Search results

This working paper highlights the significance of multiple communities as crucial conditions, processes and consequences of [further education] FE leadership. Our research suggests that in (almost) all their activities FE colleges engage communities. They make important, but frequently under-estimated contributions to the local community and economy. This is the case within colleges (e.g. students and employees), between colleges and their multiple-partners (e.g. in the local community and economy) and between different colleges (e.g. professional networks and associations between principals). The paper argues that in the FE sector communities and leadership are inextricably linked, sometimes in mutually reinforcing, but also in potentially contradictory ways. These communities are not only both internal and external to colleges themselves, they are also multiple and diverse, frequently shifting, interacting and impacting in complex, simultaneous ways. Our working paper: (1) outlines (some of) the multiple communities served by FE colleges. In particular, we explore the FE college as: a learning community, a socially inclusive community, an inclusive learning community and a provider of adult and community learning; (2) examines some of the important challenges for those occupying FE leadership positions in seeking to engage with these multiple communities. Our research findings suggest that on-going attempts to engage diverse communities constitute a crucial challenge for effective FE leadership; (3) suggests a different way of understanding the nature of FE leadership. This indicates that a 'blended leadership' (Collinson and Collinson 2005c) approach may be particularly effective in engaging multiple, shifting communities in sustainable ways; and (4) suggests that the community contribution of FE colleges is frequently neglected and/or under-estimated. Many of the staff we have interviewed argue that important aspects of colleges' community engagements remain invisible or undervalued, particularly by those who evaluate performance and make funding decisions. In particular, the current sector-wide cuts in the funding of adult and community learning are likely to have a detrimental impact on FE colleges' traditional community role.

This paper draws on research into what constitutes 'effective leadership' from the perspective of [further education] FE employees. It highlights FE staff's preference for what we term 'blended leadership', an approach that combines specific elements of both traditional hierarchical leadership with more contemporary aspects of distributed leadership. FE staff prefer leadership practices that provide structure, clarity and organization as well as team-working, communication and a shared sense of mission, responsibility and accomplishment. Within the literature on both education and on leadership, distributed and hierarchical models are typically seen as opposing polarities. Frequently, distributed leadership is highly valued whilst traditional approaches are criticised as outmoded. By contrast, this working paper suggests that FE employees continue to value important elements of a directive leadership approach combined and integrated with aspects of a distributed style. Our research finds that in the FE sector, such 'blended leadership' practices are routinely accomplished in the context of multiple, conflicting, shifting and contradictory demands on FE colleges.

This research project explores 'leader-led relations' in the post-16 education sector. It is informed by, and seeks to contribute to, recent developments in leadership studies. In particular, it goes beyond the narrow 'leader-centric' approach of traditional mainstream studies to draw on more critical perspectives that directly examine the complex dynamics between leaders and led within their specific conditions and consequences. The [first] working paper [indexed at TD/TNC 94.382] emphasised the importance of context for understanding leader-led relations in the UK post-16 education sector. It also outlined some initial findings about the widely perceived significance of leadership in the sector and the broadly preferred leadership style based on consultation. One of the most enlightening findings of our research to date is the extent of staff morale, commitment, dedication and professionalism. Yet, despite these positive findings, we have also discovered a number of key, frequently interwoven 'leadership challenges' for the post-16 sector. These relate to the issues of power, distance and inequality discussed earlier and are now elaborated below. This second working paper seeks to highlight some of the issues that impact negatively on leadership within the sector generally and on staff, students and institutions more specifically. First, it explores the impact of intensified monitoring and auditing on post-16 leadership and leader-led relations. Second, it examines several issues related to inequality (for both students and [further education] FE colleges) that constitute significant 'leadership challenges' and barriers to effective leader-led relations. Third, this paper offers specific recommendations that we are beginning to feedback into the sector based on the foregoing preliminary empirical analysis.