Annotated Bibliography

Educational Leadership
Brian Ericson
EDL 702
June 14, 2015
Dr. Frazee

Ancona, D., Malone, T., Orlikowski, W. & Senge, P. (2007). In Praise of the Incomplete
Leader. Harvard Business Review, 92-100.
Ancota, Malone, Orlikowski, and Senge debunk the myth that there are complete leaders, who
excel at all aspects of leadership. They note the trend that organizations have become less
hierarchal and more focused on shared leadership. With this in mind, leaders need to identify
their strengths and collaborate with others on their weaknesses. The authors term this distributed
leadership. This is certainly relevant to schools, in which principals rely on a team to accomplish
tasks and promote shared vision. I agree that collaboration is essential and that a leader must
refer to colleagues for support in his or her weaknesses. In regards to the four areas presented by
the authors, I disagree and feel that even a deft leader cannot alone be strong in sensemaking. I
also believe that a strong leader must be individually strong in relating in order to be successful.
One of the four areas that the authors identify is sensemaking. According to the authors, leaders
need to understand the situation that the organization is facing, relative to organizational goals. I
believe it is extremely difficult for one person to fully understanding trends in curriculum and
instruction for different contents, as well as developments in policy. It would be difficult for a
principal to keep up to date with all educational reforms, thus collaboration must be applied. He
or she would have to be adept in curriculum, law, and policy. This is an area that definitely lends
itself to shared leadership.
The second area is relating. Leaders need to be able to build trust with their coworkers. The
authors state the importance of listening to the opinions of others, explaining ones own
viewpoint, and developing a network of individuals who can assist with the implementation of
goals. While a leader may not be an expert in this area, it is vital that he or she is relatively adept
at building trusting relationships. A leader cannot depend entirely on others to assist with this
area. Leaders must be trusted and must communicate well.
The third area is visioning. Visioning is the process of determining what the future should be for
an organization. According to the authors, this area provides meaning for other members of the
organization. The fourth area is entitled inventing. Inventing is the ability to structure the vision
into concrete procedures, plans, and programs. These two areas complement one another and I
agree that a leader is unlikely excellent at both. These two areas highlight the argument made
that a leader must lean on others in areas in which he or she is not as proficient.
Leaders are not complete. They need assistance from their colleagues, which will promote buyin and a shared vision in the process. In opposition of what the authors contend, sensemaking
requires support, while a good leader should be able to relate. I do agree that visioning and
inventing are unlikely to be dually possessed. Leaders should seek support with their
weaknesses.

Barth, R. S. (2013). The Time Is Ripe (Again). Educational Leadership, 71(2), 10-16.
Barth states that a school should be a community of leaders, given the enormous pressures placed
on school leadership. Five obstacles to teacher leaders are presented. One of the hurdles
presented is that principals are ultimately responsible, and therefore find it difficult to relinquish
control. This is the largest obstacle that exists to the emergence of teacher leaders. Often times,
principals lack trust in their teachers to carry out leadership roles. Their inability to accomplish
such roles is a reflection on the principal. A principal must facilitate teacher leadership the way
a teacher facilitates student learning with scaffolding and support. More emphasis should have
been placed on this enormous hurdle.
A second obstacle presented is the taboo of elevating oneself about the other teachers. This
hurdle is a thing of the past, especially considering stipends, and the increasingly collaborative
nature of schools. Barth also claims that teachers plates are full. With the advent of the
Common Core State Standards and the M-STEP, this is probably the fastest growing hurdle.
While Barth presents teacher leadership as an impediment that must be overcome, principals
must consider the need for teachers to fulfill their teaching duties as well. There needs to be a
strategic nature in selecting teacher leaders and ensuring that their increased responsibility does
not sacrifice student learning and adaptations to new state expectations.
Barth discusses the opportunities that exist with the increased demands on schools and the need
for a revamped curriculum. As he contends, principals should play a role in the curriculum
planning, yet administrators years removed from the classroom are far less valuable than a
current highly effective teacher. This is the single largest area in which teacher leadership is
required.
The article concludes with advice on encouraging teacher leadership. One of the suggestions
posed is that teacher leaders should be presented with leadership opportunities that require
compliance, but which also deal with their passion. Principals must not be haphazard when
placing teachers in leadership roles. It is vital that principals carefully place teacher leaders in
positions in which they will thrive. This article fails to address the shift from principals
completing leadership tasks to carefully crafting leadership teams, placing members in
appropriate positions, and supporting the team. While teachers roles are evolving, so too are
those of principals.

Bennis, W. & Thomas, R. (2002). Crucibles of Leadership. Harvard Business Review, 3945.
Bennis discusses the main attribute of successful leaders: the ability to find meaning in negative
events and grow from such circumstances. The experiences that shape such leaders are called
crucibles and prompt self-reflection about ones values and decisions. According to Bennis, a
crucible allows a leader to come to a new sense of identity. I somewhat agree with this
contention by Bennis. Not all leaders face a meteoric crux in their professions to shape their
trajectory as leaders. Yet, great leaders do need a challenge to overcome. In education, this may

be a school-wide shift for some from sage on the stage to student-centered learning. This may
also be a sudden event, such as the death of students. If the challenge is not overt, then a leader
must create a challenge in order to further continuous improvement. I also agree that a leader
must be reflective on his or her practice and consider values and beliefs on a daily basis.
Bennis also identifies four essential skills that great leaders possess. The first skill is the ability
to engage others in shared meaning. This is a common expectation of leaders in recent literature.
A leader must be able to unite stakeholders around a common vision. The second ability is a
compelling and distinctive voice. This ability does not carry the same weight as the others and in
fact is a bit redundant with the first ability. The third ability posed is integrity. This is more
important than the previously mentioned abilities. Strategies will not be followed if the leader of
the organization does not possess integrity. Decisions must relate back to the mission, the shared
values of the organization, and what is just. Bennis cites adaptive capacity as the most important
skill a leader must possess. This is defined as an ability to transcend adversity and to emerge
stronger than before. While Bennis refers to this ability as magical, I do not see this degree to
be a necessity. Simply put, a strong leader must willing to address challenging issues, be
innovative, learn from mistakes, and admit that he or she, like the organization, is on a quest for
continual improvement.
Bennis makes a valid argument that leaders must accept challenges and be willing to learn from
failure and return more committed to the mission. This, combined with the ability to engage
others and act with integrity, is essential for successful leaders.

Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2002). Leading with Soul and Spirit. School Administrator,
59(2), 21-26.
Bolman conducts a series of studies on school leaders in order to determine qualities that caused
leaders to keep their passion. Focus, passion, wisdom, courage, and integrity were the five
qualities found to be present in strong, resilient leaders. Focus is extremely important. Leaders
need to have a clear mission of the direction of the school, crystalize this direction to the staff
and stress how all moves relate to the mission. While not directly addressed by Bolman, shared
leadership must accompany this quality. Without other stakeholders invested in the mission and
joining in the charge, it will seem like a dictatorship.
Passion is vital for leaders. A truly effective charismatic leader must resonate with passion for
student success. This will rub off on other member of the staff. Courage and integrity are
essential qualities that are rarely discussed. A leader must be willing to make the difficult
choices that are unpopular and unprecedented. One of the most critical parts of leading is
negotiating two sides or multiple points of view and making a decision that follows the mission,
has the students best interest in mind, and that retains as much morale as possible. While
Bolman discusses the need for courageous decisions when venturing into the unknown, he fails
to address that challenge of leading with integrity and attempting to obtain buy-in from those
who vehemently disagree. Integrity should be at the heart of all decisions made.

While these qualities are developed over time, Bolman also discussed four gifts that leaders
bestow on organizations. The first gift mentioned is authorship. Leaders can create favorable
buy-in to a mission or a movement if individual staff members recognize that they are integral
into the unique change that is occurring at the school. This gift goes hand in hand with power. It
is the role of the leader to share power and promote shared leadership. With stakeholders acting
as school leaders and realizing that their actions are contributing to a special movement, serious
growth and improvement can occur. These are the two most crucial gifts posed by Bolman.
Bolman touches upon unique spiritual aspects of being a leader. It is vital that leaders evaluate
their qualities, take time to be more spiritual, and bestow such gifts, so that other staff members
are rejuvenated and ready to meet the cause.

Drucker, P. F. (1999). Managing Oneself. Harvard Business Review, 77(2), 64-74.

Drucker argues that there are three essential questions individuals must ask themselves: What are
my strengths? How do I perform? And what are my values? Drucker states that to identify ones
strengths, feedback analysis should be used. In his opinion, individuals should write down
expected results of key actions and compare them to actual results. I agree that this provides
insight into a leaders ability to predict successful action plans. Yet this approach does not
identify why a plan may have failed. Was communication a problem? Was there a lack of buyin? Were resources insufficient? A leader should also obtain results by communicating with
colleagues and administering surveys so that candid responses emerge. Drucker urge leaders to
work on improving strengths and to remedy bad habits. He stresses that feedback will also
indicate weaknesses and what you should not be doing. I agree and believe that too often leaders
attempt to lead in areas in which they have no strengths. While bad habits must be broken,
weaknesses do not need to be overcome by leaders. In a collaborative, shared-leadership
environment, such roles can be assigned and delegated to colleagues. This will dually foster
growth in their leaderships and benefit the organization.
The second question Drucker suggests that leader ask themselves, centers on how individuals
perform. Like strengths, Drucker argues that the way of performing cannot be completely
overhauled. He breaks down the difference between readers and listeners and states that most
individuals do not use their learning style to their advantage. I agree that leaders need to
understand how they learn and use this to their advantage. Taking this a step further, leaders
need to coordinate professional developments in a manner that is attractive to different learning
styles. Also, leaders need to open the eyes of staff to the fact that they too should understand
their strengths and learning styles.
The third major question is, what are my values? Drucker considers ethics to be a part of values.
Leaders must consider if they are acting in ways that allow them to like the person they see in the
mirror. Working in a manner that is incompatible with ethics breeds underperformance and
ambivalence. A principal must consider if he values focusing short-term or long-term, on
devoting an abundance of resources to at-risk students over high achieving students, and if
expelling students demonstrating persistent disobedience is best for the school and the child.

When discussing values, Drucker does not mention a shared mission and vision. A large part of
ensuring that action is aligned with values is in the creation of a shared mission and vision. The
role of the leader is to ensure that actions within the school follow the mission, and that hired
employees have values aligned with the larger direction of the school.
Drucker makes a valid argument that leader must understand their strength and how they work.
They must deal with bad habits, focus on strengths, and demonstrate shared leadership with
weaknesses. They too must act in manners that are aligned with their values, and ensure that
others in the organization have values aligned with the mission and larger direction.

Drucker, P. F. (2002). They're Not Employees, They're People. Harvard Business Review,
80(2), 70-77.
Drucker discusses the fact that current trends in employment have led to an increase in
temporary and outsourced workers. One of the reasons posed for this is the increasing
specialization of jobs. In educations, very small schools must provide a speech-language
pathologist, even if there is only a need by a few students. Such specialized roles that do not
constitute a full time position, result in outsourcing of a position to temp agencies.
On the positive side of outsourced workers, managers are freed from worrying about the lengthy
rules and regulations that accompany such employees. All of these responsibilities are placed on
the temp agency.
There certainly are drawbacks as well. One of the dangers of having outsourcing such talent is
the inability to develop the talent. This is certainly the case with outside substitutes who fail to
receive CPI training and are absent when school-wide professional developments arise.
Furthermore, without being an actual part of the staff, they are unable to develop relationships
with colleagues and are unlikely to volunteer for vacant volunteer roles. Another drawback of
having employees outsourced is that the manager plays a small role in the hiring, promoting, and
firing. All aforementioned functions placed with the temp agency. While the temp agency may
be contacted and problematic employees may be removed from the temp list, this is a reactive
measure. Selecting well-suited staff from the onset would be much more effective. While it is
unorthodox, it would be highly beneficial for managers to develop strong relationships with temp
agencies so that potential employees could be interviewed and hired based upon their longevity.
Also, hiring such employees for professional development days would be a great opportunity.
This would be an added cost, but a worthwhile one.
Another issue is that employee performance is dependent upon management and motivation.
Temporary employees are not directly observed and are not provided motivation for strong job
performance. Managers within the company or school are not responsible for oversight.
Communication between the school manager and the temp agency manager should be strong, as
should the relationship between the school and the temp employee. With this change in hiring,
school manager must adjust and build strong relationships.

Fullan, M., & Knight, J. (2011). Coaches as System Leaders. Educational Leadership, 69(2),
50-53.
Fullan and Knight examine the importance of using instructional coaches effectively. First and
foremost, they state that instructional coaches will be misused unless school principals also act as
instructional leaders. I agree that principals need to collaborate with instructional coaches so that
the mission and goals of the school are in line with coaches instructional strategies and
curriculum models. Furthermore, as the figurehead of the school, the principal needs to be
aware and supportive of instructional goals.
The authors cite several areas, which negate the efforts of instructional coaches. They state that
coaches should not focus upon whole-system education reform centered on individual teacher
development. They cite reform efforts on pedagogy, teamwork, and capacity building as more
worthwhile for coaches to lead. I disagree with the contention that individual teacher
development should not be lead by coaches. Teachers are unique with the experiences they
bring, the strengths they possess, and their areas for improvement. Coaches are the perfect
individuals to observe teachers and provide support in areas in which teachers struggle.
Fullan and Knight cite several obstacles with which principals often present coaches. Coaches
may be given clerical work, rather than work dealing with instruction. Training is often not
provided, and the goals of instructional support are often unclear. As leaders, principals must set
clear expectations for instructional coaches by discussing with them the larger direction of the
schools continuous improvement plan. The goal of their coaching should be well defined and
training should be provided so that they can lead individual teachers effectively, as well as
department teams and the school at large.

Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (2013). The Power of Professional Capital: With an
Investment in Collaboration, Teachers Become Nation Builders. Journal Of Staff
Development, 34(3), 36-39.
Hargreaves and Fullan identify two capital approaches: the business capital approach and the
professional capital approach. The business capital approach assumes that the cost of teaching
should be reduced, as it can be easily figured out with minimal training and with the use of data.
This approach has dissolved throughout time. Professional capital assumes the opposite;
teaching is a complex field that requires three distinct types of capital.
Human capital is the expertise of individuals, social capital is the power of collaboration, and
decisional capital is the wisdom and expertise gained through experience. Hargreaves and
Fullan discuses research findings that schools with strong social and human capital were highly
successful. The research also indicates that teachers with low human capital and strong support
systems markedly outperformed teachers with low human capital who were devoid to social
capital. Thus, social capital is the most important strategy. I agree with this contention that

social capital is essential. Professional development is a cornerstone of successful schools. Even

the ability highly of skilled teachers will decline without training that brings them up to speed on
curricular, instructional, and technological changes. It is the role of a school leader to provide
constant professional development. It is also the responsibility to do so in a manner that
promotes collegial relationships. Having staff lead professional development trumps an outside
presenter, in that teachers may follow up with their colleague upon implementation. The authors
identify multiple strategies for such collaboration. Creating curriculum together, sharing ideas,
leading professional developments, and analyzing data together are all suggested. I strongly
agree that all of these strategies are beneficial.
Hargreaves and Fullan also discuss decisional capital. They identify different groups of teachers
and state that the middle teachers with four to twenty years of experience are often the strongest
and are overlooked in terms of professional development. They emphasize the importance of
challenging them. While I agree that this group of teachers must be challenged, I believe that all
groups should be equally challenged. Professional developments should be prescriptive and
based upon observations. A streamlined process for all staff should challenge them to improve.
Furthermore, all staff members should be challenged with leadership positions to ensure they are
not disengaged.

Kotter, J. (2001). What Leaders Really Do. Harvard Business Review, 85 96.
Kotter aims to differentiate leadership and management, while stressing that both complement
one another and are necessary in successful organizations. One of the differences posed by
Kotter is that management brings order and consistency, while leadership is about coping with
change. Planning, budgeting, and setting goals accomplish management. Leadership is more
dedicated to setting a direction and developing strategies to achieve the vision. I understand the
difference that Kotter is attempting to describe. Managers deal with logistics and put structures
in place, while leaders focus upon developing a mission and ensuring that strategies in place lead
to the organization vision. It is apparent that both of these two features are needed in
organizations and difficult to dually possess.
The second difference presented is that managers staff and organize, while leaders align people.
Aligning consists of communicating direction to people. I would take this a step further.
Managers organize roles, responsibility, and hierarchy, thus making an organization run
smoothly. This cannot be overlooked in importance. Leaders on the other hand, convey the
mission to staff and participate in ensuring that there is collaboration and shared leadership.
Kotter faintly touches upon a leaders role to ensure collaboration and shared leadership, let these
aspects of an organization are essential in creating buy-in to a vision.
The third difference identified is motivation vs. controlling and problem solving. According to
Kotter, leaders inspire people. Leaders gather data and relationships to explain how the direction
furthers the interest of the staff. While I agree, Kotter fails to mention that a leader actively
involves others in the planning process of strategies and the direction of the organization. He

stresses that leaders breakdown hierarchy by creating a united direction and motivation, but fails
to state that leaders largely do this by sharing the leadership. It is also stated that managers
create job-reporting relationships and provide training. Such hierarchy, while not touted like
direction, too is important.
Kotter concludes his article by stating that organizations need to put more effort into developing
leaders. It is a valid point that universities do not prepare students to become leaders and
manager, each of which are vital to organizations. Organizations themselves need to develop
individuals who can strategically manage and charismatically lead.

Laurie, D. & Heifetz, R. (2001). The Work of Leadership. Harvard Business Review, 131
141.
Laurie and Heifetz discuss the importance of adaptive work in organizations. They define
adaptive work as mobilizing an organization to adapt in new business environments when beliefs
are challenged, and values become less relevant. This is certainly applicable in the field of
education, as instructional and curriculum practices are quickly changing. I agree that it is vital
for leaders to spearhead organizational changes in order to adapt to the new landscape.
Six principles for leading adaptive work are presented. The first principle presented is getting
on the balcony. Laurie and Heifetz state that leaders need to move freely from the field of
action to the balcony. Negative patterns must be identified and the big picture needs to be kept
in mind. This too is true in the field of education. Principals must not only create plans, but must
be active with implementation to ensure that actions align with the larger direction. Laurie and
Heifetz fail to mention that, while the principal should be on the balcony and while he should be
monitoring trends, implementation should be relatively smooth so long as other stakeholders are
involved in the decision making process.
The second principle is identifying the adaptive change. This is vital and dependent upon
leaders interacting across organizations. For principals, it is vital that they remove themselves
from their building and interact at the district, state, and national level to identify trends and
patterns emerging. The third principle is regulating distress. This is defined as the delicate
balance between overwhelming people with changes and ensuring that they feel the pressure to
change. Laurie and Heifetz elaborate, stating that a leader is responsible for direction,
protection, and orientation. In schools, principals need to be able to demand change, while also
providing supports so that staff is assisted with their effort to adapt.
The fourth principle is maintaining disciplined action. This entails limiting denial,
scapegoating, and all forms of avoidance. As the authors state, this can be remedied by
collaboration. Staff members need to feel that there is a collective team effort to deal with the
adaptive challenge. This is certainly the case with MSTEP and the CCSS. The fifth principle is
entitled give the work back to people. This principle corresponds to shared leadership, which
should be a staple in all schools. The final principle is protecting voices of leadership from
below. The authors state that differing opinions should not be suppressed. While this is

certainly vital, this principle should be a component of shared leadership, in which all
stakeholders have a voice and opportunity to present diverse opinions.
Laurie and Heifetz touch upon a great topic. Adaptive changes are emerging more rapidly than
ever before in the field of education. Principals who follow these six guidelines will be on track
to effectively meet new large-scale challenges.

Leithwood, K., & Mid-Atlantic Regional Educational Laboratory, L. (2005). Educational

Leadership. A Review of the Research. Laboratory For Student Success (LSS), The MidAtlantic Regional Educational Laboratory.
Leithwood dissects leadership in multiple ways through this article. The first lens with which he
analyzes leadership is in its relationship to student achievement. He cites three different types of
research that indicate a correlation between effective leadership and student achievement. Yet, a
correlation does not equal cause and effect. Strong leadership in the right setting can certainly
result in an acceleration of learning. Yet, successful leadership practice in one district may not
apply elsewhere. Certain districts are plagued with staff vacancies, low morale due to salaries,
and other factors. Also, certain cultures are more receptive to a certain form of leader. Strong
leadership can have powerful effects on school culture and students performance if in the right
setting or if provided the right amount of time. One of the key factors not mentioned is
longevity. While the indirect and direct effects of school leadership correlate to small but
significant gains, it would be beneficial to gauge the effect of long-term strong leadership.
Two models of leadership are analyzed. Instructional leadership is presently one of the most
popular forms of leadership. Educational literature strongly encourages that principals are
actively involved in curriculum and instruction. This expectation is not always realistic and is
highly dependent upon circumstances. The principal of a seven hundred-student school may
have the time to observe classes and actively participate in curriculum planning. Yet, the
principal of a three thousand-student school may have a large responsibility on budgeting, school
improvement, and much more. In this later case, it would behoove a principal to meet with
department heads, yet being a key player in curriculum is not realistic.
Transformational leadership is the other popular model of leadership. This form of leadership is
centered on values, mission, capacity development, and school improvement. Creating a culture
of collaboration, shared leadership, and continuous improvement is always the role of a
principal. This is the most important role of a leader, regardless of the size of an institution.
Without teamwork and direction, student achievement and staff buy-in will be absent.
Leithwood touches upon the importance of shared leadership and compares additive distributed
leadership and holistic distributed leadership. Additive simply spreads out leadership
responsibilities, while holistic also focuses upon the relationships between the different leaders
within the system. This is a very valid differentiation. Leaders must not just share the
leadership, but must do so in a way that encourages collaboration. Shared leadership and
collaboration are hallmarks of an effective leader and an effective organization or school.

Newcomb, A. (2003). Peter Senge on Organizational Learning. School Administrator, 60(5),

20-25.
Peter Senge discusses many of the problems with the current organization of schools. Senge
stresses that traditional top down leadership, and short-term dedication to instructional fads
should be avoided. I do believe change is occurring and there is a strong movement away from
top-down leadership in education. Yet, educational fads still drive organization and strategies
within schools. Leaders need to be aware of this and lead with sustained goals and strategies.
One of the main suggestions posed by Senge is that all parts of a community play a large role in
the learning of a child. Senge states that parents are often the conservative force that resent the
radical nature of change. Such parents are not pervasive across all demographics. Many
disengaged parents are willing to let schools drive learning so long as they do not need to
participate. Working like gangbusters to create a community is a worthwhile aim, but often is
ineffective. If stifled by disengaged parents, student buy-in can be also be obtained by involving
them in the decision-making process. Senge makes a valid point that leaders must start with
people before structures. Without buy-in from all stakeholders, learning will only by partially
effective.
Senge also addresses important aspects of the structure within education. Constructivism,
collaboration, self-assessment, and multiculturalism are cornerstones of learning for students.
Yet, Senge also emphasizes that there is no blanket method; school structure must be tailored to
the unique needs of the students. Constructivism is certainly vital and gaining traction with the
advent of the Common Core State Standards since this articles was published. Teachers are
becoming more open to the idea of facilitating. Collaboration is also essential for preparation for
the real world. This too is gaining popularity. Multi-cultural learning is on the backburner at the
moment, as I believe it should be. There is enormous growth in education at this time. Shifting
standardized tests, evaluation tools, and standards should be tackled first so that teachers are not
overwhelmed.
Senge presents a lot to consider for a leader. Collaboration and support from stakeholders should
be established. An effort should be made with parents, and staff and student buy-in is a must.
Collaboration between teachers and between students should be a cornerstone of a schools
mission. Constructivism should be a large part of the instructional model. Multiculturalism
should be a top priority once they other core features are solidified.

Rooke, D., & Torbert, W. (2005). 7 Transformations of Leadership. Harvard Business

Review, 67-76.
Rooke and Torbert profile a large number of leaders through surveys. The surveys identify their
strengths, weaknesses, and leaderships styles. According to the authors, leaders differ largely on
how they react when their power is challenged. Rooke and Torbert claim that exploring ones
leadership has the potential to expand ones strengths and transform the organization in the
process. Similar to teaching, it is vital to reflect upon ones decisions, practices, and analyze the

type are leader you are presently and the type you strive to become. A leader affects the
direction, morale, and integrity of an organization. While, teacher evaluation is a hot topic
concern, so too should the need to evaluate administrators and ensure they receive professional
development, rather than only lead them.
Rooke and Torbert identify seven different types of leaders. While strong leaders do drive
successful organizations, one individual cannot drive success alone. Their analysis is
shortsighted in that it does not analyze the colleagues with which the administrator is working.
They play a large role, as collaboration and shared leaderships are essential in organizations.
Through their research, three forms of leaders are linked to low performance in organizations.
Opportunists are egocentric, manipulative, and justify behavior on cutthroat nature of the field.
Furthermore, they are unwilling to accept feedback and place blame elsewhere. This is a recipe
for disaster in an organization. As a leader, one must demonstrate that all individuals are
engaged in a continuous improvement process and all can grow from professional development
and trial and error. Additionally, manipulation should be checked at the door, as collaboration
and teamwork should be at the center of a successful organization. Unfortunately, I have had
experience with these types of leaders.
Diplomats and experts also are linked to low performance. Diplomats avoid and repress conflict.
Experts are more open to continuous improvement, but are unwilling to compromise. They aim
to create buy-in for their ideas, while implementing and delegating well. These two forms of
leaders seem troubling to have at the forefront of an organization as well. Conflict should be
addressed and organizations should be candid about challenges and work to resolve them. Also,
leaders should not act from an ivy tower and assume that they know all. The strengths of all
stakeholders should be exploited.
According to Rooke and Tolbert, 30% of leaders are achievers. Achievers meet goals, implement
strategies effectively, and work thought teams. While Rooke and Tolbert do not place achievers
in the top three most effective forms of leaders, I believe that achievers have the potential to be
highly effective, depending upon their colleagues. Achievers are not experts in areas and are not
creatively inclined to produce innovative ideas. Yet, with the right colleagues to accomplish these
tasks, they can be highly effective.
The final 15% of leaders are linked to successful organizations. Individualists communicate very
effectively and are acutely aware of how principles and actions mesh. Strategists are adept at
creating shared visions, decreasing resistance to change, and having positive personal
relationships. Both of these desirable leaders seem to be more removed from the ground level
of an organization. From my experience, there is a strong respect for the servant leader who is
willing to first assist wherever needed. These two supposedly desirable forms seem to be leaderfirst and from a more birds-eye view.
The final form of leadership is the alchemist. An alchemist is able to reinvest himself or herself
and work simultaneously at many different levels. They are enthusiastic and focused on the
truth. I agree that this is the most desirable type of leader. A leader needs to be charismatic and
dynamic.

Rooke and Torbert conclude their article by stressing the importance of transitioning into a more
effective leader. For this to be attainable, there needs to be more of an emphasis on professional
development for administrators and other school leaders. Furthermore, leadership strategies
from business are rich and applicable, but rarely used to develop leadership skills. This should
be more of a focus in education.

Sarason, S. B. (1997). NASP Distinguished Lecture Series: What Should We Do about

School Reform?. School Psychology Review, 26(1), 104-10.
Sarason tackles the issue of educational reform from the perspective of a psychologist. Sarason
argues that psychology and the understanding of how students learn should be more integrated
into the mindset of school organization and curriculum development. It is stated that
individuality does not exist in the school system. Sarason states several problems. First, there is
a large gap between school life and real life. Second, students are bored and disengaged. This
publication in 1997 accuses the educational system of remaining stagnant and ignoring
discontent by the public throughout time.
While this may have been the case at the time, there have been significant changes in the last
fifteen years. It is not buried, but widely publicized that the United States system of education is
inferior to that of other nations. The issue has not been ignored. The push for more
accountability for schools and teachers is a testament to this. The development of the Common
Core State Standards is another testament to this and addresses the disengagement by students.
In recent years, it has become widely understood that student-centered learning is at the core of
student achievement.
While there have been significant strides in the past fifteen to twenty years, the premises of this
article still rings true. As an educational leader, do not settle for the status quo. Listen to
stakeholders concerns and make the appropriate changes. Above all else, ensure that the
educational environment is hinged upon our understanding of learning and students, as they
change with the immersion of technology and social media.
Schwartz, Tony (2007). Managing Yourself. Harvard Business Review, 63-73.
Schwartz touches upon the personal aspect of management. He states that the increasing
demands of the workplace adversely affect the physical, mental, and emotional well being of
leaders. As a result, engagement declines, effectiveness declines, and employee turnover rises.
Shawartz lists four areas for leaders to focus upon in order to increase energy in the workplace.
This first area is physical energy. Nutrition, sleep, and exercise affect how individuals are able to
focus upon their responsibilities. Rituals presented are taking breaks every 90 to 120 minutes, as
our bodies move away from a high-energy state. School leaders need to take this into
consideration for themselves, but also for their employees. Long schedules without preps or

lunches, and extremely long professional development days should not be approved. Teachers
need to be high energy and sharp.
The second form of energy is emotional. Schwartz states that individuals must become aware
that negative emotions, irritability, and anxiousness drain energy. He proposes breathing
techniques, showing appreciation to others, and telling the empowering stories. Again, while it is
crucial for leaders to maintain emotional energy, it is also important that they foster such energy
with their staff. Leaders must quell anxiety, present failures as learning opportunities, and
commend effort.
The third form of energy is mental. Suggestions posed by Schwartz are to limit email and phone
interruptions, and identify important challenges for the next day. Such suggestions should be
considered in the structure of the school and suggestions should be posed to the staff. The final
form of energy is spiritual. Schwartz states that energy is higher when work being performed
matters to individuals. A school leader must take it upon himself or herself to constantly
recognize the accomplishments of students and staff and must commend the staff for their
efforts. In schools, what universally matters is the students and their success. It is the
responsibility of a leader to recognize this and to foster spiritual energy.
Schwartz addresses a commonly avoided issue. Employees are overworked and burned out.
This is certainly the case as the end of the school year approaches. A leader must ensure his or
her own energy, but too must be mindful of the staff. Such issues and strategies should be overly
shared so that they are conscious of their health. Also, steps should be taken to provide breaks
for staff, to limit anxiety, to decrease distractions, and to bring awareness to the difference made
by staff members.