneJ. P., HalversonR., & DiamondJ. B. (2004). Towards a theory of leadership practice: A distributed perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36(1), 3–34.
33.
ThompsonJ. D. (1967). Organizations in action: Social science bases of administrative theory.New York: McGraw-Hill.
34.
VygotskyL. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
35.
WatsonS. T. (2005). Teacher collaboration and school reform: Distributing leadership through the use of professional learning teams.Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri, Columbia.
36.
WatsonS. T., SawyerR. K., & ScribnerJ. P. (2005, April). “Learning as we go”: A study of teacher learning and leadership.Paper presented at the annual convention of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
37.
WeickK. E. (1976). Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21, 1–19.
38.
YuklG. (1999). An evaluation of conceptual weaknesses in transformational and charismatic leadership theories. Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 285–305.
