Professional identity,adaptation and the self

Abstract

There is developing interest in how professional identity can support educational leaders’ management of change. This article explores the conceptualisation and interplay of identity formation with adaptive and contingent forms of educational leadership. The article draws on qualitative data obtained from two New Zealand school principals and significant others, as each principal negotiated their way through the beginnings of a second principalship and associated change processes. Findings from this first year of a three-year study identified influential factors within each principal’s personal, and professional identities. A comparison of findings with the respective literatures revealed a potential fusion between identity formation and concepts within the broad fields of adaptive and values-based contingency leadership.

Keywords

Adaptive leadership identity change identity formation values-based contingency leadership

Introduction

Considerable attention is being focused universally on leading schools in times of change. With this attention there have been calls for the school principal to be capable of effecting quick and dramatic improvements, particularly in challenging circumstances. Such circumstances may be caused by, for example, adverse economic conditions (Smith and Bell, 2014) or by natural disasters such as hurricanes in the USA (Baum et al., 2009) and in the Caribbean (Shotte, 2013). In the New Zealand education system this has been particularly relevant in light of recent attention given to the plight of high-needs schools (Notman, 2015a) and to supporting Christchurch principals in their post-earthquake transition towards a ‘new normal’ (Notman, 2015b). However, there is little research evidence for understanding how a principal’s professional identity might contribute to their change management in such situations. The challenge is to conceptualise and determine the role of professional identity that sustains educational leaders in the face of managing change processes in their schools.

During 2014 an in-depth case study of an urban primary and a semi-rural secondary school principal in the southern region of New Zealand set out to establish the nature of professional identity factors present in each school leader’s role, and how leaders used such factors to effect school-wide change in the course of a second principalship. This research was undertaken as part of a 30-country investigation entitled the International Successful School Principalship Project (ISSPP) which seeks to focus research attention on identifying key values, attributes and strategies that enable school leaders to achieve and maintain success.

The article begins with an overview of the investigation’s conceptual frameworks. The specific context of each principal and their school is briefly described. As part of the methodology, research questions are posed, together with an outline of the methods guiding the study. This leads to a report of findings, which focuses on the origins of the principals’ values, their early leadership experiences, leadership styles and change management processes. The study concludes with a discussion that re-examines traditional identity concepts as they relate to adaptive leadership practice (Heifetz, 1994) and to contingency theories such as values-based contingency leadership (Day et al., 2000).

Conceptual frameworks

A series of school leadership case studies in New Zealand (Notman, 2011) and a review of school leadership conducted in the UK by PricewaterhouseCoopers (2007) concluded that there is a strong need to review leadership capacity in the international school sector. Day and Leithwood (2007) also concluded that understanding leadership needs to move from a notion of technical competencies to personal dimensions of values, dispositions and identity. Similarly, Crow and Scribner argued that ‘the technocratic trend that emphasizes skills and competencies and ignores values, beliefs and especially identities does not serve urban school leadership well’ (Crow and Scribner, 2014: 298).

One of the features of leading in times of change is the extent to which professional identity provides motivation to take on and enact a leadership role: ‘The energy, motivation, drive that makes roles actually work require that individuals identify with, internalise and become the role’ (Burke and Stets, 2009: 38). However, this is not an inherently easy process, as Miller noted from Wenger’s work: ‘Wenger’s (1991: 129) observed that one can design roles but one cannot design the identities that will be constructed through those roles”’ (Miller, 2016: 2).

The theme of professional identity has received attention in the educational literature in recent years, although the focus has mostly been on teachers rather than principals (e.g. Day and Gu, 2010; Miller, 2009). The literature suggests a number of dimensions that are important in understanding how principals employ their professional identities. One major dimension indicates that professional identities are multiple rather than single and have multiple meanings; for example, as problem solver, guardian of culture, change agent, advocate, or mediator (Ryan, 2007). Instead of a single notion of an identity commonly emphasised in the literature – i.e. someone’s self-identity – individuals have multiple identities largely depending on the context and the audience (Crow, 2006). Using a public ritual and performance context for their understanding of leadership identities, Lumby and English (2009) acknowledged that school leaders have multiple identities but struggle with the need to construct a sense of self: the narratives that leaders create in their relationships with others seek to provide ‘a sense of coherence, worth and belonging’ (Lumby and English, 2009: 95). Of growing interest in the identity literature is the concept of how multiple identities interact in a process of mutual influence. For example, Scribner and Crow (2012) pointed to an intersection of a female leadership identity with a parental role as a mother, and with her religious identity and teaching roles. In the course of reporting this present research study, the enactment of professional identity will be considered together with other aspects of professional and personal leadership.

In this regard, two connected theoretical frameworks of leadership are germane to the development of this research study, as they relate to professional identity. The first framework focuses on adaptive leadership concepts proposed by Heifetz (1994). Against a backdrop of the impact of values-based leadership, Heifetz examined the usefulness of viewing leadership in terms of adaptive work: ‘Adaptive work consists of the learning required to address conflicts in the values people hold, or to diminish the gap between the values people stand for and the reality they face’ (Heifetz, 1994: 22). He saw advantages in viewing leadership in terms of adaptive practice which included problem solving in situ, and the opportunity to evaluate leadership strategies during a change process, for example.

Adaptive leadership practice needs to take into account, and work within, the demands of a democratic society, including ‘respecting conflict, negotiation, and a diversity of views within a community; increasing community cohesion; developing norms of responsibility-taking, learning, and innovation; and keeping social distress within a bearable range’ (Heifetz, 1994: 26).

A second leadership framework lies in the domain of contingency theory and, in particular, a values-based contingency leadership model advanced by Day et al. (2000). The evidence from Day et al.’s research findings, on effective primary and secondary head-teachers in the United Kingdom, led them to suggest that existing theories of leadership did not either adequately reflect or explain the practices of effective school leaders. From their data, Day et al. commented that efficacy of their school leaders was based on a capacity to:

…make a difference to the lives of students, staff and community and did so principally through the strength, integrity and perseverance of their core beliefs and vision of education, their high levels of intra- and interpersonal qualities and skills, their ability to manage competing demands, tensions and dilemmas. (Day et al., 2000: 62)

From their study, Day et al. (2000) proposed a model of leadership where the behaviour of effective leaders is contingent on context and situation, and where their choices and decision-making practices are related directly to their personal beliefs, values and leadership style.¹ Day et al. identified five dimensions to report the complexity of leadership function. These dimensions include a range of characteristics that are not mutually exclusive and are summarised under the headings: values and vision, integrity, context, continuing professional development, and reflection (Day et al., 2000). The first three dimensions will be shown to be relevant to the principals’ leadership behaviours in this study, particularly where the principals have been highly responsive to the demands and challenges in their own school context. Together, the two conceptual frameworks provide contextual leadership themes against which to situate the present study.

Methodology

Research questions

The study’s two research questions were framed within the topic of leadership identity, drawing on the enactment of professional identity in the face of changed circumstances (i.e. a second principalship) in each principal’s working life.

What professional identity factors are present in the school leader’s role?

How do school leaders use such factors to effect school-wide change?

Design

An emergent research design was used that approximates Maykut and Morehouse’s (1994) adaptive model. This model featured purposive sampling, qualitative methods of data collection in natural settings, and inductive data analysis. In this case, initial data informed the later development of a schedule for follow-up interviews. This sits within an interpretive paradigm of multiple realities for both observer and observed (Morrison, 2002). The investigation used a case study approach to explore real-life contexts of school leadership (Yin, 2012) within a bounded system of time and place (Creswell, 2013).

Sampling

Few research studies have investigated the focus area of principals’ professional identity where the changed circumstances are represented by leading in a second principalship. The principle of purposive sampling was achieved by the selection of a female and a male principal of an urban primary and semi-rural secondary school respectively, thereby providing variability in principal gender, geographic location, school size, level of student intake, school curriculum, organisational culture, and practical daily operations.

Data collection and analysis

The personalised leadership practices of the two urban school principals was examined in depth by means of a process-rich and context-based model (Notman, 2011). In phase 1 of the project, qualitative data were obtained from principals, teachers and significant others (e.g. Board of Trustees) through an extensive series of semi-structured interviews designed to gather data on identity features such as principals’ life histories, values and beliefs, and how others viewed them as people and as professionals. In Phases 2 and 3, data collection will focus on negotiated identities and on developmental construction of identity.

Data for each case study were analysed by means of inductive cross-case analysis (Miles and Huberman, 1994) using a two-dimensional matrix with emerging themes on one axis and different sources of evidence on the other. Interview data were subjected to open and axial coding processes that conceptualised and categorised data, while selective coding later explored relationships and patterns across categories in a regenerated array of concepts and recurrent themes. These data gathering and analysis methods replicated ISSPP research questions and methodology protocols laid down for such qualitative studies. Because of the small sample size of this study, no claim can be, nor is, made that the research findings could be generalised to other school principals or to other change contexts. It may be useful, therefore, to think more in terms of reconstructed meanings that provide insight into each principal’s identity formation processes and their ‘circumstantial uniqueness’ (Burns, 2000: 474).

Context of case study principals

Don is the principal of a semi-rural, year 7–13 secondary school.² It is co-educational, with a school roll of 1200 students whose ages range between 10 and 18. It is his second principalship after serving a number of years as principal at a rural school located in a predominantly farming area. Sport played a major role in Don’s early life and he went on to graduate with a degree in physical education. However, teaching did not follow until later, while he had a wealth of life experiences: from working in a freezing works to selling cars, building houses, being a professional sportsman and undertaking overseas travel. While his early leadership experiences as a sports captain and school prefect were foundational, he said that ‘I never thought about leadership, I just did it’. A subsequent career pathway followed as a secondary teacher and head of physical education until he realised he needed to do ‘something serious’ about his career: ‘I didn’t want to be a 60-year old PE teacher chasing kids around a gym!’ Consequently, he continued on to being a rural deputy principal and then principal of a rural year 1–13 school (5–18 year olds).

Susan is currently the principal of a year 1–8 urban primary school with 300 students. She holds a Bachelor’s degree in education, with special expertise in music, drama and visual arts, where she honed her motivational skills ‘by getting alongside people’. Like Don, she did not purposefully seek leadership positions but assumed a number of leadership roles when they were offered to her. She began her career as a junior school teacher, taking time away from teaching to raise a young family before returning to take up curriculum leadership roles in a city primary school. In particular, she led developments in the new arts curriculum with choirs, orchestra and musical productions, which saw a real shift in terms of student involvement and in subsequent teaching practice. Her previous principalship was at a struggling 40-student primary school, where her leadership role was not structured or well-defined but gave her an opportunity to work more creatively and to manage substantial change processes.

Selected findings

Origins of leaders’ values

Both Susan and Don came from strong family backgrounds which included extended family and grandparents. They were encouraged to maintain high moral standards and a strong work ethic that required seeing a task through ‘until it’s finished’. Susan had kept to her strong Catholic work ethic and beliefs about how she behaved and how she treated people with honesty without being judgemental. Similarly, Don credits his mother’s energy and acute sense of community and directness for his ability to be ‘upfront’ with people and, in his school environment, to have the courage to undertake difficult conversations with staff.

Early leadership experiences

For Susan, early career role models came in the form of a collaborative Board of Trustees Chairperson, and a principal who took it upon himself to mentor Susan by extending her leadership capabilities, firstly through curriculum leadership of the arts, literacy and numeracy and then through assessment practice and innovative computer programs. As a result of this broad range of early leadership opportunities, Susan learned a lot about managing people and her own growing leadership capacity:

I could see the results of my leadership because you saw change happen. And once you’ve effected the change and really enjoyed the process, I knew that I could make a difference.

Don acknowledged he had learned from both positive and negative principal role models. In the case of the latter model, he vowed that he would never be seen in his office as a pure administrator and that he would talk to students and be seen around the school campus: ‘It would be fair to say they [the bad models] possibly influenced my decision to want to lead in education more so than the good ones’. However, he still believed that he learned most from his two parents, in terms of being honest and upfront with people, patient, and being given the latitude to make mistakes. He believed these life skills had played a major part in developing his educational leadership philosophy of having honest conversations with people, ‘the most difficult part of a principal’s job’.

Leadership style

Susan saw herself as an optimist and task-oriented: ‘I’m a “glass-half-full” person. If there’s something that’s got to be done, OK, how are we going to do it?’. She held high expectations for herself and others but would never ask anyone to do something she would not do herself. Although she regarded herself as a ‘cautious risk taker’, Susan’s arts background also played a significant role in her creative understanding of leadership practice:

I think you get opportunities to do things differently, and that’s why I love principalship. You don’t have to follow the rules, you can set the road and try some stuff along the way – and I enjoy that.

Susan’s leadership style was collaborative. Her people skills were acknowledged by close colleagues and trustees, who also described her as being an excellent listener who used trusted others as discreet sounding boards and was passionate about the core business of student learning. Susan was very aware that she used different leadership skills for different contexts. For example, her current school was in a ‘steady, stable state’ which required a different set of skills than her previous principalship where the school had ongoing operational issues. Ironically, she believed she was more cautious in this stable school environment about checking strategic directions than she was in the previous school, where

…in a very short space of time, we turned the culture of that school around to be a safe, happy learning place…And so the experience of going with your gut feeling, trying it, knowing that it worked… gives you the confidence to do it.

Respondents at Don’s school described his leadership qualities as being people-oriented, down-to-earth, having high expectations of students and staff, and able to articulate clearly his educational thinking. He was seen to have a genuine capacity to ‘read’ people and their situations, and to use a range of leadership styles to suit – for example, facilitative, collaborative or directional. Don also believed he was fortunate that he could transcend social and cultural sectors in his dealings with people associated with the school, ‘whether it’s engaging with a shearing gang or having tea with the Governor General!’

Don was very comfortable in exercising a range of leadership styles with his staff, whether leading from behind, leading from the middle, or leading from the front. When the school experienced the sudden death of a student the previous year, Don recognised a clear case for leading from the front: ‘You actually have to step up and physically be seen to be doing something and leading, and you can’t fudge that’.

Conversely, on account of teacher stress at the end of a term caused by examinations and report writing in a strict timeframe, Don had used a lack of electricity supply to the staffroom to encourage teachers to stay at home to complete the work. As he later reflected: ‘Good leaders, I think, understand people…it’s an empathetic thing you have, doing different things at different times depending on the situation’.

Don also enjoys talking to students and parents, and getting a feel for the mood of the school:

…and that in itself sets school culture, believe it or not: my willingness to get out there and be seen and listen to people…Walking the walk, not standing up at assembly saying ‘Hey, I care about you guys’ and giving them all the clichés and a couple of quotes from Emerson or Twain that we’ve all heard a hundred times. It’s actually getting out there and saying ‘I’m on the ground’.

Managing change

When Don first arrived at his second school he backed up his expectation that teaching should be enjoyable by reducing the number of routine staff meetings so that teachers could spend more time in lesson preparation. This was in keeping with his view that teacher activity should be directed by students’ learning needs. He referred to the process of change in this way: ‘It will be at our speed and in a direction we want to go…we change because we want to do something for our kids’. He continued:

We know our community and our kids better than anyone, and we’ve got enough brain power and pedagogical knowledge and educational experience next door to know where we want to go. We need to have direction, there’s no doubt, and it’s my job to provide that.

Change is endemic in a modern school environment. In his current school, Don noted particular changes in reviewing the use of technology in the school; a new building programme had been instigated; he believed that a culture shift had taken place among the teachers in terms of a more positive staff climate; and the teacher appraisal process had been changed from a culture of fearing competency proceedings to one more positively aligned to the school’s strategic plan. Other respondents pointed to Don’s willingness to consult with staff prior to change as evidence of his deep-level understanding of change processes: ‘He’s built some trust within the staff, he’s up front, he’s prepared to listen and compromise and adjust as he needs to’.

Similarly, Susan displayed a consultative approach to change which led to increased ownership by the staff. This was exemplified by gaining staff buy-in to an identified need to effect changes in the teacher appraisal system. With the aid of a self-evaluation tool, Susan helped teachers to realise that their current system did not comply with requirements:

So identifying a need, so then we took it as, OK, what could it look like? What should it look like for learning? And we did that together, we brainstormed that, and then with our management team looked at a range of different options of ways to move forward. We debated that a lot and then we put a plan together really about how we would make the change, and staff bought into that. We’ve come a long way in a quick space of time with. And it was because of the buy-in and people felt they had an opportunity to give their input….

This team leadership approach stood in contrast with the top-down leadership style of the previous principal. Susan’s appreciation of change management is summarised well by the Board of Trustees chairperson:

…the end product is the important one. How you get there can be varied, and there can be steps forward, steps back, steps sideways. Rather than ploughing ahead in a straight line, it can be curved.

However, Susan also has the self-confidence to take a moral directive on some change issues. For example, there was pressure from staff to suspend two year-8 students for behavioural dysfunction, but Susan rejected that approach ‘because it [rejection] was the right thing to do – and we have since made a difference for those children’.

Leadership changes in a second principalship

Because of her experiences of crisis management at her previous school, Susan had become more confident as she made the transition to a more stable school. Consequently, she saw herself as being more decisive in her leadership decision-making:

I do listen. I do debate where it fits. But if it doesn’t fit and I don’t believe it’s the way we’ll go, then I will make the decision.

There was evidence of this in her negotiation of job roles for the leadership team about which she stated that ‘I saw that as the best way for us to get change happening and to bring in new ideas’. Her decisiveness was also seen in the professionally honest manner in which she approached a financial dilemma at the start of her second principalship where budget and staffing cuts had to be made – ‘so I had to do that without being critical of what had gone on before’. In other changes, Susan was conscious of the societal impact of school decisions and their influence on children, which derived from her first principalship in an area of social disadvantage. In addition, Susan was more analytical in her curriculum decisions which were increasingly based on data-driven evidence.

However, it seems clear that managing change in her second school was not without its challenges for Susan. In comparison with her first principalship, working in a school in crisis which required quick change processes, her second ‘fabulous’ school required much greater reflection about change:

Here, it’s a very traditional model of [teacher-centred] learning that I don’t believe is going to set our kids up well for a world of change – and so I’m being much more cautious because you’re really having to challenge people’s belief systems about what’s been achieved.

As a result, she has been obliged to lead the staff through a significant period of cultural change to effect different teaching practices through the use of up-to-date research and examples of successful classroom learning. At her first school, Susan had to take her opportunities for making change when they came, because the change pathway was not at all well-defined: ‘It was like putting a jigsaw puzzle together and it wasn’t linear, and I think that was a good skill to learn’. While managing change in her first school was a reactive, pragmatic process, Susan has learned that in her second school it was very much about gauging teachers’ positions and feelings by being alert to human signals:

I think it’s about listening really carefully, it’s about watching really carefully, it’s about seeing the signals that you’re getting from people and knowing when actually their cup is full and you need to give them some time. People can only take on so much change…

For his part, Don saw a need for a cultural change as soon as he arrived in his second school, in terms of re-establishing a higher level of trust between the staff and the senior leadership team: ‘My culture shift was again one of “I see it as my job to give you the freedom to teach”’. Don’s imperative for teachers to enjoy their job derives from earlier negative teaching experiences of compliance:

There are huge demands in regard to assessments and moderations…. It’s my job to unpick all of that stuff and again I want to unshackle teachers, not shackle them up. And if I go back to my own experiences as a teacher and talking about those principals that I was under, I felt shackled by the fact that you had to conform to – and mine was a boarding school where it was said we need an 85% pass rate here. Let’s keep assessing them until they get it. I hate that!

Senior personnel at Don’s school commented that, in his time in his second principalship, there was no perceived change in his personal and professional values system nor in his philosophy about teaching and learning. As in Susan’s case, trustees noted Don’s increased confidence with each successful change implemented in the schools.

The change is Don. But on the way, he’s tidying up and making sure the [strategic] plan is clear, what we are aligning to and just keeping chipping away.

From Don’s perspective, he has also gained greater confidence in his risk taking and has become more aware of his authentic leadership style in being who he is. He is, however, not comfortable about being seen as a risk taker – he would much prefer ‘not being prepared to sit on our laurels’ and progress in a spirit of continuous improvement. He has also become more aware of the importance of a sound work–life balance between school and family, and the implications of that for effective performance in the principal role.

Discussion

In this section the research findings will be linked to concepts of personal and professional identity, as they relate to the extant literature. The discussion also raises questions about the relative merits of multiple identities versus adaptive leadership practice.

Personal identity

It is evident that for both Susan and Don their lived experiences through family conferred on them an enduring set of core personal values built around a strong work ethic, sound moral standards, respect and interpersonal honesty. Interestingly, these personal characteristics relate well to those aspirational dispositions advanced in the Kiwi Leadership Framework for Principals (Ministry of Education, 2008). Here, the importance of self in successful school leadership is encapsulated by the dual concepts of manaakitanga (leading with moral purpose) and pono (having self-belief).

Each principal represents a ‘unique biosocial individual’ (Stets and Burke, 2014: 70) who brings to their school a distinctive set of values and strategic vision. In like manner, the head-teachers in Day et al.’s (2000) study had communicated their personal vision and belief systems by direction, word and deeds. They came across as authentic leaders; that is, leaders who were acknowledged as such by their staff, who derived their credibility from personal integrity and staying true to their values.

Contingency leadership

As in Day et al.’s (2000) contingency model, Susan and Don’s professional identities had to be viewed against their contextual backdrop of a second principalship. In Susan’s case, it meant a change from a school in crisis to one that was firmly traditional with little perceived need for change. For Don, it entailed a move from a very rural school setting to a semi-urban environment where some degree of unease existed amongst the staff about their perception of a hierarchical senior leadership team.

Like Don and Susan, Day et al.’s head-teachers were subject to the influence of school context. They were highly responsive to the demands and challenges within and beyond their own school context. In the areas of people management and cultural change, they managed external as well as internal environments. As Burke and Franzoi (1988) contended, there is a strong relationship between situational meanings and identity meanings which these case study principals demonstrated as they interacted with the changing educational world in which they work. Each principal’s professional identity was tested by a different set of cultural circumstances, where both principals had to establish an identity of the ‘trusted leader’ in the eyes of their new staff.

Professional identity and adaptive leadership

As a result of the contextual influences noted above, the focus of attention now turns to the enactment of professional identity for the two case study principals. This type of identity is situated in a changed context of a second principalship which fuses the job with related identity factors. As Nias maintained, ‘all [educators] come to their work as people. It is, after all, the “self” who decides to join the profession and the occupational identity which is absorbed (if it is) into the personal’ (Nias, 1989: 150). Similarly, Sugrue claimed that ‘it is important simultaneously to recognise the impossibility of escaping the personal and the situational’ (Sugrue, 2015: 15).

The power of the leadership context was underlined by the head-teachers in Day et al.’s (2000) study in their responsiveness to the demands and challenges provided by each school’s educational circumstances:

They had skills in communicating, in supporting colleagues’ development so that they felt confident in fulfilling expectations of their contribution to the achievement of strategic goals and in the management of conflict and negotiating positive outcomes. In this sense, they were ‘adaptive’. (Heifetz, 1994: 172)

Both case study principals displayed examples of adaptive leadership. With regard to the theme of assessing the pace of change, Susan put aside her dominant collaborative leadership style to take quick action when faced with a looming financial crisis. As Heifetz et al. noted, ‘adaptive leaders…seize the opportunity of moments…to hit the organization’s reset button’ (Heifetz et al., 2009: 64).

In contrast, Don spent a good deal of reflective time in setting up a difficult learning conversation with an underperforming Head of Department. It was essential, he believed, to focus on the ‘professional’ rather than the personal’ in order to secure an optimal outcome for quality teaching and learning. This problem of knowing how to balance the pace of change for staff is described by Heifetz as follows:

In adaptive situations, fulfilling the social functions of authority requires walking a razor’s edge. Challenge people too fast, and they will push the authority figure over for failing their expectations for stability. But challenge people too slowly, and they will throw him [sic] down when they discover that no progress has been made. (Heifetz, 1994:126).

In Table 1, Heifetz provides us with a diagrammatic summary of the exigencies of a shifting orientation from a technical leader role to a more adaptive leadership stance that is both reflective and challenging of the status quo. The adaptive leadership function is well illustrated by the leadership change decisions made by Don and Susan during the early stages of their second principalship. Common adaptations were seen in their decisive decision-making, more time spent in reflective leadership practice, and their understanding of gaining staff buy-in to prospective changes – all of which was aided by an ability to read people and their accompanying context.

Table 1.

Leadership with authority in adaptive situations.

	Situational	Type
Social function	Technical	Adaptive
Direction	Authority provides problem definition and solution	Authority identifies the adaptive challenge, provides diagnosis of condition, and produces questions about problem definitions and solutions
Protection	Authority protects from external threat	Authority discloses external threat
Role orientation	Authority orients	Authority disorients current roles, or resists pressure to orient people in new roles too quickly
Controlling conflict	Authority restores order	Authority exposes conflict, or lets it emerge
Norm maintenance	Authority maintains norms	Authority challenges norms, or allows them to be challenged

Source: Heifetz (1994)

Identity changes

A question arises from this issue of professional identity acquisition: to what extent might professional identity change over time? Burke suggested that slow change is an adaptive response which ‘allows individuals to fit into their new situations and cultures where the meanings are different’ (Burke, 2006: 93). This is certainly the case for Susan and Don as they settle into the initial phase of their second principalship. Burke also raises the prospect of a more dynamic view of identity change: ‘In so far as an identity cannot change the situation (and the meanings contained therein), it adapts slowly, gaining control where it can, and adapting where it must’ (Burke, 2006: 93). Burke sees that this aspect resonates with a traditional symbolic interaction understanding of self as process. Here, one of the premises of Herbert Blumer’s theory of symbolic interactionism is instructive for interpreting the two principals’ adaptive leadership strategies:

The actor selects, checks, suspends, regroups, and transforms the meanings in light of the situation in which he [sic] is placed and the direction of his [sic] action…meanings are used and revised as instruments for the guidance and formation of action. (cited in Schwandt, 1998: 233)

In these two case studies the enactment of professional identity is proving to be a complicated endeavour. The use by both principals of adaptive styles, linked to contingency leadership, then invites a further research question to be posed.

Do Don and Susan exhibit multiple identities across their two principalships, or do they use their innate leadership skills to adapt to any given educational context or presenting problem?

Preliminary research results indicate a predominant principal and ‘significant other’ focus on changing leadership styles according to context and audience, rather than on multiple identities. This is underlined in a key description of Don by his Board of Trustees chairperson: ‘He can be a different type of leader at different times but never [chairperson’s emphasis] a different person’.

Thus, these early findings support the notion that professional identity may not necessarily be fixed but, rather, may be transitional (Day et al., 2005), such that a transitional professional identity ‘zone’ may exist between personal motivations activated by core values, and the enactment of adaptive leadership practice. In these two cases, this transitional notion suggests a topic for further investigation; that professional identity oscillates between the central core of personal identity and the outcomes of adaptive interactions with each situation that presents itself.

Conclusions

How might these case study findings contribute to the field of educational leadership? It is important to understand how principals develop their professional identity in various school contexts and how they adapt their leadership practice to such contexts. This has implications for principal preparation programmes and how service providers might best support school leaders in a dynamic and challenging job. For example, there is an evident need for principals to develop critically self-reflective skills in monitoring their own performance and in interrogating their set of core values which affect how they lead their schools. There are also necessary skills and understandings to be supported in the area of change management, where leaders may have to reconcile personal and professional identities with adaptive leadership practice.

These two New Zealand case studies have provided insightful glimpses into the idiosyncratic nature of educational leadership in a time of change, particularly in relation to identity formation. We have seen the interplay between personal identity, which takes its origins from a range of ‘lived experiences’ (Wenger, 1998), and the growing confidence in each principal’s professional identity development, as they interact with, and adapt to, their new school environments.

There is little doubt that identity formation and change for our two principals are located at the intersection of daily educational leadership practice and school context. Such interdependent processes are confirmed by Hallinger’s (2003) view of leadership as a ‘mutual influence process’, whereby effective leaders not only respond to the changing dynamics of their work context but also can be shaped by them. The concept of adaptive leadership and the mutuality of participant effects on principals’ professional identity will be another consequential focus in Phase 2 of this research study. Through researching further the domain of identity formation, we may gain a better understanding of the complex mosaic of school leadership and of the person behind the principal.

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author declares no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

This work was supported by a University of Otago Research Grant.

Notes

References

Baum

Rotter

Reidler

Brom

(2009) Building resilience in schools in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. Journal of Child and Adolescent Trauma 2(1): 62–70.

Burke

(2006) Identity change. Social Psychology Quarterly 69(1): 81–96.

Burke

Franzoi

(1988) Studying situations and identities using experiential sampling methodology. American Sociological Review 53(4): 559–568.

Burke

Stets

(2009) Identity Theory. New York: Oxford University Press.

Burns

(2000) Introduction to Research Methods. 4th ed. Frenchs Forest, NSW: Longman.

Creswell

(2013) Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Method Approaches. New York: SAGE Publications.

Crow

(2006) The professional and organisational socialisation of new English headteachers in school reform contexts. Educational Management Administration and Leadership 35(1): 51–72.

Crow

Scribner

(2014) Professional identities of urban school principals. In: Milner

Lomotey

(eds) Handbook of Urban Education. New York: Routledge, pp. 287–304.

Day

(2010) The New Lives of Teachers. Abingdon: Routledge.

10.

Day

Leithwood

(2007) Successful Principal Leadership in Times of Change: An International Perspective. Dordrecht: Springer.

11.

Day

Elliot

Kington

(2005) Reform, standards and teacher identity: Challenges of sustaining commitment. Teaching and Teacher Education 21(5): 563–577.

12.

Day

Harris

Hadfield

Tolley

Beresford

(2000) Leading Schools in Times of Change. Buckingham: Open University Press.

13.

Gurr

Drysdale

Clarke

Wildy

(2014). High-need schools in Australia: The leadership of two principals. Management in Education 28(3): 86–90.

14.

Hallinger

(2003) Leading educational change: Reflections on the practice of instructional and transformational leadership. Cambridge Journal of Education 33(3): 329–351.

15.

Heifetz

(1994) Leadership Without Easy Answers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

16.

Heifetz

Grashow

Linsky

(2009) Leadership in a (permanent) crisis. Harvard Business Review 87(7/8): 62–69.

17.

Hutton

(2016) Critical factors explaining the leadership performance of high-performing principals. International Journal of Leadership in Education. Epub ahead of print 16 March. DOI: 10.1080/13603124.2016.1142118.

18.

Lumby

English

(2009) From simplicism to complexity in leadership identity and preparation: Exploring the lineage and dark secrets. International Journal of Leadership in Education 12(2): 95–114.

19.

Maykut

Morehouse

(1994) Beginning Qualitative Research. London: Falmer Press.

20.

Miles

Huberman

(1994) Qualitative Data Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

21.

Miller

(2009) Reconstructing teacher identities: Shock, turbulence, resistance and adaptation in Caribbean teacher migration to England. Education, Knowledge and Economy, 3(2): 97–105.

22.

Miller

(2016) Exploring School Leadership in England and the Caribbean: New Insights from a Comparative Approach. London: Bloomsbury.

23.

Ministry of Education (2008) Kiwi Leadership for Principals. Wellington: Ministry of Education.

24.

Morrison

(2002) What do we mean by educational research? In: Coleman

Briggs

AJR

(eds) Research Methods in Educational Leadership and Management. London: Paul Chapman, pp.3–27.

25.

Nias

(1989) Primary Teachers Talking: A Study of Teaching as Work. New York: Routledge.

26.

Notman

(2011) Building leadership success in a New Zealand education context. In: Notman

(ed.) Successful Educational Leadership in New Zealand: Case Studies of Schools and an Early Childhood Centre. Wellington: New Zealand Council for Educational Research Press, pp.135–152.

27.

Notman

(2014) The interplay of values. In: Branson

Gross

(eds) A Handbook of Ethical Educational Leadership. New York: Routledge, pp.298–332.

28.

Notman

(2015a) Leadership in New Zealand high-needs schools: An exploratory study from the International School Leadership Development Network Project. Scottish Educational Review 47(1): 28–48.

29.

Notman

(2015b) Seismic leadership, hope and resiliency: Stories of two Christchurch schools post-earthquake. Leadership and Policy in Schools 14(4): 437–459.

30.

PricewaterhouseCoopers (2007) Independent Study into School Leadership. London: DFES.

31.

Ryan

(2007) Dialogue, identity and inclusion: Administrators as mediators in diverse school contexts. Journal of School Leadership 17(May): 337–370.

32.

Schwandt

(1998) Constructivist, interpretivist approaches to human inquiry. In: Denzin

Lincoln

(eds) The Landscape of Qualitative. New York: SAGE Publications, pp.219–259.

33.

Scribner

Crow

(2012) Employing professional identities: Case study of a high school principal in a reform setting. Leadership and Policy in Schools 11(3): 243–274.

34.

Shotte

(2013) School leadership for sustainable education: Reflections on Montserrat. In: Miller

(ed.) School Leadership in the Caribbean: Perceptions, Promises, Paradigms. Oxford: Symposium Books, pp.29–43.

35.

Smith

Bell

(2014) Leading Schools in Challenging Circumstances: Strategies for Success. London: Bloomsbury.

36.

Stets

Burke

(2014) The development of identity theory. Advances in Group Processes 31: 57–97.

37.

Sugrue

(2015) Unmasking School Leadership: A Longitudinal Life History of School Leaders. Dordrecht: Springer.

38.

Wenger

(1998) Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

39.

Yin

(2012) Applications of Case Study Research. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.