INFRASTRUCTURE POST 1994
4.5 PERCEPTIONS OF LEADERSHIP
Chapter Four: Conflicting Views On Principals As Leaders LBhagowat
While the majority of principals surveyed have five years or more experience in their current posts, a fair number are less than five years in their current post (Table 4.4).
The latter finding may point to a high turnover of principals in schools. This finding may be due to principals opting to retire at an early age because they cannot cope with the challenges that accompany school transformation, or their opting for a voluntary severance package to seek greener pastures. The schools surveyed are in existence for many years (located in settled communities) and, perhaps the opportunity for transforming schools is available as new leaders are appointed to replace other principals.
Chapter Four: Conflicting Views On Principals As Leaders
Table4.5:Leadership roles perceived by principals
L Bhagowat
PERCEIVED ROLES OF LEADERSHIP IDENTIFIED BY NUMBER OF
BY PRINCIPALS PRINCIPALS
Manager 24
Motivator 20
Role Model 19
Capacity building 17
Team builder 17
Instructional leader 16
Visionary 15
Supporter 13
Planner 13
Guide 10
Human resource manager 10
Delegant 9
Professional development 9
Decision maker 8
Mediator 8
Counsellor 7
Director 6
Academic 5
Disciplinarian 5
Supervisor 5
Communicator 5
Participative manager 4
Resource manager 4
Moral leader 4
Community leader 4
Democrat 4
Initiator 4
Professional 3
Policy development& implementation 3
Policy implementation 3
Financial manager 3
Mentor 3
Progressive leader 3
Chapter Four: Conflicting Views On Principals As Leaders LBhagowat
Negotiator 3
Liaison 2
Team leader 2
Consultant 2
Inspirational leader 2
Entrepreneur 2
Provider 2
Proactive role 2
Innovator 2
Transformer 2
Protector 2
Situationalleader I
Whole school developer I
Networker I
Nurturer I
Public relations I
The literature on management and leadership draws a distinction between these two facets. Burn's (1978) theory of transfonnational leadership draws attention to a leader's ability to inspire, encourage and involve peers and subordinates, and to generate team work to fulfill a vision for the organization. Management theorists (Handy, 1985; Taylor, 1947; Weber, 1947 as cited in Bush, 1995), focus on managers being organizers, decision makers, providers, implementers and instructors. "Another way of perceiving the dimensions is in tenns of management and leadership where management functions focus on organizational maintenance and leadership involves a proactive, visionary role" (Sergiovanni, 1997; Duigan, 1986 as cited in Duigan and Macpherson, 1992: 125). Leaders do the right thing; managers do things right is the maxim advocated by many management and leadership experts (Fullan &
Stiegelbauer, 1991; Maxwell, 2002; Reed, 2001).
In
essence management ensures efficiency while leadership ensures effectiveness.Being guided by the theories of leadership and management, the roles perceived by principals in Table 4.5 can be categorized as leadership oriented or management oriented. To draw the distinction I have used bold font to illustrate the leadership roles and nonnal font to illustrate the management roles in Table 4.5.
Chapter Four: Conflicting Views On Principals As Leaders L Bhagowat
In responding to the question on perceived leadership roles, principals in the survey identified 17 roles with a leadership orientation and 32 roles with a management orientation. Top of the list in Table 4.5 reveals that 24 of the principals (30%) perceived managing a school as a leadership role which supercedes all other roles.
To understand the tendency for principals to prioritize their management portfolio, it is important to consider the school context that derived from the decentralization efforts in education which gave rise to site-based management. Site-based management impacted on the principal's role in two different ways: firstly the responsibility of managing the school's fiscal resources, among other management functions which were traditionally the role functions of the Department of Education, were delegated to the principal and; secondly, the principal was expected to conduct added responsibilities in collaboration with the different stakeholders in education.
With the complexity of site-based management, came the reconceptualization of the principal's role. This is echoed by Steyn& Squelch (1994: 186): "It was felt that their role had changed from an 'instructional leader' to a 'manager' and said that this concluded the role of 'director' and 'fmancial expert' .... A greater need for accountability in all roles was identified and it seemed that while certain tasks might be delegated, they still remained the primary responsibility of the principal." In a similar vein lames& Vince (2001) maintain that the head teacher's role shifted from being 'a people person' towards being 'more management oriented'.
The other roles perceived by a fair number of principals: motivator - 20, role model _ 19 and visionary - 15 are more in keeping with the features of transformational leadership theory as espoused by Burns (1978); Bass (1985); Avolio (1999) and Northouse (2001). However, other important roles characteristic of transformational leadership such as mentor, inspirational leader, transformer are perceived by below 4% of principals. This can be attributed to the onslaught of management oriented functions that have impacted on the principalship. The majority of principals who participated in my survey are still in the process of dealing with the backlogs in material and human resources. Much of their time is spent on the design and development of the necessary systems and structures that are conducive to the functionality of the school. It is apparent from the survey, that they are prioritizing
Chapter Four: Conflicting Views On Principals As Leaders LBhagowat
their roles as managers of change since they are the chief accounting officers and have been tasked with creating and managing self reliant schools.
The responses from principals as indicated in Table 4.5 suggest that while principals perceive their roles to be leadership oriented, these perceptions are actually more management oriented. Yet again we see the impact of attending to the basic needs of the institution. Principals are so focused on fulfilling their vast array of management functions that they seem to construe these as leadership functions . . . or can we in reality separate management and leadership roles? What we detect here is the power of the organizational context - it is the context that is determining the direction that is taken by the principal. So while many of the principals have higher degrees and experience, their leadership abilities are curtailed by the needs of the institution which must be managed before it can be led. They realize that the proper structures and mechanisms have to be in place before they can lead the institution in transformation - it is a process not an event. The baseline study clearly illustrated this assertion since 37% of the principals who completed Appendix A, indicated that development of infrastructure was prioritized. This finding will be explored in greater detail at a later stage (Section7)when the focus turns to projects completed by principals.
4.6 LEADERSHIP ROLES PERFORMED BY PRINCIPALS AS IDENTIFIED