The Jossey-Bass Reader on Educational Leadership

Margaret Grogan

• Publisher: Jossey-Bass
• Year: 2013
• Print ISBN: 9781118456217
• eBook ISBN: 9781118621509
• Edition: 3
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education Administration

The newest edition of the bestselling book on educational leadership

This expanded and thoroughly updated edition of the popular anthology contains the articles, book excerpts, and seminal reports that define and drive the field of educational leadership today. Filled with critical insights from bestselling authors, education research, and expert practitioners, this comprehensive volume features six primary areas of concern: The Principles of Leadership; Moral and Trustworthy Leadership; Culture and Change; Leadership for Learning; Diversity and Leadership; The Future of Leadership.

• Offers a practical guide for timeless and current thinking on educational leadership
• Includes works by Peter Senge and Tom Sergiovanni
• From Jossey-Bass publishers, a noted leader in the fields of education and leadership

This important resource includes relevant and up-to-date articles for leaders today on gender, diversity, global perspectives, standards/testing, e-learning/technology, and community organizing.

Part One

The Principles of Leadership

Education leaders draw on wisdom from many disciplines and settings. In Part One of this newly revised reader, we include selections from scholars whose words have rung true for many years as well as some fresh perspectives. The first two chapters offer insights into the value of the organizational collective focused on learning.

In his classic piece, “Give Me a Lever Long Enough,” Peter M. Senge gets right to the heart of the “learning organization” as an organization where “people continually [learn] how to learn together.” His five disciplines combine to provide fertile ground for capacity building and innovation.

John W. Gardner emphasizes the need for leadership dispersed throughout the organization. His notion of leadership is built not only on an expert at the top but also includes the value of the leadership team who “must be chosen for excellence in performance.”

Though written some time ago, Jerome T. Murphy's chapter touches on the still-familiar real world need to manage organizations. He deftly strips leadership of its heroic qualities. With humor and insight he explains the pragmatic side of six popular dimensions of leadership.

Megan Tschannen-Moran and Robert J. Starratt deal respectively with trust and presence, two fundamental principles of relationship building that continue to challenge leadership practitioners in education as well as in business and nonprofit management. As Tschannen-Moran argues, “[i]n this day and age, no leader can long survive the demise of trust.” Trustworthy leaders in her view know the value of personal humility, restraint, and modesty along with tenacity and the professional will to achieve the organization's goals. Similarly, Starratt emphasizes the three virtues of responsibility, authenticity, and presence. He calls presence the “missing link” between authenticity and responsibility.

Providing a template for desired principal knowledge and behaviors are the Educational Leadership Policy Standards: ISLLC 2008. These updated national leadership standards are intended to stimulate dialogue about a new approach to leadership that will strengthen educational policies and practices everywhere.

1

“Give Me a Lever Long Enough...and Single-Handed I Can Move the World”

Peter M. Senge

From a very early age, we are taught to break apart problems, to fragment the world. This apparently makes complex tasks and subjects more manageable, but we pay a hidden, enormous price. We can no longer see the consequences of our actions; we lose our intrinsic sense of connection to a larger whole. When we then try to “see the big picture,” we try to reassemble the fragments in our minds, to list and organize all the pieces. But, as physicist David Bohm says, the task is futile—similar to trying to reassemble the fragments of a broken mirror to see a true reflection. Thus, after a while we give up trying to see the whole altogether.

The tools and ideas presented here are for destroying the illusion that the world is created of separate, unrelated forces. When we give up this illusion—we can then build “learning organizations,” organizations where people continually expand their capacity to create the results they truly desire, where new and expansive patterns of thinking are nurtured, where collective aspiration is set free, and where people are continually learning how to learn together.

As Fortune magazine recently said, “Forget your tired old ideas about leadership. The most successful corporation of the 1990s will be something called a learning organization.” “The ability to learn faster than your competitors,” said Arie De Geus, head of planning for Royal Dutch/Shell, “may be the only sustainable competitive advantage.” As the world becomes more interconnected and business becomes more complex and dynamic, work must become more “learningful.” It is no longer sufficient to have one person learning for the organization, a Ford or a Sloan or a Watson. It's just not possible any longer to “figure it out” from the top, and have everyone else following the orders of the “grand strategist.” The organizations that will truly excel in the future will be the organizations that discover how to tap people's commitment and capacity to learn at all levels in an organization.

Learning organizations are possible because, deep down, we are all learners. No one has to teach an infant to learn. In fact, no one has to teach infants anything. They are intrinsically inquisitive, masterful learners who learn to walk, speak, and pretty much run their households all on their own. Learning organizations are possible because not only is it our nature to learn but we also love to learn. Most of us at one time or another have been part of a great “team,” a group of people who functioned together in an extraordinary way—who trusted one another, who complemented each other's strengths and compensated for each other's limitations, who had common goals that were larger than individual goals, and who produced extraordinary results. I have met many people who have experienced this sort of profound teamwork—in sports, or in the performing arts, or in business. Many say that they have spent much of their life looking for that experience again. What they experienced was a learning organization. The team that became great didn't start off great—it learned how to produce extraordinary results.

One could argue that the entire global business community is learning to learn together, becoming a learning community. Whereas once many industries were dominated by a single, undisputed leader—one IBM, one Kodak, one Procter & Gamble, one Xerox—today industries, especially in manufacturing, have dozens of excellent companies. American and European corporations are pulled forward by the example of the Japanese; the Japanese, in turn, are pulled by the Koreans and Europeans. Dramatic improvements take place in corporations in Italy, Australia, Singapore—and quickly become influential around the world.

There is also another, in some ways deeper, movement toward learning organizations, part of the evolution of industrial society. Material affluence for the majority has gradually shifted people's orientation toward work—from what Daniel Yankelovich called an “instrumental” view of work, where work was a means to an end, to a more “sacred” view, where people seek the “intrinsic” benefits of work.¹ “Our grandfathers worked six days a week to earn what most of us now earn by Tuesday afternoon,” says Bill O'Brien, CEO of Hanover Insurance. “The ferment in management will continue until we build organizations that are more consistent with man's higher aspirations beyond food, shelter and belonging.”

Moreover, many who share these values are now in leadership positions. I find a growing number of organizational leaders who, while still a minority, feel they are part of a profound evolution in the nature of work as a social institution. “Why can't we do good works at work?” asked Edward Simon, president of Herman Miller, recently. “Business is the only institution that has a chance, as far as I can see, to fundamentally improve the injustice that exists in the world. But first, we will have to move through the barriers that are keeping us from being truly vision-led and capable of learning.”

Perhaps the most salient reason for building learning organizations is that we are only now starting to understand the capabilities such organizations must possess. For a long time, efforts to build learning organizations were like groping in the dark until the skills, areas of knowledge, and paths for development of such organizations became known. What fundamentally will distinguish learning organizations from traditional authoritarian “controlling organizations” will be the mastery of certain basic disciplines. That is why the “disciplines of the learning organization” are vital.

Disciplines of the Learning Organization

On a cold, clear morning in December 1903, at Kitty Hawk, North Carolina, the fragile aircraft of Wilbur and Orville Wright proved that powered flight was possible. Thus was the airplane invented; but it would take more than thirty years before commercial aviation could serve the general public.

Engineers say that a new idea has been “invented” when it is proven to work in the laboratory. The idea becomes an “innovation” only when it can be replicated reliably on a meaningful scale at practical costs. If the idea is sufficiently important, such as the telephone, the digital computer, or commercial aircraft, it is called a “basic innovation,” and it creates a new industry or transforms an existing industry. In these terms, learning organizations have been invented, but they have not yet been innovated.

In engineering, when an idea moves from an invention to an innovation, diverse “component technologies” come together. Emerging from isolated developments in separate fields of research, these components gradually form an “ensemble of technologies that are critical to each other's success. Until this ensemble forms, the idea, though possible in the laboratory, does not achieve its potential in practice.”²

The Wright brothers proved that powered flight was possible, but the McDonnell Douglas DC-3, introduced in 1935, ushered in the era of commercial air travel. The DC-3 was the first plane that supported itself economically as well as aerodynamically. During those intervening thirty years (a typical time period for incubating basic innovations), myriad experiments with commercial flight had failed. Like early experiments with learning organizations, the early planes were not reliable and cost effective on an appropriate scale.

The DC-3, for the first time, brought together five critical component technologies that formed a successful ensemble. They were the variable-pitch propeller, retractable landing gear, a type of lightweight molded body construction called “monocque,” radial air-cooled engine, and wing flaps. To succeed, the DC-3 needed all five; four were not enough. One year earlier, the Boeing 247 was introduced with all of them except wing flaps. Lacking wing flaps, Boeing's engineers found that the plane was unstable on take-off and landing and had to downsize the engine.

Today, I believe, five new “component technologies” are gradually converging to innovate learning organizations. Though developed separately, each will, I believe, prove critical to the others' success, just as occurs with any ensemble. Each provides a vital dimension in building organizations that can truly “learn,” that can continually enhance their capacity to realize their highest aspirations:

Systems Thinking. A cloud masses, the sky darkens, leaves twist upward, and we know that it will rain. We also know that after the storm, the runoff will feed into groundwater miles away, and the sky will grow clear by tomorrow. All these events are distant in time and space, and yet they are all connected within the same pattern. Each has an influence on the rest, an influence that is usually hidden from view. You can only understand the system of a rainstorm by contemplating the whole, not any individual part of the pattern.

Business and other human endeavors are also systems. They, too, are bound by invisible fabrics of interrelated actions, which often take years to fully play out their effects on each other. Since we are part of that lacework ourselves, it's doubly hard to see the whole pattern of change. Instead, we tend to focus on snapshots of isolated parts of the system, and wonder why our deepest problems never seem to get solved. Systems thinking is a conceptual framework, a body of knowledge and tools that has been developed over the past fifty years, to make the full patterns clearer, and to help us see how to change them effectively.

Though the tools are new, the underlying worldview is extremely intuitive; experiments with young children show that they learn systems thinking very quickly.

Personal Mastery. Mastery might suggest gaining dominance over people or things. But mastery can also mean a special level of proficiency. A master craftsman doesn't dominate pottery or weaving. People with a high level of personal mastery are able to consistently realize the results that matter most deeply to them—in effect, they approach their life as an artist would approach a work of art. They do that by becoming committed to their own lifelong learning.

Personal mastery is the discipline of continually clarifying and deepening our personal vision, of focusing our energies, of developing patience, and of seeing reality objectively. As such, it is an essential cornerstone of the learning organization—the learning organization's spiritual foundation. An organization's commitment to and capacity for learning can be no greater than that of its members. The roots of this discipline lie in both Eastern and Western spiritual traditions, and in secular traditions as well.

But surprisingly few organizations encourage the growth of their people in this manner. This results in vast untapped resources: “People enter business as bright, well-educated, high-energy people, full of energy and desire to make a difference,” says Hanover's O'Brien. “By the time they are 30, a few are on the ‘fast track’ and the rest ‘put in their time’ to do what matters to them on the weekend. They lose the commitment, the sense o...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title Page
• Copyright
• Sources
• About the Editor
• About the Authors
• Introduction
• Acknowledgments
• Part One: The Principles of Leadership
• Part Two: Leadership for Social Justice
• Part Three: Culture and Change
• Part Four: Leadership for Learning
• Part Five: The Future of Leadership