Principal leadership practices during the COVID-19 lockdown

A recent update of the widely cited article Seven Strong Claims about School Leadership (Leithwood et al., 2008) has reiterated that successful school leaders draw on four similar leadership practices. These are: setting direction, which involves building a shared vision and creating high expectations; building relationships and developing people, which involves building trusting relationships and supporting staff professional capacity; developing the organisation, which involves building a collaborative culture and distributing leadership; and improving instruction (Leithwood et al., 2020). There are strong similarities between these practices and the capabilities in the New Zealand Educational Leadership Capability Framework (Education Council, 2018) which also emphasises the importance of building and sustaining high trust relationships; building and sustaining collective leadership and professional community; and embodying the organisation’s values, as well as showing moral purpose, optimism, agency and resilience; and contributing to the development and wellbeing of education beyond their organisation. Building relational trust is also one of three leadership capabilities highlighted by Robinson (2019) along with using relevant knowledge to make leadership decisions and solving complex problems. Many of these leadership practices are relevant to crisis leadership as the following discussion shows.

Leadership in times of crisis has been the focus of considerable research in the business sector. Leadership behaviours that work well according to DuBrin (2013), include staying calm, making good use of team members, appreciating and recognising accomplishments, and learning from the crisis. Schoenberg (2005) has identified a range of desirable personal attributes of effective crisis leaders including integrity, passion, vision, courage and organisational skills. Kerrissey and Edmonson (2020), focusing on leadership through COVID-19, highlight four effective approaches: acting early; communicating transparently; responding productively to any mistakes; and seeking diverse opinions and constantly updating. Koehn (2020), also writing about the leadership throughout the pandemic and drawing on two decades of research on crisis leadership, recommends: acknowledging fears then encouraging resolve; giving people direction and purpose; encouraging experimenting and learning from mistakes, and modelling desirable behaviours including self-care.

A lack of research on crisis leadership specific to educational contexts has been noted (Mutch, 2015; Smith & Riley, 2012), although many of the capabilities and practices described above are likely to be relevant to school leadership. Smith and Riley emphasise key leadership attributes such as: strong interpersonal communication skills; the ability to synthesise often contradictory information sources; the capacity to empathise and to respect diverse perspectives; a capacity for optimism; flexibility; and the ability to learn from and capitalise on opportunities. Mutch, drawing on research conducted in the aftermath of the Canterbury earthquakes as well as other crises, suggests that dispositional, relational and situational factors all influence leaders’ practices. Dispositional factors include personal qualities, values, skills and knowledge, while relational factors include building relationships and a sense of community, and encouraging collaboration. Adapting to the changing situation, effectively using resources, and making appropriate decisions are examples of situational factors. Mutch (2020) has recently provided useful recommendations for school leaders responding to the COVID-19 crisis including planning for the ongoing impact of the crisis on students and their families and taking time to reflect and learn from experiences.

The leadership capabilities and approaches discussed above highlight three particular leadership practices: demonstrating emotional intelligence and building strong and trusting relationships; involving others in leadership; and learning in times of crisis. Each of these aspects will now be discussed more fully with reference to previous research. The importance of emotional intelligence competencies including self-awareness and empathy in times of crisis has been emphasised (Bhaduri, 2019), as has the value of trustworthy and calm leadership (American Psychological Association, 2020). Trust has also been identified as a key measurement of crisis leadership effectiveness and requires authenticity and honesty on behalf of the leader (Schoenberg, 2005). Trust is created when leaders lead with transparency and prioritise the wellbeing of stakeholders (Wooten et al., 2013). Trust is seen to be particularly important in crisis leadership as decisions are more likely to be accepted when those involved in the organisation have trust and confidence in the leader’s direction (Thornton, 2021).

The importance of leadership at all levels of an organisation rather than from just the positional leader has been emphasised by Schoenberg (2005), who also highlights the importance of leaders’ flexibility in being able to adopt different leadership approaches as appropriate. A benefit of leadership being distributed is that different points of view are considered, an important aspect of crisis leadership according to Powley and Taylor (2014). Similarly Wooten et al. emphasise the importance of drawing on diverse perspectives in order to learn in times of crisis. In the school context, the wide range of leadership tasks that need addressing call for a collaborative approach with principals involving their leadership teams (Mutch, 2020). (Smith and Riley 2012, p. 66) emphasise the importance of leadership being “distributed and coordinated” in order that appropriate strengths and skills are drawn on.

The importance of learning from crisis situations has been emphasised in a range of literature. Wooten and James (2008) suggest that “crisis leadership demands an integration of skills, abilities and traits that allow a leaders to plan for, respond to, and learn from crisis events” (p. 353). These authors suggest that effective crisis leadership pays attention to learning and reflection and that a crisis can be a catalyst that encourages learning and that can produce innovation and enhance the organisation’s capabilities. Learning and enhancing resilience is one of ten crisis management tasks derived from a range of literature by Boin et al. (2013). Wang (2008) suggests that crises “present considerable opportunities for learning” (p. 431) and should be incorporated into each stage of crises. He also discusses the paradoxical nature of crises as providing both challenges and opportunities and suggests that organisations can benefit from crises if they learn from them effectively. Boin et al. (2010) promote the value of crises providing opportunities for reform which may include changing policy direction. These authors also highlight the potential for learning and enhanced resilience.

A number of principals talked about the challenges they faced to leading in their usual way during lockdown, and the ways in which they had to adapt. Several reported that they felt uncomfortable about not being able to have direct contact with their staff and students:

All of these principals were actively engaged with their staff during lockdown using digital means as were the other principals. Communication was far more frequent than in pre-COVID times and tools used for regular staff briefings and senior leadership team meetings included Zoom, Microsoft Teams and Google Meet. Social as well as professional connections were maintained, for example Isla introduced WhatsApp for all staff and this provided a relaxed and humorous way of connecting. Many principals, often with the aid of student leaders used video messages to connect with staff and students. Another participant, who mentioned that he was a relatively new principal, also found he had to use different approaches and deviate from his usual consultative way of leading:

This different way of leading increased Ben’s visibility within his community and he reported:

Rawiri, another relatively new principal, also felt lockdown provided an opportunity for him to gain confidence in his role:

One principal who had an issue with a senior leadership team member had to deal differently with this from a distance:

Study participants frequently expressed how concerned they had been for the wellbeing of their staff and students and reported the ways they had acted that were conducive to building trust. Empathy was demonstrated in a variety of ways, from the messages they sent to their school communities to how they set expectations regarding online teaching and learning learning. Comments included:

The principals reported that they had realistic expectations of the learning that would occur and how much work staff, particularly those with dependents, could manage during lockdown.

The majority of principals were able to articulate how senior leadership team members and other staff had demonstrated leadership over lockdown. For some this was a continuation of long standing approach to distributing leadership:

For two principals in particular, lockdown provided a strong confirmation of the value of this approach:

Nathan also used the opportunity to think about how to introduce more cultural diversity in leadership practices:

He described how Pasifika staff had been given voice and had stepped forward and taken their leadership practice to a new level.

Two principals commented on their delight at the way staff stepped up in their leadership practice:

For others, lockdown had demonstrated the value of a more distributed approach and had provided opportunities for different staff members to use their strengths. Examples of this included staff proficient in digital technologies sharing ideas and supporting other staff.

While there were many commonalities in the responses to most of the interview questions, there was more variation in the personal lessons learned by principals in this study. Some related to the need for flexibility in the approaches taken, according the context:

Ongoing support for distributed leadership was a focus for some principals who saw their role as encouraging leadership in others:

Nathan who worked to introduce more cultural diversity in the leadership of the school, wished to continue this going forward:

Oliver commented on the importance of building culture and coaching suggesting:

He had also reflected on the importance of patience and being able to deal with ambiguity.

The importance of responsiveness was commented on by Chris who wanted to provide more opportunities for:

Three principals commented that they intended to show their appreciation of the work done by staff more overtly:

A stronger focus on vision and strategy going forward were commented on by James and Rawiri with Rawiri commenting that lockdown had provided more time to focus on strategy:

Other diverse responses included: leading the effective use of learning data (Dylan); accelerating the power shift between teachers and students that occurred over lockdown (Mereana); increasing the frequency and the diversity of communication with parents and students (Sam); focusing on succession planning (Liam); being more relaxed and laughing at herself (Isla); and gaining a better understanding of student perspectives (Kara). Emma did not feel her leadership practice had changed but shared that it had been reaffirmed:

There was a variety of responses to the question about who inspired or motivated participants over lockdown ranging from political figures to school staff and students. Nine of the 18 principals mentioned the Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, whom they thought role modelled effective leadership. Comments included:

Kara found Jacinda Ardern’s leadership inspirational and staff at her school expressed their gratitude for how Kara had taken this on board and had kept them feeling safe and supported. They told her:

The leadership of Ashley Bloomfield was also mentioned by four principals. Emma commented:

The leadership shown by the Minister of Education and the Secretary for Education was also favourably commented on by some participants including Oliver who had shared some of Iona Holstead’s emails with colleagues overseas and commented that New Zealanders could trust the messages they received from those in authority unlike some other countries. Many participants were motivated by the level of commitment shown by their senior leadership or management teams and by teachers, for example:

Other role models included principal mentors, particularly for less experienced principals, and family. Rawiri commented on the guidance he had received from his Springboard Trust coach:

Networking with colleagues both before and during lockdown was seen to be valuable for the vast majority of participants in this study. These networks varied from formal networks connected to the Secondary Principals’ Association and Post-Primary Teachers’ Association to more informal local networks. The benefits of networking included hearing a range of perspectives, being able to trouble shoot and problem solve, as well as sharing policies and ideas.

Amaia particularly valued the local principals’ network she belonged to which was active both before and during lockdown:

Kahui Ako networks were mentioned by six participants. These collaborations had the benefit of ensuring that consistent messages were passed on to the community. Dylan described this approach as doing things in unison and Isla similarly suggested:

Several participants also participated in networks organised by the Springboard Trust which they found useful and/or worked with coaches assigned to them as part of their participation in a Springboard programme. James appreciated this network for sharing ideas with other principals and the encouragement if provided for him to reflect on what was happening during lockdown, while Rawiri discussed how his coach challenged him about the welfare of the students and what the school was doing to support their needs.

There were both similarities and differences in the ways in which the leadership practices of principals shifted during and as a result of lockdown. The similarities will be discussed first and relate to three aspects: relational leadership; distributed leadership; and networking and collaboration. The differences will then be considered, in particular the ways in which the principals learned from the crisis, and suggestions made for ways in which principals can reflect on their learning.

The leadership practised by principals during the COVID-19 lockdown was to a large extent relational in nature. Relational leadership has been defined as a dynamic process of social influence through which change occurs (Uhl-Bien, 2006) and changes in practice occured iteratively throughout lockdown as principals worked collaboratively to address the challenges schools faced. Clarke (2018) highlights the importance of trust, respect and mutuality in relational leadership and these capabilities were displayed by the study participants. While at times a directive leadership approach was necessary, for the most part principals focused on relationships, demonstrating empathy for the circumstances faced by their staff and students, prioritising wellbeing, and showing appreciation for the work done by their colleagues. The prioritisation of wellbeing is also noted in a recent Education Review Office report (Education Review Office, 2020) with around 70% of school leaders reporting that “they had explicitly prioritised learner wellbeing over academic learning during lockdown” (p. 3). There is congruence between the ways in which the participants practised relational leadership and the expectation in the Leadership Capability Framework that trusting relationships are be built and sustained by respectfully engaging and demonstrating empathy (Education Council, 2018). Trusting relationships are also highlighted as a successful school leadership practice by Leithwood et al. (2020), alongside the provision of support and consideration for individuals. Trust is also seen as important in crisis leadership, with integrity, authenticity, honesty and integrity being important leadership characteristics (Schoenberg, 2005; Wooten & James, 2008). Teo et al. (2017) suggest that mutual trust within organisations is likely to support rapid adaptations in crisis situations. Relational factors emphasised by Mutch (2015) that were evident in this study include strengthening relationships, fostering collaboration and demonstrating empathy and warmth. The findings of this study emphasise that leadership is enacted through relationships (Clarke, 2018) and principals may wish to consider how they ensure strong trusting relationships exist in their schools as these will support agile and collaborative responses in times of crisis.

While many of the principals in this study already had a focus on distributed leadership within their schools, its value became even more apparent during lockdown due to the range of issues that required attention. Many participants provided examples of how their colleagues stepped up, whether they were senior leadership team members, heads of departments, IT specialists, classroom teachers or pastoral team members. They were extremely grateful for the willingness of their colleagues to take on responsibilities and work collaboratively for the benefit of students and their families. While principals sometimes had to make some quick decisions without the opportunity to consult widely, all preferred to involve others when possible. This distribution of leadership fits with the leadership capability of “Building and sustaining collective leadership and professional community” (Education Council, 2018) and with the claim from Leithwood et al. (2020) that successful school leaders develop their organisations, a strategy involving building a collaborative culture and distributing leadership. Making good use of teams in times of crisis has been recommended by (DuBrin 2013, p. 17) who suggests teams should be built “inside, across and outside the organization”. This strategy fits with Leithwood et al.’s suggestion of “the establishment of new teams, grouping and connections for specific purposes” (p. 9). Probert and Turnbull James (2011) advocate for using crises to rethink leadership concepts within organisations, suggesting that a focus on leadership practice rather than leadership roles will help address challenges facing organisations. This study has highlighted the value of distributed leadership in schools particularly in times of crisis and principals are encouraged to consider how they provide opportunities for leadership based on expertise rather than position as suggested by Leithwood et al..

Networking and collaborating with principal colleagues was a feature of principal leadership practice revealed in this study. All participants mentioned networks that provided support during lockdown including formal and informal secondary principal networks at both local and national levels and in some cases interactions with Kahui Ako colleagues. Principals appreciated having opportunities to share ideas and resources such as role descriptions and policies and to provide consistent messages to their local communities. Collaborative leadership practices including active involvement in networks are emphasised in the Education Council’s leadership capability of “Contributing to the development and wellbeing of education beyond their organisation” (Education Council, 2018). Leithwood et al. (2020) also emphasise the value of making connections and facilitating collaboration. The networks referred to in this study could be likened to DuBrin’s (2013) concept of outside teams which have the potential to offer different perspectives in times of crisis. The value of networks for making sense and meaning of crisis situations has also been emphasised by Teo et al. (2017) who advocate for “the development of relational networks that allow the organization to adapt and restore function” (p. 136). The importance of looking outside of one’s organisation and drawing on diverse sources of expertise has been emphasised (Kerrissey & Edmonson, 2020) and this was illustrated by the influence of national figures such as Jacinda Ardern and Ashley Bloomfield on participants’ practices. Principals also relied on the frequent messaging from the Ministry of Education to support their decision making. Most found this very useful and passed on the key messages to staff and the wider community where relevant. Additionally, Schoenberg (2005) emphasises the value of having an external person who can act as a sounding board. Several of the principals had coaches provided by the Springboard Trust who offered different perspectives which were highly valued. This research supports the importance of principals engaging in collaborative networks in order to gain different perspectives and to share ideas and resources.

The differences in reported changes to leadership practices and the lesson learned by principals in this study relate to the individual circumstances and contexts in which the principals operate. Two less experienced principals reported that the crisis had provided them with opportunities to be more visible and step up into principalship whereas some of the more experienced principals found themselves drawing more on the expertise of their colleagues. All participants were able to demonstrate that they had learned from leading through the crisis and outlined ways in which they had or intended to lead differently reflecting the influence of context on leadership effectiveness (Clarke, 2018). Some of these changes in leadership practice had quite significant implications for their schools such as changes in strategic direction, while others were more personal such as showing more appreciation for staff efforts. These findings reflect the situational aspects of crisis leadership suggested by Mutch (2015) including adaptability, flexibility and demonstrating an understanding of context. The principal responses also reflect the findings on earlier studies that crises provide an opportunity to learn from and capitalise on opportunities (Koehn, 2020; Smith & Riley, 2012).