Modeling Goal Leadership Indicators in Schools with Interpretive Structural Method

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

• mohammad hakak ¹
• masoome momeni mofrad ²
• Saber Taghipour ²

¹ Associate Professor, Faculty of Management and Economics, Lorestan University, Khorramabad, Iran

² PhD Student, Human Resource Management, Faculty of Management and Economics, Lorestan University, Khorramabad, Iran

10.30495/jedu.2022.25470.5069

Abstract

Introduction: The purpose of this study was to model purposeful leadership in schools.
research methodology: This study is based on the applied purpose and in terms of the type of research method in the field of descriptive survey studies. The analysis approach has been done, mixed and combined with qualitative and quantitative methods. In order to identify the indicators of purposeful leadership, semi-structured interviews with 14 university professors in the field of organizational behavior, leadership and educational management who were selected by snowball sampling method were used. The validity and reliability of the interviews were confirmed using the Q sort method and the Kappa Cohen index, respectively. Coding of interviews using Atlas ti 8 software led to the identification of 10 main categories as targeted leadership indicators. Purposeful leadership modeling was performed using the opinions of 32 experienced school principals in the city of Khorramabad, which were determined by purposive sampling, using an interpretive structural method. The validity and reliability of the pairwise comparison questionnaire were confirmed using the relative content validity method and the-test-post-test method, respectively.
Findings: The result classified purposeful leadership indicators into five levels, in which knowledge-based in the fifth level was considered as the most effective index and communication in the first level as the most effective index.
Conclusion: The findings of this study suggest that purposeful leadership is an influential factor in schools, which highlights the need to pay more attention to this issue.

Keywords

• Leadership
• Goal Oriented leadership
• schools
• Interpretive structure

20.1001.1.20086369.1400.12.6.6.2

---

References

1. Breevaart, K., & de Vries, R. E. (2019). Followers’ HEXACO personality traits and preference for charismatic, relationship-oriented, and task-oriented leadership. Journal of Business and Psychology, 1-13.
2. Cansoy, R. (2019). The Relationship between School Principals' Leadership Behaviours and Teachers' Job Satisfaction: A Systematic Review. International Education Studies, 12(1), 37-52.
3. Daniëls, E., Hondeghem, A., & Dochy, F. (2019). A review on leadership and leadership development in educational settings. Educational research review, 27, 110-125.
4. Daryanto, S., Komariah, A., & Kurniady, D. A. (2017). The Influence of the Authentic Leadership, School Culture, Infromation and Communication Technology Acceptance on the School Management Effectiveness in the Public Accredited Vocational High School in West Java. International Journal of Applied Business and Economic Research, 15(17).
5. DeMarco, A. L. (2018). The relationship between distributive leadership, school culture, and teacher self-efficacy at the middle school level.
6. Hung, W. S., Tsai, S. S., & Wu, H. T. (2016). RELATIONSHIP AMONG PRINCIPAL SERVANT LEADERSHIP, SCHOOL ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE AND TEACHERS’JOB INVOLVEMENT OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. European Journal of Research in Social Sciences Vol, 4(7).
7. Jensen, U. T., Andersen, L. B., & Jacobsen, C. B. (2019). Only when we agree! How value congruence moderates the impact of goal‐oriented leadership on public service motivation. Public Administration Review, 79(1), 12-24.
8. Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2020). Seven strong claims about successful school leadership revisited. School leadership & management, 40(1), 5-22.
9. Leithwood, K., Sun, J., & Schumacker, R. (2019). How school leadership influences student learning: A test of “The four paths model”. Educational Administration Quarterly, 0013161X19878772.
10. Mard, Seyed Mohammad, Zeinabadi, Hassan Reza, Abdollahi, Bijan, Arasteh, Hamid Reza. (2017). Indicators of a successful educational leader; Findings of a Phenomenological Study. School Management, 5 (2), 109-128. (in Persian)
11. Marquardt, D. J., Casper, W. J., & Kuenzi, M. (2020). Leader Goal Orientation and Ethical Leadership: A Socio-Cognitive Approach of the Impact of Leader Goal-Oriented Behavior on Employee Unethical Behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 1-17.
12. Middlewood, D., Abbott, I., Netshandama, V. O., & Whitehead, P. (2017). Policy leadership, school improvement and staff development in England, Tanzania and South Africa: schools working together. In Cultures of Educational Leadership (pp. 149-168). Palgrave Macmillan, London.
13. Pourkarimi, Javad, Farzaneh, Mohammad, Norouzi, Mitra. (2016). Analysis of professional competencies of school principals; Findings of a combined study. School Management, 4 (1), 1-25. (in Persian)
14. Rana, R., K'aol, G., & Kirubi, M. (2019). Influence of supportive and participative path-goal leadership styles and the moderating role of task structure on employee performance.
15. Shariq, S. M., Mukhtar, U., & Anwar, S. (2019). Mediating and moderating impact of goal orientation and emotional intelligence on the relationship of knowledge oriented leadership and knowledge sharing. Journal of Knowledge Management.
16. Stalhammar, B. (1994). Goal-oriented leadership in Swedish schools. Educational Management & Administration, 22(1), 14-25.
17. Tabernero, C., Chambel, M. J., Curral, L., & Arana, J. M. (2009). The role of task-oriented versus relationship-oriented leadership on normative contract and group performance. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 37(10), 1391-1404.
18. Tingle, E., Corrales, A., & Peters, M. L. (2019). Leadership development programs: Investing in school principals. Educational Studies, 45(1), 1-16.
19. Widiyanti, E., Murwati, M., & Raharjo, T. J. (2018). The Influence of Principal Leadership, School Culture through Motivation on Junior High School Teacher Performance. Educational Management, 7(1), 11-16.