Praxes of school and commercial management: Informing and reforming a typology from field research

Abstract

Despite the tendency to draw on experience from the commercial sector when it comes to theorising about school leadership, there is a paucity of research on comparisons between commercial and educational management. This article presents findings from a research project that followed a number of (experienced and newly appointed) school and commercial managers, and makes comparisons between them in terms of what they do, the nature of their common interactions and their leadership styles. It proposes a new, more grounded and activity‐driven typology of leadership styles than that used to underpin existing literature. The discussion takes account of the differences in approach between new and experienced headteachers and commercial managers in terms of how they perceive and actualise leadership.

Notes

Anthony Kelly works at the Research and Graduate School of Education in the University of Southampton. Previously, he worked at the Faculty of Education, University of Cambridge. He lectures and researches in the general area of school improvement, leadership and public policy, and is particularly interested in the application of business and quantitative concepts to the management of organisations in the not‐for‐profit sector. His latest books, Decision Making using Game Theory and The Intellectual Capital of Schools, were published by Cambridge University Press and Kluwer Academic Press respectively. He may be contacted at Research and Graduate School of Education, University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton, SQ17 1BJ, UK (e‐mail:[email protected])

1. Participants consisted (in roughly equal numbers) of newly‐appointed headteachers in the first year of headship, headteachers of longer than nine years standing, newly‐appointed trainee managers in the commercial sector, and experienced managers from the commercial sector. Roughly half the trainee commercial managers and half the experienced commercial managers worked for the same companies.

2. The age range of participants was 32–50 and there was no significant difference between the age or gender profiles of participating cohorts.

3. Defined as casual en passant interactions, like greetings. This is not to imply that instances of casual intimacy or friendliness are not important to the management ethos of a school or business; just that they do not represent the substantive doings of the manager.

4. In the full‐scale study, Interaction Scorecards were completed and analysed to 95% significance.

5. In addition, research has shown that even when heads are formally prepared for headship, they still feel overwhelmed and under‐prepared when in post (Draper and McMichael, 1998).

6. ‘Bildung’ in the paradoxical sense that learning organisations must teach dependents to be capable of acting independently; or that external forces can enable subjects to be independent of external forces.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Anthony Kelly

Anthony Kelly works at the Research and Graduate School of Education in the University of Southampton. Previously, he worked at the Faculty of Education, University of Cambridge. He lectures and researches in the general area of school improvement, leadership and public policy, and is particularly interested in the application of business and quantitative concepts to the management of organisations in the not‐for‐profit sector. His latest books, Decision Making using Game Theory and The Intellectual Capital of Schools, were published by Cambridge University Press and Kluwer Academic Press respectively. He may be contacted at Research and Graduate School of Education, University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton, SQ17 1BJ, UK (e‐mail:[email protected])