Principals’ boundary activities and school violence: The mediating role of school management teams

Abstract

The call for a more holistic approach to cope with school violence motivated the present study. The present model postulates that effective teamwork at the school management team level can have a positive impact on the level of school violence. Specifically, the model examined the mediating role of school management team effectiveness (in-role performance and innovation) in the relationship between the organizational-level factors of principals’ internal and external boundary activities and school violence. Data was collected from a survey of 692 school members and 92 principals in Israel. The structural equation model confirmed the main hypotheses and indicated that school management team effectiveness fully mediated the relationship of principals’ internal boundary activities to school violence. These results carry important practical implications for policymakers to help schools manage school violence issues. Understanding how the principals’ boundary activities can enhance school management team effectiveness by facilitating improved knowledge exchange and social relationships is important and may provide a mechanism to decrease school violence. The implications of these findings for both theory and practice are discussed.

Instructional boundary management: The complementarity of instructional leadership and boundary management

“…Inasmuch as schools cannot generate all necessary resources from within but rather depend on their environment for resources essential for their survival (Addi-Raccah, 2015), principals must span the boundary and enable high levels of interactions with critical external parties (Casto et al, 2016). Thus, maintaining healthy relations with external constituencies in the school environment has become a pivotal role of principals (Benoliel, 2018; Valli et al 2018).…”

“…From the perspective of the resource dependence theory, the requirement to maintain contacts with outside agencies is intended to enhance organizational efficiency and promote the organization’s core technology (Davis and Cobb, 2010). Benoliel (2017, 2018) explored the typology of Druskat and Wheeler (2003) in the school context, in order to gain a thorough understanding of school principals’ boundary management activities. Principals’ boundary activities focus alternatively on internal and external issues relative to the school.…”

“…Greater autonomy at the local level has transformed schools into open systems in a close relationship with their resource-providing environment (Addi-Raccah, 2015; Kohansal, 2015). In order to be able to respond to expectations and standards set by external agents, principals are required to assume the role of facilitating the transfer of assets and information about the school and its surroundings (Benoliel, 2018; Bogler and Nir, 2017). They must walk a tightrope between internal needs and capacities and external desires and demands that come from official (such as the district) and unofficial (such as the school community) sources, facilitating and reaching agreements among various stakeholders (Valli et al, 2018).…”

“…Against this backdrop, principals are increasingly involved in boundary management, aimed at regulating the boundary that separates the school from its environment (Thomson, 2014). In this regard, research shows that principals seek to ensure that the school boundary becomes neither too tightly delineated nor too permeable (Benoliel, 2017, 2018). On the one hand, principals can maintain a tight boundary around the school, creating an environment that strengthens the feeling of belonging on the part of the school’s staff, protecting the school from information overload, and reducing external pressures.…”

“…At the same time, traditional boundary management emphasizes the principal’s activities outside the school boundaries, viewing the principal as a boundary spanner who must build and maintain relationships with individuals and groups outside the school to develop partnerships and collaboration (Addi-Raccah, 2015). Yet, since internal activities have also been classified as part of boundary management, boundary management involves not only external activities directed at interacting with the school’s environment but also important internal boundary activities, which are focused on matters taking place within the school boundary and designed to sharpen the school boundary from within (Benoliel, 2018).…”