Leadership and organizational transformation: a discussion about distributed leadership in higher education institutions

Abstract

In an era when accountability, i.e., the requirement to demonstrate responsible actions to external stakeholders, has become a buzzword, universities are being challenged to be more autonomously responsive to an increasingly unpredictable environment. In this context of increasing pressure to deliver high quality teaching and research, the need for "good leadership" has been emphasized as strategically decisive within the sector. Nevertheless, the structure and character of higher education institutions have historically not given space for top-down leadership which is usually associated with managerialism. The concept of distributed leadership has been suggested as a response to new challenges posed towards higher education institutions based on the understanding that more hierarchical leadership practices are not well suited to global complexity and change. In academic environments, the idea of collegiality is strongly-rooted assuming a '·first among equals" approach to leadership where authority of professional expertise, self regulation, academic freedom and autonomy are more present than positional power. As a recognition of both the challenges faced by higher education institutions in the globalized world, and of perceptions of leadership that have historically characterized universities, the concept of distributed leadership has been presented as a framework for understanding leadership and change in higher education The central assumption of this concept is that, instead of being a unilateral activity of one single individual in a formal management position, leadership is the result of relatively complex interactions of activities of many individuals in one organization. I discuss here the descriptive and analytical potential of the concept of distributed leadership in order to understand changes in leadership practices in higher education institutions, with a special focus on academic departments in research-intensive universities. Hopefully, this critical analysis will contribute to the understanding of the role of leadership in contexts of change.