A meta-analysis of distributed leadership from 2002 to 2013

Abstract

This article provides a meta-analysis of research conducted on distributed leadership from 2002 to 2013. It continues the review of distributed leadership commissioned by the English National College for School Leadership (NCSL) (Distributed Leadership: A Desk Study, Bennett et al., 2003), which identified two gaps in the research during the 1996-2002 period. The review found that the studies had been unable to conceptualise distributed leadership or empirically outline its application. The two research gaps identified by Bennett et al. (2003) constitute the focus of the present review, which attempts to determine whether recent research has been able to fill these gaps. Based on the findings of the present meta-analysis, the authors recommend directions for future studies on distributed leadership.

The role of VET Colleges in stimulating teachers’ engagement in team learning

“…Empirical evidence on antecedents and outcomes of distributed leadership is limited (Hairon & Goh, 2015;Tian et al, 2016), which implies that its relationship with team learning is largely unknown. Only a few studies have examined relationships between shared leadership -a concept closely related to distributed leadership -and team learning, and these suggest that shared leadership supports team learning (Koeslag-Kreunen et al, 2017;Liu et al, 2014).…”

“…Distributed leadership implies that teachers are enabled by their managers to exercise informal leadership tasks (Bolden, 2011;Tian, Risku, & Collin, 2016). When leadership is distributed, the interdependence, coordination and interactions among team members increases, which encourages team members to engage in team learning (Liu, Hu, Li, Wang, & Lin, 2014).…”

“…Distributed leadership is a popular leadership perspective in the educational management literature and is advocated as necessary during complex tasks to increase performance (Bolden, 2011;Tian et al, 2016). Distributed leadership implies that leadership is the product of collective activity rather than being defined by the actions of individual formal leaders (Woods, Bennett, Harvey, & Wise, 2004).…”

“…The concept of hybrid leadership configurations was introduced by Gronn (2009) to take into account the role that formal leaders play in situations where leadership is distributed. More recently, Tian et al (2016) argued in their review study that there still is a research gap on these formal and informal leaders' actions and interactions, and therefore suggested to examine distributed leadership from an agency perspective, which refers to 'the actions and interactions of people in taking initiatives, making choices and participating in leadership work' (Tian et al, 2016, p. 148). In this study, we follow their suggestions and use an agency perspective to examine how the actions and interactions of formal leaders (team leaders) and informal leaders (teachers) affect the establishment of distributed leadership in VET teacher teams working on the implementation of CBE.…”

“…First, although the influence of formal leaders' actions on distributed leadership is often emphasized, scholars such as Crawford (2012) and Tian et al (2016) argue that only a few studies have actually examined formal leaders' actions. Formal leaders can create opportunities for distributed leadership (Tian et al, 2016), but can also put boundaries on distributed leadership (Hairon & Goh, 2015). As such, they act as what Bush and Glover (2012) called 'gatekeepers' of distributed leadership.…”