Search results

This study focuses on assistant principals, the “forgotten future workforce” of educational leadership. We explored the current landscape of assistant principalship within the context of work performance, including both task and discretionary performance, and the future career aspirations of assistant principals from a cross-national perspective. Specifically, the study aimed to fulfill the following objectives: (a) to identify the factors affecting the task and discretionary performance of assistant principals, (b) to identify the factors affecting three future career aspirations of assistant principals, and (c) to determine whether the influences of these factors differ by national origin. Personal initiative and perceived organizational support (POS) were the independent variables. This study also examined the demographic attributes of the participants and their schools. Two randomly selected samples, which composed of 227 Turkish and 144 American assistant principals were the participants. The data-gathering instrument incorporated the revised versions of the Personal Initiative Scale (Fay & Frese, 2001), the Perceived Organizational Support Scale (Eisenberger, Huntington, Hutchison, & Sowa, 1986), and the School Organizational Citizenship Behavior Scale (DiPaola & Tschannen-Moran, 2001). The findings of the study showed that personal initiative and POS significantly predicted the task performance, discretionary performance, and certain future career aspirations of assistant principals. National origin appeared to be a significantly differentiating factor of the assistant principals' task performances, discretionary performances, and future career aspirations. We drew conclusions and provided suggestions for future research.

The purpose of this cross-cultural study was to investigate whether the embraced national culture was a distinguishing factor of preferred downward influence tactics and targeted goals by principals of different countries. The participants of the study were the public school principals in Turkey and the United States, two culturally distinct countries. The conceptual framework for the study incorporated the Cultural Dimensions (CDs) of Hofstede and the Profiles of Organizational Influence Strategies (POIS) of Kipnis and Schmidt; two pioneers in their respective fields. The findings of the study supported Hofstede's framework for three of the four dimensions for both countries. By employing a pseudoetic cross-cultural research methodology and a relational causal-comparative research design, the study first tested the reliability and construct validity of POIS (Form S) influence tactics scale, both in the Turkish context and in the public education contexts of the two countries. The findings partially supported the applicability of POIS in both countries by yielding a three-factor model for the Turkish context and a four-factor model for the public education context. The multivariate analyses strongly supported literature in regards to the culture-specific nature of leadership influence practices, and it identified national culture as a significantly distinguishing factor of both Turkish and American principals in their preferred influence tactics. Similarly, national culture was also a significantly distinguishing factor of groups in principals' targeted educational goals.

Yahya Altınkurt holds Ph.D. from Anadolu University, Turkey. He is assistant professor at Dumlupınar University Faculty of Education in Kütahya. Dr. Altınkurt's research focuses on strategic planning, organizational justice, organizational citizenship, and leadership in schools. His most recent books include Assessment of Researches of School Administration (2008, Anadolu University Publishing coauthored with E. Ağaoğlu, M. Ceylan, E. Kesim, and T. Madden). Dr. Altınkurt's research has appeared in various journals including Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, Education and Science, Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, International Journal of Human Sciences, Academic Sight.

This study aims to present the opinions of public elementary school principals in Turkey about the current organisational justice practices among teachers from the distributive, procedural, interactional, and rectificatory dimensions.

The opinions of 11 public elementary school principals in Ankara about organisational justice practices were identified through focus group and conceptual analyses.

School principals are seen to distribute justice on matters like leave of absence, rewarding, performance appraisal, student allocation to classes, and course programs. Some complicating factors for principals in justice distribution are differences in teachers' perceptions of justice, school size, and restrictions of the policies of the Ministry of National Education. When principals make a mistake in justice distribution, they resort to checking their compliance with regulations, attempting to correct the mistake, and apologising. When teachers deem school principals unfair, they distance themselves, accuse the principals of unfair administration, slow down their work, and engage in gossip.

The research is limited by the relatively small sample of principals involved.

The research will lay the ground for discussion about the steps to eliminate current problems about organisational justice practices in schools and will contribute to policy development by the Ministry of National Education in this regard.

The study is significant in examining the concept of justice as a universal value at the school level, enabling comparison with similar studies in other countries; and being the first research in Turkey to investigate school principals' organisational justice practices.

Organizational environment where the organizational behavior takes place and the task roles employees need to perform have become increasingly complex in today's organizations. To respond to this complexity, modern organizations need willing, flexible, and proactive employees who go beyond narrow task requirements and who approach work proactively by showing personal initiative (Crant, 2000; Ohly, Sonnentag, & Pluntke, 2006; Parker, 2000; Sonnentag, 2003). In an era where the responsibility and decision making have shifted downward through transformational leadership and shared decision-making, employees have started taking part in both decision making and implementation process without constant close supervision (Frese & Fay, 2001; Sonnentag, 2003). They are expected to demonstrate discretionary behaviors that may go beyond their formally identified job descriptions to carry out the current expectations and comprehensive and complex tasks. Discretionary behavior refers to the employee behavior that is not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and in the aggregate promotes the efficient and effective functioning of the organization (Organ, Podsakoff, & MacKenzie, 2006; Van Dyne, Cummings, & McLean Parks, 1995). Employee discretionary behaviors contribute to maintenance and enhancement of the social and psychological organizational context which supports task performance and organizational effectiveness (McBain, 2004; Organ, 1997). As Den Hartog and Belschak (2007) stated, employee discretionary behaviors are crucial for organizations to be able to stay competitive in today's global economy.