1.4 Theories of educational management  (Page 13/29)

5.Coercive power. The mirror image of the control of rewards may be coercive power. This implies the abilityto enforce compliance, backed by the threat of sanctions.“Coercive power rests on the ability to constrain, to block, to interfere, orto punish”(Bolman&Deal, 1991, p. 196).

• Control of resources. Control of the distribution of resources may be an important source of power in educationalinstitutions, particularly in self-managing schools. Decisions about the allocation of resources are likely to be among the mostsignificant aspects of the policy process in such organisations. Control of these resources may give power over those people whowish to acquire them.

Consideration of all these sources of power leads to the conclusion that principals possess substantialresources of authority and influence. However, they do not have absolute power. Other leaders and teachers also have power, arisingprincipally from their personal qualities and expertise. These other sources of power may act as a counter-balance to theprincipal’s positional authority and control of rewards.

Transactional leadership

The leadership model most closely aligned with political models is that of transactional leadership.“Transactional leadership is leadership in which relationships with teachers are based upon an exchange for some valued resource. Tothe teacher, interaction between administrators and teachers is usually episodic, short-lived and limited to the exchangetransaction”(Miller&Miller, 2001, p. 182).

This exchange process is an established political strategy. As we noted earlier, principals hold power inthe form of key rewards such as promotion and references. However, they require the co-operation of staff to secure the effectivemanagement of the school. An exchange may secure benefits for both parties to the arrangement. The major limitation of such a processis that it does not engage staff beyond the immediate gains arising from the transaction. Transactional leadership does not producelong-term commitment to the values and vision promoted by school leaders.

The Limitations of Political Models

Political models are primarily descriptive and analytical. The focus on interests, conflict between groups,and power provides a valid and persuasive interpretation of the decision-making process in schools. However, these theories do havefour major limitations:

1.Political models are immersed so strongly in the language of power, conflict and manipulation that theyneglect other standard aspects of organizations. There is little recognition that most organizations operate for much of the timeaccording to routine bureaucratic procedures. The focus is heavily on policy formulation while the implementation of policy receives little attention. The outcomes of bargaining and negotiation areendorsed, or may falter, within the formal authority structure of the school or college.

2.Political models stress the influence of interest groups on decision-making. The assumption is thatorganizations are fragmented into groups, which pursue their own independent goals. This aspect of political models may beinappropriate for elementary schools, which may not have the apparatus for political activity. The institutional level may bethe center of attention for staff in these schools, invalidating the political model’s emphasis on interest group fragmentation.